Off Topic News & Current affairs

You have to wonder why the government is bringing in this bill, and why Labour are supporting it. I imagine they are anticipating an increase in protests, especially if there is a new Covid variant which causes another lockdown. While we are trying to work out the best way to fight the virus, the virus is working out the best way to survive in its comparatively new environment (humans), and how to circumvent the vaccines. I can't see any other reason for this bill.
The violence at Bristol will allow the government to present the bill as a necessity because of leftie demos, and possible damage to statues. Clever, eh?

 

When the Bill was first conceived (probably well over a year ago) the aim was clear;
To prevent XR demonstrators from disrupting city centres.
Effectively to criminalise civil disobedience.

XR is an annoying nut, for sure. But a giant, all-encompassing sledgehammer has now been created to crack it.
Look at what happened to those women who just wanted to hold a vigil on Clapham Common.
And that was before these sweeping new powers come into force.

If this new law is enacted, I hope Policemen and Policewomen of good conscience consider what they will be asked to do.
Before 1997 many people rightly predicted what would gradually happen in Hong Kong.
I wonder how many envisaged that what happens now in Hong Kong will eventually happen in this country.

 

It's an utter disgrace. Keir Starmer's lurch to the right has passed by centre ground without even slowing down.
If Labour vote for this Bill he should be ashamed of himself.

 

The other aspect of it is that it's in the electoral interests of the Conservative Party to promote a culture war. Maybe that's what's behind the bill, and maybe Sir Keir is simply refusing to be drawn into it. I've always been fascinated by politics, but I find the political scene now pretty scary, not just in this country. Macron, the old centrist, is turning into a destabilising influence in Europe, there are despots all over the world, I could go on.................

 

Bloody international breaks............................................................................

 

'Kardashian clones' jibes teacher struck off

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-56490673

Mr Price admitted writing the blogs but denied they amount to unacceptable professional conduct.
He said the panel had not taken the blogs in the proper context and that many of the extracts they read aloud had the opposite point of the articles as a whole.

Mr Price's union representative, Colin Adkins of NASUWT, said the ruling was "chilling in that it has inhibited freedom of speech".
In a statement to the panel, Mr Price said: "I find it ridiculous you say you have considered these comments in their entirety because you blatantly haven't."

Mr Price has now been handed a prohibition order banning him from teaching.
The hearing in Cardiff was told he can reapply to join the register after a two-year period.

Sounds like an attack on freedom of speech to me.
Taking certain comments out of the context of the articles that they were originally part of is deceitful.
Especially if the point of the article as a whole is opposite from the apparent intent of the comments in isolation.

It strikes me that far, far worse material - material intended to offend and cause hurt rather than simply express an opinion - is posted every day by people who hide behind online anonymity.
A case can be made that this teacher's comments were offensive to some people, and that a sanction of some kind is appropriate.
But taking away the man's job and banning him from working in that profession for two years?
He has been cancelled for speaking his mind.

 

A recent survey shows that the country is divided over whether or not the country is divided. As Leonard Cohen said,
"There is a war between those who think there is a war and those who think there isn't"

 

If these TV comments had been anti-Left (which automatically equals unforgivable bigotry) these two would have been fired.
But because they were anti-British (which is just excused as anti-Right) they get a slap on the wrist.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56495032

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-56453949

And why would you 'like' offensive tweets about the Union Flag if they don't represent your views Ms Munchetty?
Apparently you're happy to insult our intelligence as well as the flag.

 

Nothing against the flag, but the cynical way it is constantly used by this government is something new. Example: the way the minute's silence was used by Bojo as a photo opportunity, with a union flag behind him, looking sombre. As George Burns said, If you can fake sincerity you've got it made. Being photographed with a flag all the time doesn't make you patriotic, it makes you a campaigning politician.

 

Peter Hitchens was absolutely on point this week. He is not everyone's cup of tea but his interview on Talk Radio with Mike Graham is worth hearing and explains the true symbolism of the Union flag more eloquently than I could.

 

While we're on the subject of flags, I read a story this morning about a stunt cooked up by a Spanish artist, for an indigenous folks festival in Australia. He was going to drench a Union Flag in the blood of indigenous people who had volunteered to give some to him.

What breathtaking hypocrisy.
Like the Spanish Conquests weren't drowned in the blood of entire native civilisations wiped out.
He ought to look to his own country's Colonial shame before having a sick pop at ours.

