Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
Doesn’t that just reinforce the point? There’s plenty of crass, broad generalisations made about “Africans” or “Europeans”. It is only their status as geographic facts that prevents them from being removed from the language as “offensive”. The offence of the generalisation remains.
well, only if you try really hard to make it an offence.
wouldn't it be more sane to go 'its a generalisation, I know that, you know that. It has its uses but it also has its weaknesses and if you can be more specific, try to be"? Maybe?
That’s the point i’m making though (originally). It seems that over time there is a constant search to find new words to describe generalised groups, as previous ones get discredited. But the words aren’t the problem, it’s how they are used.
This guy is dangerously dumb - and worryingly close to office.
The mayor of Leicester said the same thing today.
Yes, for the last week there have been 4 mobile testing stations in East Leicester, population 327 000 last census. That is pretty intensive testing, and perhaps partly explains the increase in numbers with no increase in admissions.
It does seem strange to have all that testing and not pass on information on postcodes to Leicester Public Health, or record ethnicity.
Hancock said there were significantly higher levels of hospital admissions vs other parts of the country
Not a rise though. I see the hospital figures several times a week. Indeed I have posted them here. 75 current inpatients at midnight on Sunday.
The lack of a fall may be just as concerning.
Yes, numbers have been steady for weeks.
I don't think lockdown will work again. People have had enough, and money is running out.
10% of Leicester tests are coming back positive according to Tom Newton Dunn on Times Radio just now.
I was looking at the latest situation in Italy just now, where the overall figures have declined dramatically and much of the country hasn’t had much of an outbreak at all. What they do have is a batch (ten or eleven currently) of localised outbreaks - thirty or so in a particular town here, eleven in one extended family there - which they seem to be doing a decent job of tracking and tracing. Hopefully Leicester is our first of those rather than the beginning of a wider US style resurgence.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
Doesn’t that just reinforce the point? There’s plenty of crass, broad generalisations made about “Africans” or “Europeans”. It is only their status as geographic facts that prevents them from being removed from the language as “offensive”. The offence of the generalisation remains.
well, only if you try really hard to make it an offence.
wouldn't it be more sane to go 'its a generalisation, I know that, you know that. It has its uses but it also has its weaknesses and if you can be more specific, try to be"? Maybe?
That’s the point i’m making though (originally). It seems that over time there is a constant search to find new words to describe generalised groups, as previous ones get discredited. But the words aren’t the problem, it’s how they are used.
How long until BAME becomes a term you shouldn’t use any more?
America -- the Democrat VP market. Yesterday, as @Barnesian noted, Tammy Duckworth was very heavily backed on Betfair. She has drifted overnight back to 14/1.
Oddschecker shows a sea of blue for all the likely (ie women of colour) candidates, including layers' pal Michelle Obama. Kamala Harris is as short as 4/6 with Ladbrokes (implying a 60 per cent chance) and as long as Evens on Betfair.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Incidentally, Professor Ali Mazrui made a case for suggesting that if you're going to include the Sahara northwards including Egypt in 'Africa' then you shouldn't stop at the Red Sea. Saudi should be in Africa.
He was possibly being playful but also illustrating the absurdity of it.
The Sahara marks a very clear boundary but even then the various peoples of Ghana have little in common with the Maasai in Kenya or Batendi in DRC. They only seem to because white people, especially men, think they all look black and are therefore alike.
The rivers of racism run deep.
And yet the Nubians of Sudan - with links down into Kenya and Central Africa ruled Egypt on a number of occasions. So it is no where near as straight forward as he wants it to appear.
Moreover continents are defined primarily by geology, not by ethnicity or history. So the eastern boundary of Europe is the Ural Mountains which is far to the east of what most people would consider to be Europe.
The reason that the Arabian peninsular is not considered part of Africa in modern terms is that the Red Sea is a divergent fault boundary with Africa and Asia moving further apart due to sea floor spreading.
Regarding chips, my (lancashire) Chinese when I lived at home would do this if you asked. Hollands (pronounced "ollunds" obviously) Steak and Kidney Pudding (with suet case out of a steamer) Chips Peas and Gravy in a big round foil tray normally intended for Chow Mein.
By the time you git it home the chips peas (proper thick mush, none of this watery guff) and gravy would have merged into this congealed block which you could almost slice into. Utterly epic because of how wrong it was. Sadly the chippy changed hands yonks ago and all that is memory. As is the one in Sheffield who would do a Mushy Pea Fritter - again use the thickest of mush peas, rolled in batter, deep fried. Served with Chips and Parsley Sauce. Mmmmmm.
Alterego, do you know that one way King George and Queen Elizabeth (late Queen Mother) won the hearts of the American public in June, 1939 (an extremely opportune moment) was by eating hot dogs at a picnic hosted by the Roosevelts at Hyde Park?
OK, HM & his missus used knives & forks to cut up their hot dogs, which is pretty weird. But they were foreigners, so American people people let it slide, and decided that K&Q were good people - something the Foreign Office & rest of British establishment has failed at abjectly for the previous two centuries.
10% of Leicester tests are coming back positive according to Tom Newton Dunn on Times Radio just now.
I was looking at the latest situation in Italy just now, where the overall figures have declined dramatically and much of the country hasn’t had much of an outbreak at all. What they do have is a batch (ten or eleven currently) of localised outbreaks - thirty or so in a particular town here, eleven in one extended family there - which they seem to be doing a decent job of tracking and tracing. Hopefully Leicester is our first of those rather than the beginning of a wider US style resurgence.
