Cheer up! It's not all bad

I thought you might enjoy one of the great rants of our time.

Then you have the chaps and chapesses who can’t stand the constant raids on their wallets and their privacy. They can’t understand why they are taxed at 50% on their income and then taxed again for driving into the nation’s capital. They can’t understand what happened to the hunt for the weapons of mass destruction. They can’t understand anything. They see the Highway Wombles in those brand new 4x4s that they paid for, and they see the M4 bus lane and they see the speed cameras and the community support officers and they see the Albanians stealing their wheelbarrows and nothing can be done because it's racist. And they see Alistair Darling handing over £4,350 of their money to not sort out the banking crisis that he doesn’t understand because he’s a small-town solicitor, and they see the stupid war on drugs and the war on drink and the war on smoking and the war on hunting and the war on fun and the war on scientists and the obsession with the climate and the price of train fares soaring past £1,000 and the Guardian power-brokers getting uppity about one shot baboon and not uppity at all about all the dead soldiers in Afghanistan, and how they got rid of Blair only to find the lying twerp is now going to come back even more powerful than ever, and they think, “I’ve had enough of this. I’m off.”

The worst of it is, that it's all true. :bomb:

Just read that. He's a card isn't he?

I had a rant very similar to his last Friday to my wife and her mate. The thing is, when I see the eyes glaze over, I usually know it's time to cease and desist. This time however, they both joined in. The UK is buggered.

Still I always have the option of sleeping on a couch in Corfu. Greece might be a police state but you can still have a fag with your beer and the weathers not too bad either.

Clarkson for president, you know it makes sense. :wink:

Now that is a proper rant. Look at the bright side, Brown might just not declare a national emergency next elections making elections impossible.

Jeremy Clarkson is a :daisy: :daisy:. Hopefully he will :daisy: off and get out of this country, so we never again have to listen to his arrogant, selfish, narcissistic rubbish again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeremy Clarkson

Mostly, though, I hate [Peter Mandelson] because his one-man war on the bright and the witty and the successful means that half my friends now seem to be [thinking of emigrating]

---

Well, at least he'll still have one left.

Y'all are reading the wrong newspapers. :smash:

Well at least that prevented a peptic ulcer. :shrug:

Quote:

---

And you can’t go to Germany ... because you just can’t.

---

:inquisitive:

I was so interested to see what he would come up with for Germany, only to get ... that!?!?

I must say I've had similar thoughts to his, I always thought there's a lot wrong in Germany but at least it's not as bad as Britain. :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clarkson

So you can dream all you like about upping sticks and moving to a country that doesn’t help itself to half of everything you earn and then spend the money it gets on bus lanes and advertisements about the dangers of salt.

---

Yanno... maybe government ought to outlaw pay-stubs (you know, the little slips explaining where your earned money went). We always look at the "gross income", then at "net income" and get all worked up over the difference. My 'net' is about 45% of my 'gross' - I just have to remind myself that although the Boss says he's paying me $30 per hour, I'm really only getting about $14.

Would I rather be blissfully ignorant, or informed and ticked off over something I can't control?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KukriKhan

Yanno... maybe government ought to outlaw pay-stubs (you know, the little slips explaining where your earned money went). We always look at the "gross income", then at "net income" and get all worked up over the difference. My 'net' is about 45% of my 'gross' - I just have to remind myself that although the Boss says he's paying me $30 per hour, I'm really only getting about $14.

Would I rather be blissfully ignorant, or informed and ticked off over something I can't control?

---

Why are you giving Nancy and Harry dangerous ideas? :inquisitive:

Think about how many times people like Jag and Idaho have called take-home pay a government subsidy (because they didn't take 100% of your income, as entitled).

See, this is why it's a good thing that America is more conservative than Europe. You guys are guinea pigs, your misfortune is our guidance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KukriKhan

I'm really only getting about $14.

---

Que?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Why are you giving Nancy and Harry dangerous ideas? :inquisitive:

Think about how many times people like Jag and Idaho have called take-home pay a government subsidy (because they didn't take 100% of your income, as entitled).

---

Yeah. I should've used some kinda sarcasm smilie, huh?

