MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Questions Of The Day (Politics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 179, 180, 181 ... 184, 185, 186  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ishmael wrote:
It's hard to criticize British politicians for thinking the Jews undeserving of homeland when the same politicians think the British undeserving of one either.

It's all about anti-imperialism and guilt. Corbyn and Livingstone stoked the fires of hatred towards America, Britain and Israel by giving uncritical support to all those that opposed these "evil" nations. The problem was this included supporting nations with poor human rights records, eg Cuba and Venezuela, and being soft on Russia, they also had a history of sharing platforms with religious extremists and terrorist groups, and not being careful enough when sharing tweets and opening their gobs.

These old ex-leaders don't get that the youngsters want polite peaceful, consumer anti-imperialism.

Enough from Wiley. I am off to enjoy my fair-trade cup of coffee.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I am off to enjoy my fair-trade cup of coffee.

That reminds me, we must make a list of gestures that give the illusion of caring but actually do no good. (With a subset of those that do positive harm.) They are always a moving target. As I have been pointing out about recycling -- good idea, didn't work, now disastrous. Fair-trade itself was a nifty idea, it doesn't work but it probably does no harm. Taking the knee at Premiership matches was a reasonable act of solidarity. Now it is a rote gesture that irritates and therefore probably does more harm than good. Though, contrariwise, it's worth doing at away Champions League matches, if the other side don't, to remind everyone who are the champions of non-racism.

Undsoweiter!
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

That reminds me, we must make a list of gestures that give the illusion of caring but actually do no good.


Wiley has recently received his first email from a young lady that advises her preferred pronouns are "her" "her's"......
Send private message
Grant



View user's profile
Reply with quote

Please advise her she is illiterate: it's "hers" not "her's."
God I love being pedantic
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:

That reminds me, we must make a list of gestures that give the illusion of caring but actually do no good.


That reminds me, we need to update the breakfast menu here at Château Boreades. Some city intelligentsia types keep asking for more Vegan options.

Fairy nuff, but the useless twats usually say "Oh, by the way, did we tell you we is Vegan?.". Just after M'Lady has sent the servant into town to collect the food and drink rations for the following day. It's all strictly portion-controlled in the current lockdown regime.

In response, M'Lady has frequently made a number of gestures behind the backs of these visitors, usually involving two fingers.

Our latest vegan menu option is "a high-fibre compote with tomato puree and freshly harvested vegetables". Some might say it's corregated cardboard smeared with Heinz Tomato Ketchup, with some grass trimmings and nettles thrown on top. I couldn't possibly comment.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Grant wrote:
Please advise her she is illiterate: it's "hers" not "her's."
God I love being pedantic


Or hearse?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Actually Veganism would not count because it is not put forward as 'caring'. Vegetarianism takes care of the animals, veganism merely ensures that they will not be kept for their products i.e. dairy and eggs. It may, at a pinch, claim to be caring for the earth in that even animal products take up more land than cereals et al but that would be a hard row to hoe.

Ironically, now we know that plants feel pain too and should not be exploited by caring human beings, we are left with protein from oil, which is a non-renewable resource. Technically, cannibalism is allowable and would, long term, reduce population pressures. Illegal in Wiltshire of course.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
we are left with protein from oil, which is a non-renewable resource.


What kind of oil do you have in mind? And why is it non-renewable?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Technically, any kind of oil -- even the Kérastase Elixir Ultime Rose Hair Oil that I used in my lounge lizard days -- can be converted into edible protein. But probably Saudi Light crude would be the major source until it ran out.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Indy newspaper is asking:

Build Back Better - who said it first? Joe Biden or Boris Johnson?

Wot they talking about?

They are extremely fond of the “build back better” slogan when talking about their economic plans. Both politicians have been peppering their speeches with the promise, using it to suggest a fairer and more prosperous future awaits after our recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.

That's nice, a warm and cuddly fairer and more prosperous tomorrow.

The Indy perseveres...

So which of them had it first it? Who stole from whom? Mr Johnson formally “unveiled” the slogan at Exeter College on 29 September — using it as a backdrop and throughout his speech about jobs and training. However, Mr Biden had launched his own “build back better” recovery plan even earlier — on 9 July. When it comes to more casual use of the phrase during 2020, things get murkier. Mr Johnson first used the line “we owe it to future generations to build back better” way back on 28 May, and used it again on 30 June.

