11 May 2010

11/05/10

Byzantium was renamed Nova Roma in 330, although it became commonly known as Constantinople.  About 4000 workers for the Pullman Palace Car Company of Chicago went on strike in 1894, which became one of the most significant events in the US labour movement.  A flash fire in the stands at Valley Parade in Bradford killed 56 spectators in 1985.

Born today:  Irving Berlin (1888-1989), Margaret Rutherford (1892-1972), Salvador Dalí (1904-1989), Richard Feynman (1918-1988), Mort Sahl (1927), Eric Burdon (1941), Jeremy Paxman (1950), Natasha Richardson (1963-2009), Andrés Iniesta (1984).

It is the feast day of Gangulphus of Burgundy.

209 comments:

  1. Morning all! Gandolfo, sorry I disappeared last night - had a phone call. Tories' offer of an AV referendum is too little, too late, methinks. (Mehopes.)

    Just peeked at BBC web site and it looks like no decision yet. Harman has ruled herself out of leadership battle. Good!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Morning all - looks like I missed a doozy yesterday. retired to the pub after interview to recover (went well, they have to discuss my salary suggestion, will let me know, but all on for a 1 June start...) got home to see Hague looking wan and sleep-deprived and offering a referendum that the Tories would then campaign against...wtf? anyway.

    volcano permitting, am flying back to blighty today, so will be off-line until next week. so, after the sterling work in thinking positive thoughts yesterday, can I prevail upon all to send 'calm down, calm down' vibes to the ashcloud?

    thank you.

    right - must pack.

    ReplyDelete
  3. damnit. laundry not dry yet. may be oddly dressed at ATP. meaning, as it is ATP, would not look out of place anywhere else, but will look odd by comparison.

    peh. at least painting fitted into the suitcase.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pack some jumpers, Philippa - it's blooming cold here!

    David Blunkett & John Reid seem less than impressed by the prospect of a LibDem/Lab arrangement.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I've thrown one in, MsChin, but my nice fluffy red number is still dripping gently onto the bathroom floor...tis raining here too, but apparently that squashes ash, or something, so am fine with that at present...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Morning all

    Got distracted by preparations to go up to my Ma's today and by the Gary Young thread.

    Some really interesting comments here yesterday, sorry I couldn't have participated more.

    I may be in from time-to-time.

    Have a good week all and congrats PB on your interview ;)

    ReplyDelete
  7. BTW:

    'Fridah' is back in town.... v. nasty right-wing, masquerading as a 'riend of the poor and needy'... now, where have I heard THAT before???!!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. La Rit

    I've noticed the return of several right wingers who've been largely absent during the election. Assuming that after all that campaigning, they now have time on their hands.

    ReplyDelete
  9. btw Philippa, it's a beautiful sunny morning here in Yorkshire. But still cold.

    Off out for the day now. See you later.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've just had a quick perusal of CiF's election coverage this morning and to save everyone time (and in private eye fashion), I've written the entire commentary here for you. Delete words where applicable:

    Gordon Brown yesterday (shamefully/heroically) resigned as PM. Labour were clearly (right/wrong) in putting pressure on Brown to resign. Clegg as a result (should/should not) enter into discussions with (Labour/Tory) over a (coalition/minority) Government. It is clear that a Lib Dem/(Labour/Tory) (coalition/minority) administration is the only way to guide Britain through uncharted waters.

    A Lib-dem/Labour coalition (would/would not) destroy the (Lib Dems/Labour) movement resulting in a (general election/Tory minority/saviour of Britain) administration.

    ReplyDelete
  11. your grace - am reminded of the molesworth all-purpose thank-you card - thank you for the trainset / jumper / postal order it is lovely / interesting / broken already...

    ReplyDelete
  12. Philippa,

    Here's the all purpose Sky News wikipedia entry:

    Sky news is the (bugle of Satan/swivel eyed nihilist’s program of choice) put upon the earth to (destroy intelligent debate/rational thinking). It’s so outrageously biased, it’s the 21st Century (Pravda/Goebbels ministry of information).

    Funded and owned by an (utter c*t/enemy of humanity), their programming is fronted by the “triumvirate of evil”: Eamonn Holmes (fat c*nt/banality personified), Kay Burley (Medusa/hound of hell) and Adam Boulton (Fat Tory/Objectionable Fat Tory).

    ReplyDelete
  13. heheheh.

    almost as good as the Robbie Keane Wiki 'updates' during the last transfer window:

    Keane is now on his way to:
    Manchester City
    Arsenal
    Ibiza for his holidays
    The corner shop for a pint of milk

    ReplyDelete
  14. Aye, Duke. For supposed news outlets, there's precious little by way of news, simply the parading of prejudices and hobby-horses by alleged journalists and soi-disant commentators, most of whom happily call white black and then black white within 24hrs, or even in the same column/piece to camera.
    The Guardian has simply gone bananas: I'm sorry but just how many hastily-knocked out 500-700 word pieces do we need a day, none of which are particularly novel, fresh or insighful, and many of which either duplicate other pieces or are simple inversions/mirror-images. TV's as bad, and they are all desperate to convey that they have some special channel or influence with what's going on. They don't: they're simply bigging themselves up, making out that by dint of their platform, their views carry more weight. Not so in a situation where facts are scarce and moreover nobody, not even those in parties negotiating really know what's to be done or what will happen, as it's uncharted territory.
    Odds are that there'll simply be umpteen attempts to revert to type, business as usual, the corporatist/neo-liberal ship to sail on, and all of the evident dissatisfaction, discontent and plain discomfort with the paucity (and poverty of principles) of our political classes expressed by the populace will come to nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Morning All

    I intend to avoid all news sources today - far too many self important people telling me things I have already worked out for myself.

    Well done Phillipa.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Alisdair

    Odds are that there'll simply be umpteen attempts to revert to type, business as usual, the corporatist/neo-liberal ship to sail on, and all of the evident dissatisfaction, discontent and plain discomfort with the paucity (and poverty of principles) of our political classes expressed by the populace will come to nothing.

    A truer paragraph on the whole sorry episode yet to be written.

    Jay,

    just saw the conversation regarding "violence" on WADYYA.

    Interesting that the concept of "systemic" violence hasn't cropped up. In our contemporary Western societies of conspicuous consumption, isn't violence used to maintain this lifestyle?

    The systemic abuse of those at the bottom of the supply and production chain- sweatshop labour, subsistence wages etc which provide our lifestyle, is this not in itself a form of violence?

    Are we not consciously/unconsciously participating in this systemic violence by living the lifestyles to which we have become accustomed?

    Market speculation could also be seen as a form of violence- the ability to manipulate and bring down economies with all that entails for populations. If you define violence as hurting someone then the collapse of their livelihood as a result of market activity to gain an advantage is surely a form.

    Therefore the Bank bailout, the acceptance of market speculation as the cornerstone of our Economic system and Global capitalism can be construed as systemic violence-the abuse of populations both wittingly and unwittingly.

    Interesting that the debate on WADYYA seems to be focusng on subjective violence- throwing bricks, mobs on the streets etc rather than the more abstract (and in my opinion) more destructive form of violence- that of the systemic variety which we all passively engage in.

    I'm not 100% bought on the argument but I think it does hold a lot of merit.

    It's easier for Governments and populations to condemn brick throwers on the street than condemn the abstract concepts of systemic violence which has resulted in the financial and socio-economic impasse the west finds itself in now.

    Any thoughts anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  17. @13thDuke:

    Well, to be fair, the original talking point was about the stone-throwers and the fire-bombers. So the following thoughts were framed with that as a reference point.

    But yes, systemic violence as a concept had occurred to me as well. I'm not sure I agree with the notion, or rather, I'm not sure I agree with the term, if I can put it like that. I think it's a glib gloss on a series of different factors, and to lump them all together under one head is perhaps a step too far.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Alisdair

    Good post.And of course when things revert to type
    as you say the media will play its part in not only
    underpinning the process but also demonising and
    marginalising those whose 'faces don,t fit'.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Swiftyboy,

    regarding systemic violence. Yes, it is a troublesome concept which I daresay is open to interpretation and debate.

