A little something for SKS's St George's Day patriotism initiative:
St George, it seems, was born a Grecian And got bumped off by Diocletian An Englishman he really ain’t So how come he’s their patron saint?
And you will find, in similar vein, He’s claimed by Moscow *and* Ukraine, Georgia, Malta, Bosnia too, And several others in the queue
And as for all that dragon stuff, It really is a load of guff It’s just another permutation Of fables found in every nation
So given that the English are Almost entirely secular They sure don’t need a patron saint The notion is entirely quaint.
Very droll, but it isn't unusual to have a patron Saint from another country. Ireland has a British patron Saint for example.
Multiculturalism is nothing new.
France’s is the Virgin Mary and Germany’s is, guess what, English - St Boniface.
tbf Boniface (Bonifatius) is rarely mentioned in Germany. Boniface is famous for being Bayer Leverkusen's joint top scorer this season (so far). And what a season!
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
Give it a rest you nutjob. Most people have little to no savings. What bit of they paid NI for 50 years and that was always designated as funding state pensions. You are always desperate to get something for nothing.
What he wants is for you to work all your life to pay other people's pensions and when it comes to claiming your own it's a case of "tough shit", dig into your savings.
Very fair.
If people like you or I could have put the money we paid into other people's pensions into our own pot we wouldn't have this issue.
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
I believe NI has been around since 1907 (approx) so I think you will find that current state pensioners have paid for their state pension!
NI is a tax no different to any other, so I think you will find that they have not!
If you've been misled, then that's a shame, but if there's a pot of money current pensioners have paid into then let's use that but the reality is there is not.
Having paid NI no more pays for current pensions, than having paid fuel duty, alcohol duty or income tax does.
It's a tax that has been spent. Sorry you were misled if you thought otherwise.
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
I believe NI has been around since 1907 (approx) so I think you will find that current state pensioners have paid for their state pension!
NI is a tax no different to any other, so I think you will find that they have not!
If you've been misled, then that's a shame, but if there's a pot of money current pensioners have paid into then let's use that but the reality is there is not.
Having paid NI no more pays for current pensions, than having paid fuel duty, alcohol duty or income tax does.
It's a tax that has been spent. Sorry you were misled if you thought otherwise.
BREAKING: A dinghy with migrants has left the coast of France and is heading in the direction of the UK.
It comes after Rishi Sunak's Rwanda bill was finally passed through the Lords yesterday.
WRT betting on the general election and its timing, the ground may now have shifted slightly.
The government is already taking the line, this very morning, that the deterrent effect kicks in when flights start.
Two points on that. Flights may not start anyway - we are now nearer to day one of complex litigation, which will go to the SC, which may well only start once a named individual is served with an order for deportation under the act.
Second, if there are flights, they won't (IMHO) be a deterrent.
Which means it is, despite the talk, vital that the GE is held before the alleged deterrent can kick in, and after it is clear that 'leftie lawyers' are slowing it down placing Labour in the maximally awkward place.
On balance this supports an earlier rather than a later date for the GE.
Yes. This has been consistently the only plausible argument for an early election, that it could be fought as an echo of the 2019 GE on the basis of solving a single problem with a simple solution.
I'm not sure it works particularly though. The Tories already have a comfortable majority, and we've just seen they can pass any old crap through Parliament, so giving them a majority again doesn't change anything. But we'll see. Maybe I'm quibbling over details.
Most abuse is by large companies insisting contractors set up companies so that the large company does not have to pay employer NI and is not bound by employment rules. These contractors usually should be employees (hence IR35).
Never really reported on by the media, because pretty much every talking head on the TV and radio isn't a straightforward category A NI employee...
Definitely in the 'Are they, aren't they' category there, hence all the court cases.
Going back many years to the early days of IR35 and I had a friend who clearly failed the IR35 rules spectacularly, yet nothing happened and although in my case I clearly was running a limited company I was never challenged other than a box on the tax return to be ticked I believe.
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
NI gives you an entitlement to the state pension. The idea that the NI someone has paid has fully funded their pension is ridiculous.
It isn’t ridiculous - just not what happens.
When the Pensions Crisis first arrived in politics back in the late 80s, one idea was a contributory pot, per person. This was denounced by the left hand side of U.K. politics.
A little something for SKS's St George's Day patriotism initiative:
St George, it seems, was born a Grecian And got bumped off by Diocletian An Englishman he really ain’t So how come he’s their patron saint?
And you will find, in similar vein, He’s claimed by Moscow *and* Ukraine, Georgia, Malta, Bosnia too, And several others in the queue
And as for all that dragon stuff, It really is a load of guff It’s just another permutation Of fables found in every nation
So given that the English are Almost entirely secular They sure don’t need a patron saint The notion is entirely quaint.
Very droll, but it isn't unusual to have a patron Saint from another country. Ireland has a British patron Saint for example.
Multiculturalism is nothing new.
Britain/England has a lot of imaginary/borrowed stuff though.
Look at the British coat of arms: on one side a unicorn, on the other and on top lions. It has a motto in French, and another in Norman French. The Scottish version has something in Latin. Nothing in English anywhere.
The royal line is borrowed from Germany. The national dish is borrowed from India. The national drink is originally from China.
The most famous British people - James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, Jesus Christ, Robin Hood - are all fictional. Though you can visit the actual house where Sherlock Holmes lived, and see a sign for platform 9 3/4 in King's Cross.
And nobody even knows what the country is called. In most of the rest of Europe people routinely say 'England' when they mean the UK/Great Britain. On my passport it says 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' which implies Northern Ireland isn't part of Great Britain, but people everywhere use Great Britain/Britain when they usually aren't excluding Northern Ireland.
Yes. It's a glorious mess, but it's our glorious mess.
A little something for SKS's St George's Day patriotism initiative:
St George, it seems, was born a Grecian And got bumped off by Diocletian An Englishman he really ain’t So how come he’s their patron saint?
And you will find, in similar vein, He’s claimed by Moscow *and* Ukraine, Georgia, Malta, Bosnia too, And several others in the queue
And as for all that dragon stuff, It really is a load of guff It’s just another permutation Of fables found in every nation
So given that the English are Almost entirely secular They sure don’t need a patron saint The notion is entirely quaint.
Very droll, but it isn't unusual to have a patron Saint from another country. Ireland has a British patron Saint for example.
Multiculturalism is nothing new.
Britain/England has a lot of imaginary/borrowed stuff though.
