Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Learning from history

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited February 10 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Learning from history

It is hard – and often painful – to see ourselves as others see us. Countries don’t face annual 360° appraisals. It is perhaps a back-handed compliment that Britain has been important enough to be subject to the scrutiny of others.  Famously, in 1962 Dean Acheson commented that “Great Britain has lost an Empire and has not yet found a role.” Twitter was not around then but the speech, with its acute eye for Britain’s confusion about its role in world affairs, nonetheless struck a sensitive nerve.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • FPT

    Apparently, Jonny Bairstow has just headbutted a ball to the boundary.....

    He's from Yorkshire, we're hard as nails.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    That's a lot of shouty boldness!
  • dotsdots Posts: 615
    On the topic of learning from history, very much at home in this thread.

    Confine their reactionary impulses to themselves, as is the natural order of things.

    Take a look at this, and explain how Pugin is wrong.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus_Pugin#/media/File:Contrasted_Residences_for_the_Poor.jpg

    reaction is the natural order of things?

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,488
    Fourth like Boris
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 48,367
    OK, it's nearly time.

    Allez les Bleus !!!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479
    kinabalu said:

    notme2 said:

    Not actually in Britain though... there wasn’t black slaves in Britain. If you made it to British shores there was no concept of ownership.

    OK I am happy to (and certainly want to) believe that. General point was more that the trading of them (in overseas territories) was at one time not considered unethical in Britain. Or TBF in several other countries.
    Only under a law of 1750, confirmed in 1772. Prior to that there were slaves, including African slaves, in Britain, although not in large numbers.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 14,807

    That's a lot of shouty boldness!

    Mainly to make it easier for me to read, on account of my eyesight having been ruined spending my working life in front of computers.

    If it were down to me, I'd have everything in 18 point type......
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 7,859
    Cyclefree said:

    That's a lot of shouty boldness!

    Mainly to make it easier for me to read, on account of my eyesight having been ruined spending my working life in front of computers.

    If it were down to me, I'd have everything in 18 point type......
    I know that feeling....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    Scott_P said:

    OK, it's nearly time.

    Allez les Bleus !!!

    Ban Hammer, surely?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479
    Floater said:
    It's Ambrose Evan Pritchard. Very likely fake news. And since what the article claims is impossible without Italy leaving the Eurozone, it would be fake news in practice anyway.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    66 seconds!
  • Scott_P said:

    OK, it's nearly time.

    Allez les Bleus !!!

    In your face.

    IN YOUR FACE
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 2,887
    The French kit is very cool I must admit.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,779
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    I'm hoping England give France the biggest hammering they've had since Agincourt.
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    edited February 10
    Floater said:
    The Harry potter party. Sounds a wizard of an idea.

    Perhaps they can launch it at Kings Cross station- because 90% of their supporters and new members will probably live in Camden or Islington!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,841
    Great article @Cyclefree!
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 483
    edited February 10

    Apparently, Jonny Bairstow has just headbutted a ball to the boundary.....

    He's from Yorkshire, we're hard as nails.
    Yorkshire-born and Yorkshire-bred....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    Two score lead again.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479
    brendan16 said:

    Floater said:
    The Harry potter party. Sounds a wizard of an idea.

    Perhaps they can launch it at Kings Cross station- because 90% of their supporters and new members will probably live in Camden or Islington!
    THey would be left scarred by the experience, and would definitely make a spectacle of themselves.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,215
    Thanks for the interesting read, cyclefree!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 2,887
    brendan16 said:

    Floater said:
    The Harry potter party. Sounds a wizard of an idea.

    Perhaps they can launch it at Kings Cross station- because 90% of their supporters and new members will probably live in Camden or Islington!
    I'd be a supporter and I live in Newcastle. We need some magic after the current shower.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 26,286
    Floater said:
    Well, they could do that, but that would require them to leave the EU, as the EU is a customs union. It would be like Scotland having a trade agreement with the United States - not possible under current arrangements.

    What will, I suspect, definitely happen in Southern Europe is that countries will want to make it as easy as possible for UK holidaymakers and retirees to get into their countries, and to travel for tourist reasons. So I would expect legislation to pass in most of these countries (and it has already in Spain), making it is easier to be British and to travel to (and stay in) these places.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479

    brendan16 said:

    Floater said:
    The Harry potter party. Sounds a wizard of an idea.