    However, if one argues that systemic violence is a violence emanating from socio-political systems throughout history, the default starting point for contemporary history (1789 onwards) always seems to be the systems of communism/fascism/nazism and how many were killed, suffered etc.

    The question that never seems to have been addressed is how many have been killed and suffered under the Capitalist system? US Capitalist wealth was initially built on slavery, the Industrial Revolution caused the misery and exploitation of millions, the great depression etc etc.

    Is the violence on the streets of Athens a reaction against systemic violence? Certainly open to interpretation.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Interesting points, Duke, and i agree its a much wider topic than some comments on waddya suggest. Like most good debates, definitions need to be clear - violence in particular. It covers many things of very different natures that dont give to discussing as a homogenous bloc.

    There is systemic violence, as you mention, but to get that into the debate i suspect would be a debate in itself. I suspect a lot of people would only accept violence as *direct* physical harm, or the order to directly physically harm (i had an enjoyable chat with PB about this aspect).

    But i would say everyone on waddya believes in violence as a political tool; a democratically legitimate government rules through the law, and law is backed by violence - its an inescapable characteristic and law is inescapably political. Though a last resort (in theory) i suspect everyone supports the right of a democratic government to exercise violence in upholding the laws it enacts; forcibly imprisoning someone is violence. You cannot have laws without violence.

    If state violence (Hobbes) is legitimate by virtue of the authority conferred by the people, if it is used appropriately (debatable) - then surely mass violence against the state is also legitimate if it has the support of the people, and if peaceful avenues have been reasonably explored (as we hope the state attempts to do also).

    There's countless debates within the debate, which is why its such an interesting topic, but i think if we accept state violence as a last resort to enact "the will of the people", through the state, then when the state abuses its power and loses that authority it must also be legitimate for the people to use violence as a last resort - authority moves back from the state to the informal masses. The people have intrinsic authority, the state only derived authority.

    Arendt claimed to accept politics as intimately tied up with violence (eg Weber), it would only be plausible from a Marxist perspective, and i think she was badly wrong on that. Virtually the whole political spectrum, implicitly, supports violence as a necessary evil.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Well, to be fair, the original talking point was about the stone-throwers and the fire-bombers. So the following thoughts were framed with that as a reference point."



    Thats true, but i think the theme of "legitimacy" which always seems to be at the forefront of debates on violence, a running theme that can easily be stretched out to quite a wide debate.

    If the "rainbow alliance of authors" comes together for the article would you put your hat in the ring for the military view, Swift? You should do, police/military very interesting part of the debate. BB would be handy too for the lawyers view.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Actually, Duke, I did raise systemic features in my posts but I guess that passed you by.

    You over extend violence (not re systems) but as an abstraction, you might as well call it 'rape' and then inveigh against 'identity' politics.

    Violence requires actual acts in actual instances.

    Competition and conflict are not the same as violence.

    It's always easy to point the finger at the other.

    Hi Leni hope you're well

    ReplyDelete
  23. Duke
    Is the violence on the streets of Athens a reaction against systemic violence?

    Oh yes I think so...people have been effectively "violated by the system" and the only way that they can effectively express this is by demonstrating and counter attacking using subjective violence.....

    Slavoj Zizek has an interesting take on this
    "Systemic violence is thus something like the notorious 'dark matter' of physics, invisible to naked eye."

    ReplyDelete
  24. Duke

    Violence does not require an aggressive act - the failure to act or respond can be equally violent with horrendous results.

    An old lady dying from cold in Hull dies violently - the assumption that power controls the lives of millions is violence. Deaths under all capitlist systems number how many ? Too many to count .

    You could certainly say that the retention of national wealth in the hands of the few while others suffer is systemic violence in the same way as snatching food from a child everyday until he dies of starvation is an act of violence/murder.

    Capitalism 'passively' kills and deprives thousands daily.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Let's not get tied up too much on whether dehumanisation and upholding abusive and exploitative systems in society fits the term 'violence', which can be interpreted narrowly or broadly according to taste. It's unacceptable whatever term you choose.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Alisdair

    The riots of the 1980,s were acts of violence.How much
    they achieved is open for debate.But many believe that
    without them certain issues relating to race,poverty
    police brutality etc would never have been raised in
    the way they were.Condoning violence in whatever shape
    or form is potentially dangerous.But also dismissing
    it out of hand and classifying it as unacceptable denys the role it has historically had to play in
    trying to put right what is clearly wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Paul, without getting into semantics, which I was trying to avoid, I was referring to systemic stuff and abuse: resistance to that (whether you term that violence or not) is legitimate, as long as it's reasonably proportionate. That resistance may be active or passive, and if active may use means some might dub violent, which remain legitimate if proportionate to the systemic abuse.

    ReplyDelete
  28. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Alisdair

    That all sounds fine and reasonable in the cold light
    of day.And on one level i actually agree with you.But
    in this far from fair society we live in the rules of
    proportionate response often fly out of the window.

    For instance if forces of the State such as the police abuse their legitimate right to use violence in certain circumstances what is a proportionate
    response to that?Especially from communities which
    have endured years of abuse of power from the police,
    are demonised by the media,are ready to explode and
    may feel they have nothing to lose?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Alisdair

    I am not an advocate of abuse or violence.

    we have problems with definitions certainly. Domestic abuse for example often means violence against a family member.

    Before we can measure a proportionate response we have to understand the level of systemic abuse - who defines proportionate. The state can define any resistance as violent - thus justifying an even more violent response.

    Is a class based society abusive per se/ Was the overthrowing of ruling elites - followed by mass purges - in various revolutions proportionate ? Who decides ?

    Most importantly did these revolutions result in a fairer , none abusive society or simply concentrate power in different hands?

    Resistance - active or passive - has to have a vision beyond the overcoming/overturning of the status quo.

    We candemonstrate against but also have to be clear what it is we are demonstrating for.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Paul, proportionality and what constitutes it is a very thorny issue in its own right, and has been from the dawn of history. Personally, while I can understand an OTT response, there are some acts against the person I could never support, at least not wholeheartedly.Others may differ.
    There are no easy,universal rules, no solid lines that all know not to cross.

    ReplyDelete
  32. pen,

    apologies if I bypassed your post on WADYYA.

    Where you say:

    Competition and conflict are not the same as violence.

    I'm not quite sure what you mean,could you expand on that? Thanks.

    gandolfo, yeah Zizek is good on violence, very provocative. He likes to create academic shitstorms but plays an important part in getting these issues discussed in what he calls 'soft' liberal democratic thinking.

    Leni/Jay, you make excellent points.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Alisdair

    I so often there is a symbolic sacrifice - perhaps a policeman , perhaps a deomonstrator. Organised violent resistance very seldom touches those actually responsible - there is always the question around which side we end up on too.

    Is a local bobby - dependent upon job to feed family automatically an oppressor?

    ReplyDelete
  34. 'Competition', that touchstone of modern life, all so often be-gets violence.

    The intent/desire to win all so often gives way to win at any cost, and thus to plain old fashioned cheating.

    What starts out as an elbow in the ribs quickly gives way to thumbs in the eyes. And finally to a careless disregard for life and limb of the opposition.

    I've always considered free market economics to be an aggressive and violent system. Ruthlessness and violence are for me bedfellows.

    As Duke noted in his fine piece on Adam Smith -------words to the effect.... " men of the same trade seldom but get together but that the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public interest..."

    A conspiracy in these terms is in effect a call to arms, to gang up to win ......to win at any cost.

    The language of contemporary capitalist society is plainly encouraging of violence ---"there are no prizes for second place......" etc etc

    I would love to think that I could sweet talk the Rothschilds et al into a non violent redistribution of the means for an equitable and joyful life for all - sadly I fear such hope amounts to no more than pissing in the wind.

    I have no doubt that the 'entrenched' rich would seek my total destruction rather than even contemplate a peaceful non violent resolution of our differences.

    "....Competition and conflict are not the same as violence....." I disagree. They are elements, if not of the same sentence then certainly, of the same paragraph. They may not be 'defining' characteristics of violence but they are certainly 'accompanying' and we engage in idle pseudo rhetoric to pretend otherwise.

