BREXIT

I think you could say much the same thing about almost anywhere in the EU – apart from probably Hungary.

My nearest work colleague (adjacent desk) is from Hungary. He has absolutely nothing complementary to say about the politicians there and especially not about the leading “idiot” (that being the only word he uses that’s really suitable for polite discussions)

You could probably find people from a few other countries who would say similar things – but the UK and Hungary are probably right at the bottom of the pile in the EU at the moment :-(

leading idiot

I am reminded of Paul Erdðs ’s name Supreme Fascist  for the Deity.

As for all the [censored] lunacy that Corbyn could bring to the UK…

Rick I see you still fell for all the smears. It should be obvious what the right wing media (and the Blairites) were trying to do. They threw whatever mud they could come up with, some of it outright invented with later apologies, the rest of it distorted towards the point of falsehood, over and over again to try to make it stick. Corbyn remained civil, calm and confident through all this. He’s one of a very small number of honest, caring politicians; a reluctant leader that wasn’t just motivated primarily by self-interest.

If someone with the critical thinking skills of a programmer, and, I assume, above average intelligence, was still taken in by the character assassination of Jeremy Corbyn, then it’s no wonder we had a Tory landslide. Media bias is only going to get worse from here on. There was already some, shall we say, creative editing being done on clips of politicians on TV news. Now we’re entering the age of the deep fake, we’re doomed.

Goodbye human rights. Goodbye public services. Goodbye badgers. Hello mass surveillance. Hello voter ID. I think the Tories are going to do all they can to lock in power for decades to come now, and they’ve got the majority they need to succeed at it.

all Corbyn needed to do was follow Tony Blair’s “everything to everyone” centre-ground rhetoric with a clear policy on Brexit (we could have certainly done with a blast of “Things can only get better” song).

God no. Blair was awful. His economic policies inflated the housing bubble and the later financial crisis which set the stage for the inequality and poverty that exist today. He was also far too authoritarian. You can’t truly be “everything to everyone” so it would be complete abandonment of honesty and we need honesty in politics (although secretly I have to admit if he’d managed to somehow give the whole electorate what they wanted to hear, won the election and then implemented sensible, ethical reforms, I wouldn’t have complained too much).

As for adopting “a clear policy on Brexit”, for Corbyn it was a case of damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. If he went 100% pro-Leave, the Lib Dems would have surged and most likely jumped into bed with the Tories. If he went more pro-Remain, they’d have just lost even more votes to the Tories and Brexit party. He did about as well as he could about walking the tightrope above those two outcomes and for that the media branded him a weak leader.

Instead, we got the labour party manifesto right out of Kinnock-era 1980s – all we needed was another coal-miners strike. Oh wait, we don’t have any coal miners any more. It didn’t fly then, and it didn’t fly now.

Sure there were to be some moderate tax rises for earnings over 80k, but I think the policies would have made some genuine improvements to our public services, to the environment, to living conditions in our towns and cities.

Many of the vote winning policies from 2017 were ditched, which made no sense to me at all.

Could you give me a couple of examples?

Clive,

We’re in the process of emigrating to Scotland. Even if Scotland doesn’t manage to unshackle itself from Westminster, the sociopolitical atmosphere there is a hell of a lot pleasanter.

Or might you need to have lived there for a minimum number of years?

Who knows? The way the SNP, and Nicola Sturgeon in particular, talk, you’d think they’re welcoming anyone who lives there. But what will actually transpire in the event is impossible to guess.

We lived in Stornoway for three years, and Edinburgh for two – but that was a long time ago: 1986-91. Our daughter was born there, and proudly calls herself Scottish – although she’s now a UK/German dual citizen :-)

Rick I see you still fell for all the smears.

No, I was referring to all the smears, which one heard a lot of from the press (no surprise given a lot of it is right wing).

I don’t like Corbyn, not because of “censored” but because he is a throwback to the worst of the 70s, and he is determined to take a different stance to the rest of his party leaving voters with a confusing message. To all of their detriment.

Media bias is only going to get worse from here on.

I’d find that hard to believe given they outright lied about practically everything.
Here’s a question. Everybody voted Tory on the platform of “get Brexit done”. What kind of Brexit? Soft? Hard? WTO? Boris doesn’t need to rely upon placating the ERG, so what does he intend to deliver? You’ll find all of the “get Brexit done” failed to mention this. But whatever it is, it’s definitely “what the people voted for”.

The whole thing is madness.

and we need honesty in politics

Clearly not, given a landslide result for somebody incapable of telling the truth.

I expect to be able to call myself Scottish due to being born there.