Spain is tracking 28 outbreaks ranging from 3 to 80+ infections with very localized lockdowns introduced. The origins of each outbreak appear to have be identified ranging from Bolivian relatives to meat packing plans. Overall just under 200 new infections a day 15 UCI cases and 13 fatalities in a week.
I usually operate on the basis of MENA and SSA, but you can split SSA into RSA/EA/WA if you like. Although I’m not sure how you’d describe the bit in the middle with that classification. I’ve never spent time there so not thought about it
The organization I usually work for uses ESA, WCA and MENA. About the time South Sudan became independent it shifted from MENA to ESA
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I’m sure it’s not to her but to many people an African Is black where a South African is of indeterminate skin tone until clarified by visual contact.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Yes learning Spanish (well attempting to) it was made clear that americano/americana were for the whole continent, and if it was USA it had to be made specific.
This guy is dangerously dumb - and worryingly close to office.
The mayor of Leicester said the same thing today.
Yes, for the last week there have been 4 mobile testing stations in East Leicester, population 327 000 last census. That is pretty intensive testing, and perhaps partly explains the increase in numbers with no increase in admissions.
It does seem strange to have all that testing and not pass on information on postcodes to Leicester Public Health, or record ethnicity.
Hancock said there were significantly higher levels of hospital admissions vs other parts of the country
Not a rise though. I see the hospital figures several times a week. Indeed I have posted them here. 75 current inpatients at midnight on Sunday.
The lack of a fall may be just as concerning.
Yes, numbers have been steady for weeks.
I don't think lockdown will work again. People have had enough, and money is running out.
The ridiculously confused mixed messaging from a certain quarter has made adherence to any second lockdown unworkable.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Yes learning Spanish (well attempting to) it was made clear that americano/americana were for the whole continent, and if it was USA it had to be made specific.
Even using the term US for the USA is incorrect given the Mexico is actually the United States of Mexico.
Incidentally, Professor Ali Mazrui made a case for suggesting that if you're going to include the Sahara northwards including Egypt in 'Africa' then you shouldn't stop at the Red Sea. Saudi should be in Africa.
He was possibly being playful but also illustrating the absurdity of it.
The Sahara marks a very clear boundary but even then the various peoples of Ghana have little in common with the Maasai in Kenya or Batendi in DRC. They only seem to because white people, especially men, think they all look black and are therefore alike.
The rivers of racism run deep.
And yet the Nubians of Sudan - with links down into Kenya and Central Africa ruled Egypt on a number of occasions. So it is no where near as straight forward as he wants it to appear.
Moreover continents are defined primarily by geology, not by ethnicity or history. So the eastern boundary of Europe is the Ural Mountains which is far to the east of what most people would consider to be Europe.
The reason that the Arabian peninsular is not considered part of Africa in modern terms is that the Red Sea is a divergent fault boundary with Africa and Asia moving further apart due to sea floor spreading.
There's obviously a big difference between identifying a continent ("Africa") and a person ("African").
"Europe" is not really a continent geologically speaking, but gets to be called a continent I suppose because Europeans made the current naming system.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
Doesn’t that just reinforce the point? There’s plenty of crass, broad generalisations made about “Africans” or “Europeans”. It is only their status as geographic facts that prevents them from being removed from the language as “offensive”. The offence of the generalisation remains.
well, only if you try really hard to make it an offence.
wouldn't it be more sane to go 'its a generalisation, I know that, you know that. It has its uses but it also has its weaknesses and if you can be more specific, try to be"? Maybe?
That’s the point i’m making though (originally). It seems that over time there is a constant search to find new words to describe generalised groups, as previous ones get discredited. But the words aren’t the problem, it’s how they are used.
How long until BAME becomes a term you shouldn’t use any more?
You are probably right that at some point a new term will replace it, partly because its not a great acronym in the first place, partly because the experiences of different minorities may diverge further, but mostly because history teaches us such language does get refreshed quite regularly.
I dont really see a problem in changing language though, its just part of human progress, hence we dont speak latin or gaelic as our ancestors may have done.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Yes learning Spanish (well attempting to) it was made clear that americano/americana were for the whole continent, and if it was USA it had to be made specific.
Even using the term US for the USA is incorrect given the Mexico is actually the United States of Mexico.
We’ll be moving on to whether the Manchester clubs can be shortened to “United” and “City” next...
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Yes learning Spanish (well attempting to) it was made clear that americano/americana were for the whole continent, and if it was USA it had to be made specific.
Even using the term US for the USA is incorrect given the Mexico is actually the United States of Mexico.
We’ll be moving on to whether the Manchester clubs can be shortened to “United” and “City” next...
If the fixture is Newcastle or West Ham vs Manchester United then no dont use United, use Manchester or Man United.
This guy is dangerously dumb - and worryingly close to office.
The mayor of Leicester said the same thing today.
Yes, for the last week there have been 4 mobile testing stations in East Leicester, population 327 000 last census. That is pretty intensive testing, and perhaps partly explains the increase in numbers with no increase in admissions.
It does seem strange to have all that testing and not pass on information on postcodes to Leicester Public Health, or record ethnicity.
Hancock said there were significantly higher levels of hospital admissions vs other parts of the country
Not a rise though. I see the hospital figures several times a week. Indeed I have posted them here. 75 current inpatients at midnight on Sunday.
