Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Very good post....kind of reminds me of the 2016 Potus election where many people (particularly those on the right) said that both candidates were equally terrible. No they were not. Trump was and is fucking vile. Not quite the same with HRC.
The problem with this plague on both your houses argument is that it gives traction to the greater of the two evils. Communism and Nazism are not the same, and only people of a right persuasion will argue that this is the case.
In the 20th century Communism was responsible for far more deaths than fascism was.
How is it demonstrably "better"?
I guess you are of the "right".
Post war there were some communists who did good things. Tony Benn's 1974 Energy Policy for instance. The Gramsci marxists who effectively ran most of Italy's local government and contributed to Italy's stunning economic miracle. The French communists who propped up Mitterand Govts. Most of Europe lived quite amicably with communists within a pluralistic electoral system.
Do you really think fascists and Nazi's of of the same ilk? Really? I would suggest your right wing blinkery completely precludes your brain from assessing anything from the left with any semblance of rationality.
I am a classic liberal: economically right but socially liberal. I view both Fascism and Communism with nothing but contempt and disgust. I disagree with the left but I also draw a distinction between the left and Communists, do you do the same with the right?
I see Communism and Fascism as two sides of the same illiberal and frankly evil coin.
Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump 23m23 minutes ago More The Chinese Envoy, who just returned from North Korea, seems to have had no impact on Little Rocket Man. Hard to believe his people, and the military, put up with living in such horrible conditions. Russia and China condemned the launch.
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
No chance of Hunt beating Boris, Mogg or Davis with the membership if those are his opponents in the final 2.
Only way Hunt may get it if is MPs pick Rudd and Hunt to go to the membership, hence Hunt now trying to present himself as a 'born again Leaver' in contrast to Remainer Rudd.
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Very good post....kind of reminds me of the 2016 Potus election where many people (particularly those on the right) said that both candidates were equally terrible. No they were not. Trump was and is fucking vile. Not quite the same with HRC.
The problem with this plague on both your houses argument is that it gives traction to the greater of the two evils. Communism and Nazism are not the same, and only people of a right persuasion will argue that this is the case.
In the 20th century Communism was responsible for far more deaths than fascism was.
How is it demonstrably "better"?
Household stairs were responsible for more deaths than Islamic Terrorists in the UK this year. Islamic Terrorists are demonstrably better than stairs.
Under mass killings alone Communism is responsible for between 85 million and 100 million deaths alone.
That's just mass killing deaths ... not counting deaths due to wars etc or injuries short of death.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
No chance of Hunt beating Boris, Mogg or Davis with the membership if those are his opponents in the final 2.
Only way Hunt may get it if is MPs pick Rudd and Hunt to go to the membership, hence Hunt now trying to present himself as a 'born again Leaver' in contrast to Remainer Rudd.
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
In short it will: cancel the ongoing boundary review stick with 650 seats, not 600 protect 18 seats for Northern Ireland is protected and its quota defined separately move the variance up from 5% to 7.5% commit to a boundary review every ten years with the next review to report in autumn 2020 use the electorate at the 2017 General Election
I wonder if the Government will put up token resistance but allow this to go through? I can't see any way they have the numbers for the current review with all other parties against and individual Tories under pressure with locally controversial boundaries.
I think it would still create problems where there are stupidly large wards which unfairly create ripple effects elsewhere , albeit with 7.5% you'd have a little more choice. I'd want to see an amendment permitting ward splits where it the effects of not doing so would affect multiple other authorities - Sheffield and Birmingham are the worst 2 examples.
Reckon it'll go through?
Even when generally agreed on, it's very rare for Private Members' Bills to go through. We may well see that kind of outcome, but I'd predict it will come from a government-backed measure.
Governments sometimes "adopt" Private Members' Bills, giving them the parliamentary time required to pass into law. This is a very curious Bill in that it seems like a very sensible & fair compromise and therefore I'm not entirely clear as to why a Labour MP would be introducing it, given that it seems to be taken as read that the existing review will fail (advantaging Labour).
I agree. My understanding is that a new MP who has done well in the Private Members Ballot will be besieged by special interest groups asking them to adopt their cause - so this is a very odd bill to bring forward. You wonder whether he is sponsor in name only? And who is really behind this?
If the Government wanted to live with it they would move some non-fatal amendments such as it only taking effect if the current review fails, regular updates to registers of electors, protected status for Tory shires etc. So it looks like they are turning it into their bill while not actually doing much.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
I'll take the £10 at 50/1 on the bet.
Make it 25/1 and I will agree at £10 (purely for the moral victory if it ever occurred though I could get an M and S meal deal from you)
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
I'll take the £10 at 50/1 on the bet.
Make it 25/1 and I will agree at £10 (purely for the moral victory if it ever occurred though I could get an M and S meal deal from you)
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
No chance of Hunt beating Boris, Mogg or Davis with the membership if those are his opponents in the final 2.
Only way Hunt may get it if is MPs pick Rudd and Hunt to go to the membership, hence Hunt now trying to present himself as a 'born again Leaver' in contrast to Remainer Rudd.
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
You ought both to clarify what happens if the final two are not "Hunt and {Boris or JRM}". By the text of HYUFD's claim ("No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg") the bet ought to be void, but by the wording of TSE's proposal HYUFD ought to win.
Mr. Divvie, bit odd, I did specifically say there was a vast yawning chasm between the theory and practice of Communism.
Mr. Palmer, it's just a coincidence that a load of people with hammer and sickle banners and Stalin posters keep attending marches that Corbyn attends?
Rightyho. I'm sure you, and others, would take that view if May went on a march and some other people turned up with Nazi banners and she kept on marching with them.
Morris - whilst I share your abhorrence of communism and the appalling misery, torture, famine and death it has inflicted upon millions during its hundred years, there is the partial defence - to which you allude - that whilst the evils of fascism are mostly hard-wired into its ideology, the evils of communism arise (pretty inevitably, in my view) from its application rather than directly from its thinking?
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
No chance of Hunt beating Boris, Mogg or Davis with the membership if those are his opponents in the final 2.
Only way Hunt may get it if is MPs pick Rudd and Hunt to go to the membership, hence Hunt now trying to present himself as a 'born again Leaver' in contrast to Remainer Rudd.
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
You ought both to clarify what happens if the final two are not "Hunt and {Boris or JRM}". By the text of HYUFD's claim ("No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg") the bet ought to be void, but by the wording of TSE's proposal HYUFD ought to win.