    Perhaps they can launch it at Kings Cross station- because 90% of their supporters and new members will probably live in Camden or Islington!
    I'd be a supporter and I live in Newcastle. We need some magic after the current shower.
    I'm fairly sure that makes you Ron.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 2,887
    ydoethur said:

    brendan16 said:

    Floater said:
    The Harry potter party. Sounds a wizard of an idea.

    Perhaps they can launch it at Kings Cross station- because 90% of their supporters and new members will probably live in Camden or Islington!
    I'd be a supporter and I live in Newcastle. We need some magic after the current shower.
    I'm fairly sure that makes you Ron.
    Ron revolutionised the Ministry of Magic. He also married Hermonie. I can live with that comparison.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479

    ydoethur said:

    brendan16 said:

    Floater said:
    The Harry potter party. Sounds a wizard of an idea.

    Perhaps they can launch it at Kings Cross station- because 90% of their supporters and new members will probably live in Camden or Islington!
    I'd be a supporter and I live in Newcastle. We need some magic after the current shower.
    I'm fairly sure that makes you Ron.
    Ron revolutionised the Ministry of Magic. He also married Hermonie. I can live with that comparison.
    I think he married Hermione rather than her monie, but that's a wizarding wheeze.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,548
    edited February 10
    Learning from history? It will never catch on.

    Honestly, as confusing as it can be I don't know how we learn from history as we generally do- I'm reading a book about religious radicals in the 17th century, a topic I already know a little about, and it was so convoluted a situation it's a miracle that people are able to even summarise it, let alone learn anything. And half the things people learn from are based on things that are wrong anyway.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,572
    Scott_P said:

    OK, it's nearly time.

    Allez les Bleus !!!

    Allez les blancs, you mean? ;)
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    YES!!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    Surrender monkeys running up the white flag.....
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479

    Surrender monkeys running up the white flag.....

    Never heard Yorkshiremen called that before, although given how awful they have been on this tour...

    BAirstow's castling just the latest embarrassment.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    Great thread Cyclefree.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 2,887
    England :smiley:
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    Are you Georgia in disguise?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    Oh my God, yes.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,838
    Nowhere near first because I have been rabbiting away to myself on the PT and I have also read this (very good!) header.

    OK (dots, ydoethur) so not EVERY generation eschews the temptation to funnel their nostalgia into political (re)action. I concede that point. But they SHOULD do, if I can get away with that.

    Regarding the topic here, I think Brexit creates a marvelous opportunity to go in one of two directions, both of which are incompatible with EU membership.

    Radical shift Left - big state, widespread public ownership, socialistic redistribution of wealth.

    Radical shift Right - small state, low taxes, light regulation, free port, bulldog tiger economy.

    However if we wish to trundle along broadly as we are (which I am pretty certain that we do) then Brexit is above all else a complete waste of time.

    If we are not going to do anything particularly big and frightening that we could not in any case do as an EU member it follows that leaving the bloc does not even remotely justify the trauma, the time, the trouble of it all.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,548

    Oh my God, yes.

    I think Casino Royale may have a sex chat going in another window and is getting them mixed up.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,215

    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    Hm, that didn't end up too well for the attackers in the second half :p
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479

    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The correct expression is, 'than in an English batsman's defensive technique.'

    What is the difference between a sound defence by an England batsman and the Loch Ness Monster?

    There are people who claim to have seen the Loch Ness Monster.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 5,495
    kinabalu said:

    Nowhere near first because I have been rabbiting away to myself on the PT and I have also read this (very good!) header.

    Regarding the topic here, I think Brexit creates a marvelous opportunity to go in one of two directions, both of which are incompatible with EU membership.

    Radical shift Left - big state, widespread public ownership, socialistic redistribution of wealth.

    Radical shift Right - small state, low taxes, light regulation, free port, bulldog tiger economy.

    However if we wish to trundle along broadly as we are (which I am pretty certain that we do) then Brexit is above all else a complete waste of time.

    If we are not going to do anything particularly big and frightening that we could not in any case do as an EU member it follows that leaving the bloc does not even remotely justify the trauma, the time, the trouble of it all.

    I think there is a third option - a radical re-imagining of the nation state for the 21st Century. Your notions of the Left and Right shift are the mindsets of the 20th Century (or even further back). We need something different and better.