The real insult in my outfit comes in September every year, when the HR guys send us our annual "what you cost us" listing. They valuate sick leave, annual leave, 401(k) matching funds, Soc sec contributions, uniform allowance and so on, and so forth. In effect telling me that I cost them $75k per year, whereas my gross is $55k, and I take home $22k. It drives me crazy contemplating that I should feel rich (and I guess I am when compared to a sub-saharan goat-herder), but don't.

Weren't you kinda shot, how very nice of them. Military is just about the best paying job for a young adult here you will make more money than a docter and get any education for free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

:inquisitive:

I was so interested to see what he would come up with for Germany, only to get ... that!?!?

I must say I've had similar thoughts to his, I always thought there's a lot wrong in Germany but at least it's not as bad as Britain. :beam:

---

We even have less gun control than Britain, and when you have more gun control than Germany, you know it's pretty bad.* Otherwise great article.

*Though the 17 forms in triplicate applies to us at least as much as it applies to France.

I too long back for the good old days. When Britain was still Britain. When there was still an an Empire. When the entire island was still functioning. When there was social mobility. When the trains were affordable and ran on time, on schedule and on the track.

And when the highest bracket of income tax stood at 95%. :yes:

Where did the Albanian comment come from, there are Albanians in the United Kingdom? :inquisitive:

(Yes, I am aware there would be, but everyone always blames the Polish, Middle-Eastners and Black Africans, I never seen anyone blame Albanians, or even know an Albanian.)

The "progressive" income tax is the worst of all taxes. It does not encourage thrift as does a consumption tax and does not tax wealth and thereby redistribute that wealth evenly. The PIT serves best to keep people where they are economically or to encourage only minor improvements save for a very lucky few.

Your country can't go to hell in a handbasket, my country is going to hell in a handbasket.

WHERE WILL I MOVE TO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

WHERE WILL I MOVE TO

---

Hey! :furious3:


Did you not like that picture I send you of my sister after all? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Hey! :furious3:


Did you not like that picture I send you of my sister after all? :inquisitive:

---

Oh don't get me wrong I loved the picture, it's just I don't speak French.

I guess if you promised her as my ahem translator for my first couple of months I'll buy the ticket today

No.

I told you to send us the ring first. Then she'll do, erm, some 'translation work' for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

No.

I told you to send us the ring first. Then she'll do, erm, some 'translation work' for you.

---

The ring? I thought this was a freelance gig!

You're lucky I had your translation work before her translation work

hairy, sweaty, rough and completely awesome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

I thought you might enjoy one of the great rants of our time.

Then you have the chaps and chapesses who can’t stand the constant raids on their wallets and their privacy. They can’t understand why they are taxed at 50% on their income and then taxed again for driving into the nation’s capital. They can’t understand what happened to the hunt for the weapons of mass destruction. They can’t understand anything. They see the Highway Wombles in those brand new 4x4s that they paid for, and they see the M4 bus lane and they see the speed cameras and the community support officers and they see the Albanians stealing their wheelbarrows and nothing can be done because it's racist. And they see Alistair Darling handing over £4,350 of their money to not sort out the banking crisis that he doesn’t understand because he’s a small-town solicitor, and they see the stupid war on drugs and the war on drink and the war on smoking and the war on hunting and the war on fun and the war on scientists and the obsession with the climate and the price of train fares soaring past £1,000 and the Guardian power-brokers getting uppity about one shot baboon and not uppity at all about all the dead soldiers in Afghanistan, and how they got rid of Blair only to find the lying twerp is now going to come back even more powerful than ever, and they think, “I’ve had enough of this. I’m off.”

The worst of it is, that it's all true. :bomb:

---

Out of all these, the campaign against hunting with dogs can be pointed to as the result of the liberals. The economy can be argued to have been mismanaged, although how it could have been managed better is uncertain. The rest, however, is the result of populist and popular policies (other than the hunt for WMDs, which was the result of going step by step with US foreign policy). The congestion charge was aimed to keep London's streets clear for Londoners - suburbanites may not like the charge, but they don't live in London. The roads and ever more extravagant cars are a continuation of Thatcher's policy of a car for every family and more. Conservative Britain will not allow an easing up on drug laws, while taxes on drink and cigarettes have been an accepted constant for decades. Train fares? Blame privatisation. The Albanians? The usual complaints about a misbehaving social underclass, except that the ranter has thrown in the racial stereotype as well.