Look at the British coat of arms: on one side a unicorn, on the other and on top lions. It has a motto in French, and another in Norman French. The Scottish version has something in Latin. Nothing in English anywhere.
The royal line is borrowed from Germany. The national dish is borrowed from India. The national drink is originally from China.
The most famous British people - James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, Jesus Christ, Robin Hood - are all fictional. Though you can visit the actual house where Sherlock Holmes lived, and see a sign for platform 9 3/4 in King's Cross.
And nobody even knows what the country is called. In most of the rest of Europe people routinely say 'England' when they mean the UK/Great Britain. On my passport it says 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' which implies Northern Ireland isn't part of Great Britain, but people everywhere use Great Britain/Britain when they usually aren't excluding Northern Ireland.
Britain means UK. Great Britain does not, except in the Olympics. Recently things were shaken up again when Boris tried to buy his way out of screwing over Northern Ireland by saying UK as often as possible and making drivers change their GB plates for UK ones if they want to brave the Brexit queues and drive to Europe.
ETA and England used to mean Britain until Scots Nats got upset some time last century.
A little something for SKS's St George's Day patriotism initiative:
St George, it seems, was born a Grecian And got bumped off by Diocletian An Englishman he really ain’t So how come he’s their patron saint?
And you will find, in similar vein, He’s claimed by Moscow *and* Ukraine, Georgia, Malta, Bosnia too, And several others in the queue
And as for all that dragon stuff, It really is a load of guff It’s just another permutation Of fables found in every nation
So given that the English are Almost entirely secular They sure don’t need a patron saint The notion is entirely quaint.
Ha ha, that's pisspoor
Oh freddled gruntbuggly, Thy micturations are to me, (with big yawning) As plurdled gabbleblotchits, in midsummer morning On a lurgid bee, That mordiously hath blurted out, Its earted jurtles, grumbling Into a rancid festering confectious organ squealer. [drowned out by moaning and screaming] Now the jurpling slayjid agrocrustles, Are slurping hagrilly up the axlegrurts, And living glupules frart and stipulate, Like jowling meated liverslime, Groop, I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes, And hooptiously drangle me, With crinkly bindlewurdles,mashurbitries. Or else I shall rend thee in the gobberwarts with my blurglecruncheon, See if I don't!
I will be unimpressed unless that was typed from memory, not Googled.
Well I'm relishing the beautiful blue hues of forget-me-nots and green alkanet (the tiny blue flowers thereof) this morning with my de-cataracted eye So completing the ONS's "Shape Tomorrow" survey which asks how happy I am this morning I gave it 9 out of 10. I would never give it 10 for fear of hubris and falling on my face the next moment
Why the hell is anyone still talking about Liz Truss?
We might as well have a dialogue about Reginald Maudling.
Because outright owners (Tory) and private renters (Labour) have both increased significantly as proportions of all households from 2011 to 2021.
The key swing cohort of mortgage holders has shrunk as a result. This group has now been smashed by high interest rates, which is partly down to Truss.
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
I believe NI has been around since 1907 (approx) so I think you will find that current state pensioners have paid for their state pension!
NI is a tax no different to any other, so I think you will find that they have not!
If you've been misled, then that's a shame, but if there's a pot of money current pensioners have paid into then let's use that but the reality is there is not.
Having paid NI no more pays for current pensions, than having paid fuel duty, alcohol duty or income tax does.
It's a tax that has been spent. Sorry you were misled if you thought otherwise.
Maybe its time for your avocado on toast
Tip - egg on toast is much better!
Egg and avocado, drop the toast, is even better.
One of my friends was an excellent climber until he messed up a tendon in his hand while cutting up an avocado. Surgery + an infection.
He's extremely woke but now has a deep hatred of them.
It has been easy to make fun of the book by Liz Truss, Ten Years to Save the West...
..Before dismissing such notions as the rantings of a very disappointed ex-leader, we should note that they have a lot in common with the policies of more successful leaders overseas. In America, the Republicans have become largely subservient to a Trump agenda that includes “dismantling the deep state”, firing civil servants by presidential order, removing “Marxist” prosecutors and justifying the brazen attempt to overturn the outcome of the last presidential election.
With any luck we'll soon be able to dismiss the current MAGA nonsense as the ramblings of a very disappointed ex-leader, too.
I don't think so.
The MAGA cancer has gone deeper than that - the core of the Republican Party has imo been significantly poisoned.
It reminds me of a comment made in my family at the time when David Icke went off the psychological cliff - "He has taken his group (ie family) with him; I can't see a way back."
Plus the long-term stabiliser for the USA - the Supreme Court - has been politicised. and is abandoning the principles it is supposed to embody. Is there a way back for that?
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
NI gives you an entitlement to the state pension. The idea that the NI someone has paid has fully funded their pension is ridiculous.
My NI payments over 50+years would have yielded a far better deal than the state pension guaranteed.
And my fuel duty over 20+ years would have yielded far better roads had it actually been spend on the roads than gone into the general pot too.
Unfortunately we don't get to control how individual taxes are directed.
Your NI payments in the past, like my fuel duty payments in the past, like all other taxes, have already been spent. They weren't ever set aside to fund your pension.
I will get a jackhammer see if I can penetrate the thickness. fuel duty was never sold as being for road improvement. NI was introduced to pay for state pensions and sold as such. Fact that arsehole governments do not put it away does not mean that they are not responsible to pay it. Not sure why your pea brain cannot register that fact.
Had to pick up my wife from the garage where her car is getting fixed this morning and heard some of Michelle Hussein's rant at the Immigration minister. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the issue, and I am no fan of the Rwanda scheme, her rudeness, her determination to continuously talk over the person she is interviewing, her assertions rather than questions and her general attitude is intensely irritating.
I almost started to feel sympathy for a Minister responsible for one of the most absurd pieces of legislation in Westminster history.
I've not come across Michelle Hussein, but it sounds like maybe they should get Mishal Husain on instead
(The aggressive approach is rarely that good though - everyone wants to be Paxman. I prefer the apparently gentle but incisive approach of someone like Amol Rajan, ask the right questions and give the interviewee time to talk and enough rope to hang themselves. Any experienced media handler will be able to shrug off aggressive questioning by remaining calm and not actually have to say much.)
Woops, getting both her names wrong must be some sort of a record. Time for more coffee I think.
I actually did a quick Google in case there was a Michelle Hussein political interviewer (took me straight to Mishal, so I guess it's a common misspelling). Didn't want to look like a tit while trying to be a smartarse
I actually googled "Michelle Hussain" and got images of Mishal Hussain so I thought that I had got it right. Hey ho.