    It goes right back to the fundamentals - the kind of society and communities we want, the kind of decision making process best equipped to a digital age, the nature of work, the economic model we want to follow, the places we want to live in, the ways we want to relax.

    Leaving the EU affords us the opportunity to re-invent ourselves from the ground up and it's a debate that ought to begin the minute we leave the EU. Confronting those who feel alienated, disengaged and discontent and challenging power in all its form is what we should be about in the 2020s.

    Unfortunately, all we have is Corbyn's clapped out socialism and the Conservatives' clapped out old Thatcherism.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    First half bonus point!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479
    That was pathetic. Four wickets in three overs gives the lie to the 'batting deep' line.
  • I would be fascinated to know the 100 seats the new "centrist" party think they can win.

    If they did a deal with the LDs, I think the 2 parties could win 50 seats max between them and that's pushing it.

    Certainly I couldn't see Soubry or Umunna holding their current seats.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    ydoethur said:

    That was pathetic. Four wickets in three overs gives the lie to the 'batting deep' line.

    Anything under 300 was piss poor from that start of play today.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    ydoethur said:

    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The correct expression is, 'than in an English batsman's defensive technique.'

    What is the difference between a sound defence by an England batsman and the Loch Ness Monster?

    There are people who claim to have seen the Loch Ness Monster.
    I'm focussing on the rugger at the moment.

    The cricket is..err... too tense.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462
    kle4 said:

    Oh my God, yes.

    I think Casino Royale may have a sex chat going in another window and is getting them mixed up.
    This is even better than that.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,572
    ydoethur said:

    That was pathetic. Four wickets in three overs gives the lie to the 'batting deep' line.

    If you want to watch a great England side, switch to the rugby!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,535
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Saw most of the first half. Somewhat surprised how well England are doing.
  • More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The French chances of winning this match have sunk quicker than the French fleet at Mers-el-Kébir.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,215
    kle4 said:

    Oh my God, yes.

    I think Casino Royale may have a sex chat going in another window and is getting them mixed up.
    I thought he had just discovered an extra pineapple pizza in the freezer.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,841
    ydoethur said:

    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The correct expression is, 'than in an English batsman's defensive technique.'
    Shane Warne, like the German army, just went round the back.
  • Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    That was pathetic. Four wickets in three overs gives the lie to the 'batting deep' line.

    If you want to watch a great England side, switch to the rugby!
    England Rugby will probably score more points today than England Cricket get runs.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479

    ydoethur said:

    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The correct expression is, 'than in an English batsman's defensive technique.'
    Shane Warne, like the German army, just went round the back.
    Shane Warne's antics with Elizabeth Hurley are not germane to this thread.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 20,479

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    That was pathetic. Four wickets in three overs gives the lie to the 'batting deep' line.

    If you want to watch a great England side, switch to the rugby!
    England Rugby will probably score more points today than England Cricket get runs.
    That's like saying somebody will organise a fairer election than Nicolas Maduro.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 18,815
    edited February 10
    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,535
    I'm curious what the handicap markets were before the match kicked off. I considered giving it a look, but as I didn't have a clue how the match would go, decided against it.

    Of course, France were thrashing Wales halfway through their match, and things turned out quite differently.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771

    I'm curious what the handicap markets were before the match kicked off. I considered giving it a look, but as I didn't have a clue how the match would go, decided against it.

    Of course, France were thrashing Wales halfway through their match, and things turned out quite differently.

    I'll look forward to France having a shocking second half.....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,548
    The messenger is as important as the message a lot of the time. Or more so, given people will support or reject an idea because of who proposes it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462

    More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The French chances of winning this match have sunk quicker than the French fleet at Mers-el-Kébir.
    Like.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,548
    I just don't see how Liverpool can stop Man City. Despite where the points are when you see them play Man City look leagues better.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 14,807

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    Actually, I haven't missed that. The Henderson despatch does not show the arrogance you describe though I don't doubt that it existed. I think if anything there was a mixture of that and a refusal to understand the nature of the EU and what it was set up for.

    I think that if Britain ends up remaining or rejoining it must do so on a proper understanding of what the EU is and what that means for the future.

    But - equally - those who now think that leaving is the right thing to do need to have a clear understanding of what this means. And I fear that they don't. And, further, that they display exactly the same arrogance and refusal to face facts as the people you describe.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 5,495

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    To what extent and in what way could it have been different?