There are dozens of hospitals with less than 5 patients with Covid and many with zero. I would think 75 patients with Covid would be one of if not the highest in the country.
I don’t know if she’s just an idiot or congenitally to r deaf but she comes across as if she’s happy that Covid cases are spiking
Only if you're biased against her. It's an obvious reference to MAGA and Trump's policies which have made Covid-19 much worse in the US than it should have been.
It is a point of faith amongst the Libertarian set that FDR caused the depression.
A simple examination of the time line as to when stimulus was applied and removed by FDR and the preceding administration would show that to be utter, utter bollocks but it is a matter of absolute truth for many on the economic right.
Hannan and utter bollocks that just happens to align exactly with the views of his far-right paymasters in the USA? You do surprise me.
Starmer isn't more socially conservative than Johnson, he's just not going to get involved in the culture war.
As I said yesterday, Blair was spot on the money a few months ago. You just don't have the argument - and you move the debate onto economic grounds where Labour can win.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
I am telling the left now, if we want to win, we have to got to get a lot better at picking our battles and picking them carefully.
A battle than can be won, is this concept of "them and us", which Starmer is going to exploit. The other one is on jobs and investment. Labour can win on these grounds. It cannot win on culture - don't even try.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Wasn’t Amerigo Vespucci a racist? We should rename those two continents.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
» show previous quotes But it's a great way of adding another level of separation between Scotland the rest of the UK which is what she wants...
Carlotta is having kittens, CCHQ must be whipping her to get all the agents out quick. Sturgeon is threatening to do the popular and sensible thing yet again. Unionists are having a bad time of it.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
It’s been a long time since I read the economic analysis but there is an argument that some of his early moves extended the recession & that recovery didn’t really come until the war ramp up
Trying to blame stuff on FDR whilst ignoring all the insane shit that Hoover and the associated Congress did would be the most myopic analysis of all time.
The stunning acts of self sabotage during Hoovers admin are the root of the issue.
Absolutely, Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933 in the teeth of the great depression caused by Hoover's botched response to the Wall Street crash and following economic fall-out. He had a 19th century response to a truly 20th century crisis (not unlike the Generals of the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War), and was well out of his depth.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Starmer isn't more socially conservative than Johnson, he's just not going to get involved in the culture war.
As I said yesterday, Blair was spot on the money a few months ago. You just don't have the argument - and you move the debate onto economic grounds where Labour can win.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
I am telling the left now, if we want to win, we have to got to get a lot better at picking our battles and picking them carefully.
A battle than can be won, is this concept of "them and us", which Starmer is going to exploit. The other one is on jobs and investment. Labour can win on these grounds. It cannot win on culture - don't even try.
Excellent comment. (I wish you hadn't mentioned Blair though.)
Of course, you do have to take your own people with you, which means that you can't completely avoid giving conservatives "culture war" opportunities. Fortunately, there will always be things where the right will only making themselves look silly if they complain (e.g. Starmer taking the knee).
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
So now we are down to everyone having to be mystic Meg and be able to magic up which country someone's ancestors came from or even guess they were born in Scunthorpe, what next you address them by their postcode or you are being racist. FFS.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
You do realise that there are large areas of the UK with very few if any new cases over the last month
Criticism of Pillar 2 (the privately run mass testing facilities in car parks etc) on my understanding is that they aren't, or maybe weren't, fed back into the public health and reporting systems. The individual get the result but it isn't reported to their GP unlike Pillar 1; if the individual subsequently dies it isn't reported as a CV19 death; it doesn't appear in healthboard stats for monitoring and countermeasures.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
You do realise that there are large areas of the UK with very few if any new cases over the last month
So far. This is surely a sign of things - unfortunately - to come.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
Scientists suggested when the whole affair unravelled that another couple of weeks would be helpful. For the moment the numbers, particularly of fatalities have been on Johnson's side.
The real failure has been the poor communication of an ill thought through plan
Interesting piece on a topic that I know essentially know nothing about. Pensions policy doesn't get the attention it needs, I think.
Its already being done for the local government (and teachers) pension fund - one of the country's biggest. Funds from each council are being pooled in collective investment vehicles - it would be an easy step to redirect a chunk of this toward infrastructure investments.
This guy is dangerously dumb - and worryingly close to office.
The mayor of Leicester said the same thing today.
Yes, for the last week there have been 4 mobile testing stations in East Leicester, population 327 000 last census. That is pretty intensive testing, and perhaps partly explains the increase in numbers with no increase in admissions.
It does seem strange to have all that testing and not pass on information on postcodes to Leicester Public Health, or record ethnicity.
Hancock said there were significantly higher levels of hospital admissions vs other parts of the country
Not a rise though. I see the hospital figures several times a week. Indeed I have posted them here. 75 current inpatients at midnight on Sunday.
There are dozens of hospitals with less than 5 patients with Covid and many with zero. I would think 75 patients with Covid would be one of if not the highest in the country.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Yes learning Spanish (well attempting to) it was made clear that americano/americana were for the whole continent, and if it was USA it had to be made specific.
Even using the term US for the USA is incorrect given the Mexico is actually the United States of Mexico.
We’ll be moving on to whether the Manchester clubs can be shortened to “United” and “City” next...
If the fixture is Newcastle or West Ham vs Manchester United then no dont use United, use Manchester or Man United.
