On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 1:24:39 AM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 6:32:34 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > I've lost count of how many times I
> > and other immigrant engineers had
> > to correct marketing documents
> > penned by native English speakers
> > graduated from top US and British
> > universities.
> >
> Put it this way - if a British or Australian
> concert goer were to turn to you and say
> "Now *that* was a fine performance",
> he/she would be extremely perplexed
> if you were to reply, "Just fine, huh?".

?!? I don't perform for an audience.

dk

On Sunday, 11 September 2022 at 18:20:37 UTC+10, andrewc..gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 11:16:37 AM UTC+10, ljk...aol.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 7:52:34 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 6:11:06 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
> > > > On 9/10/22 11:50 AM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 1:32:20 AM UTC+10, ljk...aol.com wrote:
> > > > >> On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 10:24:51 AM UTC-5, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > > > >>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 11:55:30 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
> > > > >>>> On 9/8/22 8:52 PM, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > > > >>>>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 10:18:05 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> On 9/8/2022 9:55 PM, Bob Harper wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>> On 9/8/22 12:02 PM, Herman wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>> Imagine, she received Boris J. and Liz T. only two days before.
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> Incredible trooper. RIP
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> She took her duties seriously. The world could use more with the same dedication.
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> Bob Harper
> > > > >>>>>> Not that there is overwhelming support for ending the monarchy (AFAIK), but it seems like if the monarchy was ever to end, this would be a good time. Go out with a winner.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I'll bet that with Charles III in Buckingham Palace the monarchy will be over in less than five years. Truss will run the country into the ground; Charles, a Tory at heart -- will go out of his way to support her in any way he can (his mother was as non-partisan as possible for 70 years), and both Truss and Charles will be history. I know -- the PM and the monarch are not connected by law or otherwise, but Charles will make it seem to the British public that they are, and then "boom goes the dynamite!"
> > > > >>>> Just how will PM Truss run the country into the ground? I'm genuinely
> > > > >>>> curious.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Bob Harper
> > > > >> See Koji Karam's op-ed piece in yesterday's NY Times for details..
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't subscribe to the NYT, but I gather that it is a sort of Archie comic for intellectuals.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew Clarke
> > > > > Canberra
> > > > Great comment! :-)
> > > >
> > > > Bob Harper
> > > Here is that NY Times op-ed piece about PM Truss that I referred to above. Make of it what you will:
> > >
> > > LONDON — “Do we confront this moment with honesty,” asked Rishi Sunak, one of the two candidates running to replace Boris Johnson as prime minister of Britain, “or do we tell ourselves comforting fairy tales?”
> > > The answer, from the Conservative Party membership, at least, is fairy tales. On Monday the members elected Liz Truss as their new leader and the next prime minister. In a campaign built around a belief in the miraculous power of tax cuts, Ms. Truss presented herself as the economic savior of a country heading into a winter of crisis. In the face of sky-high inflation and widespread economic misery, it’s a fantastical proposition.
> > > But fairy tales don’t come out of nowhere. For her zealous commitment to privatization, deregulation and tax-cutting, many see Ms. Truss as a would-be second coming of Margaret Thatcher. Sealed by sartorial mimicry, there’s something in the comparison. Yet Ms. Truss’s most apt antecedent, in fact, is someone who had already left the Conservative Party under a cloud of controversy by the time Ms. Thatcher came to lead it: Enoch Powell.
> > > Largely known for his bitterly racist denunciation of immigration, Mr.. Powell has a claim to being Britain’s most influential postwar politician. That’s chiefly because, in an era of decolonization, he sketched out a route for Britain to maintain its global dominance. Fashioned in the dying of the imperial light, that roster of policies — preferential terms of global trade achieved through hard-line anti-migrant policies, shrinking the state, undermining organized labor and fostering finance — forms the basis of Ms. Truss’s politics today. The British Empire may have all but ended 60 years ago, but the country’s next prime minister is still in thrall to its legacy.
> > >
> > > While Ms. Truss has been happy to court association with Ms. Thatcher — boasting that “we did great things in the 1980s” — she’s likely to be more wary of openly celebrating Mr. Powell. His name, after all, is synonymous with racism and xenophobia. Chiefly that’s because of an infamous speech he gave in 1968: Addressing a room full of Conservatives, he warned that immigration from the colonies would lead to a race war, resulting in the rivers of Britain “foaming with much blood.” Indulging in the language of bizarre colonial revenge fantasies, he spoke fearfully of how “in 15 or 20 years’ time, the Black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”
