7 ms·

I genuinely don't think they care unless you're a wavering Tory Brexit voter who has (amazingly) reached their limit – at which point, they'll do anything to tr

I genuinely don't think they care unless you're a wavering Tory Brexit voter who has (amazingly) reached their limit – at which point, they'll do anything to try to keep you coming back for more punishment. From the recently-announced plans to reintroduce imperial measures [1] to the fact that 96% of respondents to the Government's consultation on the sale (privatisation) of Channel 4 disagreed with it [2], this government is stupid, antidemocratic, nepotistic and downright dangerous. The list of rules broken and scandals encountered could not be larger, and still, Boris does not go. Urgh. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/28/boris-johnson-set-to-bring-back-imperial-measurements-to-mark-platinum-jubilee https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/28/boris-johns... [2] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-a-change-of-ownership-of-channel-4-television-corporation/outcome/government-response-to-the-consultation-on-a-potential-change-of-ownership-of-channel-4-television-corporation https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consultation-on-...

Svip 4y ago
Well, if things get worse, he can always introduce the reversing of decimalisation. Bring back the guinea!
- arethuza 4y ago
  In case anyone is wondering: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_monetary_system#United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_monetary_system#Un...
- tragomaskhalos 4y ago
  The guinea was imo a rather elegant thing, as it allowed retailers to impart additional value or eminence to a good simply by pricing in guineas rather than pounds. From wikipedia: "Savile Row tailors, bespoke boot makers, fine jewelers, and expensive motorcars were always priced in guineas".
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  Guineas are still in use, particularly in livestock sales.
  - biorach 4y ago
    that's not totally accurate. The Guinea coin is no longer legal tender and it is not a unit of currency Livestock sales are priced in Guineas as a convention > Bids are still made in guineas for the sale of racehorses at auction, at which the purchaser will pay the guinea-equivalent amount but the seller will receive only that number of pounds. The difference (5p in each guinea) is traditionally the auctioneer's commission (which thus, effectively, amounts to 5% on top of the sales price free from commission). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_(coin) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_(coin)
madaxe_again 4y ago
I find it phenomenal that people in the U.K. are so caught up in the Johnson narrative - whether you’re for or against him, it seems absolutely everyone is within his thrall - talking about him, thinking about him, to the exclusion of all else. Now, it’s not about “stick your head in the sand”, so much as it is realising that on both sides of the aisle you’re reading from the same script - the same paradigm, the same dichotomy of stay or go, the same stage and set dressing. Your protests are expected, appreciated, and necessary, as they further the narrative, and deepen his power - because power flows from narrative, from the ideas which you accept as “just is” within the story, as it doesn’t make sense without them - never mind that it’s all a fantastical fabrication. This is how kings are made. Johnson has been telling a particular story for a while now, in which he becomes king. It gave him vast popularity in the run up to the mayoral election (apt control of narrative is commonly called charisma), and from there, he’s been punting the same can down the road whilst we all chase it like rabid dogs. This only ends when a better, stronger narrative comes along - and nobody in any position to challenge him has it. Labour own a narrative in which they stumble onwards, tripping on their scabbard as they scramble up the dusty ramparts of Fort Johnson, and are stuck in it, as they mistake their narrative for their reality. For instance, they initially approached the antisemitism debacle by treating it as a valid issue - they played whackamole with the press on it, and it kept the story (“Labour are antisemites”) prime in the public mind. The whole thing has been rather quiet lately, because they changed tactics, are are hiding from that narrative and are hoping it will wither away. It might - but it only takes an ember to rekindle a bonfire. Rather, they should be getting ahead of the story, and should pick on, oh, I don’t know, the greens, kick off a rumour that they’re a Masonic cabal of drag queen drug lords and make them defend it, and drag the Tories into that