If Hunt wins the Tory leadership I win, if JRM or Boris wins, HYUFD wins, if none of those three win, bet is void.
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
No chance of Hunt beating Boris, Mogg or Davis with the membership if those are his opponents in the final 2.
Only way Hunt may get it if is MPs pick Rudd and Hunt to go to the membership, hence Hunt now trying to present himself as a 'born again Leaver' in contrast to Remainer Rudd.
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
You ought both to clarify what happens if the final two are not "Hunt and {Boris or JRM}". By the text of HYUFD's claim ("No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg") the bet ought to be void, but by the wording of TSE's proposal HYUFD ought to win.
If the bet is void in those circs then it is a beyond horrendous bet for HYUFD.
As always companoes benefit from making money and the losses are loaded onto the taxpayer. He should have hung stagecoach out to dry and forced them to lose money for 3 years.
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
O
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
You ought both to clarify what happens if the final two are not "Hunt and {Boris or JRM}". By the text of HYUFD's claim ("No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg") the bet ought to be void, but by the wording of TSE's proposal HYUFD ought to win.
If Hunt wins the Tory leadership I win, if JRM or Boris wins, HYUFD wins, if none of those three win, bet is void.
What if one of them comes second and the other(s) aren't in the final two, but beaten in the MPs ballot? It hinges on what "beat" means in the original bet.
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
But the commies were exterminating the right people, they were the good guys. Why can't any of you see it!
What if one of them comes second and the other(s) aren't in the final two, but beaten in the MPs ballot? It hinges on what "beat" means in the original bet.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Governments sometimes "adopt" Private Members' Bills, giving them the parliamentary time required to pass into law. This is a very curious Bill in that it seems like a very sensible & fair compromise and therefore I'm not entirely clear as to why a Labour MP would be introducing it, given that it seems to be taken as read that the existing review will fail (advantaging Labour).
It's the successor to a bill last year by Pat Glass, also a Labour MP - essentially Labour is trying to put forward a constructive alternative since the boundary review can't be postponed forever. It's 3rd in the ballot so may well pass (not least as they have an extended 18-month session) unless the Government opposes it.
So still about the same as the 2005 Luntz focus group which correctly predicted future general election winner Cameron should be next Tory leader then.
You're making all the same mistakes that led you to ramping Boris as the next nailed on Tory leader.
Boris still leads current Tory members polls so certainly cannot be ruled out
General polls are meaningless unless someone has a commanding lead. Otherwise, you need head-to-heads to understand where the land lies.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
I'm struggling to fault Andrew Adonis' logic in his tweets. Unless I've missed something, the Tories are handling the situation re: Stagecoach utterly awfully.
Interesting stat: online revenue is now 20% of the Mail revenue, rising. I wonder what the Guardian proportions are? The two have, I believe, the largest newspaper readership online in the world.
In short it will: cancel the ongoing boundary review stick with 650 seats, not 600 protect 18 seats for Northern Ireland is protected and its quota defined separately move the variance up from 5% to 7.5% commit to a boundary review every ten years with the next review to report in autumn 2020 use the electorate at the 2017 General Election
I wonder if the Government will put up token resistance but allow this to go through? I can't see any way they have the numbers for the current review with all other parties against and individual Tories under pressure with locally controversial boundaries.
I think it would still create problems where there are stupidly large wards which unfairly create ripple effects elsewhere , albeit with 7.5% you'd have a little more choice. I'd want to see an amendment permitting ward splits where it the effects of not doing so would affect multiple other authorities - Sheffield and Birmingham are the worst 2 examples.
Reckon it'll go through?
Even when generally agreed on, it's very rare for Private Members' Bills to go through. We may well see that kind of outcome, but I'd predict it will come from a government-backed measure.
Governments sometimes "adopt" Private Members' Bills, giving them the parliamentary time required to pass into law. This is a very curious Bill in that it seems like a very sensible & fair compromise and therefore I'm not entirely clear as to why a Labour MP would be introducing it, given that it seems to be taken as read that the existing review will fail (advantaging Labour).
I agree. My understanding is that a new MP who has done well in the Private Members Ballot will be besieged by special interest groups asking them to adopt their cause - so this is a very odd bill to bring forward. You wonder whether he is sponsor in name only? And who is really behind this?
If the Government wanted to live with it they would move some non-fatal amendments such as it only taking effect if the current review fails, regular updates to registers of electors, protected status for Tory shires etc. So it looks like they are turning it into their bill while not actually doing much.
If the current review fails (rather than getting cancelled early) then there won't be time surely to have another one?
What if one of them comes second and the other(s) aren't in the final two, but beaten in the MPs ballot? It hinges on what "beat" means in the original bet.
Yeah that too.
Or if there isn't a ballot, as last time, or various very unlikely events like death or withdrawal during or after a ballot.
It would be more straightforward to say "...becomes the next leader", which is what you were actually arguing about. The mechanics of the process don't appear relevant.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
So still about the same as the 2005 Luntz focus group which correctly predicted future general election winner Cameron should be next Tory leader then.
You're making all the same mistakes that led you to ramping Boris as the next nailed on Tory leader.
Boris still leads current Tory members polls so certainly cannot be ruled out
General polls are meaningless unless someone has a commanding lead. Otherwise, you need head-to-heads to understand where the land lies.
Head to heads also have both Boris and Davis beating Rudd with Tory members
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
I know it is in Scotland but as far as I am aware it was largely a re-opened railway.
I remember Beeching's axe and the anger it caused at the time
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
and Stagecoach can still bid for other franchises.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
and Stagecoach can still bid for other franchises.
I thought east coast was run by Virgin - am I mistaken
Governments sometimes "adopt" Private Members' Bills, giving them the parliamentary time required to pass into law. This is a very curious Bill in that it seems like a very sensible & fair compromise and therefore I'm not entirely clear as to why a Labour MP would be introducing it, given that it seems to be taken as read that the existing review will fail (advantaging Labour).
It's the successor to a bill last year by Pat Glass, also a Labour MP - essentially Labour is trying to put forward a constructive alternative since the boundary review can't be postponed forever. It's 3rd in the ballot so may well pass (not least as they have an extended 18-month session) unless the Government opposes it.
Well it seems sensible enough to me. Given Brexit and our 73 MEPs, restoring to 650 is still a net decrease in parliamentarians compared to the Cameron proposals. From a personal perspective an increase to 700 would be welcome but I don't suppose there's any chance of that
Obviously no Parliament can bind its successor etc. but a mechanism to make the process more automatic would be welcome. What happened under the coalition was a disgrace.