> > > The speech, incendiary and unrepentant, forever sealed his reputation as Britain’s most famous nativist politician. But his notorious racism has overshadowed the extent to which he was also, in the words of the academic Robbie Shilliam, Britain’s first neoliberal politician. In this view, Mr. Powell was the first major conservative voice to break with the postwar consensus of social democracy and call for tax cuts, privatization and the free movement of money.
> > > The evidence is clear enough. Just months after he delivered his “rivers of blood” speech, he spoke at a meeting of the influential Mont Pelerin Society, Friedrich Hayek’s international organization that spread the gospel of the free market, on the importance of freeing capital from the control of the state. He collaborated with and championed a free-market think tank, the Institute of Economic Affairs, at a time when its members were viewed as marginal eccentrics. In articles and speeches, Mr. Powell led the charge for turning Britain into the financialized economy it became in the later decades of the 20th century.
> > > Behind his politics lay the empire — or, more accurately, its end. By the mid-1960s, the British Empire, once the proprietor of a quarter of the world, was winding down. As former colonies assumed independence, Britain faced a dwindling of its global dominance. To politicians like Mr. Powell, reared on British power, the dangers were paramount. How could Britain retain its imperial advantages, if not the empire itself? The answer he came to was simple: borders for the people of the empire but not for the wealth of the empire.
> > >
> > > Ms. Truss is heir to this tradition of thinking. On immigration she has staked out a hard-line position, vowing to increase the border force by 20 percent and backing the government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. On the world stage, too, she is notably bullish — whether in threatening to renege on Britain’s deal with the European Union over the Northern Ireland protocol or promising to call out Vladimir Putin to his face. But it is on the terrain of the economy where her absorption in zombie imperial thinking is most striking.
> > >
> > > In 2012, Ms. Truss announced herself on the political scene as a co-author of a book, tellingly titled “Britannia Unchained,” that argued that Britain’s diminished position globally was the result of an overextended welfare state raising generations of mollycoddled workers, derided as “the worst idlers in the world.” While she likes to wrap herself in the Union Jack, her position a decade on appears to be the same. British workers, she said in a recent leaked recording, lacked the “skill and application” of their foreign counterparts and needed to work harder.
> > > The state, by contrast, should do less. Any effort to help Britons facing ruinously high energy bills, Ms. Truss has said, would amount to “handouts,” deeply undesirable even if, under pressure, she may have to resort to them. The only panacea for the country’s economic woes is tax cuts — likely to predominantly benefit the wealthy and big business — free ports and special investment zones where international capital can enjoy free rein. The state is to be cut down, wages restrained, red tape reduced, the market set free. This is pure Powellism.
> > > The problem is that none of these prescriptions are likely to work. The economic cycle begun by Ms. Thatcher has long exhausted itself, and tax cuts have been consistently shown to increase inequality while having a negligible effect on growth or unemployment. And yet a plausible solution to the country’s woes lies close at hand: a price cap on energy bills, increased taxation on profits and state investment to rebalance the economy..
> > > Instead, under Ms. Truss, the broken mentality of empire rules. And it is everyday Britons who will pay the price.
> > Author of the above piece is Dr Kojo Koram, a Lecturer in Law at Birkbeck School of Law, University of London.
> And a most bizarre piece of work it is, too. I'm not quite sure how he got from Lady Thatcher to Enoch Powell to Liz Truss, but there you are. I hope he doesn't give lectures like this at Birkbeck College. Perhaps he could put his mouth where his money is and get out of nasty, racist Britain and take up a position in a similar college in Harare, Zimbabwe, where he can tell the readers of the New York Times how Robert Mugabe and his cronies destroyed one of the most prosperous countries in Africa in order to line their own pockets. This might not be a very prudent thing to do, as people who are critical of Robert Mugabe and his pals tend to get thrown in jail or assassinated, especially if they vote for the wrong political party or were born into the wrong tribe. Or he could follow Zimbabwe's unemployed to Jo'burg ZA if he's happy to do without air conditioning, as the state electricity generators break down more and more frequently and for longer and longer periods, and as the unemployment rate continues to rise? That might not be prudent either, as economic refugees from Zim are being treated with increasing hostility, which often results in the locals welcoming their African brothers by beating them up and/or demolishing their houses.
>
> Andrew Clarke
> Canberra