I was glad to hear even among the Indigenous people of Australia were some who thought this idea was offensive posturing.

 

History is very subjective. I know that, having seen the difference between the way it is taught in Scotland to the way it is taught in England. I remarked on this at parents evening to my son's history teacher, and he replied, and I quote, "Oh yeah, is this the old chip-on-the-shoulder thing?" There is no reply to that, so I didn't.

 

Yet another flag story - too many to be a coincidence now...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56514501

I'm proud of our flag, despite the historical and political baggage.
But I won't deny that the baggage exists, and that it evokes strong feelings (both positive and negative) in some people.
Also, I have sympathy for some people in other countries who would prefer not to have our Union flag as part of the flags of their own nations. Deciding whether to remove it is a matter for their governments of course, but perhaps as an issue it becomes a bit more relevant again, if Britain is going to pursue stronger trading ties with some of them after our withdrawal from the EU.

However, this decision to fly the Union flag from all Government buildings here in the UK feels to me like part of a deliberate shift by Johnson's government towards a more American style of national identity.
Inside No.10 now we will have a US Style 'briefing room' and in due course US style briefings to go with it. All very Presidential. I wonder whether we'll end up with a US style crest to go on the lecterns as well.

Personally, and aside from the superficial (if colourful) display of US style patriotism this is designed to broadcast, I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the idea of our Government, cabinet and Prime Minister moulding themselves more on the pattern of the Federal centre of a Republic.
Particularly if we aren't going to get real democratic reforms - such as an elected second chamber and a written constitution.
If those are steps that Boris is not willing to begin taking, then there isn't any substance to go with the style.

 

I don't like the idea of having to prove your patriotism. Too NorthKorean.

 

The strong impression I get from this is that the Conservative party are taking control of the flag to send a none to subtle message that they are the party of patriotism and national pride, always a stong card to drop into an election. It also casts oppostion parties as unpatriotic. I imagine a lot of the rhetoric to come out of the Brexit debate, as well as a similar stance by Trump and his 'Make America Great Again, which instantly casts the other side as somehow responsible for making it small, has been readly absorbed by the Tory mandarins with a beady eye on 2024. It doesn't even need a budget - keep the flags on display in every interview, and bobs your fathers brother. A quick look on most social media comments show that this is already becoming a major focus, where terms like flag shaggers and traitors are cheerfully thrown about. A fairly grim outlook, but I suppose Boris and his dodgy mates have looked at the huge social divisions in the US and the UK and seen there is political gain to be had from enhancing them.

 

Well, I for one won't accept Trumpian politics in the UK any more than I liked seeing it in America.
There are some hard-line haters of our country on the extreme left. But they don't represent the views of most traditional Labour voters. I'm from such a family myself - Labour voters for generations. And I know we always loved this country down the years.
There are a small number of evil racists on the far-right too. But they don't represent traditional centre-right tory folk either.

The politics of polarisation is pure poison.
We did see it during 2016-2020 after the referendum.
We don't want to see it anymore.

 

As DR Johnson said "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"
I've enjoyed travelling to many countries, and invariably find the people helpful and friendly, and there is always something to like in other countries. Even the French become a little more friendly when I tell them I'm Scottish. Remember The Likely Lads episode where Terry went through all the European countries and dismissed the people of each in one word?

 

The Auld Alliance...

 

I've had this arguement in Spain a few times, generally begun by one of the locals telling me how awfull the Bristish empire was, and how many people died as a result of British colonialism. I'd be the first to agree that it was a terrible thing with no redeeming features other than a government authorised robbery of other countries. However, while I'm happy to discuss it if I must (football would be my goto topic) I see no need to be lectured about Bristish failings wen the Spanish had their own equally nasty empire in South America. The conversation generally goes from me being informed by the Spanish that their empire was 'different' and then (and I love this) complaints about Bristish pirates sinking Spanish vesseld carrying gold back from the Caribbean in the 16th century. And apparently it was 'their' gold so I assume it was just lying around on the beaches when they arrived.
I'd expect this sort of jovial patriotism from the older generation who still feel Spain has gone to the dogs since Franco died (and yes, I've worked with a couple of guys like that) but I've had the same conversation with students who should be well educated enough to at the least see their moral high ground isn't really there. I think somewhere in the education system here, it's still being taught as a beneficial thing. I can remember in primary school being told more than once that the British empire was quite a civilising influence in places like India, which would probably cause a bit f a stir if you announced that in Bombay or Calcutta.
Kids eh!!