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
Who was stupid enough to suggest that the presence of an ideology is a guarantee of virtue?
The extermination of classes wasn't the solution proposed in 1848, and anyone around then wasn't there for the destruction of the Kulaks or the cultural revolution. Otoh most of the 'idealists' who supported Hitler and his racial ideology were around for the full 12 years and complicit in the outcomes. There was a big war crimes trial and everything.
I'm struggling to fault Andrew Adonis' logic in his tweets. Unless I've missed something, the Tories are handling the situation re: Stagecoach utterly awfully.
Please tell me what I've missed !
It certainly looks as though Lord Adonis is raising some serious issues there.
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
As a Remainer she won't be it will be a Leaver next time
Does't that rather depend on when the leadership election is? If it's in 2019, they yes, I think a Leaver is likely. But if it's in 2021 or later, I think nobody will remember or care what people did in the EuroRef. We're all Leavers now.
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Very good post....kind of reminds me of the 2016 Potus election where many people (particularly those on the right) said that both candidates were equally terrible. No they were not. Trump was and is fucking vile. Not quite the same with HRC.
The problem with this plague on both your houses argument is that it gives traction to the greater of the two evils. Communism and Nazism are not the same, and only people of a right persuasion will argue that this is the case.
In the 20th century Communism was responsible for far more deaths than fascism was.
How is it demonstrably "better"?
Household stairs were responsible for more deaths than Islamic Terrorists in the UK this year. Islamic Terrorists are demonstrably better than stairs.
Wow what a post,comparing murdering B's to stairs,just wow.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
What about East-West rail? It looks as though the central portion of that long-standing project (a couple of decades IIRC) is being accelerated. Although it seems they haven't even picked a final route yet ...
If it wasn't for her majority, Amber Rudd should be favourite for next PM/Tory leader.
In fact she might be PM already.
Increasingly Hunt looking a good prospect for next PM or at least next Con leader.
No chance of Hunt beating Boris, Mogg or Davis with the membership if those are his opponents in the final 2.
Only way Hunt may get it if is MPs pick Rudd and Hunt to go to the membership, hence Hunt now trying to present himself as a 'born again Leaver' in contrast to Remainer Rudd.
I disagree. I think there'd be a good chance he'd beat either Boris or JRM. (Though I'm doubtful Rees-Mogg would run and even more doubtful that he'd get very far if he did).
For all the caricature of Tory members as extreme Thatcherite ideologues, you have to remember that they backed Cameron over Davis (by about 2:1), and, according to polls, were backing May over Leadsom. True, they picked IDS over Clarke in 2001 but the Euro really was a red line there. As long as a candidate signs up to delivering a meaningful Brexit, they'll get a hearing.
No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg, current top 3 in both Yougov and ConservativeHome Tory members polls are Boris, Mogg then Davis in that order. With a transition likely until 2021 and a new leader likely to be picked by then Tory members will want a confirmed Leaver to ensure Brexit.
Plus there is no polling evidence to suggest Hunt or Rudd have any appeal with the public, as there was for Cameron by autumn 2005 and May by late June 2016.
You say no chance,
I'd like to stake £100 on Hunt being Boris or JRM in the final two at 500/1, as no chance is generously equivalent to 0.5% chance.
Deal?
For £10 agreed I almost never bet more than that on anything
Erm, you are putting up £5000 there, @HYUFD. If I were you I would withdraw at this point; I'm sure @TSE won't mind.
I have put at 50/1, will not go higher than that and OK will take the original £100 If that is TSE's stake (I don't normally gamble very often so am not an expert on these things)
You ought both to clarify what happens if the final two are not "Hunt and {Boris or JRM}". By the text of HYUFD's claim ("No chance Hunt beats Boris or Mogg") the bet ought to be void, but by the wording of TSE's proposal HYUFD ought to win.
TSE's proposal was that he wins only if Hunt beats Boris or JRM in the membership ballot and I have accepted only on that basis.
I'm struggling to fault Andrew Adonis' logic in his tweets. Unless I've missed something, the Tories are handling the situation re: Stagecoach utterly awfully.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
and Stagecoach can still bid for other franchises.
I thought east coast was run by Virgin - am I mistaken
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
and Stagecoach can still bid for other franchises.
I thought east coast was run by Virgin - am I mistaken
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
What about East-West rail? It looks as though the central portion of that long-standing project (a couple of decades IIRC) is being accelerated. Although it seems they haven't even picked a final route yet ...
Already being progressed. Not as a result of yesterday's report.
TSE's proposal was that he wins only if Hunt beats Boris or JRM in the membership ballot and I have accepted only on that basis.
It is highly likely the bet will be void, but in the small window of non void bet - that's quite possibly both the best and worst bet I've ever seen.
The proposal from TSE was that he wins only if Hunt beats JRM or Boris in the final 2 sent to members. Those are the only circumstances he wins the bet.
If Hunt does not get to the final 2 against those 2 the bet is void, if JRM or Boris beats Hunt in the final 2 I win
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
What about East-West rail? It looks as though the central portion of that long-standing project (a couple of decades IIRC) is being accelerated. Although it seems they haven't even picked a final route yet ...
Already being progressed. Not as a result of yesterday's report.
Accelerated though, by the sounds of it.
(I'm intensely interested in it, as it may go fairly near me, and therefore be rather useful if it ever occurs)
I'm struggling to fault Andrew Adonis' logic in his tweets. Unless I've missed something, the Tories are handling the situation re: Stagecoach utterly awfully.
Please tell me what I've missed !
It certainly looks as though Lord Adonis is raising some serious issues there.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
What about East-West rail? It looks as though the central portion of that long-standing project (a couple of decades IIRC) is being accelerated. Although it seems they haven't even picked a final route yet ...
Already being progressed. Not as a result of yesterday's report.
Accelerated though, by the sounds of it.
(I'm intensely interested in it, as it may go fairly near me, and therefore be rather useful if it ever occurs)
I'm hopeful for Skipton-Colne to be reopened. But I'm not holding my breath.
The thing that I've found most gob smacking is that this rail franchise stuff has happened before. Five years ago the Coalition government let first group avoid 800million of payments and end the contract early but them reawarded the contract to them.
TSE's proposal was that he wins only if Hunt beats Boris or JRM in the membership ballot and I have accepted only on that basis.
It is highly likely the bet will be void, but in the small window of non void bet - that's quite possibly both the best and worst bet I've ever seen.