On 9/11/2022 4:24 AM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 6:32:34 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> I've lost count of how many times I
>> and other immigrant engineers had
>> to correct marketing documents
>> penned by native English speakers
>> graduated from top US and British
>> universities.
>>
>
> Put it this way - if a British or Australian concert goer were to turn to you and say "Now *that* was a fine performance", he/she would be extremely perplexed if you were to reply, "Just fine, huh?".
>
> Andrew Clarke
> Canberra

I have no idea how the word is used in proper English, but in the U.S. it obviously depends on how it is used. In your usage above "fine" could be good or maybe even great, though I would wonder why the speaker didn't just say "great." Did he mean to say it was very good but not great? You can't tell. OTOH, I bet in the U.S. "fine" is much more often used to mean "adequate." It all depends on the usage and probably the tone of voice and facial expression. This is not rocket science. Or even economics.

On 9/11/22 7:57 AM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:

> Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
>
> I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree

Again with the F word (no, not that one :-)). Well, here is the
definition from the author himself:

“Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the
State.” Benito Mussolini's formulation remains one of the most enduring
definitions of modern totalitarianism.

The notion that Lady Thatcher had or Liz Truss has that as an objective
is simply silly, as is the notion that I, or Frank (!), or any other
conservative contributor here has that objective. You know that, but for
you and your ilk 'fascist' is sim[y a curse word to be spat at anyone
with whom you disagree.