    I think it rare that a man or women on the floor with a bloodied nose was not, at some point, subject to some foolish competition/conflict before the fist was smashed into them.

    I am increasingly of the view that full on free marketeers are little short of socio-paths who (inter-alia) appear to share with psychopaths shrivelled or non existent 'empathy' brain cells.

    Such disordered folk seem to consider it natural to use violence to 'push' the opposition out of the way on the path to what they want and consider their natural right.

    I had intended to have a day or so off from posting - but you bastards here on UT pose such interesting questions that you lured me in.

    Safe journey PB and well done with the interview.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Another... 'interesting' day at the job finding chaos. Anyway, I have done the best really. I have sent off an application last week, will do. Sod it, I hate stanindg in the job centre who can barely talk, read or have any politness or manners, including the staff. I am sorry if I sound pretentious, but I consider myself an enlightened intellectual, this is an affront to my sensibilites. It is an insult to my Yorkshire mining/steelworking forebears, we would never act like reprobates. There is a reason why the TV programme is called 'Shameless', it is becuase many of our underclass youth have no sense of shame or anapropriate behaviour. I am not a rightwinger, 'but' (as they always say) some aspects of the welfare state have clearly gone to far.

    The kafkaesque system requires me to phone a specual number for them to send me an application form,. Just a basic retail job and they won't even tell me where it is. Almost no job application slips at the JC tell you where or who the job is with. So you may go through this bureacratic mess of phoning a line requesting an application form, then waiting, and you do not know whether the place of employment is 10 minutes down the road or on the other side of the city. Of course, for a low wage job, it just isn't worth travelling far. And of course, the idea of just popping down to the place offering employnment is anathema!

    Anyaway, enough of that. At least I have the afternoon free, so I will be doing lots of studying, research into training/education, relaxing, reading etc. I have my books, my dictionaries etc.

    ReplyDelete
  36. At least at home I can sit around in my underwear!

    ReplyDelete
  37. And on a lighter note I found my 10 week bus ticket I though I had lost, it fell behind the radiator. So, I can at least go to different parts of the city without a lengthy footslog

    ReplyDelete
  38. Nap - glad you found your bus ticket.

    I did think to wonder If you had looked behind the radiator and amongst your socks......but I didn't like to presume.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Nap

    Good news on the ticket.
    what's this about underwear ? A boy should always be prepared for unexpected visitors.

    Hi Deano .

    ReplyDelete
  40. Leni

    "..Is a local bobby - dependent upon job to feed family automatically an oppressor?.."

    No. But if he doesn't know that when he accepts the Queen's shilling he may well be called upon to become one, he is a little, at best, 'unaware'.

    Perhaps such unawareness really should disqualify him from the job.

    A lot of the 'friendly' local policemen waving the overtime money at the miners in 1984 didn't seem unaware to me.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Deano

    Agreed. That was really my point - the lack of awareness of where we fit into the system and of how we are being , or may be, used.


    Many of course choose the 'winning' or stronger side as a means of self protection and are more than willing to sell out their fellows - including family.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Morning/afternoon all,

    RE - violence. It's an interesting question.
    Indeed, one of the 'definitions' of politics frequently thrown around is the 'access to sanctioned and legitimate means of state violence' one.

    In my opinion, like most things, you can tell a lot about the nature of it, depending on the euphemism employed. So, we have...

    Heroic defence of the realm, rule of law, justice, nations values, democracy, etc for state sanctioned violence, however/wherever/whenever implemented.

    Insurrection, insurgency, rioting, violence, (and more recently) terrorism for anything that seeks to challenge the state, including it's use of the above!

    and, where the insurrection is successful, it goes on to be known as glorious, revolutionary, or patriotic.

    Again, in my opinion, it tends to be one of those things where the eventual winner gets to decide, after the fact.

    And on the Duke's point, I think I mostly agree.
    In supporting a system of even limited, or officially sanctioned violence, we often, either wittingly or unwittingly, support the opposite.

    One can't help but think of the Cold War as the obvious example. In defence of the supposedly peaceful and democratic ideals of the West, we turned a blind eye/supported the actions of those who most certainly did not share them.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Hey all,

    Playing the interested observer to your debate, as often.

    Been sent info around work about career progression schemes: we have separate ones for men and women, I have to wonder, why?!!?

    (and I blame you, Jay, among others, for me immediately wondering why ;-))

    ReplyDelete
  44. David Blunkett writes:

    "....The first thing all of us from the left of politics should say is, "Thank you". Thank you to Gordon Brown for his 10 years as chancellor, when we had the most benign and stable economic environment of any similar period in our history..."

    Sorry David you are off your trolley. You may be blind but you ain't daft. You knew when you were bedding that soft tart that you were shagging a Tory. And you knew when you got down greedy with Blair that you were in similar company.

    Your simpleton wailing that we have had 10 wonderful years ignores one discomforting reality - the ordinary and the poor are going to be paying dearly for it, for at least the next ten years.

    Thus the truth is we on the left ain't had lot to write home about. An illusion is not a reality. It's you that's had the ten wonderful years not us.

    Any view that Blairite tossers like you have are of little value to me and mine. It was alleged left wingers like you that sold the Labour Party out.

    What is it about that truth that you struggle with? - your idea that "...a Lib-Lab pact puts Labour's survival at risk..." is patently absurd.

    Something that is now long dead and buried cann't survive or be resurrected. The left will have to start again.

    Blindness is no excuse for shagging a Tory or concealing and shagging a corpse. Necrophilia is a criminal offence.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Deano

    Necrophilia is a criminal offence.

    I think we have a new slogan.....

    ReplyDelete
  46. "(and I blame you, Jay, among others, for me immediately wondering why ;-))


    Such injustice astounds me. Here I am, minding my own business...

    ReplyDelete
  47. Sorry for my rant at Blunkett. It was not an assault on the disabled.

    Tossers like him never seem to understand what hurt and despair their actions cause.

    I once admired him and I will never easily understand how a man whose father met a gruesome end (if I remember rightly a boiling/scalding to death in a workplace accident at the local Gasworks) was so easily separated from his roots.

    The fact that I know of the circumstances of his dad's death suggests that David used the story to his own advantage advancement in the labour movement.

    In retrospect it would seem that all was negotiable for him - a principle, two or three, in exchange for a second home in the Peak District and a directorship or two to finish off his career.

    He maketh me to feel sick.

    ReplyDelete
  48. deano30: Know what you mean about Blunkett. Why is it that when ever someone gets made Home Secretary they turn into a raving Nazi overnight?

    ReplyDelete
  49. deano

    Having a disability doesn,t mean Blunkett should be
    treated with kid gloves.A lot of what you said was
    spot on.Nice one!

    ReplyDelete
  50. Crikey, an epic day in cif today. An article about South African rape 'teeth', a Denis Mcshane, obesity, prison reform (Tory troll central no doubt), genital mutilation,an I/P with a high number of deletions even for I/P standards. And that is not to mention anything to do with the election/poltics

    Pity I am too busy

    ReplyDelete
  51. Talking of which, message for Atomboy of Cifmoderationwatch. This mmorning I posted on the south Africa rape-axe thread.

    I talked about the South African health minister who said eating beetroot would cure HIV.

    I talked about the president and prime minister who sing songs like 'Kill the boer' and 'bring me my machine gun'

    I said this rape axe was similar to that- yet another case of SA chauvinism.

    Then maybe this is what got me deletion. I said 'SA really had a chance to get their country back on track after apartheid, and they didn't'

    This, it seems, is worthy of deletion

    ReplyDelete
  52. Deano,

    Ditto what Paul said on Blunkett

    Jay,

    Seriously, you've changed my POV on some things: I still remember your argument against different entry requirements for male and female fire fighters on CiF a couple of years back.

    ReplyDelete
  53. If I were a Liberal - my instinct would now be to leave the Conservatives to it.

    Talk about the kiss of death. If Clegg joins Dave I really would expect him to be fighting the next election as a Tory candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  54. deano et al

    Haven't caught up on this thread yet but:

    Sold out & sold down the river by the bloody Labour Party. WTF is that about? Do they really believe anyone will ever vote for them again when they took away our one chance to avoid a Tory government.