mess. The crazier and broader the accusations the better - grapeshot gives a lot of holes to patch, and distracts from the one which hit below the waterline. Play it right and you make everyone remember that it was the Tories that started it, as labour smearing the greens makes no sense. Punching up and doing minor damage makes you look weak and petty, punching down and demolishing an innocent makes you look strong. Children understand this - the world is a schoolyard. I wrote a little while back about narrative control as being the thing which divides the ruling classes from the consumer classes - I went to a similar school to Johnson, and the main thing you’re taught, albeit largely unwittingly (you have to follow the lessons which aren't spoken), is how to dominate narrative. So, you want Johnson gone, you need either events to run roughshod over his constructed reality, and that would take something very substantial - or you need a greater master of human reality. Thing is, as long as the techniques of narrative control remain the domain of the elite, passed on to their children through expensive institutions and family neuroses that spread mimetically through the affected population, the leaders will continue to be from the same caste. Occasionally someone from the outside stumbles over the alchemy of mind control, and they do things with it, often involving gas and guillotines, but it’s the exception, not the rule, and from the perspective of the entrenched ruling classes reinforces the need to gatekeep. So. Johnson will likely one day go, but the disease that allows Johnson will remain until the next revolution.
easytiger 4y ago
Bills like the online safety bill are cross party designed in committee. If you think a different government would do anything different you are mistaken - your only opposition from the back benches of the Tory party itself
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  Follow the money. Someone connected to the Tory cabinet will be getting paid sweetly to devise this shit.
  - easytiger 4y ago
    Evidence please.
    - tjpnz 4y ago
      Honestly would if really surprise anyone at this point? It's already widely known that a Tory member's family was receiving government money for PPE. Everything they do is for their own benefit.
      - easytiger 4y ago
        > It's already widely known that a Tory member's family was receiving government money for PPE. Why don't you cite the specific example then and we can discuss it. > Honestly would if really surprise anyone at this point? The intellectual dishonesty to use this as an argument is staggering.
        LightG 4y ago
        You're probably right that it's better to cite things, especially on what is a US-centric forum. However, as someone in the UK, the corruption that went on here with regards to PPE and many other government contracts is widely known and just a google search away. Sorry - but your faux outrage concerning intellectual dishonesty reads as exactly that ... That people speculate cynically over the actions of the current government is directly a result of the mistrust they have grown in the electorate. Reap it.
Ntrails 4y ago
[1] I actually don't think it makes a blind bit of difference if people sell a pound of jam instead of 454g or whatever. I don't think pubs need to stop selling Pints either. Hard to be outraged here. [2] TV stations are dead. Sell them all.
- smokey_circles 4y ago
  [2] several citations needed. The danger is they're not dead, they're alive and well with a large part of a voting population. Terrible idea. As is [1]. Let's spend money for no reason, and also it makes it harder to integrate with the outside world, where the money London needs to launder is
- eptcyka 4y ago
  Channel 4 required no money to operate. It was making money for the taxpayers. There's no reason to sell it.
  - Ntrails 4y ago
    It is losing revenue YoY (afaik?) along with diminishing relevance in a world that doesn't revolve around a small number of channels providing mass market content. (Free depends whether you view the license fee as a tax, and whether the free license for pensioners is costed). The main reason to sell it is simply a question of "is it fulfilling a societal good unavailable via a private enterprise". If not, the Government has no place owning it imo.
    - regularfry 4y ago
      Why is the license fee relevant in a discussion about Channel 4?
      - Ntrails 4y ago
        I thought all content termed as "public service broadcasting" was given specific funding. A quick google suggests it is a term/requirement of having the channel at all, rather than actually funded? I can twist my logic to argue charging for the channel with requirement for Public Service Content costs money etc, but would be dishonest xD

