Gimme. I can stand the guy and I am not even British, don't know what it is but I am pretty sure he's not quite right in the head, some sort of narcistic disorder
Printable View
Gimme. I can stand the guy and I am not even British, don't know what it is but I am pretty sure he's not quite right in the head, some sort of narcistic disorder
He's half blind, and possibly dyslexic. You're hardly going to get a caligraphic masterpiece.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Oh God our transformation into American politics is completeQuote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
I'm sorry. I don't give a flying :daisy: if he's lysdexic or half blind. Writing a letter to a mother who has lost her son, in a war Brown started and supports, should be one of the most important duties he had to do that day. To send it out with spelling mistakes, (including his name FFS) shows a disdain and contempt for the poor woman and her son. Not just spelling mistakes but with parts of her sons name crossed out and written over. I bet he doesn't write to O'Bama Beach like that!Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
I have no idea how old you are but bowing one's head in recognition of the sacrifice of service personell in saving our liberties and freedoms has been the protocol since the first remebrance day.Quote:
Oh God our transformation into American politics is complete
Honestly some peeps. :embarassed:
I heard on an service website that he hates the army as his lovely wife was porked by a member of 2nd Para a few years back. Not sure if it's true but very funny. :laugh4:
Nooo! Where did it go?
Quote:
404 Error
The page could not be loaded.
If you have typed the URL in by hand then please make sure you have entered it correctly.
Alternatively, if you have come from a link within the site and found this page, please click on the link below to register a technical problem that we will correct as soon as possible!
Or select the back to the Times Online link to return to the Times Online homepage.
* Register technical problem
* Back to the Times Online
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Jeremy Clarkson is a national treasure. If he doesn't get knighted soon, it's a travesty. :yes:
If respect is American, perhaps we should look to them for a positive example more often.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
What IA points to is appearances. Proper respect is measured by how active and former soldiers are looked after, in particular funding and direction of funding. IA's argument to appeals to emotions, and is good for the tabloids (and unfortunately is what elections are fought on), but avoids substance altogether. It's the same kind of political discourse that has led to the domination of the suburban middle class I described above - there is a ground that is politically inviolate, and politicos on all sides try to portray their opponents as violating it, all the while avoiding examining the substance behind that accepted position (since they're just as bad).Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars
Meh. He should've written a letter without spelling mistakes. If he is lysdexic, then he's been so for a long time and should've had his letter corrected. Other than that, I would not care very much about his 'disrespectful' behaviour. An Americanization of politics indeed. Driven by the sensationalist press. Who focus on irrelevant trivialities, blow these up way out of proportian, and make them the focus of political debate. That is, continual outrage.
Also, I dislike politicians remembering wars in an altogether too military fashion. And I disapprove of them wearing poppies, flags, or pink breast cancer symbols altogether. Symbolism and silly populism. It is the banner of politicians firmly on the leash of this world's Rupert Murdochs.
I prefer them with a spine, proudly showing themselves to be well above the annual Daily Mail November poppy campaign, which comes a few weeks before the 'teh foreigners and PC are killing Christmas' campaign.
Not to mention, I think the poppy itself is a pseudo-fascist symbol in the first place, the result of that most obscene poem in the history of European literature, 'In Flanders Fields'. :yes:
I approve of having these symbols. But not to the point of fetishising them, of promoting them to the point where they're seen as more important than what they're supposed to represent. That's the kind of image-based politics that Subotan is referring to, and that kind of politics is what's propagating the political domination of the odious, unbelievably selfish, suburban middle class. If Thatcher hadn't been the person who brought this political battleground into being, I'd wish for someone like her to appear and rip the consensus apart like she did to the old order.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I could say some very rude things here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I shall instead say this: Form is important, lack of care for the proper forms and protocols is symptomatic of disrespect.
In Britain, form and protocol was once social glue, now it has been abandoned and our society is litterally coming apart at the seams.
The problem is not lack of form and protocoll but the fact you have not yet fully replaced the old forms and protocols with new more fitting one for use in todays world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Wrong. Approval of society was once social glue. Form and protocol was just an outward form of that, a way for people to share the experience. Form and protocol still exists, but the desire to be approved by society, which was what held society together, has gone. Thatcher was the reformer who destroyed that, and replaced it with the neo-liberal outlook which is now the political norm. She encouraged Britain to show more energy, but it's come at the expense of social coherence, something she was quite aware of and willing to accept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
I would agree with that assesment :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pannonian
It's the tories! :dizzy2:
I dunno how many of you were around in the 70s but it wasn't a very nice time to live in. A bit like now, nothing worked. Thatcher was a response to the growing awareness that the unions had buggered up the economy. The winter of discontent did for Labour then as sure a McRuin has done for Labour today.
It's bit simplistic to blame Hilda. IMO the rot had started many years before. I know, I was around. To me the biggest act of social vandalism was when whole swaths of the country were 'developed' in the sixties. Entire communities were uprooted and sent packing to 'new towns'. Great examples of which are Cumbernauld, Milton Keynes and last, if not the worst, Skelmersdale.
This fractured communities that had developed over the previous centuary. We still havn't recovered forty years on. When I was a nipper, everyone in the adjacent streets knew who I was, where I lived and who my parents were. The chances of getting away with mischeif was low. Not so today.
Coupled with the failed social engineering experiment of the last couple of decades, it is and was a recipe for disaster.
Pannonian for Parliament!!
Ahem.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Quote:
"Everything in life is somewhere else, and you get there in a car."