    And please don't forget that David Blunkett was responsible for selling out my city when he was building his political career here as leader of the council here.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Very interesting discussion up thread on systemic violence and i agree with a lot of what's already been said.

    Rosa Luxemburg was interesting on this - in Accumulation of Capital she said:

    “The historical career of capitalism can only be appreciated by taking them together. ‘Sweating blood and filth with every pore from head to toe’ characterizes not only the birth of capital but also its progress in the world at every step, arid thus capitalism prepares its own downfall under ever more violent contortions and convulsions...”

    ... “colonial policy, an international loan system -- a policy of spheres of interest -- and war. Force, fraud, oppression, looting are openly displayed without any attempt at concealment, and it requires an effort to discover within this tangle of political violence and contests of power the stern laws of the economic process.”

    ReplyDelete
  56. I think I am going to be mighty unpopular here - but I just have a feeling that Labour might be right. My heart wanted them to do a deal but my head looked at the maths and the huge forces of right wing scumbag press, foaming mouthed Tories, and the ''markets'' and thought it could tear them all apart in short months if not weeks.

    I am dreading what is coming but feared that if a lib/lab pact fell apart early on (as I think it might) the Tories - still with lots of money - would win the ensuing election in a landslide.

    My only hope is that Clegg and co have bolted the bastards down to a fixed term so they cannot call an election as soon as the polls look good. And that they stop their most destructive impulses.

    But I think that Clegg might become a little Tory now and shed his liberal disguise - then we are fooked. And I still try to take comfort from the fact that a majority Tory government aint going to be sitting in parliament next week.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Just emailed the Labour Party to express my disgust. Probably a waste of time, but feel free to join me if you feel so moved.

    ReplyDelete
  58. deano,

    you never need to apologise about a rant against Blunkett. Especially as fine a rant as that was.

    A horror of a man.


    ConLib on the way, the Libdems sell out for cabinet baubles and high ranking Labour members reject PR.

    In the words of Johnny Rotten to the audience at the sex pistols final gig:

    Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

    ReplyDelete
  59. What the alleged 'progressives' must now hope is that the 'left' of the Liberals will leave their Party and join with the centre and left of those still in Labour and aim at driving out the 'right' of the Nulabour. There can be a lot of common ground in a rallying call - fuck em.

    The weak and the poor will suffer but plainly the Blanketers are over mindful of the words of the Governor of the Bank of England - (to the effect that) the winners will become the losers next time around.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Blanketers?? = Blairites! FFS.

    ReplyDelete
  61. MsC

    I think Labour want the tories to have to deal with the shitstorm of debt and cuts, and potential unrest about to be unleashed on our heads - whilst they re-group and plot a 'glorious' return.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Evening all

    Stolen some time on the PC - w00t!

    Feckin feckers. Not happy at all about a Lib/Con pact. Not sure that the Lib Dem party stalwarts can stomach it for long either.

    Blunkett and Reid want shooting. Ditto what whoever it was said about Home Secretaries becoming nazis, too.

    ReplyDelete
  63. "Seriously, you've changed my POV on some things: I still remember your argument against different entry requirements for male and female fire fighters on CiF a couple of years back"

    Ah, the odd rant changing a mind makes CIF worthwhile ;)

    ReplyDelete
  64. Your Grace

    ConLib on the way, the Libdems sell out for cabinet baubles

    That whiff of power is irresistible!

    Clegg might find some of the more left leaning LBs a bit difficult to keep in line though - they are not going to be at all happy being in bed with the tories. It'll be interesting to watch. Although as Deano says it's going to be very hard on the 'poor and the weak'.

    ReplyDelete
  65. sheff

    It's a big gamble though.

    Jay

    I don't recall your "your argument against different entry requirements for male and female fire fighters on CiF a couple of years back". I'm interested though, since the entry requirements as I understand them are the same whatever the gender/sex of the firefighter. Things like the minimum height requirement went out years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Sheff,

    great Luxemburg quote.

    'ConDem' are on their way. Toot toot!!

    ReplyDelete
  67. PPC

    "..but my head looked at the maths and the huge forces of right wing scumbag press, foaming mouthed Tories, and the ''markets'' and thought it could tear them all apart in short months if not weeks..".

    I recognise the seriousness of your worry. I would have expected just that from day one.

    The issue would really have been about planning for the inevitable next election - from day one the coalition should have been pointing the finger at the obstructive city/banks/newsmedia.

    "These guys say you can't have a civilised society a NHS a decent education for your kids - we say you can. These guys need to be put back in their boxes etc etc"

    The question for the next election was really always going to be a rerun of "Who runs Britain - your Parliament or......(hopefully with a different outcome) these unelected bastards who will create pain and discontent on our streets2.

    ReplyDelete
  68. "I'm interested though, since the entry requirements as I understand them are the same whatever the gender/sex of the firefighter. Things like the minimum height requirement went out years ago."

    I havent a clue tbh, i would imagine either someone said there were differing requirements or they were talking about the police and i used firefighting as an analogy, i have only vague memories of the debate.

    ReplyDelete
  69. princess

    The sight of a gloating pie face when he first enters No 10 is going to be truly nauseating. Sick bags at the ready!

    ReplyDelete
  70. ""These guys say you can't have a civilised society a NHS a decent education for your kids - we say you can. These guys need to be put back in their boxes etc etc""

    What i have found amazing about the election is how so much has gone unsaid, so many easy, irrefutable charges of cronyism, special interests, corruption, nepotism, nest feathering, etc, etc, but of course it rarely gets mentioned - reason being they are all at it.

    So you end up with an absurd election where minor quibbles occupy the news for days and there is a gentleman's silence on these countless areas of serious impropriety and anti-democratic behaviour.

    Listening to them all talk about "the national interest" is beyond satire...

    ReplyDelete
  71. Good to see you again BB.

    You arrive back just as I feel like saying ....." I may be gone some little time..."

    ReplyDelete
  72. Jay

    Fair enuff. Just curious & maybe wanted to point out that sex discrimination law works both ways - if there were different criteria for recruiting women then the blokes would be justified in making a complaint.

    ReplyDelete
  73. It's all over people.

    For years the Lib Dems have been arguing for serious voting reform, and have been presented with a unique opportunity to achieve it.

    Yet, it's increasingly looking like they're going to blow it - instead choosing to sell out for the political equivalent of dogging in the back rooms/car parks of Westminster.

    AV, for the most part, is the electoral reform version of polishing a turd, and, if anything, makes things worse by adding a thin veneer of legitimacy to what is essentially, the same old shit.

    I've said it before, and I'll say it again, they're all a bunch of f@cking f@ck-faced f@ckers.....

    ReplyDelete
  74. I's looking more and more that the ConDems have it.

    Not happy inScotland or in Wales.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Montana - thanks young miss for the picture from Dali to start our day. Methinks it/you most prescient.

    From the skulls of men do crawl the most alarming of images.......

    ReplyDelete
  76. Ta Deano

    James - you're not wrong there. I am not sure that Labour were offering them anything at all, though, were they? I can't believe that they would throw in the towel on something more tasty than AV. There has to be something else going on.

    And maybe, as MsChin and Sheff say, Labour are retreating to lick their wounds and regain their strength for the next fight, knowing that the next government is a poisoned chalice (if you will excuse the appalling mixed metaphors.)

    ReplyDelete
  77. Jay

    Listening to them all talk about "the national interest" is beyond satire...

    Yup, it is. A sense of humour though, is going to be essential if we're to get through whats coming up.

    J

    ReplyDelete
  78. Its now very clear Labour will never deliver PR, despite their lies. Tories will never deliver PR or Lords reform or anything else smelling remotely like democracy. Without that change Libs will only ever be third party, firstly, and secondly its now clear the Lib Dems arent really that fussed about PR, seats in a cabinet is far more pressing.

    What an ugly, depressing sham. And to think we lecture other countries about democracy...

    ReplyDelete
  79. Extended PM on Radio 4, so something is afoot & they are expecting 'an announcement'.