The proposal from TSE was that he wins only if Hunt beats JRM or Boris in the final 2 sent to members. Those are the only circumstances he wins the bet.
If Hunt does not get to the final 2 against those 2 the bet is void, if JRM or Boris beats Hunt in the final 2 I win
I think it’s think probably for the best you don’t bet that often...
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Very good post....kind of reminds me of the 2016 Potus election where many people (particularly those on the right) said that both candidates were equally terrible. No they were not. Trump was and is fucking vile. Not quite the same with HRC.
The problem with this plague on both your houses argument is that it gives traction to the greater of the two evils. Communism and Nazism are not the same, and only people of a right persuasion will argue that this is the case.
In the 20th century Communism was responsible for far more deaths than fascism was.
How is it demonstrably "better"?
Household stairs were responsible for more deaths than Islamic Terrorists in the UK this year. Islamic Terrorists are demonstrably better than stairs.
Wow what a post,comparing murdering B's to stairs,just wow.
Sigh.
It was an absurd illustration out the logical error in comparing one factor (deaths under communism) without any context (the number of people under communist regimes compared to fascist regimes).
If you actually think anyone believes that murderous fanatics are better than stairs, you really need your head read. Or do you think divvie actually believes* "there are some very fine" fascists??
The thing that I've found most gob smacking is that this rail franchise stuff has happened before. Five years ago the Coalition government let first group avoid 800million of payments and end the contract early but them reawarded the contract to them.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
I think T. May , so far is making the best of a hugely difficult job re Brexit. In other respects of course her leadership style has been poor but on Brexit she has been fairly consistent in what she said from the start. We are moving to a sensible compromise position - much depends now on an element of good faith from the EU, far from a given, and a greater recognition on the part of the Ultras that the result of the referendum was too close for anything other than a compromise negotiation.
Far far too sensible. Where’s the drama? The talk of saboteurs or Brexiter morons?
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
But the commies were exterminating the right people, they were the good guys. Why can't any of you see it!
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Very good post....kind of reminds me of the 2016 Potus election where many people (particularly those on the right) said that both candidates were equally terrible. No they were not. Trump was and is fucking vile. Not quite the same with HRC.
The problem with this plague on both your houses argument is that it gives traction to the greater of the two evils. Communism and Nazism are not the same, and only people of a right persuasion will argue that this is the case.
In the 20th century Communism was responsible for far more deaths than fascism was.
How is it demonstrably "better"?
Household stairs were responsible for more deaths than Islamic Terrorists in the UK this year. Islamic Terrorists are demonstrably better than stairs.
Wow what a post,comparing murdering B's to stairs,just wow.
Sigh.
It was an absurd illustration out the logical error in comparing one factor (deaths under communism) without any context (the number of people under communist regimes compared to fascist regimes).
If you actually think anyone believes that murderous fanatics are better than stairs, you really need your head read. Or do you think divvie actually believes* "there are some very fine" fascists??
*he doesn't
Rather insensitive though to the approximately 100 million murdered in cold blood by Communist mass killings though surely?
Anyone who thinks that Communism is in any way better than its twin Fascism needs their head read. Both are vile and despicable and making excuses for either is wrong.
The thing that I've found most gob smacking is that this rail franchise stuff has happened before. Five years ago the Coalition government let first group avoid 800million of payments and end the contract early but them reawarded the contract to them.
TSE's proposal was that he wins only if Hunt beats Boris or JRM in the membership ballot and I have accepted only on that basis.
It is highly likely the bet will be void, but in the small window of non void bet - that's quite possibly both the best and worst bet I've ever seen.
The proposal from TSE was that he wins only if Hunt beats JRM or Boris in the final 2 sent to members. Those are the only circumstances he wins the bet.
If Hunt does not get to the final 2 against those 2 the bet is void, if JRM or Boris beats Hunt in the final 2 I win
I think it’s think probably for the best you don’t bet that often...
Given Boris is beating Rudd 57% to 33% in the latest Yougov of Tory members head to head and for Rudd you can read Hunt too I should be safe unless Hunt suddenly gets a surge of popularity with the public and Tory members neither of which he has so far. Even if anything I won would be largely token
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
But the commies were exterminating the right people, they were the good guys. Why can't any of you see it!
They were our allies. The Nazis were our enemies.
During WWII not because of ideology but simply because the Nazis directly threatened us and our allies.
Had the Nazis not been a direct threat to us invading our allies but the Communists did that then its possible the roles could have been reversed.
Mr. Divvie, bit odd, I did specifically say there was a vast yawning chasm between the theory and practice of Communism.
Mr. Palmer, it's just a coincidence that a load of people with hammer and sickle banners and Stalin posters keep attending marches that Corbyn attends?
Rightyho. I'm sure you, and others, would take that view if May went on a march and some other people turned up with Nazi banners and she kept on marching with them.
Morris - whilst I share your abhorrence of communism and the appalling misery, torture, famine and death it has inflicted upon millions during its hundred years, there is the partial defence - to which you allude - that whilst the evils of fascism are mostly hard-wired into its ideology, the evils of communism arise (pretty inevitably, in my view) from its application rather than directly from its thinking?
I think that doesn’t really work, given it seems to almost always amount to the same end. I myself have said things like it’s a nice idea in theory, yet nearly always it leads to incredibly awful regimes, too often to be coincidence. What an ideologies proponents claim it is about is immaterial next to the reality. Thankfully fascists find it harder to cover for the obvious endpoint of what they suggest.
The thing that I've found most gob smacking is that this rail franchise stuff has happened before. Five years ago the Coalition government let first group avoid 800million of payments and end the contract early but them reawarded the contract to them.
I'm not sure what is worse, the Gov'ts general negotiation and awarding of rail franchises or @HYUFD wagers with @TSE.
So here's the thing. Technically if you walk away from a franchise you are blocked from bidding for a new franchise. But it's never "Stage Coach" who bid for a franchise, it's some subsidiary company.
It's like movie financing. Fox don't make any movies, they just finance Fox Harry Potter Goblet of Fire Ltd who make one movie.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
Of course you're comparing the EU to Nazi Germany in that. What is the freedom that is under threat now that was under threat in Dunkirk?
Mr. Divvie, bit odd, I did specifically say there was a vast yawning chasm between the theory and practice of Communism.
Mr. Palmer, it's just a coincidence that a load of people with hammer and sickle banners and Stalin posters keep attending marches that Corbyn attends?
Rightyho. I'm sure you, and others, would take that view if May went on a march and some other people turned up with Nazi banners and she kept on marching with them.