Who was the comedian who said that Man United and Man City sounded like a couple of gay nightclubs?
For anyone who doesn't believe me that £5bn is sod all, it's a grand total of 7% of HS2.
Even if we ignore the spiralling cost of HS2, it's still an extraordinarily small amount of money to make a big speech about. Presumably it sounds large and is a vote winner.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
You do realise that there are large areas of the UK with very few if any new cases over the last month
So far. This is surely a sign of things - unfortunately - to come.
Local lockdowns will continue until the vaccine is released. As Australia has shown this virus is very very hard to eradicate without a vaccine. We cannot stay in lockdown waiting for a vaccine. The good news is that if Leicester is the worst area at the moment then we have come a long way since March.
It’s been a long time since I read the economic analysis but there is an argument that some of his early moves extended the recession & that recovery didn’t really come until the war ramp up
Trying to blame stuff on FDR whilst ignoring all the insane shit that Hoover and the associated Congress did would be the most myopic analysis of all time.
The stunning acts of self sabotage during Hoovers admin are the root of the issue.
Absolutely, Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933 in the teeth of the great depression caused by Hoover's botched response to the Wall Street crash and following economic fall-out. He had a 19th century response to a truly 20th century crisis (not unlike the Generals of the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War), and was well out of his depth.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Roosevelt occupied the ground vacated by the other party and appealed to erstwhile Republicans on their values. Indeed his first version of the New Deal aimed to balance the books, albeit that changed later. He was a skilled coalition maker whose real opposition was in his own party.
Blair is clearly the most Rooseveltian of recent British prime minister.
This guy is dangerously dumb - and worryingly close to office.
The mayor of Leicester said the same thing today.
Yes, for the last week there have been 4 mobile testing stations in East Leicester, population 327 000 last census. That is pretty intensive testing, and perhaps partly explains the increase in numbers with no increase in admissions.
It does seem strange to have all that testing and not pass on information on postcodes to Leicester Public Health, or record ethnicity.
Hancock said there were significantly higher levels of hospital admissions vs other parts of the country
Not a rise though. I see the hospital figures several times a week. Indeed I have posted them here. 75 current inpatients at midnight on Sunday.
There are dozens of hospitals with less than 5 patients with Covid and many with zero. I would think 75 patients with Covid would be one of if not the highest in the country.
There are 3 hospitals in Leicester
If it is 75 over three hospitals and that is considered to be the worst in the UK then we really have come a long way
It’s been a long time since I read the economic analysis but there is an argument that some of his early moves extended the recession & that recovery didn’t really come until the war ramp up
Trying to blame stuff on FDR whilst ignoring all the insane shit that Hoover and the associated Congress did would be the most myopic analysis of all time.
The stunning acts of self sabotage during Hoovers admin are the root of the issue.
Absolutely, Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933 in the teeth of the great depression caused by Hoover's botched response to the Wall Street crash and following economic fall-out. He had a 19th century response to a truly 20th century crisis (not unlike the Generals of the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War), and was well out of his depth.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Roosevelt occupied the ground vacated by the other party and appealed to erstwhile Republicans on their values. Indeed his first version of the New Deal aimed to balance the books, albeit that changed later. He was a skilled coalition maker whose real opposition was in his own party.
Blair is clearly the most Rooseveltian of recent British prime minister.
Nah. Boris is eclipsing great leaders from history. Churchill, now Roosevelt. By the twilight days of his 25 year term he will have surpassed Julius Caesar.
For anyone who doesn't believe me that £5bn is sod all, it's a grand total of 7% of HS2.
Even if we ignore the spiralling cost of HS2, it's still an extraordinarily small amount of money to make a big speech about. Presumably it sounds large and is a vote winner.
There's a fair amount of research that shows people respond better to numbers they can put into context, £5bn is probably towards the upper limit of that but yes I'd suggest it's a number being used because of that rather than anything else.
It's why £350m per week was so much more effective than 5% loss of GDP during the referendum campaign despite the latter being worth potentially £50-70bn per year in state expenditure or £1bn per week.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
Doesn’t that just reinforce the point? There’s plenty of crass, broad generalisations made about “Africans” or “Europeans”. It is only their status as geographic facts that prevents them from being removed from the language as “offensive”. The offence of the generalisation remains.
well, only if you try really hard to make it an offence.
wouldn't it be more sane to go 'its a generalisation, I know that, you know that. It has its uses but it also has its weaknesses and if you can be more specific, try to be"? Maybe?
That’s the point i’m making though (originally). It seems that over time there is a constant search to find new words to describe generalised groups, as previous ones get discredited. But the words aren’t the problem, it’s how they are used.
Reminds me of when I was told government was coming up with a new name for NEETs (not in employment education or training), as it was becoming a stigma, though I dont know they did.
Or in Yes Minister referring to underdeveloped countries becoming Less Developed Countries. Which by the time I was at school were Less Economically Developed Countries but theyd added Newly Industrialised Countries for those between LEDCs and MEDCs
It’s been a long time since I read the economic analysis but there is an argument that some of his early moves extended the recession & that recovery didn’t really come until the war ramp up
Trying to blame stuff on FDR whilst ignoring all the insane shit that Hoover and the associated Congress did would be the most myopic analysis of all time.
The stunning acts of self sabotage during Hoovers admin are the root of the issue.