    ReplyDelete
  80. BB

    (Good to see you again)

    It just makes me so angry.

    The electorate turned out in large numbers, and effectively delivered a vote of no confidence to all three main parties, and, I would argue, the system as a whole.

    Out of the three, two have taken PR off the table, and the one that didn't immediately, seems to be now doing so because they've not been offered it on a plate by either of the other two.

    Essentially, the response to the voice of the electorate saying 'you're all a bunch of cock-knockers', and 'the system's a crock of shit', has been for them to stick their fingers in their ears, act more like a bunch of cock-knockers, and circle their collective wagons around the crock of shit.

    Outrageous.

    (If I wasn't already six thousand miles away, I think I soon would be....)

    ReplyDelete
  81. MsChin and Sheff - I am with you re the feeling sick part. In fact I have been in bed half the afternoon with something akin to a Victorian swoon at the news. Seriously fucked off.

    I just feel very scared for those of us on welfare and working in the public sector and very depressed.

    But I just had a horrible feeling that if Labour (who are bruised and battered and about to go through a leadership election) went into a coalition that fell apart very quickly then we would have a big Tory majority very soon.

    I think the lib dems should have refused an all out deal - as I have said many times - and just approved legislation piece by piece and worked for PR with Labour MP's on the back benches.

    The only thing that gives me cheer is that the Tory press and grandees like dickwad Rifkin will have to now smile happily at Clegg, who they called two faced and a liar earlier as he has posibly saved their bacon.

    But the Lib Dem party still might not give this the go ahead and then I think the Tory's will have to form their minority government.

    What is very interesting is the fact that the Conservative and Unionist party may be about to drop the whole Union bit. Reading the Tory forums they are faoming at the mouths to drop the 'Celtic fringes'. Can you imagine that?

    I would defect to Scotland or Wales. No hideous blue-forever, little England for me.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Jay

    I disagree that they aren't fussed about PR. We have no idea what, if anything, Labour really put on the table, and what else they were intransigent about. And it seems like it is Labour doing all the back-peddling at the moment, so something is afoot that doesn't add up.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Jay

    "....so much has gone unsaid, so many easy, irrefutable charges of cronyism, special interests, corruption, nepotism, nest feathering, etc, etc, but of course it rarely gets mentioned - reason being they are all at it...."

    Sadly on the money young sir.

    Voting methods are only part of the issue for 'reform'. Lobbying should questionably be made unlawful and we really have to consider public funding for all political parties and other funds made unlawful.

    Nobody in their right mind should object to public money being made available to 'inform' the public of what is on offer.

    I hope we do get a piece from MsR on the black arts of advertising on UT2. I want to see discussion about advertising during Elections being made unlawful.

    ReplyDelete
  84. "A sense of humour though, is going to be essential if we're to get through whats coming up."

    I'm not ready to start thinking about that yet, i'm still reeling in disgust, anger and disillusionment. Feels like a waste of time even paying attention to the whole charade. So depressing.

    ReplyDelete
  85. I have said on Cif - and got told to cheer up for my efforts - it is increasingly apparent that this will only be resolved on the streets.

    As Leni said yesterday - governments are running out of carrots and it is a question of how big a stick they can weild. People might eventually have to get out there and, possibly literally, fight for anything resembling democracy and the much touted 'fairness'.

    Which ties in nicely with the very interesting discussion from earlier.

    ReplyDelete
  86. There must be some furious packing going on in the Brown and Cameron households right now. News is saying its looking like condom man will be moving in to No10 tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  87. great post on blunkett deano.....
    I think it's time someone suggests to him the time has come to donate his brain, as he promised he would, to research into senile dementia....

    looks like clegg's going to be the tory teaboy then....

    like the rosa quote sheff and my sick bag is positioned well.....

    ReplyDelete
  88. BB,

    Im sure both Tories and Labour were strongly against PR, soundbites aside, and the Lib Dems for it. But the initial idea that PR referendum was a red line was clearly nonsense - that red line's been crossed, yet they still seem about to announce a deal.

    Deano

    Yep there is so much crucial reform needed, i just find them all dwarfed by PR.

    ReplyDelete
  89. As New Labour relinquish power, here's Tony Blair, 2nd May 1997.



    Try not to retch too violently


    >”I have just accepted Her Majesty the Queen’s kind offer to form a new administration and government for the country. John Major’s dignity and courage over the last few days and the manner of his leaving, is the mark of the man. I am pleased to pay tribute to him.

    As I stand here before 10 Downing Street I know all too well the huge responsibility that is upon me and the great trust that the British people have placed in me.

    I know well what this country has voted for today. It is a mandate for New Labour and I say to the people of this country — we ran for office as New Labour, we will govern as New Labour.

    This is not a mandate for dogma or for doctrine, or for a return to the past, but it was a mandate to get those things done in our country that desperately need doing for the future.

    And this new Labour government will govern in the interests of all our people — the whole of this nation. That I can promise you. When I became leader of the Labour party some three years ago I set a series of objectives. By and large I believe we have achieved them. Today we have set objectives for new Labour Government – a world class education system. Education is not the privilege of the few but the right of the many.

    A new Labour Government that remembers that it was a previous Labour Government that formed and fashioned the welfare state and the National Health Service. It was our proudest creation. It shall be our job and our duty now to modernize it for a modern world, and that we will also do.

    We will work in partnership with business to create the dynamic economy, the competitive economy of the future. The one that can meet the challenges of an entirely new century and new age.

    And it will be a government that seeks to restore trust in politics in this country. That cleans it up, that decentralizes it, that gives people hope once again that politics is and always should be about the service of the public. And it shall be a government, too, that gives this country strength and confidence in leadership both at home and abroad, particularly in respect of Europe.

    It shall be a government rooted in strong values, the values of justice and progress and community, the values that have guided me all my political life. But a government ready with the courage to embrace the new ideas necessary to make those values live again for today’s world — a government of practical measures in pursuit of noble causes. That is our objective for the people of Britain.

    Above all, we have secured a mandate to bring this nation together, to unite us — one Britain, one nation in which our ambition for ourselves is matched by our sense of compassion and decency and duty towards other people. Simple values, but the right ones.

    For 18 years — for 18 long years — my party has been in opposition. It could only say, it could not do. Today we are charged with the deep responsibility of government. Today, enough of talking — it is time now to do.”

    ReplyDelete
  90. princess

    Am staying off cif as I can't bear all those right wing trolls who'll be having a field day. i've already started polishing my street fighting skills.

    Jay

    Have a wallow and then get that chin up...fuck 'em...No Pasaran!

    ReplyDelete
  91. It will be no surprise if we find in tme that ex Blunkett and ex Reid helped spook the left rump of the Liberals.

    Talk about irony.

    BB My understanding (based on pundit rumour) was that an immediate whipped Law on AV was on offer from Labour followed by a referendum on PR??

    Liberals may be in position to wrongfoot Labour by asserting that would have been acceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Duke

    Wretching right now, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Sheff

    (Maybe you should have kept them bottles what you recycled t'other day).

    ReplyDelete
  94. I dont think you could have posted anything more depressing and sickening, Duke.

    ReplyDelete
  95. BB - without hvaing any insight to the shenanigans at all. My gut instinct is that Labour want the Lib Dems and Tories to take the flak for the horrendous poisoned chalice that is going to be the next four years in office.

    My big fear is we are now seeing a real and concerted attack on populations of all countries by the 'markets' - an attack that wants nothing more than to send us all back to 1912 or so. One day after the most massive warchest is announced by the Eu the markets are back to being 'jittery'. This is what I said yesterday when asking about this money - that I feared within a few days or weeks the markets would again be down - I didn't think it would be hours. It seems the whole system is now out of control and no amount of money or 'easing' or anything else can stop it unravelling. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

    I watched Dateline London the other night and one of the journos on there was saying that he thinks that labour have hidden the true horror of our debt (Jay he was talking about the pfi schemes that are failing left, right and center) and that when the Tories and Lib Dems see the books they may realise they have an almost impossible task.