    Centuries of conflicts, misunderstandings and misconceptions were always going to be difficult to overcome. The notion that the British could disrupt or break down the Franco-German axis and create either an Anglo-French or Anglo-German core would have required more effective leaders at that than we had.

    Possibly Blair was the nearest we came to the "European" leader and along with Schroeder, he acted as a useful counterpoint to Chirac.

    To take your observation a shade further, the notion we could lead the EU and make it more British is as absurd as the notion the EU could make us more European.
  • stodge said:

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    To what extent and in what way could it have been different?

    Centuries of conflicts, misunderstandings and misconceptions were always going to be difficult to overcome. The notion that the British could disrupt or break down the Franco-German axis and create either an Anglo-French or Anglo-German core would have required more effective leaders at that than we had.

    Possibly Blair was the nearest we came to the "European" leader and along with Schroeder, he acted as a useful counterpoint to Chirac.

    To take your observation a shade further, the notion we could lead the EU and make it more British is as absurd as the notion the EU could make us more European.
    Oh I agree entirely. The mistake was in thinking it could be otherwise. But it is that mistaken strand of thinking that has permeated British Europhile attitudes to the EU ever since it was founded.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,841

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    Again and again your analysis falls down because of a moveable definition of "we". Whether or not members of the British elite were deluded about the level of influence they would have within the EEC/EU has no bearing on whether or not it is right for "us" to be part of it.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,353
    kle4 said:

    Learning from history? It will never catch on.

    Honestly, as confusing as it can be I don't know how we learn from history as we generally do- I'm reading a book about religious radicals in the 17th century, a topic I already know a little about, and it was so convoluted a situation it's a miracle that people are able to even summarise it, let alone learn anything. And half the things people learn from are based on things that are wrong anyway.

    History.

    History.

    History.

    Sorry about that. I ignored history and that's what I ended up having to do.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,535
    Talk of reshaping the EU and influencing it to 'make it work for us' reminds me of when I watched This Week. It was a while ago, maybe a decade. The guests were an actor fellow (blonde chap, played one of the sons of the king in Stardust, I think it was called) and some wonky expert chap.

    Blonde chap had an edited little video clip about how good the EU was and how we should engage with it. End the video, and Andrew Neil asked him how, using the EU's structures/machinery, we could influence it that way. Actor-chap turned to wonky expert and immediately said "Over to you."

    Witty, but it does sum up those who think we should stay in and reform the EU. I'd really like that idea, if it had an iota of credibility. EU reform has always been about ever great integration. The maximum they'll entertain is the occasional opt-out. A so-called associate status doesn't exist, and won't.

    Furthermore, the vast majority of the EU, of course, is non-British. If you have an EU demos, a continent-spanning identity, that's fine, because decisions democratically taken (not that that happens, but it's the obvious counterpoint to those who argue the EU isn't democratic enough) can then be accepted by others who do not share those views. But such an identity only exists in the UK in a tiny handful of people. There is no EU demos.

    This fork in the road was always coming. The difference is that if Remain had been won there'd be no talk in the political/media class of a compromise solution where we partially leave the EU. It'd all be about accepting the democratic decision and moving on.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 3,838
    stodge said:


    I think there is a third option - a radical re-imagining of the nation state for the 21st Century. Your notions of the Left and Right shift are the mindsets of the 20th Century (or even further back). We need something different and better.

    It goes right back to the fundamentals - the kind of society and communities we want, the kind of decision making process best equipped to a digital age, the nature of work, the economic model we want to follow, the places we want to live in, the ways we want to relax.

    Leaving the EU affords us the opportunity to re-invent ourselves from the ground up and it's a debate that ought to begin the minute we leave the EU. Confronting those who feel alienated, disengaged and discontent and challenging power in all its form is what we should be about in the 2020s.

    Unfortunately, all we have is Corbyn's clapped out socialism and the Conservatives' clapped out old Thatcherism.

    Excellent points - and it certainly sounds a more alluring 3rd way than Tony and Bill's.

    Couple of things though -

    VERY ambitious.

    And are these the sort of issues that we are more likely to tackle successfully outside the EU rather than in?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 14,807

    stodge said:

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    To what extent and in what way could it have been different?

    Centuries of conflicts, misunderstandings and misconceptions were always going to be difficult to overcome. The notion that the British could disrupt or break down the Franco-German axis and create either an Anglo-French or Anglo-German core would have required more effective leaders at that than we had.