Morris - whilst I share your abhorrence of communism and the appalling misery, torture, famine and death it has inflicted upon millions during its hundred years, there is the partial defence - to which you allude - that whilst the evils of fascism are mostly hard-wired into its ideology, the evils of communism arise (pretty inevitably, in my view) from its application rather than directly from its thinking?
The purpose of communism is to abolish individual liberty.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
Who was stupid enough to suggest that the presence of an ideology is a guarantee of virtue?
The extermination of classes wasn't the solution proposed in 1848, and anyone around then wasn't there for the destruction of the Kulaks or the cultural revolution. Otoh most of the 'idealists' who supported Hitler and his racial ideology were around for the full 12 years and complicit in the outcomes. There was a big war crimes trial and everything.
Conflating fascists with Nazis, while differentiating between
So still about the same as the 2005 Luntz focus group which correctly predicted future general election winner Cameron should be next Tory leader then.
You're making all the same mistakes that led you to ramping Boris as the next nailed on Tory leader.
Boris still leads current Tory members polls so certainly cannot be ruled out
General polls are meaningless unless someone has a commanding lead. Otherwise, you need head-to-heads to understand where the land lies.
Head to heads also have both Boris and Davis beating Rudd with Tory members
OK, fair enough. But I still think things will change before or during a leadership election because Boris is flaky (and is being exposed as so), JRM is completely untried as a man-manager, and Davis is going to have to deliver on a very tough job first.
It's entirely possible that none of them will even run.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
I think T. May , so far is making the best of a hugely difficult job re Brexit. In other respects of course her leadership style has been poor but on Brexit she has been fairly consistent in what she said from the start. We are moving to a sensible compromise position - much depends now on an element of good faith from the EU, far from a given, and a greater recognition on the part of the Ultras that the result of the referendum was too close for anything other than a compromise negotiation.
Far far too sensible. Where’s the drama? The talk of saboteurs or Brexiter morons?
Lol. This is the problem with modern politics - way too media driven nowadays. I just witnessed the British press with T. May in Jordan making total a**** of themselves as they tried to goad her into threatening war against the USA because of his awful tweeting. I'm afraid we get the politics we deserve.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
I think T. May , so far is making the best of a hugely difficult job re Brexit. In other respects of course her leadership style has been poor but on Brexit she has been fairly consistent in what she said from the start. We are moving to a sensible compromise position - much depends now on an element of good faith from the EU, far from a given, and a greater recognition on the part of the Ultras that the result of the referendum was too close for anything other than a compromise negotiation.
Far far too sensible. Where’s the drama? The talk of saboteurs or Brexiter morons?
Lol. This is the problem with modern politics - way too media driven nowadays. I just witnessed the British press with T. May in Jordan making total a**** of themselves as they tried to goad her into threatening war against the USA because of his awful tweeting. I'm afraid we get the politics we deserve.
The thing that I've found most gob smacking is that this rail franchise stuff has happened before. Five years ago the Coalition government let first group avoid 800million of payments and end the contract early but them reawarded the contract to them.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
What about East-West rail? It looks as though the central portion of that long-standing project (a couple of decades IIRC) is being accelerated. Although it seems they haven't even picked a final route yet ...
Already being progressed. Not as a result of yesterday's report.
Confusingly, there's already an east-west route from Birmingham via Ely to Norwich or Cambridge. The one being discussed used to be called the Oxford-Cambridge line or the Varsity line.
I had thought the route was clear all the way to Cambridge, except for the late Martin Ryle's radio telescope equipment, and I'm sure he'd have liked to see them moved and the line reopened. But no, it seems that idiots built housing in at least two places: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Line.
What causes people to be so silly as to release transport corridors that might be needed again in the future?! The same happened on the Severn Valley line beyond Bridgnorth.
Mr. Palmer, it's historically abhorrent that Communism is not held in the same regard as Nazism.
I agree that it isn't, but it's rancid to see Corbyn, happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, condemn Trump for retweeting a group less extreme than those Corbyn has called friends.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Naziism's aims were idealistic too, to those who advocated them.
An ideal of a racially pure society v. an ideal of a classless society?
'Some very fine people on both sides'
When the solution to a 'classless society' is the physical extermination of classes deemed unsuitable, I don't really see the difference.
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
But the commies were exterminating the right people, they were the good guys. Why can't any of you see it!
If you want to look at the history of these islands, you might find that our ancestors were not innocent of genocide, and that includes many atrocities after the late 19th century, authorised and supervised by those who in no way could be considered "commies" or Marxists..... People in glass houses....?
The main problem as I understand is that Network Rail has not been maintaining the East Coast line well (lots of delays, overhead lines down, etc) so VTEC has been making lots of losses at the moment. They have been supported by their shareholders and continuing to make premium payments to the Government.
So no money lost to date for the Government (but lots by the VTEC shareholders).
As the Government has enforced delays to Network Rail renewal and upgrade program, this means the expected passenger growth is now not likely. In addition a poor economic climate means that passenger growth on the railway in general has slowed.
So the problem part is actually the nationalised Network Rail not doing its part (due to Government restrictions) rather than VTEC not performing itself - cf Railtrack and the West Coast upgrade and the revised Virgin deal.
The key part to me of yesterday’s announcement was bringing in the private sector to run (in partnership) the regional rail infrastructure.
On Northern Ireland, I'll be interested to see the detail.
It's clear some sort of fudge is coming. But, the GFA already has a fair few fudges in it anyway.
I think T. May , so far is making the best of a hugely difficult job re Brexit. In other respects of course her leadership style has been poor but on Brexit she has been fairly consistent in what she said from the start. We are moving to a sensible compromise position - much depends now on an element of good faith from the EU, far from a given, and a greater recognition on the part of the Ultras that the result of the referendum was too close for anything other than a compromise negotiation.
Far far too sensible. Where’s the drama? The talk of saboteurs or Brexiter morons?
Lol. This is the problem with modern politics - way too media driven nowadays. I just witnessed the British press with T. May in Jordan making total a**** of themselves as they tried to goad her into threatening war against the USA because of his awful tweeting. I'm afraid we get the politics we deserve.
..... happy to march under the hammer and sickle and call Hamas/Hizbollah his friends, .....
*looks at profile pic.... moves on....*
The Soviets under Stalin were complete and utter shits. The two reasons they get a free pass is that the 20million that died under Stalin were HIS own people (rather than invading other countries), and the fact that the Soviets then did a lot of fighting against the Nazis.