And since summer 2016 (oh, I wonder why ;-) ) I have corrected anybody who refers to me as “anglais”. Yes, it’s a generic term for a Brit, but now I wish to make a distinction.

Not my fault my parents found work in Hartley Wintney shortly after I was born.
Hell, I’ll even wear a skirt (poke poke)¹ and drink Irn-Bru. But I draw the line at haggis. <ducks and hides >

¹ After saying that I was Scottish, more than one person has had the idea that I wear a skirt and live on a diet of porridge and whisky. Hmm. Porridge to keep you regular and whisky to deal with all the confusion, right?.

Media bias is only going to get worse from here on.

I’d find that hard to believe given they outright lied about practically everything.

What kind of Brexit?

The whole thing is madness.

Clearly not, given a landslide result for somebody incapable of telling the truth.

I don’t mind porridge or haggis, but I draw the line at whisky, and I can’t say I’m fond of Irn-Bru (far too sweet)…

I don’t mind porridge

Porridge is good, especially now winter is here. I might make some tonight.

Are you a “gloopy” or a “spoon stands up by itself” person?

but I draw the line at whisky,

I don’t drink. My stomach reacts quite violently to alcohol.

and I can’t say I’m fond of Irn-Bru (far too sweet)…

I tried that once. Wasn’t keen on it, but they might have been in part because I couldn’t figure out what it was supposed to taste of.
Ah, it contains E110 (amongst don’t other really weird things). I’d better stay away from it then…

It most certainly can get a lot worse.

While that’s true, such things are only “democratic” by virtue of having that word stuffed into the country name. I think people might realise if Britain turned into the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Well. I would hope that they would.

Well. I would hope that they would.

Things can happen quickly. Would they notice before it was too late? Some would, but if they’re in a minority they might not be in a position to affect the course of events.

Some would

Some have, I think…

And for Remainers (like me and like many here it seems) here’s a jolly Brexmas sing-song courtesy Peter Wishart SNP member for Perth & North Perthshire and friends.

Oh, and I’ve now got an Irish EU passport to help me slip into continental countries. I’m keeping the UK one to get back in. Maybe Scots will get a similar deal when Scotland rejoins the EU in a year or two ;-)

Maybe Scots will get a similar deal when Scotland rejoins the EU in a year or two ;-)

I’m rather hoping so…

Americanism, with or without quotes, is inherently wrong!

So, thread moved from Window Manager.

Discussing “spelling” (not grammar!) of words ending in “ize” or “ise”.

“ize” is apparently the preferred English spelling!

This is despite my educational experience in the late ’50s early ’60s.

But have I been mislead?

Or “missled”, as we sometimes like to say?

Why here?

Just wait and see!

Why here?

Well as you said elsewhere:

Linked by – well, a “[insert preferred term here]” leadership.

Ah yes, FOMO – Fear Of Missing Out. People saw they had an idiot in charge over the pond and thought “we want one too” and…

So, thread moved from Window Manager.

So, John, you left me in suspense. If I were to say “Hopefully, the Tories will have a change of heart”, could your Head Master’s objection be on the grounds that the Tories might definitely be going to have* a change of heart whilst doing so in a hopeful manner? :)

_{*That’s an interesting grammatical construction in itself, “might definitely be going to have”. Would you call that subjunctive future tense or something more complicated? I didn’t study advanced English Grammar.}

“ize” is apparently the preferred English spelling!

Or still was when my copy of The Oxford Dictionary for Writers and Editors was published (1981). Whether it still is now, after at least a couple of decades of Microsoft insisting otherwise, I don’t know.

might definitely be going to have

I’m not sure whether such a construction needs a grammatical descriptor, given that “might” and “definitely” are logically mutually exclusive.

I didn’t study advanced English Grammar.

Nor did I.

If I were to say “Hopefully, the Tories will have a change of heart”

First deal with the assumption that a heart exists to be changed. After that anything is possible including pixies in the wood across the school field listening to death metal.

I’m not sure whether such a construction needs a grammatical descriptor, given that “might” and “definitely” are logically mutually exclusive.

Ah, forgive my ambiguity. I meant it in the sense that the word “hopefully” might apply to the Tories rather than to me. If so, my use of “will” would then imply certainty that they will definitely have a change of heart.

The “definitely” is a conditional probability with a value of 1, although I do see how it can look redundant in the original sentence without further qualification.

Does that help? :)

First deal with the assumption that a heart exists to be changed.

One hewn from stone?

One hewn from stone?

Mite bee.

One hewn from stone?

You might end up paying high quality stone masons prices, but the quality will be cheap far east recycled plastic knockoff. (Or just a scam that takes the money and does a runner¹)

¹ Bestest grammar mate :)