|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 19, 2018 23:59:31 GMT 1
Here it is, in a nutshell: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bp3d24/question-time-2018-18102018#Michael Dobbs, from 12:30 to 14:35 Now, what I've been trying with no success to get people like Aqua to address is this fundamental issue. Do they disagree with this basic point, and if so, why? Or do they think it's mistaken, and if so, why? Or do they perhaps have some sort of superior vision, whereby the future USE morally supercedes the values of democracy and self-determination? I mean - something a little more substantial than what possible jobs his granddaughters might get on the European gravy train. Everyone accepts there might well be such losses, especially for the well-to-do middle classes, who earn their living through State extortion of working people. Nevertheless, most of us discounted the logic of such authoritarian privilege - we voted for higher values. What is the response of the ilk of Aqua to this crucial essential point of Michael Dobbs?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Oct 20, 2018 0:44:39 GMT 1
Here it is, in a nutshell: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bp3d24/question-time-2018-18102018#Michael Dobbs, from 12:30 to 14:35 Now, what I've been trying with no success to get people like Aqua to address is this fundamental issue. Do they disagree with this basic point, and if so, why? Or do they think it's mistaken, and if so, why? Or do they perhaps have some sort of superior vision, whereby the future USE morally supercedes the values of democracy and self-determination? I mean - something a little more substantial than what possible jobs his granddaughters might get on the European gravy train. Everyone accepts there might well be such losses, especially for the well-to-do middle classes, who earn their living through State extortion of working people. Nevertheless, most of us discounted the logic of such authoritarian privilege - we voted for higher values. What is the response of the ilk of Aqua to this crucial essential point of Michael Dobbs? 'Michael Dobbs, from 12:30 to 14:35' No idea what that means. Therefore no idea what the basic point is. However, I do understand the underlying point - that State or public servants are simply parasites. But you always say that. (Dobbs made a few good points, but not good enough.)
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 20, 2018 0:57:22 GMT 1
Here it is, in a nutshell: www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bp3d24/question-time-2018-18102018#Michael Dobbs, from 12:30 to 14:35 Now, what I've been trying with no success to get people like Aqua to address is this fundamental issue. Do they disagree with this basic point, and if so, why? Or do they think it's mistaken, and if so, why? Or do they perhaps have some sort of superior vision, whereby the future USE morally supercedes the values of democracy and self-determination? I mean - something a little more substantial than what possible jobs his granddaughters might get on the European gravy train. Everyone accepts there might well be such losses, especially for the well-to-do middle classes, who earn their living through State extortion of working people. Nevertheless, most of us discounted the logic of such authoritarian privilege - we voted for higher values. What is the response of the ilk of Aqua to this crucial essential point of Michael Dobbs? 'Michael Dobbs, from 12:30 to 14:35' No idea what that means. Therefore no idea what the basic point is. You don't know what "democracy" means? What? What is it that you don't understand? Yes. And? That's not Dobbs' point - that's just a basic fact of economics. How would you know, if as you claim you didn't understand? I believe you did understand his point - you simply don't value what it's about. You see yourself as part of the governing elite that will benefit from this authoritarian conglomerate, like the Chinese politburo. As someone who's never had to earn his living, you think it's great. Bugger those millions of peons who pay for your luxurious existence - if they object, we can always find more Bulgarians, or whoever, to take their place.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Oct 20, 2018 1:21:08 GMT 1
Oh dear, oh dear. This again. Never was and never aspired to be part of the governing elite. Like most people, I've always had to earn my living, coming from a one-parent family, and taking up to just now to live it down. (Forgive me.)
In my Oxford and Cambridge interviews, I was asked whether I was a bastard.
I got to my feet and asked them to repeat it, and they stayed seated.
The bastards!
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 20, 2018 1:49:23 GMT 1
Oh dear, oh dear. This again. Never was and never aspired to be part of the governing elite. Sorry - didn't work at Nuremberg. You washed cars one summer. They wanted to know: are you one of us? Or: are you the sort of person who's uncomfortable with this whole exploitative charade? You turned out to be a bastard, after all.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 20, 2018 8:33:30 GMT 1
Watched it Nick. V good! We need leadership like that rather than the appalling mess that is our negotiating 'team' (if youdisagree catch a taxi home) I see the four muskshiteers Blair, Clegg, Mandelsson. Hesseltine were active in Brussels on Wednesday attempting to thwart democracy. Do these people not realise that they are playing with fire?