If he doesn't like these things, he should wear a badge and knock on doors, because most of it is the result of government policies that were popular with voters, and continue to be popular with voters.

Who the hell ever drives in a city with more than 300.000 inhabitants anyway?

Designing a city for 10 million with enough driving and parking space for everyone - now that is true waste.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Who the hell ever drives in a city with more than 300.000 inhabitants anyway?

Designing a city for 10 million with enough driving and parking space for everyone - now that is true waste.

---

Design, logic and waste had nothing to do with it. The suburban middle class has money to spend on cars and themselves, therefore it's their right to drive themselves anywhere they wish. And not just in a literal sense. Other than themselves and their material needs, what matters most in this world is their children. They will drive their children everywhere, and they will drive society anywhere that is necessary for their children's welfare, or their vision of their children's welfare. Anything that impinges on their children's right to do whatever they want while being free from whatever the real world may impose on them (such as reality) has to change. They are the ones driving Britain towards authoritarianism, not any single political party. New Labour has wholeheartedly pandered to their interests, partly because they are a sizeable constituency that is guaranteed to vote in numbers, and partly because they are so politically active so as to make it political suicide to ignore them (and the Tories won't ignore them either). Such is the result of Thatcher's politics of coupling the middle class, family over society approach, and the me, me, me attitude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Hey! :furious3:


Did you not like that picture I send you of my sister after all? :inquisitive:

---

Why didn't I get to see? :cry:

Funny.

I can't stand the guy when he's on TV, though.

Clarkson should stick to Top Gear...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Design, logic and waste had nothing to do with it. The suburban middle class has money to spend on cars and themselves, therefore it's their right to drive themselves anywhere they wish. And not just in a literal sense. Other than themselves and their material needs, what matters most in this world is their children. They will drive their children everywhere, and they will drive society anywhere that is necessary for their children's welfare, or their vision of their children's welfare. Anything that impinges on their children's right to do whatever they want while being free from whatever the real world may impose on them (such as reality) has to change. They are the ones driving Britain towards authoritarianism, not any single political party. New Labour has wholeheartedly pandered to their interests, partly because they are a sizeable constituency that is guaranteed to vote in numbers, and partly because they are so politically active so as to make it political suicide to ignore them (and the Tories won't ignore them either). Such is the result of Thatcher's politics of coupling the middle class, family over society approach, and the me, me, me attitude

.

---

*APPLAUSE*

Can't wait to see what Clarkson has to say about that disgusting letter our Great Leader sent to the bereaved squaddies mam. Not to mention that he seems incapable of bowing his head at the Cenotaph.

Turd needs more polish.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Can't wait to see what Clarkson has to say about that disgusting letter our Great Leader sent to the bereaved squaddies mam.

---

He's half blind, and possibly dyslexic. You're hardly going to get a caligraphic masterpiece.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Not to mention that he seems incapable of bowing his head at the Cenotaph. .

---

Oh God our transformation into American politics is complete

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

He's half blind, and possibly dyslexic. You're hardly going to get a caligraphic masterpiece.

---

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:

---

Oh God our transformation into American politics is complete

---

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.

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

Oh God our transformation into American politics is complete

---

If respect is American, perhaps we should look to them for a positive example more often.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

If respect is American, perhaps we should look to them for a positive example more often.

---

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).

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:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

Meh. I disapprove of politicians 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.

Who doesn't want to wear the ribbon?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

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 could say some very rude things here.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

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

I could say some very rude things here.

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.

---

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 Pannonian

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.

---

I would agree with that assesment :yes:

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!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Who the hell ever drives in a city with more than 300.000 inhabitants anyway?

Designing a city for 10 million with enough driving and parking space for everyone - now that is true waste.

---

Ahem.

Quote:

---

"Everything in life is somewhere else, and you get there in a car."
- Elwyn Brooks White

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

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.

---

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 Beskar

Where did the Albanian comment come from, there are Albanians in the United Kingdom? :inquisitive:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

:inquisitive:

I was so interested to see what he would come up with for Germany, only to get ... that!?!?