    If this is true then that may well be why Labour don't want anything to do with it and also if this is true then the Tories and the Lib Dems will do everything they can to make the electorate place the blame solely at Labours door.

    But people are fickle creatures and tend to punish those doing the actual cutting even if they claim they are not responsible.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Might join you in giving CIF a miss, Sheff, the thought of seeing MaM and co is, well...

    ReplyDelete
  97. Jay "..Yep there is so much crucial reform needed, i just find them all dwarfed by PR..."

    As I reported yesterday Scargill would most likely agree with you! At least it's official Party policy for the Socialist Labour Party.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Your Grace

    Ugh! Putting that up is very cruel.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Keith Vaz giving an unequivocal backing to the New Labour model on BBC, twat.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Jay,

    I know, I know, but let's never forget the way New Labour threw away the greatest chance in modern political history to make a better society in the pursuit of Mammon.

    Thatcher begat Blair begat Cameron.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Thank God I got some extra supplies in yesterday.

    Dog walking calls.

    laters

    ReplyDelete
  102. duke
    god what a hideous flashback....thank god you didn't link to this this is guaranteed to make you throw

    ReplyDelete
  103. Aye Sheff the old street fighting skills may be needed soon. After all it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees. Allegedly :)

    ReplyDelete
  104. I am off to make some tea. And drink some more wine. Despite it causing much upset in my stomach region - I have not been able to get through these last few days without a tipple and seeing Camerons smug moon face outside number ten will surely mean I need some more tonight.

    ReplyDelete
  105. James

    You may be right, but I shall have no problem accumulating more!

    Your Grace

    If I hadn't just eaten a rather decent meal - I would be retching along with MsC!

    ReplyDelete
  106. princess,

    better to die on your feet than live on your knees.

    which is quite apposite considering Cameron's been on his knees sucking Clegg off all week. "Deputy PM, Nick? You like that? MMMMMMMMMMMMMM"

    ReplyDelete
  107. "I have not been able to get through these last few days without a tipple and seeing Camerons smug moon face outside number ten will surely mean I need some more tonight."

    I'm ordering pizza in to console me...

    Call me dave, our PM - a humiliatingly shit man to represent us to the world - shallow, odious, slimey, and as for his gimp boy Osborne, god help us. What a pair of fucking twats.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Call me dave, our PM - a humiliatingly shit man to represent us to the world - shallow, odious, slimey, and as for his gimp boy Osborne, god help us. What a pair of fucking twats.

    That has to be repeated again.

    ReplyDelete
  109. On the plus side...

    at least my (slightly risque) William Hague impression/routine might be more in demand now*....


    *appearing soon on selected P&O cruise routes shortly...

    ReplyDelete
  110. Get channel4 news on I think GB might be about to resign.

    ReplyDelete
  111. "Call me dave, our PM - a humiliatingly shit man to represent us to the world - shallow, odious, slimey, and as for his gimp boy Osborne, god help us. What a pair of fucking twats."

    That has to be repeated again.

    And again

    ReplyDelete
  112. Call me dave, our PM - a humiliatingly shit man to represent us to the world - shallow, odious, slimey, and as for his gimp boy Osborne, god help us. What a pair of fucking twats.

    ...and again! Oh and don't forget that demonic piece of work, Gove!

    ReplyDelete
  113. Sky news (on-line) says that a 3 year ConDem deal has been cut, with Cameron as PM ..

    ReplyDelete
  114. And again:

    "Call me dave, our PM - a humiliatingly shit man to represent us to the world - shallow, odious, slimey, and as for his gimp boy Osborne, god help us. What a pair of fucking twats."

    I wouldn't want our many overseas visitors to have any doubt about what the majority of UT's thought....

    ReplyDelete
  115. God you spend one day away from the computer and the news in general and you come back to this nightmare.

    I think I will join Deano and Princess on the booze (don't worry I won't post drunk and swear at any one). :-)

    When I finally end up getting my stomach pumped and attending AA I will blame David Cameron and 24 hour news.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Radio 4 - lectern in place outside No 10, ready for announcement

    ReplyDelete
  117. Did Alan Duncan really just say this is an age of enlightenment?

    ReplyDelete
  118. cameron is less than shit - shit has substance.

    ReplyDelete
  119. So it's all over, Cam's in.

    Signing out to get drunk. And I don't normally drink.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Would the last one to leave the country please turn off the lights....

    ReplyDelete
  121. channel4 just followed (by helicopter) GB on his way to Buck House. three black limos. Like watching a funeral procession.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Jon snow just said "We're in a new Jerusalem of politics" might be for the media - they'll have a ball - god help the rest of us.

    ReplyDelete
  123. "Oh and don't forget that demonic piece of work, Gove!"

    He's possibly the most sinister of the lot. Yet 36% voted for them, for Dave, Gove and Osborne (and Ashcroft and Murdoch) - beyond belief.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Gove = Rove

    Bugger - the phrase "ConDem nation" has already been used!

    I'll try this one:
    Well, what do you expect after all the whores trading?

    Time to go to the kitchen,
    Find a strong chair to sit in
    And drink myself far, far away...

    (Cowboy Junkies are very good when you're trying to forget something)

    ReplyDelete
  125. Fucking dismal day

    Hey linguists - can anyone tell me if this is Dutch or Belgian ?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X1VIyZe3Ws&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  126. Evening all

    According to the London Evening Standard a'Blistering
    rise in factory output in March 2010 has lifted the economy'-

    In reality this translates in the growth figure for
    the whole economy in the first quarter of 2010 being
    upgraded from 0.2% to 0.3%.Nothing to worry about then!!

    ReplyDelete
  127. "In reality this translates in the growth figure for
    the whole economy in the first quarter of 2010 being
    upgraded from 0.2% to 0.3%."



    As long as the banks are doing ok...

    ReplyDelete
  128. So after all that fuss it's business as usual then. Unbe-fuckingbastard-lievable!
    I'm going to the corner shop to get a bottle of vodka.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Lovefilm sent me 'The Age of Stupid' a film about the aftermath of global enviromental meltdown. Am watching that this evening. Might as well have a proper gloom fest.

    ReplyDelete
  130. prepare yourselves vodka, wine, whiskey, meths anything....."humiliatingly shit man" is due to arrive at downing street......

    ReplyDelete
  131. So it is going to be a full coalition then.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Fuck me - I never thought I would see the day when the PM, Mayor of London and the probable Chancellor of the Exchequer were all Bullingdon Bastards.

    What have you done oh crazed electorate. If you think that we shall build a better Britain on the falling crumbs from an exclusive Dining Club for Public Schoolboys you are plainly mad. When they have buggered each other they will surely shaft you.

    I am sick sick sick and as I have laid in emergency stocks I may be even sicker on the morrow.

    Hard times indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  133. Look on the bright side - the coalition can't last long.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Good evening, lefties - rejoice at the return of your natural masters!

    ReplyDelete
  135. Did I hear right that Clegg is likely to be Deputy PM?

    Isn't that a pretty toothless position?

    ReplyDelete
  136. Walter - if you were a regular reader here you would know that most of us are only too aware that we have really seen is not the 'return' of anything.

    We have simply witnessed the passing of soiled underpants from one arse to another.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Good evening, Walter - rejoice at the return of the anus you worship. Maybe it will let you in for a sniff?

    ReplyDelete
  138. Actually - love the site, and am very familiar with your opinions. You, for example, have an obsession with buggery and benefit from the kindness of some ghastly landowner (whose political leanings one can only imagine).

    Tra lala lala!

    ReplyDelete
  139. ".. Simon Hughes has just told Sky that the coalition agreement covers a full four years.."

    Which is another way of saying Nick the lad has taken leave of his senses.

    I bet they will have less paid up members at the end than at the start.

    ReplyDelete
  140. How could a coalition be announced before the Lib Dem MPs voted on it?

    Didn't they need a 75% yes vote?

    ReplyDelete
  141. Walter - Hello and welcome. Don't confuse obsession with fear.

    Had I my time again I might have wished to be a sailor.

    The rum and the concertina would have gone down well but unlike a hero of mine (George Melly a public schoolboy of talent) I was never up for the bum.