Bob Harper

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, 11 September 2022 at 18:20:37 UTC+10, andrewc..gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 11:16:37 AM UTC+10, ljk...aol.com wrote:
> > > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 7:52:34 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 6:11:06 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
> > > > > On 9/10/22 11:50 AM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 1:32:20 AM UTC+10, ljk...aol..com wrote:
> > > > > >> On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 10:24:51 AM UTC-5, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > > > > >>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 11:55:30 PM UTC-5, Bob Harper wrote:
> > > > > >>>> On 9/8/22 8:52 PM, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 10:18:05 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>> On 9/8/2022 9:55 PM, Bob Harper wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>> On 9/8/22 12:02 PM, Herman wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Imagine, she received Boris J. and Liz T. only two days before.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Incredible trooper. RIP
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> She took her duties seriously. The world could use more with the same dedication.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Bob Harper
> > > > > >>>>>> Not that there is overwhelming support for ending the monarchy (AFAIK), but it seems like if the monarchy was ever to end, this would be a good time. Go out with a winner.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I'll bet that with Charles III in Buckingham Palace the monarchy will be over in less than five years. Truss will run the country into the ground; Charles, a Tory at heart -- will go out of his way to support her in any way he can (his mother was as non-partisan as possible for 70 years), and both Truss and Charles will be history. I know -- the PM and the monarch are not connected by law or otherwise, but Charles will make it seem to the British public that they are, and then "boom goes the dynamite!"
> > > > > >>>> Just how will PM Truss run the country into the ground? I'm genuinely
> > > > > >>>> curious.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Bob Harper
> > > > > >> See Koji Karam's op-ed piece in yesterday's NY Times for details.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't subscribe to the NYT, but I gather that it is a sort of Archie comic for intellectuals.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew Clarke
> > > > > > Canberra
> > > > > Great comment! :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Bob Harper
> > > > Here is that NY Times op-ed piece about PM Truss that I referred to above. Make of it what you will:
> > > >
> > > > LONDON — “Do we confront this moment with honesty,” asked Rishi Sunak, one of the two candidates running to replace Boris Johnson as prime minister of Britain, “or do we tell ourselves comforting fairy tales?”
> > > > The answer, from the Conservative Party membership, at least, is fairy tales. On Monday the members elected Liz Truss as their new leader and the next prime minister. In a campaign built around a belief in the miraculous power of tax cuts, Ms. Truss presented herself as the economic savior of a country heading into a winter of crisis. In the face of sky-high inflation and widespread economic misery, it’s a fantastical proposition.
> > > > But fairy tales don’t come out of nowhere. For her zealous commitment to privatization, deregulation and tax-cutting, many see Ms. Truss as a would-be second coming of Margaret Thatcher. Sealed by sartorial mimicry, there’s something in the comparison. Yet Ms. Truss’s most apt antecedent, in fact, is someone who had already left the Conservative Party under a cloud of controversy by the time Ms. Thatcher came to lead it: Enoch Powell.
> > > > Largely known for his bitterly racist denunciation of immigration, Mr. Powell has a claim to being Britain’s most influential postwar politician. That’s chiefly because, in an era of decolonization, he sketched out a route for Britain to maintain its global dominance. Fashioned in the dying of the imperial light, that roster of policies — preferential terms of global trade achieved through hard-line anti-migrant policies, shrinking the state, undermining organized labor and fostering finance — forms the basis of Ms. Truss’s politics today. The British Empire may have all but ended 60 years ago, but the country’s next prime minister is still in thrall to its legacy.
> > > >
> > > > While Ms. Truss has been happy to court association with Ms. Thatcher — boasting that “we did great things in the 1980s” — she’s likely to be more wary of openly celebrating Mr.. Powell. His name, after all, is synonymous with racism and xenophobia. Chiefly that’s because of an infamous speech he gave in 1968: Addressing a room full of Conservatives, he warned that immigration from the colonies would lead to a race war, resulting in the rivers of Britain “foaming with much blood.” Indulging in the language of bizarre colonial revenge fantasies, he spoke fearfully of how “in 15 or 20 years’ time, the Black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”
> > > > The speech, incendiary and unrepentant, forever sealed his reputation as Britain’s most famous nativist politician. But his notorious racism has overshadowed the extent to which he was also, in the words of the academic Robbie Shilliam, Britain’s first neoliberal politician. In this view, Mr. Powell was the first major conservative voice to break with the postwar consensus of social democracy and call for tax cuts, privatization and the free movement of money.
