The silly thing is, if Os actually *did* read Syed, he'd find that a lot of what Syed argues about and for, are exactly the same things Os argues about and for - just with a sensible hat on.
I hadn't read anything of his since his books on talent until maybe a year or so ago, having known he stood for Labour way back when and was almost shocked at the bias in his reporting. His books were flawed, but made good points at least. He is a long way from being a lefty!
When you say you worry about DOGE, do you mean the actual intent to get in there, stop fraud and waste, or it being Musk and the way he does / is doing things? If the latter then I agree with you. If the former not because I think the Western world could do with bodies that get into all the monetary spendings of those in charge and stop them funding their friends and pet projects and spurious supposedly "well natured" stuff. There's a lot of people that get rich off the backs of NGOs, Quangos, Thinktanks and Charities these days
I have read a lot of his stuff. Assuming he’s the tennis player and author that wrote those performance books? I also have read a lot of his articles and his bias is quite clear to me. He is what I would consider to be a statist that agrees with most of the political elites points. Much like you guys actually
Very much the latter. The idea of it is great, how could you argue against making government more efficient? More transparency in policy and contracts can only be a good thing.
He used to be a table-tennis Olympian. Your second paragraph contradicts itself, because if you had actually read a lot of his articles, you'd know that his bias isn't to the left, and he doesn't agree with most of the political elite's points. It's a bit like your response to the Grok posts I made. If that's your interpretation, then I'm afraid you've been so radicalised that your interpretation of written matter is now so clouded by what's in your head, you've lost the ability to digest and interpret things normally. I'm sorry to hear that, and genuinely hope you can get that sorted out.
He was a Wif Waf player. I remember watching him Definitely not a leftist. I had in my mind he was a Tory Wet from seeing him in interviews. lol
I think if we don’t believe that Western democratic values, inclusion, moving away from religious extremism, multiculturalism, support for the weak, welfare, freedom of choice, etc. are better than is on offer in China, Russia and North Korea then what is the point in anything? That is not to say the American brand, meddling in world affairs and toppling socialist governments for right wing allies is what we should align with either. The reason Russia is not as impacted by online bots is their freedoms are far less than ours. China has literally clamped down on non-state messaging. So, we are both the beneficiaries and victims of freedoms that expose us to the manipulation and lies of hostile states. The USA, with its capitalist imperialism- enacted through the faceless tyranny of multinational corporations - is almost certainly responsible for so much of the world’s extremism and hostility, but that doesn’t mean that the European model isn’t one to aspire to.
can sympathise re you wife's cooking, I have a similar problem with my missus's cooking it's virtually inedible and I have to force myself to eat it!
Fair enough. I admit that I read his books a long time ago and don’t follow him religiously. I’ll take your word for it that I’m wrong. You’re right that I probably have been radicalised against EU and their bureaucracy. But my question is; how are you NOT when they risk world war 3 and say absurd **** like this: https://x.com/disclosetv/status/1896140767598707085?s=46 These people are so out of touch with the citizens. They have no care for the average people that would die as a result of their inane chattering. I detest them all.
If you have been radicalised against the EU, you can hardly present an unbiased view. I am a great believer in European Unity, but I also appreciate the fact that no two of the Nations are alike in many ways. You have treat each with an open mind and know that they will never agree on evey nuance of any treaty of allegiance. The trick is in persuading them all to accept the majority view. Nigh on impossible, so any compromise has to be accepted. With the USA taking a one for all, none for anyone else attitude, it is important that the rest of the World, not just Europe, deals with that how they think fit.
I think the original intention behind nato, the eu, the imf, the world bank etc was noble. But all of the above in their current forms are causing more harm than good in my opinion
Reading between the lines here, she's essentially saying "if we just roll over for Russia and let them have what they want, where's the deterrent for China in taking Taiwan?" Why is that an unreasonable question? She's saying that we're giving a green light to China if we just cede everything to Russia. Which we are. (Let me caveat that by saying that I'm not a fan of the EU in it's current form - it needs a huge overhaul).
Btw the hyperbole and outcry about Trump’s conversation with Zelensky is also partially manufactured: Of course; the big difference here is that one happened publically and one was kept private, which is a huge difference. But the outcry is massively overblown this time. People are looking for any reason to hate on Trump. Biden would have been given a much easier time if a similar exchange played out