    Possibly Blair was the nearest we came to the "European" leader and along with Schroeder, he acted as a useful counterpoint to Chirac.

    To take your observation a shade further, the notion we could lead the EU and make it more British is as absurd as the notion the EU could make us more European.
    Oh I agree entirely. The mistake was in thinking it could be otherwise. But it is that mistaken strand of thinking that has permeated British Europhile attitudes to the EU ever since it was founded.
    The issue now though is what sort of Britain the Brexiteers want it to be, how to get there and what sort of relationship with the EU Britain should have.

    There is no sign of any sensible thinking on these rather important topics. Rather, there is evidence of the sort of arrogance and delusions about facts which you make of the Europhiles.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    If we get 8 tries, can we have two bonus points? Pretty please?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 76,380
    edited February 10
    If we score 50 points we're entitled to Calais, Normandy, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771
    England have a 6 score lead with 23 minutes to go......
  • Cyclefree said:


    The issue now though is what sort of Britain the Brexiteers want it to be, how to get there and what sort of relationship with the EU Britain should have.

    There is no sign of any sensible thinking on these rather important topics. Rather, there is evidence of the sort of arrogance and delusions about facts which you make of the Europhiles.

    There is plenty of sensible thinking, just not by the politicians. And it seems to be the Remainers who bemoan the loss of influence and power projection which they associate with Brexit just as much as the 'Singapore on Sea' crowd seen to think it would enhance our position. Neither is necessary or viable. There is nothing wrong with being Norway, or Canada or for that matter Estonia. What is important is we find a sustainable position in the world that we are happy with and which provides the population with a certain standard of living. Telling the rest of the world what they should be doing is a mugs game better left to mugs like the US and China.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,548
    With the Rugby and the CIty-CHelsea game, do people not like actual contests anymore!?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,390
    Two more for City and Arsenal go fifth!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771

    If we score 50 points we're entitled to Calais, Normandy, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.

    If we score 50 points, Macron has to ask for the backstop to be dropped.....
  • kinabalu said:

    stodge said:


    I think there is a third option - a radical re-imagining of the nation state for the 21st Century. Your notions of the Left and Right shift are the mindsets of the 20th Century (or even further back). We need something different and better.

    It goes right back to the fundamentals - the kind of society and communities we want, the kind of decision making process best equipped to a digital age, the nature of work, the economic model we want to follow, the places we want to live in, the ways we want to relax.

    Leaving the EU affords us the opportunity to re-invent ourselves from the ground up and it's a debate that ought to begin the minute we leave the EU. Confronting those who feel alienated, disengaged and discontent and challenging power in all its form is what we should be about in the 2020s.

    Unfortunately, all we have is Corbyn's clapped out socialism and the Conservatives' clapped out old Thatcherism.

    Excellent points - and it certainly sounds a more alluring 3rd way than Tony and Bill's.

    Couple of things though -

    VERY ambitious.

    And are these the sort of issues that we are more likely to tackle successfully outside the EU rather than in?
    I would say I agree with Stodge's vision entirely. I would also say that yes, these sorts of changes can only take place outside the EU because so many aspects of our lives that would need to be adjusted for this revolution to take place are now controlled by the EU.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 50,535
    Becoming concerned my bets on Ireland/England vs Italy being the top scoring match might be thwarted...
  • tlg86 said:

    Two more for City and Arsenal go fifth!

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 29,462

    If we score 50 points we're entitled to Calais, Normandy, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.

    If we score 50 points, Macron has to ask for the backstop to be dropped.....
    If we score 50 points, Macron has to honour the Treaty of Troyes
  • So who will get sacked first?

    Marco Silva or Sarri?
  • Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    Again and again your analysis falls down because of a moveable definition of "we". Whether or not members of the British elite were deluded about the level of influence they would have within the EEC/EU has no bearing on whether or not it is right for "us" to be part of it.
    That is just meaningless drivel.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 25,771

    So who will get sacked first?

    Marco Silva or Sarri?

    Going to be an interesting half time team talk!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 22,572
    So the recent low definition of a cricket score is the miserable 60 that the Aussies got a couple of years ago. England rugby well on course to put cricket score past the frogs tonight.

    Thankfully I’ve not got a meeting with two French customers in the morning. Oh...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,215

    If we score 50 points we're entitled to Calais, Normandy, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.