Had to pick up my wife from the garage where her car is getting fixed this morning and heard some of Michelle Hussein's rant at the Immigration minister. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the issue, and I am no fan of the Rwanda scheme, her rudeness, her determination to continuously talk over the person she is interviewing, her assertions rather than questions and her general attitude is intensely irritating.
I almost started to feel sympathy for a Minister responsible for one of the most absurd pieces of legislation in Westminster history.
I've not come across Michelle Hussein, but it sounds like maybe they should get Mishal Husain on instead
(The aggressive approach is rarely that good though - everyone wants to be Paxman. I prefer the apparently gentle but incisive approach of someone like Amol Rajan, ask the right questions and give the interviewee time to talk and enough rope to hang themselves. Any experienced media handler will be able to shrug off aggressive questioning by remaining calm and not actually have to say much.)
Woops, getting both her names wrong must be some sort of a record. Time for more coffee I think.
I actually did a quick Google in case there was a Michelle Hussein political interviewer (took me straight to Mishal, so I guess it's a common misspelling). Didn't want to look like a tit while trying to be a smartarse
I actually googled "Michelle Hussain" and got images of Mishal Hussain so I thought that I had got it right. Hey ho.
I assume this Labour tweet on Rwanda has been posted already, but if not it's worth watching.
They've done a very good job here on a topic that's full of risk for them. I think they've chosen the right angle: Rwanda as an expensive waste of taxpayer money, with the opportunity to remind people of Rishi's helicopter and Michelle Mone's yachts.
I particularly like the Virgin Galactic image showing 4 people including Truss and Boris being sent off into space.
Labour's social media hit jobs on the Tories have generally been pretty good and certainly better than vice versa, barring a bit of an aberration on that brooding couple meme last week.
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
I believe NI has been around since 1907 (approx) so I think you will find that current state pensioners have paid for their state pension!
NI is a tax no different to any other, so I think you will find that they have not!
If you've been misled, then that's a shame, but if there's a pot of money current pensioners have paid into then let's use that but the reality is there is not.
Having paid NI no more pays for current pensions, than having paid fuel duty, alcohol duty or income tax does.
It's a tax that has been spent. Sorry you were misled if you thought otherwise.
Maybe its time for your avocado on toast
Tip - egg on toast is much better!
Egg and avocado, drop the toast, is even better.
If you must drop the toast make sure it lands butter side up.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
What happens to the backlog of asylum seekers which will build up as the government’s legislation prohibits processing them.
Rwanda only has the capacity of about 200 people a year at present .
Look, if you are going to waste time asking practical questions like that you simply aren't getting with the zeitgeist. The government has acted! Labour wouldn't! What more can you ask for?
A little something for SKS's St George's Day patriotism initiative:
St George, it seems, was born a Grecian And got bumped off by Diocletian An Englishman he really ain’t So how come he’s their patron saint?
And you will find, in similar vein, He’s claimed by Moscow *and* Ukraine, Georgia, Malta, Bosnia too, And several others in the queue
And as for all that dragon stuff, It really is a load of guff It’s just another permutation Of fables found in every nation
So given that the English are Almost entirely secular They sure don’t need a patron saint The notion is entirely quaint.
Very droll, but it isn't unusual to have a patron Saint from another country. Ireland has a British patron Saint for example.
Multiculturalism is nothing new.
Britain/England has a lot of imaginary/borrowed stuff though.
Look at the British coat of arms: on one side a unicorn, on the other and on top lions. It has a motto in French, and another in Norman French. The Scottish version has something in Latin. Nothing in English anywhere.
The royal line is borrowed from Germany. The national dish is borrowed from India. The national drink is originally from China.
The most famous British people - James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, Jesus Christ, Robin Hood - are all fictional. Though you can visit the actual house where Sherlock Holmes lived, and see a sign for platform 9 3/4 in King's Cross.
And nobody even knows what the country is called. In most of the rest of Europe people routinely say 'England' when they mean the UK/Great Britain. On my passport it says 'The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' which implies Northern Ireland isn't part of Great Britain, but people everywhere use Great Britain/Britain when they usually aren't excluding Northern Ireland.
The UK is a political regime. Cf. the Fifth Republic in France.
The country is BRITAIN. That includes Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and nowhere else. I'm sure nits can facetiously be picked, but no alternative word does the job anywhere near as well as the word Britain.
There is a problem with the USA. The country is obviously not America. It only accounts for a small proportion of America both by population and by land area. Most people in America use the word "America" to denote, well, America - the entire continent. To call the USA "America" is not only wrong but ludicrously parochial. But to make an exception and say that since there's nothing better on offer we'll call the country the United States is to ignore the fact that it isn't the only "United States" even in North America!
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
Maybe he would like the MOD to actually produce some defence capability for the spend. In which case he may be on to something.
Germany does appear to be getting its act together on arms procurement - but the constitutional court enforcing the 'debt brake' has severely curtailed the planned increase in their defence budget.
Meanwhile, we plough on with Ajax and Challenger III, both of which are money pits which, if they ever deliver finished systems, won't add much to our useful defence capacity anyway.
Realistically, they're likely only even to be used in Europe (definitely the case for Challenger), and it makes zero sense not to buy something that's 100% interoperable with European armies. What's even more daft is that we already have something which fits the bill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Vehicle_90
Had to pick up my wife from the garage where her car is getting fixed this morning and heard some of Michelle Hussein's rant at the Immigration minister. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the issue, and I am no fan of the Rwanda scheme, her rudeness, her determination to continuously talk over the person she is interviewing, her assertions rather than questions and her general attitude is intensely irritating.
I almost started to feel sympathy for a Minister responsible for one of the most absurd pieces of legislation in Westminster history.
I've not come across Michelle Hussein, but it sounds like maybe they should get Mishal Husain on instead
(The aggressive approach is rarely that good though - everyone wants to be Paxman. I prefer the apparently gentle but incisive approach of someone like Amol Rajan, ask the right questions and give the interviewee time to talk and enough rope to hang themselves. Any experienced media handler will be able to shrug off aggressive questioning by remaining calm and not actually have to say much.)
Woops, getting both her names wrong must be some sort of a record. Time for more coffee I think.
I actually did a quick Google in case there was a Michelle Hussein political interviewer (took me straight to Mishal, so I guess it's a common misspelling). Didn't want to look like a tit while trying to be a smartarse
I actually googled "Michelle Hussain" and got images of Mishal Hussain so I thought that I had got it right. Hey ho.