Absolutely, Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933 in the teeth of the great depression caused by Hoover's botched response to the Wall Street crash and following economic fall-out. He had a 19th century response to a truly 20th century crisis (not unlike the Generals of the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War), and was well out of his depth.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Roosevelt occupied the ground vacated by the other party and appealed to erstwhile Republicans on their values. Indeed his first version of the New Deal aimed to balance the books, albeit that changed later. He was a skilled coalition maker whose real opposition was in his own party.
Blair is clearly the most Rooseveltian of recent British prime minister.
Nah. Boris is eclipsing great leaders from history. Churchill, now Roosevelt. By the twilight days of his 25 year term he will have surpassed Julius Caesar.
I don't think Johnson hides the fact that it's a tribute act. The Rolling Clones rather than the original. Interesting, though, that he's decided Churchill is no longer a marketable act.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
Maybe - but the difference to March is genuinely we have enough testing now. I think there is a case for suggesting that (a) our lockdown was not as strict as some other countries and (b) we may have eased too soon in terms of cases. However we don't know as everyday punters where the 1000 new cases a day are coming from. Where did they get infected? I am sure there is a lot more detail in the data, not being released yet. On other things - the Daily Express scare story yesterday was ridiculous. Apparently Wiltshire has rising cases - not according to the testing data, with 7 cases in 500,000 people in the last seven days, and 9 the previous.
For anyone who doesn't believe me that £5bn is sod all, it's a grand total of 7% of HS2.
Even if we ignore the spiralling cost of HS2, it's still an extraordinarily small amount of money to make a big speech about. Presumably it sounds large and is a vote winner.
The trick with all government numbers is to convert them to per person; I'm sure I'm not telling anyone here something they don't know!
So it's about £100 per head. So it's a moderately nice flatpack wardrobe per person.
Wasn't the ONE MILLION POUNDS thing fatally skewered by the first Austin Powers movie?
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
You do realise that there are large areas of the UK with very few if any new cases over the last month
So far. This is surely a sign of things - unfortunately - to come.
Why are you so sure that this will go in this direction?
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
To put it politely, bollocks. The repeal of section 28 and the introduction of civil partnerships were massive culture wars. You don't remember them as culture wars as they were won, and they were won because Labour had the courage to fight them.
The homophobia unleashed by the move to repeal section 28 (clause 2a) in Scotland was horrendous. And the courage of the Lab politicians to stand up to it was commendable.
It’s been a long time since I read the economic analysis but there is an argument that some of his early moves extended the recession & that recovery didn’t really come until the war ramp up
Trying to blame stuff on FDR whilst ignoring all the insane shit that Hoover and the associated Congress did would be the most myopic analysis of all time.
The stunning acts of self sabotage during Hoovers admin are the root of the issue.
Absolutely, Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933 in the teeth of the great depression caused by Hoover's botched response to the Wall Street crash and following economic fall-out. He had a 19th century response to a truly 20th century crisis (not unlike the Generals of the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War), and was well out of his depth.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Roosevelt occupied the ground vacated by the other party and appealed to erstwhile Republicans on their values. Indeed his first version of the New Deal aimed to balance the books, albeit that changed later. He was a skilled coalition maker whose real opposition was in his own party.
Blair is clearly the most Rooseveltian of recent British prime minister.
Nah. Boris is eclipsing great leaders from history. Churchill, now Roosevelt. By the twilight days of his 25 year term he will have surpassed Julius Caesar.
I don't think Johnson hides the fact that it's a tribute act. The Rolling Clones rather than the original. Interesting, though, that he's decided Churchill is no longer a marketable act.
What I love is that all these analogies with political giants of the past are self proclamations.
It would be like Alvin Stardust proclaiming himself to be Elvis.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
You do realise that there are large areas of the UK with very few if any new cases over the last month
So far. This is surely a sign of things - unfortunately - to come.
Local lockdowns will continue until the vaccine is released. As Australia has shown this virus is very very hard to eradicate without a vaccine. We cannot stay in lockdown waiting for a vaccine. The good news is that if Leicester is the worst area at the moment then we have come a long way since March.
A local lockdown is going to be much more difficult to manage than a national one.
With the national one, everyone is in it together, the PM is on TV telling everyone to stay home in a somber mood. Emergency schemes help those who can't work or are forced to close their businesses.
With a local one, it's just you. Everyone else is going to work or having a party, TV is full of pubs and football - but your town has police all around it, and no-one is allowed to leave. It's not even certain that you'll be safe from losing your job.
These temporary lockdowns need to be managed very carefully, otherwise they are going to be a short cut to civil unrest and disorder.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
There are millions of English people who are happy to be called English but not European.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
Doesn’t that just reinforce the point? There’s plenty of crass, broad generalisations made about “Africans” or “Europeans”. It is only their status as geographic facts that prevents them from being removed from the language as “offensive”. The offence of the generalisation remains.
well, only if you try really hard to make it an offence.
wouldn't it be more sane to go 'its a generalisation, I know that, you know that. It has its uses but it also has its weaknesses and if you can be more specific, try to be"? Maybe?
That’s the point i’m making though (originally). It seems that over time there is a constant search to find new words to describe generalised groups, as previous ones get discredited. But the words aren’t the problem, it’s how they are used.
How long until BAME becomes a term you shouldn’t use any more?
Piece on the BBC today entitled 'dont call me BAME'. Havent read it yet though.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Yes learning Spanish (well attempting to) it was made clear that americano/americana were for the whole continent, and if it was USA it had to be made specific.