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 20, 2018 12:50:42 GMT 1
Watched it Nick. V good! We need leadership like that rather than the appalling mess that is our negotiating 'team' (if youdisagree catch a taxi home) Time for May to go. She's exhausted any good will she might still have had with this latest betrayal of her "red lines". If she had any real integrity she'd resign. Yesterday I put fifty quid down on a general election before Xmas - I can't see how it can be avoided (unless she accedes to "The People's Vote" - and even then, she's history - ignoble history.) Yes - if I follow you, Andrew Neil made the same urgent point on This Week the other night to that ignorant arrogant elitist little turd Alistair Campbell. (Very worth watching on iPlayer if you missed it, if only for Bobby Gillespie's jaw-dropping guest appearance! Unavoidably redolent of the oratorical brilliance and awesome rational persuasiveness of Aqua. Catch his face at the end! )
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 22, 2018 22:09:51 GMT 1
Did anyone watch The Darkest Hour? Leaving aside the horrible, ghastly historical distortions (entirely unnecessary), isn't this a very close parallel with the situation we now find ourselves in? Except we're led by Halifax, instead of Churchill?
I'm entirely serious about this. It's not a metaphor. In the week where the EU (by which we must be clear, we mean Germany - and, in essence, German banks) has instructed Italy - a sovereign nation, one might suppose - that it's national Budget is "not acceptable" and must be rejected, what are we to make of people like Aqua's insouciant claim that he doesn't understand what democracy means, and that sovereignty "doesn't matter"? It means nothing to him, we must acknowledge, if he so insists - amazing though it may be, for any Englishman. These people exist, in vast numbers - they would have once, during the war, been called traitors. Now they're merely public sector employees, public sector union members, Momentum members, and middle class little old ladies who haven't a clue about what's going on, like Aqua.
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Oct 22, 2018 23:59:51 GMT 1
I'm entirely serious about this. It's not a metaphor. In the week where the EU (by which we must be clear, we mean Germany - and, in essence, German banks) has instructed Italy - a sovereign nation, one might suppose - that it's national Budget is "not acceptable" and must be rejected, what are we to make of people like Aqua's insouciant claim that he doesn't understand what democracy means Show me the claim. and that sovereignty "doesn't matter"? Show me the claim.It means nothing to him, we must acknowledge, if he so insists - amazing though it may be, for any Englishman. These people exist, in vast numbers - they would have once, during the war, been called traitors. Now they're merely public sector employees, public sector union members, Momentum members, and middle class little old ladies who haven't a clue about what's going on, like Aqua. It's weird, isn't it, that even tho I've spent a clear minority of my working life in the public sector, and gave it up (except the voluntary side), 22 years ago, to become self-employed, mrsonde doesn't have the flexibility and generosity of mind to stop exploiting his ludicrous caricature of me, which usually includes pin-stripes and bowler, for his polemical purposes. Bad faith, or what?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Oct 23, 2018 0:42:08 GMT 1
As it occurs to me, against and prompted by the caricature - of my privileged life (ha) and the public sector - that mrsonde cleaves to...
When I was 17 I spent six months as a hospital operating theatre porter (and later for several months more, in university vacations). Many anecdotes to hand (some not too shareable), but this particular experience has had a lasting impression.
I was doing the night-shift alone and was called urgently to go and fetch a lot of blood. It was the first time I'd done it. I learnt that the patient was a railway worker who'd had both of his legs partially severed by a train.
Then I had to deliver the blood to the theatre, and go on to the ward to lift him on to the trolley. It needed two people, for general safety of the patient and porter(s), and particularly because he was about 20 stone. A male nurse came to help me, but left when we'd lifted him over. You can imagine the screams. The patient kept grasping my hand and pleading with me to help him and tell him what was going to happen. I did my best, and when we got to the outer-room of the theatre he begged me to stay with him, which the nurses allowed.
I made many trips to get blood on that night; and even now I must still have blocked out whether he survived.