Still not there. Husain, not Hussain.
I recommend Aasmah Mir instead.
Isn't Aasmah Mir a satellite figure?
Pax vobiscum.
Once you've had Times Radio for breakfast you'll never want to hear R4 again.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th Novemner or any other date.
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
I know people always think their own kids are amazing*, but my 20-month old has certainly mastered the sardonic smile and can do at least a few hundred metres at a fair speed.
* I'm not entirely blinkered - he's a complete hooligan, has no sense (or possibly a lot of sense - not sure whether he hurls himself off high things because he's stupid or because he's very smart and knows we'll catch him), can barely string a few words together, is a right grump and soils himself regularly.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th November or any other date.
You just don't identify as British, malcolm. It would take another referendum, or your renouncing your citizenship, to change the uncomfortable fact.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th Novemner or any other date.
You should get down on your knees on November 5th, and thank the English for saving and preserving democracy, and then having the generosity to share it with the ungrateful Scots
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
I believe NI has been around since 1907 (approx) so I think you will find that current state pensioners have paid for their state pension!
NI is a tax no different to any other, so I think you will find that they have not!
If you've been misled, then that's a shame, but if there's a pot of money current pensioners have paid into then let's use that but the reality is there is not.
Having paid NI no more pays for current pensions, than having paid fuel duty, alcohol duty or income tax does.
It's a tax that has been spent. Sorry you were misled if you thought otherwise.
Maybe its time for your avocado on toast
Tip - egg on toast is much better!
Egg and avocado, drop the toast, is even better.
If you must drop the toast make sure it lands butter side up.
"Overall, government debt was around 98.3% of the UK's annual gross domestic product (GDP) in March - up 2.6 percentage points from the previous year and at levels not seen since the early 1960s."
But didn't Rishi Rich tell us that he would bring down the debt?
Unfunded NI cuts pushing up the debt!
This will keep interest rates higher for longer.
Indeed, NI cuts should be fully funded by raising income tax.
Merging Income Tax and NI would depending upon your political bent allow real tax cuts for people in work, or raise billions for expenditure. Win/win either way.
Only people who lose out are those not working for a living, who want to be subsidised by those who are working.
Well they can just go and get a job.
Er no. NI is there for people to contribute towards their state pension.
Current state pension recipients have paid for their state pension so it's only fair that current workers should do so
👍
No current state pension recipients have not paid for their state pension.
If they have, then let's use their savings they've set aside to pay for it to fully fund their pensions and not have today's workers pay for it instead.
I believe NI has been around since 1907 (approx) so I think you will find that current state pensioners have paid for their state pension!
NI is a tax no different to any other, so I think you will find that they have not!
If you've been misled, then that's a shame, but if there's a pot of money current pensioners have paid into then let's use that but the reality is there is not.
Having paid NI no more pays for current pensions, than having paid fuel duty, alcohol duty or income tax does.
It's a tax that has been spent. Sorry you were misled if you thought otherwise.
Maybe its time for your avocado on toast
Tip - egg on toast is much better!
Egg and avocado, drop the toast, is even better.
One of my friends was an excellent climber until he messed up a tendon in his hand while cutting up an avocado. Surgery + an infection.
He's extremely woke but now has a deep hatred of them.
I don't get the issue with cutting avocados, but it does seem - anecdotally - that people have a lot of issues.
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
I know people always think their own kids are amazing*, but my 20-month old has certainly mastered the sardonic smile and can do at least a few hundred metres at a fair speed.
* I'm not entirely blinkered - he's a complete hooligan, has no sense (or possibly a lot of sense - not sure whether he hurls himself off high things because he's stupid or because he's very smart and knows we'll catch him), can barely string a few words together, is a right grump and soils himself regularly.
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
I endorse this view. Slow walkers are the absolute dregs of humanity. Similarly people who don't walk up the escalator on the tube. What is wrong with these people? Slow walking isn't universal outside of London, growing up in Scotland we tended to walk fast in order to stay warm. Hmm London and Scotland... Maybe fast walkers = Remainers? Would explain the IQ correlation anyway!
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th November or any other date.
You just don't identify as British, malcolm. It would take another referendum, or your renouncing your citizenship, to change the uncomfortable fact.
Neither of those things would change that fact. Scotland voting for independence wouldn't change its geography, and Malcolm becoming stateless would not change his origin.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
And how many have (a) actually bought the book and (b) read it?
I've bought Liz Truss's book as a service to pb and our search for the Rothschild quote last week. I've not read it yet, although it surely cannot be as dull as David Cameron's outpourings from the shepherd hut or whatever he called his posh shed.
Rebel Wilson has claimed that a member of the royal family who was “15th or 20th in line to the British throne” invited her to an orgy in California where drugs were freely offered to guests.
Writing in her memoir Rebel Rising, the Australian actress says that the party was held in 2014 and hosted by a tech billionaire at a rented ranch on the outskirts of Los Angeles.
The comedian, 44, best known for Pitch Perfect and Bridesmaids, said that she did not realise the medieval-themed party was an orgy until 2am when a tray of “molly”, the slang term for MDMA, was passed around.
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
I endorse this view. Slow walkers are the absolute dregs of humanity. Similarly people who don't walk up the escalator on the tube. What is wrong with these people? Slow walking isn't universal outside of London, growing up in Scotland we tended to walk fast in order to stay warm. Hmm London and Scotland... Maybe fast walkers = Remainers? Would explain the IQ correlation anyway!
We are told from a young age that we must be able to walk 500 miles and then 500 more.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th Novemner or any other date.
Yes, and the point is on Nov 5th no-one is forcing you to be. Just enjoy some explosions and some parkin and some treacle toffee, and possibly a burger and a nice pint. It's one of the delightful occasions when we can be entirely apolitical and put whatever context around it that we want. You can, if you prefer, see it as the triumph of the Scottish monarchy over English plotters. You can take what you want from it. We don't need to fall out. I am confident that if you came to my town on 5th November we could have a nice pint together to the backdrop of a lot of explosions and not fall out about history or politics at all. And that's what makes it so good as our national day. Whatever meaning you want to place on that. It's an opportunity to agree about things. (This is what the queen used to be very good at: something we could agree on: that the queen had indeed been doing her job for a very very long time, and here, have some cake.)