    ReplyDelete
  142. Jenni

    bit of a turn up if the Dems vote against it ! Don't think they will tho - they have *Power* and will doubtless try to hang on to it.

    Have to wait for public reaction to anticipated cuts - and even those we haven't yet thought of.

    ReplyDelete
  143. "Don't talk to me about naval tradition - it's all rum, sodomy, and the lash" ...

    ... as our last PM to have been both a Liberal and a Conservative said.

    ReplyDelete
  144. Churchill as first sea lord I guess - I'll go check

    ReplyDelete
  145. GB has resigned. Cameron has entered no 10.

    The best we can hope for is electoral reform and another election this year.
    The worst is that we have 4 years of Tory majority in a coalition and then an election to permanently put them in the wilderness.

    And an even worse situation is if they don't get electoral reform through at all.

    ReplyDelete
  146. I agree Leni, it wouldn't have been announced unless they were sure but wouldn't it have been politic of them to go through the motions first?

    ReplyDelete
  147. Jenni

    Queeny will look a bit silly if they reject the coalition.

    I suppose we would then have a minority Con gvt. I agree - it would have been more diplomatic had they waited for Dems to formally approve but do they care about other MPs and mebership ?

    ReplyDelete
  148. First Lord of the Admiralty (not First Sea Lord) is more plausible (on reflection) since Churchill was never a sailor.

    ReplyDelete
  149. Deano - ''When they have buggered each other they will surely shaft you''

    Ah I love you! Brilliant. I have had one glass of wine (thats all we have in) and him indoors is out climbing. Know it will make me feel poorly but need more - so have rung him on mobile and told him to get arse back here and go on a booze run.

    Actually cried when saw funeral procession of Brown going to the Queen. Then felt all conflicted and weak and finally I understand how I feel.

    I feel like a lady of a certain age and a certain time in history (i.e. before us 'ladies' had any freedoms of our own) who has spent her time taking the compliments and empty promises of a smooth suitor - who has spent about - oooh - thirteen years believing one lie after another. Anyway this lady comes to detest and hate this man - he has shafted her time and time again. But he is her last hope, her only chance of a better life. She awakes one morning to find he has left her for a younger, richer woman and she is - strangely and humiliatingly - bereft. That is how I feel. Betrayed and fucked over, yet still feeling stirrings of the heart strings over the heartless bastard thats done it.

    I feel sad.

    ReplyDelete
  150. "...The quote usually attributed to Churchill is, "Don't talk to me about naval tradition, it's all rum, sodomy and the lash!" The only problem, of course, is that Sir Winston never said it, although according to his assistant, Anthony Montague-Browne, he wished he had. The source of the quote is unknown, but as with many such false attributions, perhaps it's more fun to believe the story than the truth.

    As for the traditions mentioned, flogging was officially abolished as a punishment in the Royal Navy on March 29, 1949, though it had not actually been practiced since 1879. On July 31, 1970 the Admiralty Board, citing the requirement for sobriety aboard complex modern warships, ended the daily rum ration for men, which had begun in 1655. So it seems that only one of these grand traditions is left to the sailors of today's Royal Navy. Poor buggers..."

    ReplyDelete
  151. Well, he did say more or less everything ;)

    Will it be Tory? Will it be Liberal?

    Or just ... TORIBAL!

    ReplyDelete
  152. TORIBAL! - promising, verging on class! ;)

    PCC - love you too.

    The sadness for me is that what little Nu Labour achieved will be so easy to reverse. So much that was built was built on sand. It was always going to be difficult to defend a creation based on smoke and mirrors.

    What probably saddens me most is that nulabour didn't win against Thatcher - she/Major lost. Their time was up and the people were not convinced.

    1997 was a time when Labour would have won on the natural swing of the pendulum in any event and thus the absurd ditching of values and principles that meant so much to so many was not even necessary.

    Hope you man gets the text and recognises the urgency and gets the supplies in.

    xx.

    ReplyDelete
  153. Princess

    I,ve seen you fight your way through enough threads
    on Cif to know you ain,t no quitter lady!Time will
    heal that wound and we,ll all live to fight another
    day.Otherwise we all might as well fuck of to Zurich
    on a one-way ticket!!

    ReplyDelete
  154. Oh well, having just watched Mr Pastry toddling into No 10 now is the time to retire to my pit with a good book - the SAS survival handbook would do I think. Nite all.

    ReplyDelete
  155. Paul - Thanks mate. I will be back to fight another day - as I hope will we all. Right now - stomach permitting - I am off to drown my sorrows well and proper.

    One last thing - and this is true - when Cameron stood up in front of Downing street - my little terrier jumped up and pissed all over the legs of the television cabinet! He did a dirty protest! He has never done anything like that before - just peed out of the blue. Not proper cocked his leg on a piece of furniture. Gawd love him.

    goodnight my untrusted friends.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Bitterweed:

    Hey linguists - can anyone tell me if this is Dutch or Belgian

    A famous case, seen it before, Belgian TV, Flemish presenter, speaking Flemish, laughing stupidly. I think he was sacked for it.

    ReplyDelete
  157. That's perfect Princess, sorry about having to clean it up but well done to that dog.

    Good luck with the drinking and I hope the stomach problems pass soon.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Newsnight:

    Fuck me - Brown is alleged to have had to borrow a red tie from his (Burnley fan) adviser for his televised resignation speech.

    ReplyDelete
  159. Love the dog story PCC - if only you could have it on video!

    I'm just hoping I get through the night without waking in terror and pissing on my TV in confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Brown's departure speech....."I want to thank my colleagues..........."

    FFS - The man was going, if he was of me why couldn't he say........... I want to thank my comrades......

    ReplyDelete
  161. Harriet Harman is the temporary leader of the Labour
    Party.Where,s me iron jock strap ?

    ReplyDelete
  162. HM Queen - confirms Nick as Deputy PM ( BBC Newsnight)

    ReplyDelete
  163. Did he get 30 pieces of silver as well?

    ReplyDelete
  164. BBC - ponders how Nick will feel when he finds that the Libs may no longer be invited on Newsnight etc as part of the opposition since they will be de facto part of HM Govt. Cant have two Govt speakers to one opposition.....


    Loves it.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Loves you Jenn - suspect just the usual shilling and the hold out of a little grace and favour.

    ReplyDelete
  166. Deano

    The dems will be absorbed by the Cons.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Leni - I suspect you may well be right, save that some Libs will return to Lab.

    Had I been a Lib and not able to conclude a decent deal with Lab I would have wanted to leave the Tories to it and reserve my right to oppose the excesses.

    No end to what the public schoolboys arrogantly think the can pull on us.

    ReplyDelete
  168. Leni

    Think you,re spot on.The LibDems signed their own
    death warrant today.

    ReplyDelete
  169. All

    Barely skimmed the comments here, sadly, too much wine and a row with me Ma after being at home for less than 5 hours, put paid to any sensible response. Also, the Tory-Lib-Dem coalition - what a fucking farce. I did manage to put the boot into dear old Hermoine Gingold tonight on the Jackie Ashley thread... she is shameless and not in a good way - the embodiment of faux concern as she loafs around sipping her Bolly circa 19-bloody-45 or whatever.

    She may as well have been posting as Bullingdon Boy HAHAHA.... x500

    Paul, did catch your point re: the Police and violence. Never in dispute. By pure chance, I met the sister of someone who'd been killed in Police custody in the mid-80's and still has no justice and no resolution. What struck me was, they (La Police) are random in their killing, they kill the people they think they can get away with killing, if you look up 'deaths in Police custody' you'd be shocked how many 'hanged themselves' etc.etc....... but the idea of violence as a means to an end? to elicit some kind of change? I've spent so much of my life being angry and frustrated, I'm not sure if I'm prepared to waste the rest of it getting my head cracked open by a robo-cop wielding a telescopic baton on double-time courtesy of the 'tax-payer'.

    As for Cameroonion... let's see the arse suffer

    ReplyDelete
  170. imagine all those that voted for the libdems tactically to keep out the tories....god what a pisser

    ReplyDelete
  171. Paul + Deano

    I think the libs will split and founder - my only hope is that from the wreckage a new and vibrant Left may emerge.