Khrushchev did a lot to reform things and make the Soviet Union acceptable.
Still, the Soviet Union is one of my favourite countries to play in Hearts of Iron though.
The Northern Ireland deal in the making sounds quite intelligent (this is turning into a "be nice to the Tories" week for me). The thing is that in the areas in question, especially agriculture, there is I believe far more Ulster-Eire trade than Britain-Ulster, and if these areas are excluded then the Ulster-Eire trade is minor. So having Ulster stick with EU rules for agriculture could be a way out of the trade dilemma, although it does mean that what British-Ulster agriculture trade exists will become subject to border controls and/or special labelling requirements. It's an anomaly, but not a huge one, and I think unlikely to trigger a strong DUP reaction.
On my specialist subject, the reports that Gove is one of the key Ministers involved in improving the Tory imag by strengthening their record on nvironment and animal welfare make sense, as he has made a really good start, but should be seen with caution. The baffling intransigence over the apparently easy issue of retaining legal recognition of animal sentience is doing serious damage to the general welcome that Gove has had from non-usual suspects: if it isn't resolved, it will really damage his other efforts. I know it sounds obscure, but there are now over half a million signatures on related petitions out there: for this niche audience, a solution needs to be found.
You keep posting on sentience as if it is a minor thing. It really isn't - it was hugely controversial on introduction and has massive philosophical implications in terms of future regulation.
For example: is it right to test lifesaving drugs on a sentient being without their consent? Is it right to eat them?
Fundamentally humans are different to other animals and have different rights. The advocates of animal sentience are seeking moral equivalence because of their political end game.
Wouldn't you say that there's a qualitative difference between an ideology whose stated aims were abhorrent in themselves, and one whose aims (however corrupted and abhorrent the process of enacting them may have been) were idealistic?
Very good post....kind of reminds me of the 2016 Potus election where many people (particularly those on the right) said that both candidates were equally terrible. No they were not. Trump was and is fucking vile. Not quite the same with HRC.
The problem with this plague on both your houses argument is that it gives traction to the greater of the two evils. Communism and Nazism are not the same, and only people of a right persuasion will argue that this is the case.
In the 20th century Communism was responsible for far more deaths than fascism was.
How is it demonstrably "better"?
Household stairs were responsible for more deaths than Islamic Terrorists in the UK this year. Islamic Terrorists are demonstrably better than stairs.
Wow what a post,comparing murdering B's to stairs,just wow.
Sigh.
It was an absurd illustration out the logical error in comparing one factor (deaths under communism) without any context (the number of people under communist regimes compared to fascist regimes).
If you actually think anyone believes that murderous fanatics are better than stairs, you really need your head read. Or do you think divvie actually believes* "there are some very fine" fascists??
*he doesn't
Rather insensitive though to the approximately 100 million murdered in cold blood by Communist mass killings though surely?
Anyone who thinks that Communism is in any way better than its twin Fascism needs their head read. Both are vile and despicable and making excuses for either is wrong.
Firstly, that must include me, because I think the principals of communism are better than those of fascism. I think both are wrong-headed and doomed to failure, as the implementation of those communist principals has shown. However I'm able to perceive shades or wrongness rather than viewing the world as being a monochromatic mix of purest black and purest white.
And secondly, I refuse to bend to those who deny the freedom to discuss important topics to avoid being "insensitive". Or do you suggest we never discuss failures in the NHS as it's insensitive to those who lost relatives at East Staffs? Or discuss road safety lest we upset someone who's been in an RTA? Or brexit in case it's read by an immigrant European?
Mr. Divvie, bit odd, I did specifically say there was a vast yawning chasm between the theory and practice of Communism.
Mr. Palmer, it's just a coincidence that a load of people with hammer and sickle banners and Stalin posters keep attending marches that Corbyn attends?
Rightyho. I'm sure you, and others, would take that view if May went on a march and some other people turned up with Nazi banners and she kept on marching with them.
Morris - whilst I share your abhorrence of communism and the appalling misery, torture, famine and death it has inflicted upon millions during its hundred years, there is the partial defence - to which you allude - that whilst the evils of fascism are mostly hard-wired into its ideology, the evils of communism arise (pretty inevitably, in my view) from its application rather than directly from its thinking?
The purpose of communism is to abolish individual liberty.
The Northern Ireland deal in the making sounds quite intelligent (this is turning into a "be nice to the Tories" week for me). The thing is that in the areas in question, especially agriculture, there is I believe far more Ulster-Eire trade than Britain-Ulster, and if these areas are excluded then the Ulster-Eire trade is minor. So having Ulster stick with EU rules for agriculture could be a way out of the trade dilemma, although it does mean that what British-Ulster agriculture trade exists will become subject to border controls and/or special labelling requirements. It's an anomaly, but not a huge one, and I think unlikely to trigger a strong DUP reaction.
On my specialist subject, the reports that Gove is one of the key Ministers involved in improving the Tory imag by strengthening their record on nvironment and animal welfare make sense, as he has made a really good start, but should be seen with caution. The baffling intransigence over the apparently easy issue of retaining legal recognition of animal sentience is doing serious damage to the general welcome that Gove has had from non-usual suspects: if it isn't resolved, it will really damage his other efforts. I know it sounds obscure, but there are now over half a million signatures on related petitions out there: for this niche audience, a solution needs to be found.
You keep posting on sentience as if it is a minor thing. It really isn't - it was hugely controversial on introduction and has massive philosophical implications in terms of future regulation.
For example: is it right to test lifesaving drugs on a sentient being without their consent? Is it right to eat them?.
To sully a serious discussion with an old joke - if they didn’t want to be eaten they shouldn’t have been so delicious.
The thing that I've found most gob smacking is that this rail franchise stuff has happened before. Five years ago the Coalition government let first group avoid 800million of payments and end the contract early but them reawarded the contract to them.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
Of course you're comparing the EU to Nazi Germany in that. What is the freedom that is under threat now that was under threat in Dunkirk?
I suggest you take off your Brexit Blinkers and read it again.
Interesting stat: online revenue is now 20% of the Mail revenue, rising. I wonder what the Guardian proportions are? The two have, I believe, the largest newspaper readership online in the world.
Mr. Divvie, bit odd, I did specifically say there was a vast yawning chasm between the theory and practice of Communism.
Mr. Palmer, it's just a coincidence that a load of people with hammer and sickle banners and Stalin posters keep attending marches that Corbyn attends?