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Bonfire night round here has been overtaken by and subsumed into Diwali so we get fireworks smeared over a fortnight or so, and for one-off fireworks displays, New Years Eve/Day is bigger.
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Interesting. The last two weddings I went to, plus a few Hogmanay celebrations, featured bonfires. My first ever "date" was on bonfire night too - held hands and everything.
"Malaysia: 10 dead after navy helicopters collide mid-air during flyover rehearsal The two helicopters crashed during training for a flyover for Malaysia's 90th Naval Day celebrations."
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th November or any other date.
You just don't identify as British, malcolm. It would take another referendum, or your renouncing your citizenship, to change the uncomfortable fact.
Neither of those things would change that fact. Scotland voting for independence wouldn't change its geography, and Malcolm becoming stateless would not change his origin.
Of course they would. Scottish independence would make malcolm solely Scottish, without the taint of Britain.
Pointe du Raz. The Celtic Sublime on a glorious day - skylarks trill above the sea-thrift
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
If you must drop the toast make sure it lands butter side up.
The ever excellent singer/songwriter Andy Thornton once penned a little ditty with the immortal refrain
"I don't want to live my life with the jammy side down..."
is this the same Andy Thornton who was involved in an experiment in community known as The Late, Late Service in Glasgow around 1990 - sounds quite like it?
I met him at a fascinating day conference on future forms of worship / church in London in 1991 organised by the Greenbelt Festival.
"Malaysia: 10 dead after navy helicopters collide mid-air during flyover rehearsal The two helicopters crashed during training for a flyover for Malaysia's 90th Naval Day celebrations."
More Coalition warfighters died during Desert Shield (the build-up) than Desert Storm (the fighty bit). Moving large pieces of machinery around in close proximity has a high probability of going wrong, even without the other side shooting back.
Interestingly, two of the current events channels I watch regularly have Russian videos newly uploaded. Largely covering different but related matter, there's substantial overlap with the concept of a nuclear blackmail threat after a (perhaps initially limited) Baltic invasion. Both pretty long (36 and 48 minutes respectively).
People that walk slowly should be thrown in the Atlantic
Never try the Royal Mile at Festival time. There are lichen on the forest floor that move faster and with a more obvious purpose.
They do my nut. I think it’s a London thing - we walk fast, you have to, then you go outside London and everyone plods along like a fucking donkey that missed the bus. Also people that walk slowly are stupid - this is a known correlation. Look at two year olds - barely able to cover 20 metres and also incapable of sardonic humour
I know people always think their own kids are amazing*, but my 20-month old has certainly mastered the sardonic smile and can do at least a few hundred metres at a fair speed.
* I'm not entirely blinkered - he's a complete hooligan, has no sense (or possibly a lot of sense - not sure whether he hurls himself off high things because he's stupid or because he's very smart and knows we'll catch him), can barely string a few words together, is a right grump and soils himself regularly.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Interesting. The last two weddings I went to, plus a few Hogmanay celebrations, featured bonfires. My first ever "date" was on bonfire night too - held hands and everything.
I haven't worked out what the history of this is, but I don't think it's an environmental thing. They still let people cut turf for heating homes, which has to be one of the worst things you could do environmentally, in terms of the ratio of benefit: harm.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
I thought Liverpool/Manchester had a sizeable catholic population? Do they celebrate Bonfire Night too?
Pointe du Raz. The Celtic Sublime on a glorious day - skylarks trill above the sea-thrift
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
Superbe
Mythically, the end of the world. Well, apart from a bit further on, England.
Pointe du Raz. The Celtic Sublime on a glorious day - skylarks trill above the sea-thrift
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
Superbe
I rather love the Celtic (and possibly also Scandi/Germanic) concept of the mysterious west. That somewhere over the limitless sea where the sun sets, there was - what? The afterlife? Tir-na-nog? A place where you never age (the final destination of King Arthur and his remaining entourage)? Tolkein's land of elves? Giants? There are a hundred stories of mysterious lands over the sea to the west. I find it tremendously satisfying that my ancestors grew up at the edge of the known world, with a huge mysterious blank slate beyond, and the stories and myths that were associated with this. Oceans are so much more satisfying to gaze at than seas.
Pointe du Raz. The Celtic Sublime on a glorious day - skylarks trill above the sea-thrift
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
Superbe
Mythically, the end of the world. Well, apart from a bit further on, England.
How very French.
And Ireland. Let's not forget. All one linked association in the Celtic days, and still too to some extent.
If you must drop the toast make sure it lands butter side up.
The ever excellent singer/songwriter Andy Thornton once penned a little ditty with the immortal refrain
"I don't want to live my life with the jammy side down..."
is this the same Andy Thornton who was involved in an experiment in community known as The Late, Late Service in Glasgow around 1990 - sounds quite like it?
I met him at a fascinating day conference on future forms of worship / church in London in 1991 organised by the Greenbelt Festival.
After a little digging, I see that it is - videos and all:
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
I thought Liverpool/Manchester had a sizeable catholic population? Do they celebrate Bonfire Night too?
Yes, you can happily emphasise the democracy over absolutism aspect of it as you want. Or decide that Guy Fawkes is the tragic hero of the piece. It is a tradition you can take anything you want from. No-one expects you to buy in to any particular interpretation of it, nor to interpret it at all. Just enjoy it for what it is. So yes, Catholics enjoy it too.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Interesting. The last two weddings I went to, plus a few Hogmanay celebrations, featured bonfires. My first ever "date" was on bonfire night too - held hands and everything.
I haven't worked out what the history of this is, but I don't think it's an environmental thing. They still let people cut turf for heating homes, which has to be one of the worst things you could do environmentally, in terms of the ratio of benefit: harm.
Yes, there are essentially no restrictions at all on having a bonfire in your garden here, even in parts of the country, like London, where you can't have a fire in your house (if your neighbour has bonfires all the time you can report it as a nuisance, but that's it). We had a massive bonfire once as the easiest way to dispose of a garden shed and I checked the rules before going ahead. There are no rules.
Interestingly, two of the current events channels I watch regularly have Russian videos newly uploaded. Largely covering different but related matter, there's substantial overlap with the concept of a nuclear blackmail threat after a (perhaps initially limited) Baltic invasion. Both pretty long (36 and 48 minutes respectively).
Mr. Viewcode, cheers. I actually watch Kings and generals a lot (mostly for the historical stuff, although they did get the number of elephants wrong at the Battle of Cynoscephalae by an order of magnitude). Very occasional seen Caspian Report stuff.