I can't say I know I did much good on that occasion, beyond what was required, but I tried. And lots of people do their best every day, and night. For NHS patients.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 23, 2018 6:21:27 GMT 1
As it occurs to me, against and prompted by the caricature - of my privileged life (ha) and the public sector - that mrsonde cleaves to... I'll stop cleaving to the view that you're "privileged" when I stop being taxed to pay for your pension. Or you start paying for mine. And for that matter I'm still being taxed to pay for your "self-employment", seeing as the councils and any other public sector organisation you managed to gouge was quite certainly in debt and couldn't afford to pay you in the first place - debts the taxpayers are still shelling out for (many councils pay about three quarters of their total tax-take merely on the 10%=plus interest of such loans - loans they took out with the permission and encouragement of Gordon Brown, in pursuit of your lunatic political philosophy. Then they have the bare-faced nerve to moan and whine that they're having to make "cuts" in their services because of central government "austerity"!) Jesus wept. And how would this story be in any way different had this guy been a private patient? Or French, or Dutch, or Danish? Or it had happened before 1948. You magically became this self-sacrificial Florence Nightingale figure because you were employed by the blessed NHS, did you - otherwise you'd just be doing a job? You got paid for your efforts, I presume? As did the nurse, and the doctors? Where do you imagine that money came from?
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 23, 2018 6:28:30 GMT 1
I'm entirely serious about this. It's not a metaphor. In the week where the EU (by which we must be clear, we mean Germany - and, in essence, German banks) has instructed Italy - a sovereign nation, one might suppose - that it's national Budget is "not acceptable" and must be rejected, what are we to make of people like Aqua's insouciant claim that he doesn't understand what democracy means and that sovereignty "doesn't matter"? Show me the claim.You became a "consultant" to the public sector, you claimed - not some sort of admirable donkey-wormer, doing something valuable, as a fair deal providing a service to someone who wants it and is willing to pay your price, but an even worse sort of parasite on the taxpayer than you were before. Shall I explain to you what "bad faith" means, or are you finally going to google it one day?
|
|
|
Post by aquacultured on Oct 23, 2018 15:56:25 GMT 1
Shall I explain to you what "bad faith" means, or are you finally going to google it one day? No explanation or googling needed, thanks. (MR quite liked my definition of bad faith/mauvaise foi recently.) No reason to explain democracy either. What I indicated that I didn't understand - and I'm sorry I didn't make it clearer for you - was your timing; it looked like over two hours. But you used this as meaning I'd said I didn't understand what democracy was, when I hadn't mentioned democracy. A trick you often use; but picking you up on this sort of thing usually brings forth repeated tirades about whatever takes your fancy, so I tried to short-circuit this by accusing you of bad faith instead. I actually watched that Question Time live. Dobbs came over as somewhat airy-fairy and other-worldly, whereas other guests were more realistic.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 24, 2018 23:31:13 GMT 1
Shall I explain to you what "bad faith" means, or are you finally going to google it one day? No explanation or googling needed, thanks. (MR quite liked my definition of bad faith/mauvaise foi recently.) Yes, that was equally misguided, and Marchesa expressed no view either way, to my recollection. I sort of sense what you imagine it means - but it's a specific philosophical concept, coined for the purpose, and it doesn't mean what you think it does. Or anyone else. Huh? What? I don't use any tricks, you fool! You merely express yourself with such obnoxious laziness and supercilious elitism that no one has a clue what you're on about. I'm the only one who even bothers responding to you! As I said. No one has a clue what you're on about. You struggle to even speak comprehensible English. People actually paid you as a consultant??!!!! Bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by mrsonde on Oct 24, 2018 23:39:39 GMT 1
Oh! I think I get what you're trying to express, with your as usual sub-minimal effort. You mean you thought the timing reference I gave was referring to hours, rather than minutes. Yes? You imagined, even though you'd actually watched the program, and it's not an unfamiliar part of the BBC schedule, after forty or so years, that Question Time might run for over two hours, with one guest speaking for that length of time, and so you were befuddled as to what I might be referring to. Is that right? We're to conclude from this that you are in fact suffering from quite severe dementia?
|
|