    Hi Larit

    ReplyDelete
  172. I'm looking forward to Dave & Nick getting a note from Obama.............

    "Dear D & N

    Have received a note from the Chinese to the effect that they are happy with our mutually assured destruction strategy.

    They put it to us that the world population needs to be reduced by about 615M.

    US and China now have about equal nuclear warheads so the suggestion is that each country agrees to take a 307.5 million hit.

    Please advise your views

    Yours Obama ...."


    cc Hu Jintao

    ReplyDelete
  173. gandolfo
    Something went very seriously adrift with the tactical voting ploy.

    I am waiting now to see if this strengthens the hand of the Nats - England broadly Tory - Wales ans Scotland Lab,

    ReplyDelete
  174. LaRit

    Hear what you,re saying but when things have kicked
    off they have often been as an act of spontaneous
    combustion which have been a reaction to abuse of
    power.People are capable of all sorts when backed
    into a corner.But when people do kick off the
    kicking off if you like has been more as a reaction
    to the abuse rather than a pre-meditated action to
    bring about change.Yet sometimes these acts of
    spontaneous combustion are the driving forces that
    can actually bring about change.Or at least raise
    up the political agenda the issues that caused the act of spontaneous combustion .

    Hope that made sense!

    ReplyDelete
  175. Fixed term for 5 years - does this mean we have no way out of this for this period ?

    If , for example, Dems desert at some time will the Cons continue as minority gvt ? Does the option of vote of no confidence still apply ?

    ReplyDelete
  176. Leni
    hi yes that's what I'd hope for as well but on past record and the fact that nulab is such a dominant force within the the party I doubt that it will happen so quickly....if ever

    LaRit
    police violence is really horrendous there have been so many cases here the most internationally noted being the Scuola Diaz at the Genoa G8...a clear expression of orchestrated state violence. How do you counter this violence when we are so disempowered?

    The state is more powerful,and tactics such as passive resistence, strikes, peaceful civil disobedience etc will ultimately fail because the crumbs offered will never totally resolve the core issue: that the state functions through exploitation and crushing people socially and economically and in many cases physically.....

    ReplyDelete
  177. Leni
    "Something went very seriously adrift with the tactical voting ploy."

    indeed....bet the likes of Hain regret telling people to tactically vote libdem and the fact that labour didn't want to hear when clegg said that he would consider both labour and the tories as possible options.....

    re the 5 years, I thought they said 4 but whatever...I think if government fails, the libdems would be made to be seen as the traitors...no doubt it was part of the deal from the tories "stay the term and you'll come out clean...and we'll give you X,Y and maybe Z leave and we'll crap on you from heights you never thought possible...." essentially blackmail.....

    ReplyDelete
  178. Leni

    It,s scary how BLUE England is.If the Union was ever
    disolved England would in effect become a right-wing
    one -party state.

    ReplyDelete
  179. Paul

    It will be possible for gvt. to stifle all development in Wales - already public sector jobs dominate here - in the event of the Nats gaining support Wales could be economically isolated leaving us unable to pursue independence.

    The Nats in Wales and Scotland will, I think, try to form a united front . Much will depend upon how hard the forthcoming cuts impact here and in Scotland.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Paul and Gandalfo...

    Made perfect sense Paul ;)

    Now they do it online as well as in the streets. Anyone would have thought people were pissed-off the bloody BNP didn't get a seat in Parliament.

    Gandalf - in Italy, no surprises there... it's all a concerted effort, someone sure as hell has a desire to neuter the art of constructive debate, some right-wing Tory arse on CiF has just threatened me. My words (as an anonymous commentator) are apparently 'actionable'?

    ReplyDelete
  181. I don't suppose Clegg even in his wildest dreams thought he would become deputy PM.

    ReplyDelete
  182. Thanks all for helping me keep sane.

    Just watched a great BBC4 programme on wine at Château Margaux (as I understand it a class house)

    They were entertaining a nouveaux rich couple from Hong Kong...... Amused me greatly to see a young Chinese man asked why he thought the wine he was drinking (1959) was grande..." I like the idea of drinking fine wine that was made before I was born......"

    Ah the rich they have such a wonderful way with words.

    Good night dear friends.

    ReplyDelete
  183. Oh fuck I'm gagging for a bottle or three of Château Margaux 2005 or better yet:

    " Chateau Margaux 1922 1ere Grand Cru Classe Margaux
    Ref: 6488 From the rare 1922 vintage, this wine produced by one of the world's greatest vineyards has Margaux's inimitable fragrance blossoming in the glass, with flavour to match. It is rich yet delicate. Drink now - 2012. Note: Recorked by Whitwams in the '80s.

    This vintage wine is shipped in a deluxe silk lined wooden presentation box with four wine accessories (corkscrew, wine pourer, drip stopper & wine stopper) [worth £14.99] and comes with our limited edition 'Great First Growths of Bordeaux' Print (worth £49.97) at no extra cost..."



    Heavens above I think I might even not lust of a lady assistant who offered me a sample.

    Truth is I noticed Dave's London kitchen (as viewed in the elections vids) had a rather large wine rack (about 40+ bottles) above the fitted units. But I sense he would have kept his Margaux in temperature controlled conditions.

    Fuck it there is no real reason why a tramp in Yorkshire couldn't appreciate a £940+ a bottle wine. Bring it on Dave I'm up for developing a nose. It may take a little practice but so then the finer things of life...

    ReplyDelete
  184. Deano my lovely

    Your Acers will still be beautiful when the bottle is empty x

    ReplyDelete
  185. Oh come on you miserable bastards. £940 a bottle is only about 15 weeks job seekers allowance or 10 weeks incapacity allowance.

    What the fuck - the Bullingdon Boys have to have a mouthwash that differentiates them - their breath is truly foul.

    In any event it takes more than two bottles to buy a Bullingdon waistcoat. And that's with ordinary(ish) buttons.

    ReplyDelete
  186. Love you Leni - but they do get up me tits!

    xx.

    ReplyDelete
  187. Moscow, Moscow; when are we going to Moscow? Why can't we go to Moscow?
    Well I did say I went out for a bottle of vodka didn't I? So what did you expect?

    ReplyDelete
  188. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  189. Deano

    And up mine - when they start talking about 'poverty lines' - below which we apparently must not fall while they spend more on a meal than some have to live on for a week i could eviscerate them - very, very slowly. The arrogance and presumption of their own worthiness and entitlement earns them a special place in Hell.

    Cyrus the Great had slaves to eat his enemies - bit by bit - while still living. Makes you think.

    ReplyDelete
  190. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDnLIYd0hZY

    for Chekhov with love

    ReplyDelete
  191. Greetings Comrade Chekhov - if i won the Euro lottery (after I had dealt with my passion for Furnivall) I would invest in a study of the antecedents of the Russian Oligarchs.

    I want to know if the owner of Chelsea FC et al is descended from a White/Jewish family of wealth who were too slow to evacuate when the revolution closed in on them.

    ReplyDelete
  192. leni: with regard to your earlier post re: Insanity v Ignorance. I'd just like to clarify my postion which is; the more you know the more you realize what you don't know! Hope that makes sense!

    ReplyDelete
  193. "..more on a meal than some have to live on for a week..."

    I could stand correcting my dear young miss but I have been told that the likes of Dave, can spend more on the dressing for a sprout than my mum and dad budgeted for the weddings of two daughters and their own Silver Wedding.

    Good to see you Comrade Paul

    for the avoidance of doubt my reference to the old Russian rich should have said White/Rich Jewish/Aristocratic.......a lot of Jews in Tsarist Russia were stuffed

    ReplyDelete
  194. "..Cyrus the Great had slaves to eat his enemies - bit by bit - while still living. Makes you think...

    It makes me think of an entertainment for half time at the Cup Final...................Cyrus's & mates versus Dave's & mates.

    ReplyDelete
  195. Leni: thanks for the link. Not "Three Sisters" but very amusing all the same!

    ReplyDelete
  196. Boudican?? - I was wondering where you were. Not a good day here.

    ReplyDelete