Work's been a little lighter than usual so I've had more time for such things of late.
Re: Bonfire Night. When I was at University, some students spent a term at Berkley, CA., on an exchange. They attempted to celebrate bonfire night but got into serious trouble with University security on an attempted arson charge.
The flag of St George was first flown in England by yeomen and peasants of the Weald of Sussex and Kent, rebelling against their corrupt and incompetent overlords.
The opinions of a middle-class, middle-aged, historically aware but vaguely gammony man on St. George:
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual. Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values. It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban. But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not. In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby. Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
Speak for yourself , I am certainly not British on 5th November or any other date.
You just don't identify as British, malcolm. It would take another referendum, or your renouncing your citizenship, to change the uncomfortable fact.
Neither of those things would change that fact. Scotland voting for independence wouldn't change its geography, and Malcolm becoming stateless would not change his origin.
Of course they would. Scottish independence would make malcolm solely Scottish, without the taint of Britain.
I might as well say that you are European.
I assume you're being sarcastic, but just in case, I am European.
Doesn't change the situation. Look more closely, as I poined out on the previous thread. The default filters exclude critical verified purchases, so far as I can see.
In fact there are some one-star verified purchases, so AndyJS is entirely accurate even if one sticks to verified purchases.
Plus verified just means bought through Amazon - nothing more. And some of the critical reviews have obviously read the book.
More generally, the unreliability of the review system on online purchases, bookings etc. is a major concern [edit] for online merchants, broadly speaking. See link in my post on the last thread.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Interesting. The last two weddings I went to, plus a few Hogmanay celebrations, featured bonfires. My first ever "date" was on bonfire night too - held hands and everything.
I haven't worked out what the history of this is, but I don't think it's an environmental thing. They still let people cut turf for heating homes, which has to be one of the worst things you could do environmentally, in terms of the ratio of benefit: harm.
Yes, there are essentially no restrictions at all on having a bonfire in your garden here, even in parts of the country, like London, where you can't have a fire in your house (if your neighbour has bonfires all the time you can report it as a nuisance, but that's it). We had a massive bonfire once as the easiest way to dispose of a garden shed and I checked the rules before going ahead. There are no rules.
The next nanny state intervention will probably be to stop being setting off fireworks in their garden. Already banned in places like Australia I think.
Pointe du Raz. The Celtic Sublime on a glorious day - skylarks trill above the sea-thrift
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
Superbe
I've just been fishing out, for rereading, a history of the RN blockade of that coast in all weathers during the Napoleonic war - "Those far distant, storm-beaten ships, upon which the Grand Army never looked, stood between it and the dominion of the world.” So this is absolutely ideal.
Pointe du Raz. The Celtic Sublime on a glorious day - skylarks trill above the sea-thrift
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
Superbe
I rather love the Celtic (and possibly also Scandi/Germanic) concept of the mysterious west. That somewhere over the limitless sea where the sun sets, there was - what? The afterlife? Tir-na-nog? A place where you never age (the final destination of King Arthur and his remaining entourage)? Tolkein's land of elves? Giants? There are a hundred stories of mysterious lands over the sea to the west. I find it tremendously satisfying that my ancestors grew up at the edge of the known world, with a huge mysterious blank slate beyond, and the stories and myths that were associated with this. Oceans are so much more satisfying to gaze at than seas.
Yes, and you can find it in every Celtic country. Right down to Galicia. There is a strain of Celtic self-mythologising that says that’s why the Celts came here - to the west - they weren’t chased here they chose these places. Where they could yearn for the isles of the blessed. For fated Lyonesse, now lost beneath the sea. Always lost
The myth was so powerful in Roman times that when the legions reached the river of the dead in northern Portugal/Galicia - which led to the lands of the ghosts, the soldiers refused to cross this relatively tiny river. Julius Caesar himself had to swim it, to prove you could survive on the other side
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Interesting. The last two weddings I went to, plus a few Hogmanay celebrations, featured bonfires. My first ever "date" was on bonfire night too - held hands and everything.
I haven't worked out what the history of this is, but I don't think it's an environmental thing. They still let people cut turf for heating homes, which has to be one of the worst things you could do environmentally, in terms of the ratio of benefit: harm.
Yes, there are essentially no restrictions at all on having a bonfire in your garden here, even in parts of the country, like London, where you can't have a fire in your house (if your neighbour has bonfires all the time you can report it as a nuisance, but that's it). We had a massive bonfire once as the easiest way to dispose of a garden shed and I checked the rules before going ahead. There are no rules.
The next nanny state intervention will probably be to stop being setting off fireworks in their garden. Already banned in places like Australia I think.
When I lived in the Netherlands, they had banned fireworks all year around (due to an unfortunate explosion in a fireworks factory in 2000 which killed dozens), except on New Years Eve. So on the 31st December fireworks were going off constantly all over Amsterdam from about lunchtime.
Mr. Viewcode, cheers. I actually watch Kings and generals a lot (mostly for the historical stuff, although they did get the number of elephants wrong at the Battle of Cynoscephalae by an order of magnitude). Very occasional seen Caspian Report stuff.
Work's been a little lighter than usual so I've had more time for such things of late.
You can work on work on one laptop, and listen to the videos on another. It doesn't distract you, honestly! (swallows, looks around nervously, grimaces, shuffles offstage... )
The flag of St George was first flown in England by yeomen and peasants of the Weald of Sussex and Kent, rebelling against their corrupt and incompetent overlords.
Just so you know.
I loathe these people that ALWAYS say on St George’s Day, in a wanky and sneering tone “oh don’t you know he’s actually from Syria, he would be a refugee” as if it’s some amazing discovery they’ve made, and proves some fucking ludicrous point they don’t have
"Malaysia: 10 dead after navy helicopters collide mid-air during flyover rehearsal The two helicopters crashed during training for a flyover for Malaysia's 90th Naval Day celebrations."
More Coalition warfighters died during Desert Shield (the build-up) than Desert Storm (the fighty bit). Moving large pieces of machinery around in close proximity has a high probability of going wrong, even without the other side shooting back.
Interesting. Malaysia seems to have more of a problem with air accidents than other countries on the face of it.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
There's a couple things worth saying about Bonfire Night.
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
Bonfire night round here has been overtaken by and subsumed into Diwali so we get fireworks smeared over a fortnight or so, and for one-off fireworks displays, New Years Eve/Day is bigger.