That's fine, maybe there's a website where JB's and BJ's political scriptwriters swap ideas? Something like "Applied Electoral Librettos"?

Then we get to the real origin of the phrase.

Building Back Better (BBB) is a program that was first officially used in the United Nations' Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction document, which was agreed on at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction held on March 14–18, 2015, in Sendai, Japan. The UN General Assembly adopted this document on June 3, 2015.


Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_Back_Better

That's all very well, but my question of the day is:
Why did they chose an anagram of “Bilderberg Attic Bunk” as their slogan?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Bilderberg People first came together in the rash of conferences held towards the end of and just after the Second World War. They laid the planks for the New World Order which was to 'build back better' after the destruction wrought by the war. And did a thoroughly good job too.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

More phrases in the news:

Dark Winter.

Mentioned a few times recently on Radio 4 in connection with Covid-19.

Originally a US military Psy-Ops exercise in 2001, wondering how to control the population after a smallpox outbreak.

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/events-archive/2001_dark-winter/about.html

Stand easy soldier, this is no drill. Just a case of life imitating art.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote



So what are we to make of Dom's Departure? The Punch theory about the Kaiser wanting to take the reins himself? Forget it, Boris isn't interested in power, only in being Prime Minister. The Jeremy Thorpe theory, re Macmillan's night of the long lives, "Greater love hath no man than this, that he lay down his friends for his life"? No, Boris kept him on after Barnard Castlegate. Her indoors giving him a hard time? Mebbe. But only if everybody else is giving him a hard time (in the Margaret Thatcher / Winston Churchill sense not the Jeffrey Archer / Jonathan Aitken sense). Boris wants to be loved. Boris needs to be loved.

Dom of course is the opposite. But now there is no lightning rod. Worse, the government will continue to go off the rails because of the inadequacies of the governmental machine and there will no longer be a Dom machine to do anything about it. But it was a forlorn quest anyway -- machine? spanner in the works more like -- so Boris will soldier on until 2024 to be replaced by that arch-apparatchik, Keir Stamper. When will it ever end? Not in my lifetime I hope.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:

So what are we to make of Dom's Departure?


Maybe he had the wrong skill set? The critical moment for Boris was when his activists elected him, and in part the nation elected him to get Brexit done. Who could be better than Dom who was at the forefront of the original campaign? Good appointment. Afraid not, much of governance is simply not like this, it's really about gently nudging reluctant supporters or often simply swerving issues, simply keeping the thing going whilst waiting for the critical issues. I doubt Dom had the skillset.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

But surely it is obvious that nobody has the requisite skill-set. Not just here but everywhere (even, it seems, Germany). All modern industrialised societies hover around 40% for the public sector and as society as a whole has expanded, the public sector cannot cope.

The private sector manages its 60% by the simple expedient of breaking down (and when necessary merging together) its units into manageable bite-sized chunks, each responsible for a narrow range of functions, all operated by specialist professionals. Being monolithic, the government cannot do this. It keeps trying to create arms-length units to operate this or that function but eventually everything breaks down (no, better, clogs up) because all the strings are, sooner or later, in the hands of the civil service and its managing board, the Cabinet.

Take the NHS. (Please!) This is, as I keep pointing out, the third largest corporate body in the world and yet the whole thing is run from Richmond House, by civil servants who are neither health professionals nor corporate executives experienced in running large organisations. They report to a minister who has to learn on the job and will be moved long before he has done so. But who in any case reports to a Cabinet that can only devote, say, an hour a week to the NHS (imagine the board of BP devoting an hour a week to the oil business) but even that does not include considerations of efficiency, only an anxiety to deflect complaints about this or that 'scandal' that is currently assailing it. Universal solution: throw a bit more money at whatever it is.

Universal result: a well-funded corporate body that is stupendously inefficient and run for the benefit of its staff rather than the consumer of its services because they are the only professionals in town and know where the bodies need to be buried. Not only do they have no professional oversight, they can't even go bust, the ultimate sanction in the private sector when the customer is dissatisfied. Dissatisfied? They just lurve the NHS! That's the bit that Dom and his ideologues can never fathom. They are right-wing intellectuals not Applied Epistemologists.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 179, 180, 181 ... 184, 185, 186  Next

Jump to:  
Page 180 of 186

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group