> > > > The evidence is clear enough. Just months after he delivered his “rivers of blood” speech, he spoke at a meeting of the influential Mont Pelerin Society, Friedrich Hayek’s international organization that spread the gospel of the free market, on the importance of freeing capital from the control of the state. He collaborated with and championed a free-market think tank, the Institute of Economic Affairs, at a time when its members were viewed as marginal eccentrics. In articles and speeches, Mr. Powell led the charge for turning Britain into the financialized economy it became in the later decades of the 20th century.
> > > > Behind his politics lay the empire — or, more accurately, its end. By the mid-1960s, the British Empire, once the proprietor of a quarter of the world, was winding down. As former colonies assumed independence, Britain faced a dwindling of its global dominance. To politicians like Mr.. Powell, reared on British power, the dangers were paramount. How could Britain retain its imperial advantages, if not the empire itself? The answer he came to was simple: borders for the people of the empire but not for the wealth of the empire.
> > > >
> > > > Ms. Truss is heir to this tradition of thinking. On immigration she has staked out a hard-line position, vowing to increase the border force by 20 percent and backing the government’s plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda. On the world stage, too, she is notably bullish — whether in threatening to renege on Britain’s deal with the European Union over the Northern Ireland protocol or promising to call out Vladimir Putin to his face. But it is on the terrain of the economy where her absorption in zombie imperial thinking is most striking.
> > > >
> > > > In 2012, Ms. Truss announced herself on the political scene as a co-author of a book, tellingly titled “Britannia Unchained,” that argued that Britain’s diminished position globally was the result of an overextended welfare state raising generations of mollycoddled workers, derided as “the worst idlers in the world.” While she likes to wrap herself in the Union Jack, her position a decade on appears to be the same. British workers, she said in a recent leaked recording, lacked the “skill and application” of their foreign counterparts and needed to work harder.
> > > > The state, by contrast, should do less. Any effort to help Britons facing ruinously high energy bills, Ms. Truss has said, would amount to “handouts,” deeply undesirable even if, under pressure, she may have to resort to them. The only panacea for the country’s economic woes is tax cuts — likely to predominantly benefit the wealthy and big business — free ports and special investment zones where international capital can enjoy free rein. The state is to be cut down, wages restrained, red tape reduced, the market set free. This is pure Powellism.
> > > > The problem is that none of these prescriptions are likely to work. The economic cycle begun by Ms. Thatcher has long exhausted itself, and tax cuts have been consistently shown to increase inequality while having a negligible effect on growth or unemployment. And yet a plausible solution to the country’s woes lies close at hand: a price cap on energy bills, increased taxation on profits and state investment to rebalance the economy.
> > > > Instead, under Ms. Truss, the broken mentality of empire rules. And it is everyday Britons who will pay the price.
> > > Author of the above piece is Dr Kojo Koram, a Lecturer in Law at Birkbeck School of Law, University of London.
> > And a most bizarre piece of work it is, too. I'm not quite sure how he got from Lady Thatcher to Enoch Powell to Liz Truss, but there you are. I hope he doesn't give lectures like this at Birkbeck College. Perhaps he could put his mouth where his money is and get out of nasty, racist Britain and take up a position in a similar college in Harare, Zimbabwe, where he can tell the readers of the New York Times how Robert Mugabe and his cronies destroyed one of the most prosperous countries in Africa in order to line their own pockets. This might not be a very prudent thing to do, as people who are critical of Robert Mugabe and his pals tend to get thrown in jail or assassinated, especially if they vote for the wrong political party or were born into the wrong tribe. Or he could follow Zimbabwe's unemployed to Jo'burg ZA if he's happy to do without air conditioning, as the state electricity generators break down more and more frequently and for longer and longer periods, and as the unemployment rate continues to rise? That might not be prudent either, as economic refugees from Zim are being treated with increasing hostility, which often results in the locals welcoming their African brothers by beating them up and/or demolishing their houses.
> >
> > Andrew Clarke
> > Canberra
> Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
>
> I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 1:16:17 AM UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 9/11/2022 4:24 AM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 6:32:34 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> I've lost count of how many times I
> >> and other immigrant engineers had
> >> to correct marketing documents
> >> penned by native English speakers
> >> graduated from top US and British
> >> universities.
> >>
> >
> > Put it this way - if a British or Australian concert goer were to turn to you and say "Now *that* was a fine performance", he/she would be extremely perplexed if you were to reply, "Just fine, huh?".
> >
> > Andrew Clarke
> > Canberra
> I have no idea how the word is used in proper English, but in the U.S. it obviously depends on how it is used. In your usage above "fine" could be good or maybe even great, though I would wonder why the speaker didn't just say "great." Did he mean to say it was very good but not great? You can't tell. OTOH, I bet in the U.S. "fine" is much more often used to mean "adequate." It all depends on the usage and probably the tone of voice and facial expression. This is not rocket science. Or even economics.