One of the small triumphs of, I think, the 1997 to 2010 Labour government was to restrict (how? can't remember) fireworks to the two weeks either side of 5th November. I instinctively opposed this as a rule where none was needed. But I was wrong: it was a brilliant compromise between the libertarians and the killjoys, the outcome of which was rather than having 6 weeks of protracted bangs, we get about a week - sometimes even just a weekend - of really, really intense bangs.
Doesn't change the situation. Look more closely, as I poined out on the previous thread. The default filters exclude critical verified purchases, so far as I can see.
In fact there are some one-star verified purchases, so AndyJS is entirely accurate even if one sticks to verified purchases.
Plus verified just means bought through Amazon - nothing more. And some of the critical reviews have obviously read the book.
More generally, the unreliability of the review system on online purchases, bookings etc. is a major concern [edit] for online merchants, broadly speaking. See link in my post on the last thread.
Why would the filters do that? It appears they include reviews only (as opposed to just ratings).
There are no negative reviews from verified purchasers.
Doesn't change the situation. Look more closely, as I poined out on the previous thread. The default filters exclude critical verified purchases, so far as I can see.
In fact there are some one-star verified purchases, so AndyJS is entirely accurate even if one sticks to verified purchases.
Plus verified just means bought through Amazon - nothing more. And some of the critical reviews have obviously read the book.
More generally, the unreliability of the review system on online purchases, bookings etc. is a major concern [edit] for online merchants, broadly speaking. See link in my post on the last thread.
It's a mystery. Who on earth buys reads this stuff? Has a single PB reader/contributor bought it? I never meet anyone who would contemplate it, even next month for 50p in the Oxfam shop. All politics wonks know that it would be self justifying drivel, and that the reviews will point up anything interesting; non-politics people would (rightly) prefer to read The People's Friend or Finnegans Wake.
Comments
Very fair.
If people like you or I could have put the money we paid into other people's pensions into our own pot we wouldn't have this issue.
In the long term NEST may well solve this.
Tip - egg on toast is much better!
🇬🇧 defence spending 2023 (Nato estimate): $77.4bn, 2.3% of GDP
🇩🇪 defence spending: $74.1bn, 1.7% of GDP
They don't meet the actual Nato target!!! Scholz surely not on to a winner here.
https://x.com/hugogye/status/1782674730299867427?
https://www.politico.eu/article/rishi-sunak-olaf-scholz-uk-germany-wants-rishi-sunak-to-spend-big-on-defense/
She also has no self awareness.
I'm not sure it works particularly though. The Tories already have a comfortable majority, and we've just seen they can pass any old crap through Parliament, so giving them a majority again doesn't change anything. But we'll see. Maybe I'm quibbling over details.
Going back many years to the early days of IR35 and I had a friend who clearly failed the IR35 rules spectacularly, yet nothing happened and although in my case I clearly was running a limited company I was never challenged other than a box on the tax return to be ticked I believe.
When the Pensions Crisis first arrived in politics back in the late 80s, one idea was a contributory pot, per person. This was denounced by the left hand side of U.K. politics.
ETA and England used to mean Britain until Scots Nats got upset some time last century.
So completing the ONS's "Shape Tomorrow" survey which asks how happy I am this morning I gave it 9 out of 10. I would never give it 10 for fear of hubris and falling on my face the next moment
He's extremely woke but now has a deep hatred of them.
https://www.mh370search.com/2024/04/21/malaysian-military-radar/
Latest post:
"Malaysian Military Radar — Was the Malaysian Military Radar data released by Geoscience Australia?"
The MAGA cancer has gone deeper than that - the core of the Republican Party has imo been significantly poisoned.
It reminds me of a comment made in my family at the time when David Icke went off the psychological cliff - "He has taken his group (ie family) with him; I can't see a way back."
Plus the long-term stabiliser for the USA - the Supreme Court - has been politicised. and is abandoning the principles it is supposed to embody. Is there a way back for that?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ten-Years-Save-West-conservative/dp/178590857X/
Rwanda only has the capacity of about 200 people a year at present .
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/patrick-harvie-quit-scottish-green-32649167
They've done a very good job here on a topic that's full of risk for them. I think they've chosen the right angle: Rwanda as an expensive waste of taxpayer money, with the opportunity to remind people of Rishi's helicopter and Michelle Mone's yachts.
I particularly like the Virgin Galactic image showing 4 people including Truss and Boris being sent off into space.
https://x.com/UKLabour/status/1782687105291780122
Labour's social media hit jobs on the Tories have generally been pretty good and certainly better than vice versa, barring a bit of an aberration on that brooding couple meme last week.
NEW: The Alba Party have lodged a motion of no confidence in Patrick Harvie.
Should it be backed by 25 other MSPs, it will lead to a confidence vote in the Scottish Government minister.
"I don't want to live my life with the jammy side down..."
It's hard to get too excited about him either way as an individual.
Clearly he was introduced in the plantaganet era by foreign kings with different values.
It would have been nice to have retained one of our pre-Norman actually English saints as our patron saint - Cuthbert, say, or Alban.
But largely they all had daft names. So maybe not.
In any case, the concept of a patron saint is a bit foreign now: we don't really have much more in common with the values of Cuthbert or Alban than we do with George. It's hard to get too enthusiastic about the concept of early English Christians: mostly they tend to come across as on the side of Christianity, rather than of the English. It's hard, for the vaguely partisan 21st century Englishman, to side with dark ages English Christians over dark ages English pagans; and harder still to be unequivocally sure that the right side won at the synod of Whitby.
Essentially it would be hard to find an English saint who we could be unequivocally supportive of.
Still, everyone apparently has to have a patron saint, and St. George is probably no worse than anyone else. He has a nice flag. And more to the point, he's who we've got; he's been our patron saint for generations, and that is more important (for the English or anyone else) than whatever qualities he himself might have possessed. Frankly the qualities of the saint himself are incidental: it's a national day, which again, everyone apparently has to have, and one in mid-Spring seems the right sort of time to have one.
We don't make a massive fuss, but we don't let the day go past entirely uncommented on as we might with, say, Rogation Sunday. Seems about right.
I once heard an American describe Bonfire Night as the British national day. I initially thought this a cultural misreading: they have fireworks on 4th July, which is their national day; our fireworks are on 5th November, so that must be our national day. A big oversimplification. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought it to be true. Bonfire night is when we are at our most unselfconsciously British. It's one of the very few solely British traditions, and one which we do without really thinking about. We rehash the historical story, but we don't really think about the significance of it: we just set fire to things and blow things up. You could, if you want, see it as the first win for parliamentary democracy over absolutism, but most people don't really think about things that deeply, and it's not really in the British tradition to do so. You don't HAVE to do anything; your presence isn't required anywhere. No-one needs to fall out about its significance. It's just something that happens. That to me makes it a true national day.