---

This is the problem with Clarkson's humour. It relies on an 'other' an externalised figure of hate and ridicule.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

Think about how many times people like Jag and Idaho have called take-home pay a government subsidy (because they didn't take 100% of your income, as entitled).

---

Yeah I say that everyday - in your imagination :idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

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.

---

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?

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

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 Vladimir

So, are you saying Ireland is hell? :inquisitive:

---

If you discount the drizzle, it's a passable facsimile at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

If you discount the drizzle, it's a passable facsimile at the moment.

---

Tell me about it.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I could say some very rude things here.

---

Do speak your mind.



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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

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.

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat

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.

---

Perhaps, I blame the principle that all men are equal before the Law, equal in station, or equal in merit.

Quote:

---

Do speak your mind.

---

Sorry, I'm English.

Quote:

---

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.

---

Wiki: context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Flanders_Fields

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.

Why would you wish to criticise an emblem of a charity? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Why would you wish to criticise an emblem of a charity? :inquisitive:

---

Lot's of charities should be criticized. Much of it is just plain useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InsaneApache

Why would you wish to criticise an emblem of a charity? :inquisitive:

---

Because many people see it as a symbol of imperialist oppression others just don't like the idea of overlly celebrating a period in european history that tore it apart and laid the groundwork for WW2 and later the cold War. And then others hate the fact the Poppy seems to be worn earlier and earlier every year which makes them fear people are not wearing the Poppy for the reason it was made I could go on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Because many people see it as a symbol of imperialist oppression others just don't like the idea of overlly celebrating a period in european history that tore it apart and laid the groundwork for WW2 and later the cold War. And then others hate the fact the Poppy seems to be worn earlier and earlier every year which makes them fear people are not wearing the Poppy for the reason it was made I could go on

---

Isn't that what made the deaths so tragic? I thought the idea was remembering the ordinary soldiers, not celebrating imperialist regimes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Because many people see it as a symbol of imperialist oppression others just don't like the idea of overlly celebrating a period in european history that tore it apart and laid the groundwork for WW2 and later the cold War. And then others hate the fact the Poppy seems to be worn earlier and earlier every year which makes them fear people are not wearing the Poppy for the reason it was made I could go on

---

Many people are idiots. For starters, it's Armistice Day, we celebrate the end of the Great War, and we remember those who fell needlessly during it. I completely fail to see the "Imperialist" connection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Many people are idiots. For starters, it's Armistice Day, we celebrate the end of the Great War, and we remember those who fell needlessly during it. I completely fail to see the "Imperialist" connection.

---

Personally, I wear the poppy in remembrance of the old men. That they fought in a war is only incidental to the respect I'm paying to my seniors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Lot's of charities should be criticized. Much of it is just plain useless.

---

Many charities are very corporatised, especially ones like "Guide Dogs for the Blind", and a lot of the gap year charities (Yeah, go over to Africa and teach those black people how to build toilets, show them the benefits of Western Civilisation).
A lot of the money you donate is hoovered up by admin, are invested in the stock market. It's interesting how charities are becoming like companies, companies want to be charities, yet only "real" charities are exempt from taxation.

Btw, I would be fine with the poppy thing, if it honoured the dead from all countries, and all wars. But no, we all shed tears for the boys who were killed in a war in which nobody alive today actually fought in, and then we have the nerve to compare a few hundred volunteers dying over an eight year period with the tens of thousands of conscripts who perished in mere days in that particular war.

I don't know. But something about the way the whole thing is used and treated annoys me.

Remembrance in Canada is for Canadians. And Sophie Scholl, apparently. The assembly went no where, I'm playing Hearts of Iron, and no one seems to care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

But no, we all shed tears for the boys who were killed in a war in which nobody alive today actually fought in, and then we have the nerve to compare a few hundred volunteers dying over an eight year period with the tens of thousands of conscripts who perished in mere days in that particular war.

---

They all died in the service of their countries on the field of battle. Where doesn't really matter. The day is about honouring all the soldiers that fell for your country, and the lives of those dying in Afghanistan are just as valuable as the lives of those who fell on the Western Front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Many people are idiots. For starters, it's Armistice Day, we celebrate the end of the Great War, and we remember those who fell needlessly during it. I completely fail to see the "Imperialist" connection.