In which case there is a difference in the British and American usage, and we have to understand that, and respect that. In my own usage, "fine" and "great" are almost interchangeable, although on reflection, I'd probably use "great performance" for something that has become a classic, like the Klemperer Beethoven's Seventh.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra

On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 03:25:13 UTC+10, Bob Harper wrote:
> On 9/11/22 7:57 AM, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> >
> > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> >
> > Ray Hall, Taree
> Again with the F word (no, not that one :-)). Well, here is the
> definition from the author himself:
>
> “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the
> State.” Benito Mussolini's formulation remains one of the most enduring
> definitions of modern totalitarianism.
>
> The notion that Lady Thatcher had or Liz Truss has that as an objective
> is simply silly, as is the notion that I, or Frank (!), or any other
> conservative contributor here has that objective. You know that, but for
> you and your ilk 'fascist' is sim[y a curse word to be spat at anyone
> with whom you disagree.
>
> Bob Harper

If you had read correctly, I never mentioned anything about Thatcher's or Truss's objectives. The fact that they lie to the far right of UK politics, ensures your deference to them. So what else is new?

Incidentally, your description of fascism above, is not that far removed from the MAGA concept, in the sense it has little to do with democracy.

Ray Hall, Taree

On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> >
> > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> >
> > Ray Hall, Taree
> The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
>
> Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
>
> Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
>
> Andrew Clarke
> Canberra

One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.

Ray Hall, Taree

On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> > > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> > >
> > > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> > >
> > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
> >
> > Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee.. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
> >
> > Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
> >
> > Andrew Clarke
> > Canberra
> One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree

They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-4, ljk...@aol.com wrote:
> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail..com wrote:
> > > > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> > > >
> > > > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> > > >
> > > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > > The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
> > >
> > > Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
> > >
> > > Andrew Clarke
> > > Canberra
> > One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
> >
> > Ray Hall, Taree
> They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.

Posting using the hated Google Groups because Thunderbird is still not working:

What do those concerned citizens think the likely "fate" under a Truss or other Conservative government will be? Oh I know they want a more equal distribution of wealth than they are likely to get, and a more open immigration policy, and so forth. But if they don't get what they want, how bad will it be, really? Do they think that UK citizens will be worse off than those in Zimbabwe, Congo, or North Korea?

She was an evil queen who abused her subjects. What did she ever do for me? She never even knew who I was.

On 9/12/2022 5:25 PM, simonelvladtepes wrote:
> She was an evil queen who abused her subjects. What did she ever do for me? She never even knew who I was.

If she was the greatest ruler who ever lived she still wouldn't have known you. And she would have been the better for it.

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:02:28 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-4, ljk...@aol.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> > > > >
> > > > > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > > > The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
> > > >
> > > > Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
> > > >
> > > > Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew Clarke
> > > > Canberra
> > > One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone.. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
> > >
> > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.
> Posting using the hated Google Groups because Thunderbird is still not working:
>
>
> What do those concerned citizens think the likely "fate" under a Truss or other Conservative government will be? Oh I know they want a more equal distribution of wealth than they are likely to get, and a more open immigration policy, and so forth. But if they don't get what they want, how bad will it be, really? Do they think that UK citizens will be worse off than those in Zimbabwe, Congo, or North Korea?

They're concerned about economic distress, which will have grave practical conse. In particular, heating costs this winter are expected to rise about 60 percent

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:02:28 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-4, ljk...@aol.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> > > > >
> > > > > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > > > The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
> > > >
> > > > Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
> > > >
> > > > Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew Clarke
> > > > Canberra
> > > One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone.. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
> > >
> > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.
> Posting using the hated Google Groups because Thunderbird is still not working:
>
>
> What do those concerned citizens think the likely "fate" under a Truss or other Conservative government will be? Oh I know they want a more equal distribution of wealth than they are likely to get, and a more open immigration policy, and so forth. But if they don't get what they want, how bad will it be, really? Do they think that UK citizens will be worse off than those in Zimbabwe, Congo, or North Korea?

They're concerned that Truss' "the common people can and should tough it out" economic policies could have grave effects on the quality of life. In particular, heating costs this winter are expected to raise 60 percent.

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 6:21:29 PM UTC-5, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:02:28 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-4, ljk...@aol.com wrote:
> > > On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > > > > The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
> > > > >
> > > > > Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrew Clarke
> > > > > Canberra
> > > > One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
> > > >
> > > > Ray Hall, Taree
> > > They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.
> > Posting using the hated Google Groups because Thunderbird is still not working:
> >
> >
> > What do those concerned citizens think the likely "fate" under a Truss or other Conservative government will be? Oh I know they want a more equal distribution of wealth than they are likely to get, and a more open immigration policy, and so forth. But if they don't get what they want, how bad will it be, really? Do they think that UK citizens will be worse off than those in Zimbabwe, Congo, or North Korea?
> They're concerned that Truss' "the common people can and should tough it out" economic policies could have grave effects on the quality of life. In particular, heating costs this winter are expected to raise 60 percent.

I meant "rise," not "raise."