Even using the term US for the USA is incorrect given the Mexico is actually the United States of Mexico.
We’ll be moving on to whether the Manchester clubs can be shortened to “United” and “City” next...
If the fixture is Newcastle or West Ham vs Manchester United then no dont use United, use Manchester or Man United.
Who was the comedian who said that Man United and Man City sounded like a couple of gay nightclubs?
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Wasn’t Amerigo Vespucci a racist? We should rename those two continents.
In his book The Silk Roads Peter Frankopan refers to a pretty unsavoury incident in which Vespucci allows a group of Islamic pilgrims to perish at sea. Not sure it was specifically racist, but if true very nasty indeed, even by the standards of the day.
I understand Columbus was a bit of a nutter too, but then other periods, other standards.
It’s been a long time since I read the economic analysis but there is an argument that some of his early moves extended the recession & that recovery didn’t really come until the war ramp up
Trying to blame stuff on FDR whilst ignoring all the insane shit that Hoover and the associated Congress did would be the most myopic analysis of all time.
The stunning acts of self sabotage during Hoovers admin are the root of the issue.
Absolutely, Roosevelt was inaugurated in 1933 in the teeth of the great depression caused by Hoover's botched response to the Wall Street crash and following economic fall-out. He had a 19th century response to a truly 20th century crisis (not unlike the Generals of the Western Front at the beginning of the First World War), and was well out of his depth.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Roosevelt occupied the ground vacated by the other party and appealed to erstwhile Republicans on their values. Indeed his first version of the New Deal aimed to balance the books, albeit that changed later. He was a skilled coalition maker whose real opposition was in his own party.
Blair is clearly the most Rooseveltian of recent British prime minister.
Nah. Boris is eclipsing great leaders from history. Churchill, now Roosevelt. By the twilight days of his 25 year term he will have surpassed Julius Caesar.
I don't think Johnson hides the fact that it's a tribute act. The Rolling Clones rather than the original. Interesting, though, that he's decided Churchill is no longer a marketable act.
What I love is that all these analogies with political giants of the past are self proclamations.
It would be like Alvin Stardust proclaiming himself to be Elvis.
It is a bit desperate. Nevertheless, I supported Johnson in his pretence of being Churchill. It meant he took the epidemic seriously, for a while.
Concerning times. The government’s messaging Is very muddy. The position of the bug appears to be fragile.
We should at least be relieved that Johnson has sub-contracted the post Covid-19 economic recovery to the ghost of FDR, so he can concentrate on any second wave.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
We have undoubtedly come out of this lockdown far too early.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
You do realise that there are large areas of the UK with very few if any new cases over the last month
So far. This is surely a sign of things - unfortunately - to come.
Why are you so sure that this will go in this direction?
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
Upon English independence move the capital back to Winchester. Purchase a nice greenfield or brownfield site and run an international architecture competition. Just don’t give the job to a shite Catalan one.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
To put it politely, bollocks. The repeal of section 28 and the introduction of civil partnerships were massive culture wars. You don't remember them as culture wars as they were won, and they were won because Labour had the courage to fight them.
The homophobia unleashed by the move to repeal section 28 (clause 2a) in Scotland was horrendous. And the courage of the Lab politicians to stand up to it was commendable.
You labelled Battery's comment "bollocks" and then cited an example that very much supports it, if you read the entire comment rather than just the part you have extracted. This was something that Labour did not publicly give much attention while in opposition, but then were strong on when they came to power.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
So now we are down to everyone having to be mystic Meg and be able to magic up which country someone's ancestors came from or even guess they were born in Scunthorpe, what next you address them by their postcode or you are being racist. FFS.
What's race got to do with it?
Like more than a fifth of South Africans my wife is white, I never brought colour into it. The idea that all people from South Africa or Africa in general are black is as bizarre as saying all people in England or the USA are white.
If you wish to refer to nationality refer to nationality. If you wish to refer to ethnicity then refer to ethnicity. The problem with vaguely calling people "African" is that refers to neither nationality nor ethnicity.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
For 4 billion quid they should knock the fucking thing down and build a new one somewhere cheap and horrible like Doncaster.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I've met people from Brazil who hate it when people refer to the USA as "America".
Wasn’t Amerigo Vespucci a racist? We should rename those two continents.
In his book The Silk Roads Peter Frankopan refers to a pretty unsavoury incident in which Vespucci allows a group of Islamic pilgrims to perish at sea. Not sure it was specifically racist, but if true very nasty indeed, even by the standards of the day.
I understand Columbus was a bit of a nutter too, but then other periods, other standards.
I get the impression that most high profile characters throughout history have been total nutters. And history hasn’t stopped.
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
I’m sure it’s not to her but to many people an African Is black where a South African is of indeterminate skin tone until clarified by visual contact.
A lot of it just comes down to plain ignorance by some people. My wife was once asked by someone if she came from South Africa how come she isn't black? 🤦🏻♂️
I think this is one of those stories that we're only hearing about because of what's happening at the moment. It's a bit like how the media jumped on any fire in a tower block in the months after Grenfell.
When you are PM and having to 'relaunch' only months after winning a GE, it 'aint good.
Why not? The whole country is trying to relaunch post-virus.
That the PM is trying to relaunch by honouring the same commitments he was elected to implement in his manifesto seems to be an odd thing for Scott to be criticising him with.