Rightyho. I'm sure you, and others, would take that view if May went on a march and some other people turned up with Nazi banners and she kept on marching with them.
Morris - whilst I share your abhorrence of communism and the appalling misery, torture, famine and death it has inflicted upon millions during its hundred years, there is the partial defence - to which you allude - that whilst the evils of fascism are mostly hard-wired into its ideology, the evils of communism arise (pretty inevitably, in my view) from its application rather than directly from its thinking?
The purpose of communism is to abolish individual liberty.
[citation needed]
What does it matter what its purpose is supposed to be, good or bad, if in practice it manifests so terribly so much of the time? I’m in China right now, and those Ive spoken to seem genuinely supportive of the government and particularly the president, but with no prompting they are very free to discuss how terrible it was before elements of capitalism were introduced.
Rather insensitive though to the approximately 100 million murdered in cold blood by Communist mass killings though surely?
Anyone who thinks that Communism is in any way better than its twin Fascism needs their head read. Both are vile and despicable and making excuses for either is wrong.
Firstly, that must include me, because I think the principals of communism are better than those of fascism. I think both are wrong-headed and doomed to failure, as the implementation of those communist principals has shown. However I'm able to perceive shades or wrongness rather than viewing the world as being a monochromatic mix of purest black and purest white.
And secondly, I refuse to bend to those who deny the freedom to discuss important topics to avoid being "insensitive". Or do you suggest we never discuss failures in the NHS as it's insensitive to those who lost relatives at East Staffs? Or discuss road safety lest we upset someone who's been in an RTA? Or brexit in case it's read by an immigrant European?
How are the illiberal principles of communism, whereby the removal of individual liberty is part of the principles rather than just practice "better"? I am able to perceive shades here but there is no shading involved with fascism or communism - they are both illiberal and totalitarian in their design. If you're OK with illiberal totalitarianism then so be it but but I'm not under whatever guise you name it.
I never said you can't discuss something, but if you contrast the mass murder of 100 million people with falling down the stairs you deserve to be called for it. Similarly if you want to discuss failures in the NHS then fine but don't contrast it with the common cold. The analogies are not just insensitive they don't work either.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
Of course you're comparing the EU to Nazi Germany in that. What is the freedom that is under threat now that was under threat in Dunkirk?
I suggest you take off your Brexit Blinkers and read it again.
I've asked a direct question that I note you can't answer without admitting my point. No further questions.
Mr. Divvie, bit odd, I did specifically say there was a vast yawning chasm between the theory and practice of Communism.
Mr. Palmer, it's just a coincidence that a load of people with hammer and sickle banners and Stalin posters keep attending marches that Corbyn attends?
Rightyho. I'm sure you, and others, would take that view if May went on a march and some other people turned up with Nazi banners and she kept on marching with them.
Morris - whilst I share your abhorrence of communism and the appalling misery, torture, famine and death it has inflicted upon millions during its hundred years, there is the partial defence - to which you allude - that whilst the evils of fascism are mostly hard-wired into its ideology, the evils of communism arise (pretty inevitably, in my view) from its application rather than directly from its thinking?
The purpose of communism is to abolish individual liberty.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
Of course you're comparing the EU to Nazi Germany in that. What is the freedom that is under threat now that was under threat in Dunkirk?
I suggest you take off your Brexit Blinkers and read it again.
I've asked a direct question that I note you can't answer without admitting my point. No further questions.
Nope, I don't accept the premise. I didn't imply a comparison between the situation at Dunkirk, and today, only that I'd watched the film and, shock horror, it made me *think*. You know, how art often does. I didn't mention the Nazis or the EU.
I'm going to assume you misunderstood - thats fine - so lets move on.
Adonis seems to be claiming the Beeching stuff yesterdays was a fig leaf to cover another transport fiasco.
And he is 100% correct. No lines will be reopened following yesterday's report. Meanwhile Stagecoach get off the hook to the tune of hundreds of millions.
Isn't the borders railway a re-opened line last year
In Scotland. That's the difference.
What about East-West rail? It looks as though the central portion of that long-standing project (a couple of decades IIRC) is being accelerated. Although it seems they haven't even picked a final route yet ...
Already being progressed. Not as a result of yesterday's report.
Confusingly, there's already an east-west route from Birmingham via Ely to Norwich or Cambridge. The one being discussed used to be called the Oxford-Cambridge line or the Varsity line.
I had thought the route was clear all the way to Cambridge, except for the late Martin Ryle's radio telescope equipment, and I'm sure he'd have liked to see them moved and the line reopened. But no, it seems that idiots built housing in at least two places: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Line.
What causes people to be so silly as to release transport corridors that might be needed again in the future?! The same happened on the Severn Valley line beyond Bridgnorth.
It's a little worse than that. The eastern couple of miles of the line from Trumpington to Cambridge was used for the Misguided Bus - which was planned whilst they were talking about reopening the line!
However I think it's unlikely they'll use the old route from Sandy - it was just far too slow and winding for modern use. Reading the runes, they'll go for a route that joins further south, serving the planned Addenbrokes station as well - though I'd prefer them to go north near me, as this is where they're building housing ...
There are also problems at Bedford (Bedford Midland in the wrong place IIRC) and Bletchley, where the line goes west-east and the station in on the main line going north-south.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
Of course you're comparing the EU to Nazi Germany in that. What is the freedom that is under threat now that was under threat in Dunkirk?
I suggest you take off your Brexit Blinkers and read it again.
I've asked a direct question that I note you can't answer without admitting my point. No further questions.
Nope, I don't accept the premise. I didn't imply a comparison between the situation at Dunkirk, and today, only that I'd watched the film and, shock horror, it made me *think*. You know, how art often does. I didn't mention the Nazis or the EU.
I'm going to assume you misunderstood - thats fine - so lets move on.
Oh I understood. I understood that you were making a vile comparison and now wish to backtrack from it.
It turns out that if you make it clear you hate foreigners and you don't want them, the ones with the most agency will choose to go elsewhere. Who knew?
Unspoofable.
Net migration this year is over 200,000 people.
And you're doubling down on this inane nonsense about hating foreigners.
From the man that compared the EU with Nazi Germany, unspoofable indeed.
Didn't happen, though, did it?
You're ashamed of it and keep lying about your own past excesses.
Which in a sense is progress.
Nope, it didn't happen.
This was what I said:
'Finally saw Dunkirk last night.
Convinced me that Remainers haven't got a hope. We're too proud of our freedom and its heritage to do a reverse ferret.'