- Elwyn Brooks White
Call it a disaster, but have a look at what kind of disaster it was, and what kind of disaster we have now. Although I wasn't around at the time, I'm aware of the kind of place Britain used to be back then. I give Thatcher full credit for dealing with it, extraordinarily effectively. However, what I also give Thatcher credit for, but which you do not, is her solution to the problem she saw. Britain suffered from stagnation, so she destroyed the old order and put in place a new order which was far more energetic. In addition to its merits, the new order also intrinsically had its demerits, which is the me, me, me culture. Thatcher was aware of that, but deemed it an acceptable price to pay. You give Thatcher credit for the positive things resulting from her actions, but blame Blair and Brown for the negative things that were also a result of Thatcher's actions. The bad old England is no more, thanks to Thatcher. What we have now is the bad new England, also thanks to Thatcher.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
This is the problem with Clarkson's humour. It relies on an 'other' an externalised figure of hate and ridicule.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
There he is representing the best of Britain - the richest and noblest who although they have become filthy rich due to the bad economic practices of the last 10 years, don't want to pony up and pay their share.
I don't know what he is worrying about. They all have clever lawyers and accountants. They probably pay less tax than we do.
Yeah I say that everyday - in your imagination :idea2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
How about when small industrial towns in your part of the world lost all their manufacturing and primary economy? Turning them into the sad, directionless heroin towns they are now?Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Ah the merits and demerits of Thatcherism to be honest as an Irishman if someone could just send me a nice brand new shovel in the post to me I promise to dig a deep deep hole and deposit her in hell personally.
So, are you saying Ireland is hell? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
If you discount the drizzle, it's a passable facsimile at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vladimir
Tell me about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
Much of the changes in British society that are lamented in this thread, resonate elsewhere too. This would suggest the blame can not be put on Thatcher, or on any specific British policy.
Do speak your mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
I dislike poppies. With a passion. I hate 'In Flanders Fields' with a vengeance - the most shameless, obscene, murderous poem ever written. Moral bankruptcy in verse. The poem does not respect the death, rather it exhumes the fallen and parades their rotting corpses around, using them to blackmail others to follow them to their doom. It is the work of the devil, granting neither the living nor indeed the fallen any peace, even in death.
I could not think of a graver sign of disrespect than a poppy.
(I do however, understand that the intention behind wearing a poppy is for most people rather more innocent, or merely the result of social pressure)
Likewise, I consider a militaristic remembrance of the dead by civilian society a continuation of what caused their deaths in the first place.
Lastly, I mistrust militaristic politicians and politics. I find it a comforting sign if a politician is disinterested in precise miltary/istic protocol.
We've seen across the Atlantic in recent years how clouded the judgment of politicians and the electorate can become once in the grip of overt militarism. And all of that fades into insignificance compared to the same thing happening on a far larger scale in Europe a century ago.
A democracy respects its military death, because the democratic process is ultimately responsible for their death. But beyond that kind of respect and remembrance, madness lies.
The fault lies in the ramping up of liberalism-capitalism, or the self as overwhelmingly more important than wider society. In Britain, this was done by Thatcher. She assessed, probably correctly, that encouraging the seeking of self-interest would help shatter the stagnation that Britain had suffered for a decade. In addition to policies that gave free rein to exploitative capitalism, she also encouraged the view that society was nothing. She was undeniably a great politician, the most influential since Attlee's government, having completely reshaped the political norm. What IA and others fail to recognise though is that the bad things they complain about are the natural flipside of the good things they credit Thatcher with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
I agree with Louis here, for two reasons.
1. I dislike having been indoctrinated as a child into wearing a poppy, and now being guilt-tripped into wearing one now. If I wish to pay respect to our Armed Forces, I wil do it on my own terms.
2. It's always about remembering "Our Boys". Nevermind the millions of Germans, Austrians, Turks and Bulgarians who we killed, or even the French, Belgian, American, Russian or Italian troops who died fighting alongside us (And that's just the First World War). As if they weren't somebody's boys at all.
Perhaps, I blame the principle that all men are equal before the Law, equal in station, or equal in merit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Sorry, I'm English.Quote:
Do speak your mind.
Wiki: context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Flanders_FieldsQuote:
I dislike poppies. With a passion. I hate 'In Flanders Fields' with a vengeance - the most shameless, obscene, murderous poem ever written. Moral bankruptcy in verse. The poem does not respect the death, rather it exhumes the fallen and parades their rotting corpses around, using them to blackmail others to follow them to their doom. It is the work of the devil, granting neither the living nor indeed the fallen any peace, even in death.
I could not think of a graver sign of disrespect than a poppy.
Soldiers are not normal people, the problem is not in the poem itself, it may be in the use of it. However, at the time the War was considered to be one of "Good and Evil" in a way that most wars have not since the Crusades, I think.
Don't know if this happens in other countries, but here in Scotland some of the radical left-wingers refuse to wear poppies.
As with everything, this gets polarised into the Loyalist Protestant v Nationalist Catholic divide (although only the more strict elements of each, of course). So a lot of Catholics, often as an expression of Marxist sentiments, will refuse to wear a poppy which glorifies a war between colonial powers.
On the other hands, we Proddies all wear them. It's part of the wider loyalist culture, for example with all the songs surrounding the 36th Ulster Division, which was formed from members of the original UVF and YCV (NOT the 1966 version). At the end of the church service last Sunday, we all sang "God Save the Queen" at the end of it. A couple of nationalists actually walked out at that point, but some the older guys I know that are staunch Orangemen were singing twice as loudly to compensate I think. It was so stereotypical I nearly laughed in the middle of it. :laugh4:
I wouldn't mind, but it's become so nationalist, and nobody ever remembers the dead of other countries. It's also become taboo to criticise the poppy, at least at school.