    Better start thinking up some anglicised versions of those names... :p
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,841

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    Again and again your analysis falls down because of a moveable definition of "we". Whether or not members of the British elite were deluded about the level of influence they would have within the EEC/EU has no bearing on whether or not it is right for "us" to be part of it.
    That is just meaningless drivel.
    You're arguing against a strawman, which should be obvious given that you've just suggested we could be like Estonia.

    I fully agree. Let's start by joining the Eurozone.
  • RobD said:

    If we score 50 points we're entitled to Calais, Normandy, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.

    Better start thinking up some anglicised versions of those names... :p
    New Agincourt, New Waterloo, and New Trafalgar, respectively.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 38,215

    RobD said:

    If we score 50 points we're entitled to Calais, Normandy, and Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur.

    Better start thinking up some anglicised versions of those names... :p
    New Agincourt, New Waterloo, and New Trafalgar, respectively.
    Fitting, I’m sure the locals will be most pleased with the new name for their town.
  • Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    Spot on. Those who ask why are we leaving are asking exactly the wrong question. The question should be why did we join ?

    It was genuinely interesting to the English that the continentals were setting up a Common Market. Now, after 1789, 1914 and 1939 it was self-evident that Johnny Foreigner really wasn't up to these big projects and they would need our experience in leadership.

    We never joined to be equal, we joined to provide the same leadership we had already given, so benevolently to the Irish, the Scots and the Welsh. At first it went to plan and it was England that provided the first leaders of Europe, Henry Plumb, Chris Tugenhat and Roy Jenkins for instance. I think we assumed that like the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish, the French, the Germans at al would become more English than the English.

    As early as 1980 Giscard d'Estang famously said he didn't like Margaret Thatcher, "ni comme homme, ni comme femme". But, he wasn't being honest, he didn't like her because she was English.

    Only De Gaulle truly had our interests at heart when he said "non".
  • More holes in the French defence than the Maignot Line.

    The French chances of winning this match have sunk quicker than the French fleet at Mers-el-Kébir.
    Um. Surely a better comparison would be Trafalgar?

    At Mers-el-Kebir, the French only lost one battleship outright, the Bretagne. And a tugboat.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 45,548
    Close to it. It is unbelievably irresponsible to keep kicking the can like this.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 29,841
    edited February 10

    Cyclefree misses the most obvious consequence of Acheson's comments. Those in Britain who thought that losing an Empire was a thing to be regretted were then arrogant enough to think that joining the EEC would provide us with a ready made replacement to rule over. Such was the thinking inside the political classes and the civil service for many years both before and after 1973. It is also the arrogance that has pervaded the Europhile elements of British society for all of our membership - the idea that if only we played a greater role the then EU would be bound to transform into something we could be happy with, something we had remade in our own image.

    Even now this is a common delusion repeated on here regularly by Remainers.

    And yet the EU was never, ever going to be remoulded in the way we wanted and nor should it. For this reason, amongst many others, we are much better off being out of it for both our sakes and those of the rest of the EU.

    Spot on. Those who ask why are we leaving are asking exactly the wrong question. The question should be why did we join ?

    It was genuinely interesting to the English that the continentals were setting up a Common Market. Now, after 1789, 1914 and 1939 it was self-evident that Johnny Foreigner really wasn't up to these big projects and they would need our experience in leadership.

    We never joined to be equal, we joined to provide the same leadership we had already given, so benevolently to the Irish, the Scots and the Welsh. At first it went to plan and it was England that provided the first leaders of Europe, Henry Plumb, Chris Tugenhat and Roy Jenkins for instance. I think we assumed that like the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish, the French, the Germans at al would become more English than the English.

    As early as 1980 Giscard d'Estang famously said he didn't like Margaret Thatcher, "ni comme homme, ni comme femme". But, he wasn't being honest, he didn't like her because she was English.

    Only De Gaulle truly had our interests at heart when he said "non".
    This is self-pitying tosh. If we'd joined because we thought we should take the lead, we wouldn't have shown the level of disinterest that led some to conclude we were only in it to take what we could get out of it.
  • kle4 said:

    Close to it. It is unbelievably irresponsible to keep kicking the can like this.
    Brexit will be fun, soon the EU will realise the UK holds all the cards and acquiesce to the UK's demands.
This discussion has been closed.