---

Many people are idots but we had thirty years of violence because two side's deified the glorious fallen dead of there own side and demonised the other. Its dangerous to be unthinking about the symbols you hold dear if they become part of your Identity then it can lead to problems with other people who dont have the same feelings.

I am not saying its you personally its just summit that happens

On a personal note I have no love or hatred for the Poppy but it does seem to be worn now as a badge rather than to actually display rememberence. I think personally it should be worn just for the week as it is becoming devalued as evidenced by the fact more and more British people are voicing concern over just this point.

I have never worn a Poppy ever but I see no reason for English people to stop wearing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

Many people are idots but we had thirty years of violence because two side's deified the glorious fallen dead of there own side and demonised the other. Its dangerous to be unthinking about the symbols you hold dear if they become part of your Identity then it can lead to problems with other people who dont have the same feelings.

I am not saying its you personally its just summit that happens

---

Sure, but europe isn't going to go to war with itself anytime soon.

Why do people in Ireland wear marijuana plants? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Why do people in Ireland wear marijuana plants? :inquisitive:

---

We dont mark it at all except for a couple of small scale services held by various NGO's or the various embassies of the countries. I fact I dont think I have ever actually seen an actual Poppy on anyone ever except on telly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy

We dont mark it at all except for a couple of small scale services held by various NGO's or the various embassies of the countries. I fact I dont think I have ever actually seen an actual Poppy on anyone ever except on telly

---

And that's very sad, although you will see places where the poppy is worn widely - my estate for example. 49,000 Irishmen lost their lives in the Great War - and it was very widely supported by the Irish population. Only through the re-invention of our history by nationalists has that contribution been forgotten.

Obviously, my attachment to the symbol of the poppy is rooted in my own military service. I wear it for the global symbolism of course, and for the remembrance of men and women who gave so much - both in folly and in greatness - whom I never knew save as etched names on endless white stones.

But I truly wear it for my friends, the smiling faces I recall that did not return from the Falklands. Perhaps strangely, I also remember those terrible, frozen young faces of the Argentinian conscripts who would never leave those bleak hills. And the bemused expressions of the two Irishmen I killed before they wreaked unknowable destruction on innocents, shaking as I saw the light I had extinguished fade from their wide eyes. And finally, for my daughter taken before her time.

It is only by seeing the faces of the lost, by contemplating each and every one of their possible futures, how they may have lived and made the world a better or worse place, that we can comprehend the utter horror of war - be it the War to End War or a minor police action. For us or against, every one of those killed had a mother, a future, a life. Every single one lost everything they could ever be, everything they would ever have. They lost the entire world.

We should remember them. Not because of a symbol, but because not to do so makes us less human.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

And that's very sad, although you will see places where the poppy is worn widely - my estate for example. 49,000 Irishmen lost their lives in the Great War - and it was very widely supported by the Irish population. Only through the re-invention of our history by nationalists has that contribution been forgotten.

Obviously, my attachment to the symbol of the poppy is rooted in my own military service. I wear it for the global symbolism of course, and for the remembrance of men and women who gave so much - both in folly and in greatness - whom I never knew save as etched names on endless white stones.

But I truly wear it for my friends, the smiling faces I recall that did not return from the Falklands. Perhaps strangely, I also remember those terrible, frozen young faces of the Argentinian conscripts who would never leave those bleak hills. And the bemused expressions of the two Irishmen I killed before they wreaked unknowable destruction on innocents, shaking as I saw the light I had extinguished fade from their wide eyes. And finally, for my daughter taken before her time.

It is only by seeing the faces of the lost, by contemplating each and every one of their possible futures, how they may have lived and made the world a better or worse place, that we can comprehend the utter horror of war - be it the War to End War or a minor police action. For us or against, every one of those killed had a mother, a future, a life. Every single one lost everything they could ever be, everything they would ever have. They lost the entire world.

We should remember them. Not because of a symbol, but because not to do so makes us less human.

---

To be honest it will take at least another 100yrs in my view before the poison on both sides is drained enough for people to wear it without it being seen as a victory for a particular side its sad but then the stroy of this country is one tragedy on another.