No comparison of the EU to anything, just a reminder of our national strength in adversity. No mention of the Nazis.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop accusing me of lying, and stop peddling your line about that comment too.
Of course you're comparing the EU to Nazi Germany in that. What is the freedom that is under threat now that was under threat in Dunkirk?
I suggest you take off your Brexit Blinkers and read it again.
I've asked a direct question that I note you can't answer without admitting my point. No further questions.
Nope, I don't accept the premise. I didn't imply a comparison between the situation at Dunkirk, and today, only that I'd watched the film and, shock horror, it made me *think*. You know, how art often does. I didn't mention the Nazis or the EU.
I'm going to assume you misunderstood - thats fine - so lets move on.
Oh I understood. I understood that you were making a vile comparison and now wish to backtrack from it.
No backtracking necessary; not least because no-one else seems to have a problem understanding my post. I'm not going to spend any more time on it.
Comments
I see Communism and Fascism as two sides of the same illiberal and frankly evil coin.
Donald J. TrumpVerified account
@realDonaldTrump
23m23 minutes ago
More
The Chinese Envoy, who just returned from North Korea, seems to have had no impact on Little Rocket Man. Hard to believe his people, and the military, put up with living in such horrible conditions. Russia and China condemned the launch.
That's just mass killing deaths ... not counting deaths due to wars etc or injuries short of death.
You think that's comparable to stairs?
EDIT: Nevermind missed your edit.
If the Government wanted to live with it they would move some non-fatal amendments such as it only taking effect if the current review fails, regular updates to registers of electors, protected status for Tory shires etc. So it looks like they are turning it into their bill while not actually doing much.
TM live from Jordan on Sky just now
Anyway, I wasn't making a moral case for either; simply that the presence of an ideology is no guarantee of virtue.
Please tell me what I've missed
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/30/dmgt-daily-mail-group-shares-slump-to-five-year-low
It would be more straightforward to say "...becomes the next leader", which is what you were actually arguing about. The mechanics of the process don't appear relevant.
A September Yougov of Tory members had Boris beating Rudd 57% to 33% head to head
http://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2017/09/29/johnson-would-beat-rudd-and-davis-in-leadership-election-says-po/
I remember Beeching's axe and the anger it caused at the time
Obviously no Parliament can bind its successor etc. but a mechanism to make the process more automatic would be welcome. What happened under the coalition was a disgrace.
The extermination of classes wasn't the solution proposed in 1848, and anyone around then wasn't there for the destruction of the Kulaks or the cultural revolution. Otoh most of the 'idealists' who supported Hitler and his racial ideology were around for the full 12 years and complicit in the outcomes. There was a big war crimes trial and everything.
If Hunt does not get to the final 2 against those 2 the bet is void, if JRM or Boris beats Hunt in the final 2 I win
(I'm intensely interested in it, as it may go fairly near me, and therefore be rather useful if it ever occurs)
www.theguardian.com/business/2012/jul/19/firstgroup-hangs-on-to-great-western
It was an absurd illustration out the logical error in comparing one factor (deaths under communism) without any context (the number of people under communist regimes compared to fascist regimes).
If you actually think anyone believes that murderous fanatics are better than stairs, you really need your head read. Or do you think divvie actually believes* "there are some very fine" fascists??
*he doesn't
Anyone who thinks that Communism is in any way better than its twin Fascism needs their head read. Both are vile and despicable and making excuses for either is wrong.
Had the Nazis not been a direct threat to us invading our allies but the Communists did that then its possible the roles could have been reversed.
It's like movie financing. Fox don't make any movies, they just finance Fox Harry Potter Goblet of Fire Ltd who make one movie.
It's entirely possible that none of them will even run.
I had thought the route was clear all the way to Cambridge, except for the late Martin Ryle's radio telescope equipment, and I'm sure he'd have liked to see them moved and the line reopened. But no, it seems that idiots built housing in at least two places: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Line.
What causes people to be so silly as to release transport corridors that might be needed again in the future?! The same happened on the Severn Valley line beyond Bridgnorth.
The main problem as I understand is that Network Rail has not been maintaining the East Coast line well (lots of delays, overhead lines down, etc) so VTEC has been making lots of losses at the moment. They have been supported by their shareholders and continuing to make premium payments to the Government.
So no money lost to date for the Government (but lots by the VTEC shareholders).
As the Government has enforced delays to Network Rail renewal and upgrade program, this means the expected passenger growth is now not likely. In addition a poor economic climate means that passenger growth on the railway in general has slowed.
So the problem part is actually the nationalised Network Rail not doing its part (due to Government restrictions) rather than VTEC not performing itself - cf Railtrack and the West Coast upgrade and the revised Virgin deal.
The key part to me of yesterday’s announcement was bringing in the private sector to run (in partnership) the regional rail infrastructure.
The Soviets under Stalin were complete and utter shits. The two reasons they get a free pass is that the 20million that died under Stalin were HIS own people (rather than invading other countries), and the fact that the Soviets then did a lot of fighting against the Nazis.
Khrushchev did a lot to reform things and make the Soviet Union acceptable.
Still, the Soviet Union is one of my favourite countries to play in Hearts of Iron though.
For example: is it right to test lifesaving drugs on a sentient being without their consent? Is it right to eat them?
Fundamentally humans are different to other animals and have different rights. The advocates of animal sentience are seeking moral equivalence because of their political end game.
And secondly, I refuse to bend to those who deny the freedom to discuss important topics to avoid being "insensitive". Or do you suggest we never discuss failures in the NHS as it's insensitive to those who lost relatives at East Staffs? Or discuss road safety lest we upset someone who's been in an RTA? Or brexit in case it's read by an immigrant European?
The media are far worse than the politicians - they need to grow up
I never said you can't discuss something, but if you contrast the mass murder of 100 million people with falling down the stairs you deserve to be called for it. Similarly if you want to discuss failures in the NHS then fine but don't contrast it with the common cold. The analogies are not just insensitive they don't work either.
https://twitter.com/rafaelbehr/status/935860704653037568
NEW THREAD
I'm going to assume you misunderstood - thats fine - so lets move on.
However I think it's unlikely they'll use the old route from Sandy - it was just far too slow and winding for modern use. Reading the runes, they'll go for a route that joins further south, serving the planned Addenbrokes station as well - though I'd prefer them to go north near me, as this is where they're building housing ...
There are also problems at Bedford (Bedford Midland in the wrong place IIRC) and Bletchley, where the line goes west-east and the station in on the main line going north-south.