I see Parliament continues to fall to bits. Perhaps as the cash will be thrown around they will stop dragging their feet and fully authorise the spend to begin proper renovations.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
Sooner the better then we can have a proper legislative home fit for the modern world
It's a historical site worthy of restoration even if it's not used for a legislature. We wont bulldoze salisbury cathedral because church attendances are decreasing, and these days at least we dont destroy old sites just because they are not used . In fact it is not permitted to let such things run down deliberately
Mushy peas and gravy. And NOT in separate polystyrene tubs like it's some perverted Geordie fondue.
I'm disappointed Dixie - it has to be salt and vinegar (malt)
Oh. Yes if you're just having chips. Plenty of vinegar...Not too heavy on the salt... Ketchup is an offence for which one should be righteously doxxed and sacked. "Curry" sauce, a collection of abominable e numbers too. Mayonnaise is acceptable. Salad cream deserves a hefty jail sentence. No sauce is the only plausible reason for bringing back hanging.
In my native homeland - West Virginia - the big question is, what to put hot dogs, the Mountain State equivalent to fish & chips in London or schnitzel in Vienna. Different parts of the state have their own distinct preferences; in my home town it was sauerkraut on your dog.
There's a West Virginia Hot Dog map on the web, but don't know how to post it here.
I though it was only Orientals who ate dogs. Nothing wrong with eating dogs if you're hungry.
OK, I give up! However, a serious piece of advice: best way to piss off an Asian person, at least Asian Americans, is by calling them "Orientals" as they REALLY hate that, on same par these days as calling a Black person "Colored". Just don't go there UNLESS you want to make a bad impression, 'cause is considered insulting even if you don't mean it to be.
Here in the home of English, "Oriental" is not a dirty word
Isn’t the fundamental issue that all terms used to group together ethnic minority groups eventually become discredited because any generalised grouping inevitably fails to nuance different circumstances within it right down to the individual level. Of course the problem isn’t the words, but the concept of generalising. So the cycle repeats ad infinitum, but keeps a lot of people in jobs arguing about it.
To an extent, although it depends on usage. For example a clear geographic category (“European” or “African”) is fine. It’s where there is an artificial grouping that is believed to be imposed from outside.
A classic piece of colonialism from Charles there, surprise surprise.
The term 'African' is NOT fine: linguistically, geographically, ethnically, historically.
Pan-Africanism may have a role to play but it needs to be very carefully tempered, not airily dismissed by a white man as 'fine.'
Nothing colonial about it.
I think about the term “African” in the same way I think about “european” or “the Americas”
An African is someone from the continent of Africa. A simple description. I’d usually try to be more specific (eg Nigerian or Kenyan) but you can’t always be so.
Don’t seek offence.
Interesting that you said "the Americas" and not "American" which is the equivalent word. Try calling a Canadian an American and see how they take it.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
That's an interesting one, Philip. I'll run it past Mrs PtP when I catch up with her later today.
I'm pretty sure she is ok with *North* American because I've often heard her speak of North American writers, plainly including Canadians. I suspect she equates America with the USA, as I tend to. I wouldn't normally think it included Canada or South America, much less Latin America.
Not sure anybody need be offended by any perceived error. I wouldn't be upset at being called Scottish, Irish, or Welsh. Might be a little bit more problematic the other way around but in my experience the Scots, welsh and Irish shrug off the mistake with good humour whilst correcting it.
Why are people so particular anyway - we're all effing mongrels, aren't we?
Comments
I don't think lockdown will work again. People have had enough, and money is running out.
Oddschecker shows a sea of blue for all the likely (ie women of colour) candidates, including layers' pal Michelle Obama. Kamala Harris is as short as 4/6 with Ladbrokes (implying a 60 per cent chance) and as long as Evens on Betfair.
My wife is from South Africa and is happy to be called South African but not African.
Moreover continents are defined primarily by geology, not by ethnicity or history. So the eastern boundary of Europe is the Ural Mountains which is far to the east of what most people would consider to be Europe.
The reason that the Arabian peninsular is not considered part of Africa in modern terms is that the Red Sea is a divergent fault boundary with Africa and Asia moving further apart due to sea floor spreading.
By the time you git it home the chips peas (proper thick mush, none of this watery guff) and gravy would have merged into this congealed block which you could almost slice into. Utterly epic because of how wrong it was. Sadly the chippy changed hands yonks ago and all that is memory. As is the one in Sheffield who would do a Mushy Pea Fritter - again use the thickest of mush peas, rolled in batter, deep fried. Served with Chips and Parsley Sauce. Mmmmmm.
Which of these techinques would you recommend for royalty?
and 13 fatalities in a week.
The organization I usually work for uses ESA, WCA and MENA. About the time South Sudan became independent it shifted from MENA to ESA
"Europe" is not really a continent geologically speaking, but gets to be called a continent I suppose because Europeans made the current naming system.
"America" is also a bit dodgy.
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1277846030734819329
I dont really see a problem in changing language though, its just part of human progress, hence we dont speak latin or gaelic as our ancestors may have done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWuLfvL20aY
Positive cases have exploded since the 4th of June, deaths are plunging.
The only thing I can see is that it seems to be 18-29 year olds who seem to be the largest group of positive tests.
It's an obvious reference to MAGA and Trump's policies which have made Covid-19 much worse in the US than it should have been.