Svip 4y ago

Well, if things get worse, he can always introduce the reversing of decimalisation. Bring back the guinea!

arethuza 4y ago
In case anyone is wondering: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_monetary_system#United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_monetary_system#Un...
tragomaskhalos 4y ago
The guinea was imo a rather elegant thing, as it allowed retailers to impart additional value or eminence to a good simply by pricing in guineas rather than pounds. From wikipedia: "Savile Row tailors, bespoke boot makers, fine jewelers, and expensive motorcars were always priced in guineas".
Gordonjcp 4y ago
Guineas are still in use, particularly in livestock sales.
- biorach 4y ago
  that's not totally accurate. The Guinea coin is no longer legal tender and it is not a unit of currency Livestock sales are priced in Guineas as a convention > Bids are still made in guineas for the sale of racehorses at auction, at which the purchaser will pay the guinea-equivalent amount but the seller will receive only that number of pounds. The difference (5p in each guinea) is traditionally the auctioneer's commission (which thus, effectively, amounts to 5% on top of the sales price free from commission). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_(coin) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_(coin)

madaxe_again 4y ago

I find it phenomenal that people in the U.K. are so caught up in the Johnson narrative - whether you’re for or against him, it seems absolutely everyone is within his thrall - talking about him, thinking about him, to the exclusion of all else. Now, it’s not about “stick your head in the sand”, so much as it is realising that on both sides of the aisle you’re reading from the same script - the same paradigm, the same dichotomy of stay or go, the same stage and set dressing. Your protests are expected, appreciated, and necessary, as they further the narrative, and deepen his power - because power flows from narrative, from the ideas which you accept as “just is” within the story, as it doesn’t make sense without them - never mind that it’s all a fantastical fabrication. This is how kings are made. Johnson has been telling a particular story for a while now, in which he becomes king. It gave him vast popularity in the run up to the mayoral election (apt control of narrative is commonly called charisma), and from there, he’s been punting the same can down the road whilst we all chase it like rabid dogs. This only ends when a better, stronger narrative comes along - and nobody in any position to challenge him has it. Labour own a narrative in which they stumble onwards, tripping on their scabbard as they scramble up the dusty ramparts of Fort Johnson, and are stuck in it, as they mistake their narrative for their reality. For instance, they initially approached the antisemitism debacle by treating it as a valid issue - they played whackamole with the press on it, and it kept the story (“Labour are antisemites”) prime in the public mind. The whole thing has been rather quiet lately, because they changed tactics, are are hiding from that narrative and are hoping it will wither away. It might - but it only takes an ember to rekindle a bonfire. Rather, they should be getting ahead of the story, and should pick on, oh, I don’t know, the greens, kick off a rumour that they’re a Masonic cabal of drag queen drug lords and make them defend it, and drag the Tories into that mess. The crazier and broader the accusations the better - grapeshot gives a lot of holes to patch, and distracts from the one which hit below the waterline. Play it right and you make everyone remember that it was the Tories that started it, as labour smearing the greens makes no sense. Punching up and doing minor damage makes you look weak and petty, punching down and demolishing an innocent makes you look strong. Children understand this - the world is a schoolyard. I wrote a little while back about narrative control as being the thing which divides the ruling classes from the consumer classes - I went to a similar school to Johnson, and the main thing you’re taught, albeit largely unwittingly (you have to follow the lessons which aren't spoken), is how to dominate narrative. So, you want Johnson gone, you need either events to run roughshod over his constructed reality, and that would take something very substantial - or you need a greater master of human reality. Thing is, as long as the techniques of narrative control remain the domain of the elite, passed on to their children through expensive institutions and family neuroses that spread mimetically through the affected population, the leaders will continue to be from the same caste. Occasionally someone from the outside stumbles over the alchemy of mind control, and they do things with it, often involving gas and guillotines, but it’s the exception, not the rule, and from the perspective of the entrenched ruling classes reinforces the need to gatekeep. So. Johnson will likely one day go, but the disease that allows Johnson will remain until the next revolution.

easytiger 4y ago

Bills like the online safety bill are cross party designed in committee. If you think a different government would do anything different you are mistaken - your only opposition from the back benches of the Tory party itself

Gordonjcp 4y ago
Follow the money. Someone connected to the Tory cabinet will be getting paid sweetly to devise this shit.
- easytiger 4y ago
  Evidence please.
  - tjpnz 4y ago
    Honestly would if really surprise anyone at this point? It's already widely known that a Tory member's family was receiving government money for PPE. Everything they do is for their own benefit.
    - easytiger 4y ago
      > It's already widely known that a Tory member's family was receiving government money for PPE. Why don't you cite the specific example then and we can discuss it. > Honestly would if really surprise anyone at this point? The intellectual dishonesty to use this as an argument is staggering.
      - LightG 4y ago
        You're probably right that it's better to cite things, especially on what is a US-centric forum. However, as someone in the UK, the corruption that went on here with regards to PPE and many other government contracts is widely known and just a google search away. Sorry - but your faux outrage concerning intellectual dishonesty reads as exactly that ... That people speculate cynically over the actions of the current government is directly a result of the mistrust they have grown in the electorate. Reap it.

Ntrails 4y ago

[1] I actually don't think it makes a blind bit of difference if people sell a pound of jam instead of 454g or whatever. I don't think pubs need to stop selling Pints either. Hard to be outraged here. [2] TV stations are dead. Sell them all.

smokey_circles 4y ago
[2] several citations needed. The danger is they're not dead, they're alive and well with a large part of a voting population. Terrible idea. As is [1]. Let's spend money for no reason, and also it makes it harder to integrate with the outside world, where the money London needs to launder is
eptcyka 4y ago
Channel 4 required no money to operate. It was making money for the taxpayers. There's no reason to sell it.
- Ntrails 4y ago
  It is losing revenue YoY (afaik?) along with diminishing relevance in a world that doesn't revolve around a small number of channels providing mass market content. (Free depends whether you view the license fee as a tax, and whether the free license for pensioners is costed). The main reason to sell it is simply a question of "is it fulfilling a societal good unavailable via a private enterprise". If not, the Government has no place owning it imo.
  - regularfry 4y ago
    Why is the license fee relevant in a discussion about Channel 4?
    - Ntrails 4y ago
      I thought all content termed as "public service broadcasting" was given specific funding. A quick google suggests it is a term/requirement of having the channel at all, rather than actually funded? I can twist my logic to argue charging for the channel with requirement for Public Service Content costs money etc, but would be dishonest xD