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2024-04-18/us-to-reduce-licensing-by-80-for-uk-australia-to-boost-aukus
So they might save a few pennies.
The country is BRITAIN. That includes Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and nowhere else. I'm sure nits can facetiously be picked, but no alternative word does the job anywhere near as well as the word Britain.
There is a problem with the USA. The country is obviously not America. It only accounts for a small proportion of America both by population and by land area. Most people in America use the word "America" to denote, well, America - the entire continent. To call the USA "America" is not only wrong but ludicrously parochial. But to make an exception and say that since there's nothing better on offer we'll call the country the United States is to ignore the fact that it isn't the only "United States" even in North America!
Meanwhile, we plough on with Ajax and Challenger III, both of which are money pits which, if they ever deliver finished systems, won't add much to our useful defence capacity anyway.
Realistically, they're likely only even to be used in Europe (definitely the case for Challenger), and it makes zero sense not to buy something that's 100% interoperable with European armies.
What's even more daft is that we already have something which fits the bill
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Vehicle_90
At the other end of the scale, we are doing potentially promising stuff.
https://dronexl.co/2024/04/22/drone-london-defence-tech-hackathon/
Once you've had Times Radio for breakfast you'll never want to hear R4 again.
* I'm not entirely blinkered - he's a complete hooligan, has no sense (or possibly a lot of sense - not sure whether he hurls himself off high things because he's stupid or because he's very smart and knows we'll catch him), can barely string a few words together, is a right grump and soils himself regularly.
It would take another referendum, or your renouncing your citizenship, to change the uncomfortable fact.
Slow walking isn't universal outside of London, growing up in Scotland we tended to walk fast in order to stay warm. Hmm London and Scotland... Maybe fast walkers = Remainers? Would explain the IQ correlation anyway!
On the timing, the 5th of November is pretty much bang on the cross-quarter day of Samhain, and therefore the start of winter in the Celtic calendar, which would traditionally have been marked by the lighting of fires, to ward away the cold of winter. So *that's* a big coincidence.
On bonfires themselves, listening to early Modern English history and you find that the English were mad about bonfires at the time. Anytime they ever had anything to celebrate, they'd all spontaneously rush out and celebrate with a bonfire. So it's a very appropriate link with the past to have an annual bonfire, even if there was a distinct lack of bonfires to celebrate the passing of the Rwanda Bill, and there won't be any to celebrate the impending Tory rout in the general election either, the reflexive urge to light a bonfire in response to good news now being in abeyance.
And that's what makes it so good as our national day. Whatever meaning you want to place on that. It's an opportunity to agree about things.
(This is what the queen used to be very good at: something we could agree on: that the queen had indeed been doing her job for a very very long time, and here, have some cake.)
Anthony Albanese responds to X owner who criticised Australian authorities demanding videos of a Sydney church stabbing be removed
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/apr/23/elon-musk-anthony-albanese-x-twitter-australia-prime-minister-sydney-church-stabbing-videos-ntwnfb
Just sayin'....
Surprised the Greens haven't banned them tbh.
The two helicopters crashed during training for a flyover for Malaysia's 90th Naval Day celebrations."
https://news.sky.com/story/malaysia-10-dead-after-naval-helicopters-collide-mid-air-during-flyover-rehearsal-13121210
I might as well say that you are European.
That’s the Ile de Sein out there. Mythically the end of the world, and home to an ancient little town and port
In lost Celtic times it was the domain of virgin druid priestesses prone to human sacrifice. By the 17th century it boasted a tribe of black capped wrecking witches who would lure sailors to their deaths on the many lethal reefs
Perhaps to make up for this chequered record, when Charles de Gaulle made his famous appeal to France from London on June 18, 1940, every single able bodied male inhabitant of the island - some 150 men - got in a fishing boat and sailed to Britain to join the Free French
Superbe
I met him at a fascinating day conference on future forms of worship / church in London in 1991 organised by the Greenbelt Festival.
Good Times Bad Times, The Age of Wars: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06PtZaSK4YU
RealLifeLore, NATO and Russia preparing for Total War: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lakdZIuZe7c
I hadn't noticed that it is published by Biteback, which is Iain Dale's imprint.
I haven't worked out what the history of this is, but I don't think it's an environmental thing. They still let people cut turf for heating homes, which has to be one of the worst things you could do environmentally, in terms of the ratio of benefit: harm.
How very French.
It's a beautiful, sunny, clear, crisp day in Paris.
Oh to be alive.
Oceans are so much more satisfying to gaze at than seas.
X blocked it from Australia and say that it is only hosted on servers outside Australia.
https://www.andythornton.me.uk/the-late-late-service/
So yes, Catholics enjoy it too.
Work's been a little lighter than usual so I've had more time for such things of late.
So it is very much a British thing.
The flag of St George was first flown in England by yeomen and peasants of the Weald of Sussex and Kent, rebelling against their corrupt and incompetent overlords.
Just so you know.
In fact there are some one-star verified purchases, so AndyJS is entirely accurate even if one sticks to verified purchases.
Plus verified just means bought through Amazon - nothing more. And some of the critical reviews have obviously read the book.
More generally, the unreliability of the review system on online purchases, bookings etc. is a major concern [edit] for online merchants, broadly speaking. See link in my post on the last thread.
The myth was so powerful in Roman times that when the legions reached the river of the dead in northern Portugal/Galicia - which led to the lands of the ghosts, the soldiers refused to cross this relatively tiny river. Julius Caesar himself had to swim it, to prove you could survive on the other side
I had a nice cafe pingado there
So on the 31st December fireworks were going off constantly all over Amsterdam from about lunchtime.
Always Remainers. Midwit Remainers. Guaranteed
There are no negative reviews from verified purchasers.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/178590857X/ref=cm_cr_arp_mb_viewopt_smt?reviewerType=avp_only_reviews&pageNumber=1&sortBy=recent&filterByStar=all_stars&formatType=all_formats&mediaType=all_contents
And there are no verified purchasers amongst the negative reviewers:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/178590857X/ref=cm_cr_getr_mb_paging_btm_2?reviewerType=all_reviews&pageNumber=2&sortBy=recent&filterByStar=critical
Does anyone know?