As I said yesterday, Blair was spot on the money a few months ago. You just don't have the argument - and you move the debate onto economic grounds where Labour can win.
Entering a culture war is always losing ground, so don't even have the debate. Those challenges can be dealt with after winning an election. Blair did more for LGBTQ+ people than any other PM this century - and he did it without getting into a culture war in the first place.
I am telling the left now, if we want to win, we have to got to get a lot better at picking our battles and picking them carefully.
A battle than can be won, is this concept of "them and us", which Starmer is going to exploit. The other one is on jobs and investment. Labour can win on these grounds. It cannot win on culture - don't even try.
In 'stop appeasing these fuckwits, you cowards' news:
https://twitter.com/Roman_Britain/status/1277675652121051136
I am shocked.
Eclipsing both Churchill and now Roosevelt. No one can suggest Johnson doesn't lack ambition.
eek said:
» show previous quotes
But it's a great way of adding another level of separation between Scotland the rest of the UK which is what she wants...
Carlotta is having kittens, CCHQ must be whipping her to get all the agents out quick. Sturgeon is threatening to do the popular and sensible thing yet again. Unionists are having a bad time of it.
I thought we'd see a second wave, I just didn't think it would happen so quickly. What we're seeing (so far only on a small-scale) is exactly what happened in the US.
Which is what struck me as funny about Boris and Gove trying to rebadge themselves as Rooseveltian when in fact they are the causes of so many of the issues - it may be a reasonable PR move but the reality is that their government is the cause of the economic calamity facing the country and so very unlikely to be the salvation. They certainly don't represent a fresh approach or a new deal.
Of course, you do have to take your own people with you, which means that you can't completely avoid giving conservatives "culture war" opportunities. Fortunately, there will always be things where the right will only making themselves look silly if they complain (e.g. Starmer taking the knee).
The real failure has been the poor communication of an ill thought through plan
Even if we ignore the spiralling cost of HS2, it's still an extraordinarily small amount of money to make a big speech about. Presumably it sounds large and is a vote winner.
The good news is that if Leicester is the worst area at the moment then we have come a long way since March.
Blair is clearly the most Rooseveltian of recent British prime minister.
It's why £350m per week was so much more effective than 5% loss of GDP during the referendum campaign despite the latter being worth potentially £50-70bn per year in state expenditure or £1bn per week.
Or in Yes Minister referring to underdeveloped countries becoming Less Developed Countries. Which by the time I was at school were Less Economically Developed Countries but theyd added Newly Industrialised Countries for those between LEDCs and MEDCs
Perhaps £100bn I would have been thinking "wow" but £5bn just seems cynically calculated in focus groups to win support back.
Let's not forget that with inflation it's not even covering money that was cut over the last 10 years.
His biggest crime was using a Christian symbol at the battle of the milvian bridge pre conversion - cultural appropriation.
On other things - the Daily Express scare story yesterday was ridiculous. Apparently Wiltshire has rising cases - not according to the testing data, with 7 cases in 500,000 people in the last seven days, and 9 the previous.
So it's about £100 per head. So it's a moderately nice flatpack wardrobe per person.
Wasn't the ONE MILLION POUNDS thing fatally skewered by the first Austin Powers movie?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJR1H5tf5wE
The homophobia unleashed by the move to repeal section 28 (clause 2a) in Scotland was horrendous. And the courage of the Lab politicians to stand up to it was commendable.
It would be like Alvin Stardust proclaiming himself to be Elvis.
But it feels like itll burn down before that happens
With the national one, everyone is in it together, the PM is on TV telling everyone to stay home in a somber mood. Emergency schemes help those who can't work or are forced to close their businesses.
With a local one, it's just you. Everyone else is going to work or having a party, TV is full of pubs and football - but your town has police all around it, and no-one is allowed to leave. It's not even certain that you'll be safe from losing your job.
These temporary lockdowns need to be managed very carefully, otherwise they are going to be a short cut to civil unrest and disorder.
There are millions of English people who are happy to be called English but not European.
https://youtu.be/ZzEL9RvM9SA
Constantine's murdering his wife and son are probably more relevant objections to his statue being in place of worship - but nobody's perfect.
I understand Columbus was a bit of a nutter too, but then other periods, other standards.
Which is more ridiculous
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/29/chinese-scientists-discover-new-swine-flu-capable-triggering/
Not NOW!!!!!
Like more than a fifth of South Africans my wife is white, I never brought colour into it. The idea that all people from South Africa or Africa in general are black is as bizarre as saying all people in England or the USA are white.
If you wish to refer to nationality refer to nationality. If you wish to refer to ethnicity then refer to ethnicity. The problem with vaguely calling people "African" is that refers to neither nationality nor ethnicity.
That the PM is trying to relaunch by honouring the same commitments he was elected to implement in his manifesto seems to be an odd thing for Scott to be criticising him with.
I'm pretty sure she is ok with *North* American because I've often heard her speak of North American writers, plainly including Canadians. I suspect she equates America with the USA, as I tend to. I wouldn't normally think it included Canada or South America, much less Latin America.
Not sure anybody need be offended by any perceived error. I wouldn't be upset at being called Scottish, Irish, or Welsh. Might be a little bit more problematic the other way around but in my experience the Scots, welsh and Irish shrug off the mistake with good humour whilst correcting it.
Why are people so particular anyway - we're all effing mongrels, aren't we?