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/2022-09-09/ty-article/.highlight/over-120-countries-but-never-israel-queen-elizabeth-iis-unofficial-boycott/00000183-20a3-d2c9-a387-e7bbb2b90000

dk

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 5:02:56 PM UTC-7, Dan Koren wrote:
>
> https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/2022-09-09/ty-article/.highlight/over-120-countries-but-never-israel-queen-elizabeth-iis-unofficial-boycott/00000183-20a3-d2c9-a387-e7bbb2b90000
>

https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/2022-09-09/ty-article/.highlight/between-a-mohel-and-a-sieg-heil-what-did-elizabeth-really-think-of-her-jewish-subjects/00000183-22fb-da20-a1f3-e6fb223e0000

On 9/11/22 6:41 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 03:25:13 UTC+10, Bob Harper wrote:
>> On 9/11/22 7:57 AM, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
>>>
>>> I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
>>>
>>> Ray Hall, Taree
>> Again with the F word (no, not that one :-)). Well, here is the
>> definition from the author himself:
>>
>> “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the
>> State.” Benito Mussolini's formulation remains one of the most enduring
>> definitions of modern totalitarianism.
>>
>> The notion that Lady Thatcher had or Liz Truss has that as an objective
>> is simply silly, as is the notion that I, or Frank (!), or any other
>> conservative contributor here has that objective. You know that, but for
>> you and your ilk 'fascist' is sim[y a curse word to be spat at anyone
>> with whom you disagree.
>>
>> Bob Harper
>
> If you had read correctly, I never mentioned anything about Thatcher's or Truss's objectives. The fact that they lie to the far right of UK politics, ensures your deference to them. So what else is new?
>
> Incidentally, your description of fascism above, is not that far removed from the MAGA concept, in the sense it has little to do with democracy.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree
>
>
>
That's nuts, Ray. If 'MAGA' has any coherent meaning (which I sometimes
doubt), it is 'less state, more freedom', not the reverse.

Bob Harper

On Tuesday, 13 September 2022 at 10:16:00 UTC+10, Bob Harper wrote:

> > If you had read correctly, I never mentioned anything about Thatcher's or Truss's objectives. The fact that they lie to the far right of UK politics, ensures your deference to them. So what else is new?
> >
> > Incidentally, your description of fascism above, is not that far removed from the MAGA concept, in the sense it has little to do with democracy.
> >
> > Ray Hall, Taree
> >
> >
> >
> That's nuts, Ray. If 'MAGA' has any coherent meaning (which I sometimes
> doubt), it is 'less state, more freedom', not the reverse.
>
> Bob Harper

The meaning as trumpeted by your previous Prez, has more the connotation I intended.

Ray Hall, Taree

On 9/12/2022 7:21 PM, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:02:28 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-4, ljk...@aol.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ray Hall, Taree
>>>>> The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew Clarke
>>>>> Canberra
>>>> One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
>>>>
>>>> Ray Hall, Taree
>>> They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.
>> Posting using the hated Google Groups because Thunderbird is still not working:
>>
>>
>> What do those concerned citizens think the likely "fate" under a Truss or other Conservative government will be? Oh I know they want a more equal distribution of wealth than they are likely to get, and a more open immigration policy, and so forth. But if they don't get what they want, how bad will it be, really? Do they think that UK citizens will be worse off than those in Zimbabwe, Congo, or North Korea?
>
>> They're concerned that Truss' "the common people can and should tough it out" economic policies could have grave effects on the quality of life. In particular, heating costs this winter are >expected to raise 60 percent.

Not being a follower of British politics I don't know what an expected increase in heating costs has to do with politics. Do you mean that a Liberal government would tax the rich to offset increased heating costs and a conservative government wouldn't? Or that some conservative policy is actually going to drive up fuel costs?

In California run forever by liberals they are simultaneously legislating electric cars and rationing the use of electricity.

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 6:38:11 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:

> If she was the greatest ruler who ever lived she still wouldn't have known you. And she would have been the better for it.

It's not surprising that you are the only one who did not understand that by failing to ignore my inane post you stooped lower that a pubic louse, let alone by actually responding to it.

> In California run forever by liberals they are simultaneously legislating electric cars and rationing the use of electricity.

California is usually ahead of the rest of the states in terms of progress on climate change, and a good example of what has to be done. Yes - we need electric cars. And yes, we need to consume less electricity. They are both obviously compatible - people just need to drive less and/or collectively take more train or bus journeys. Simple. Nobody said climate change could be achieved without significant social changes.

On 9/13/2022 12:14 AM, simonelvladtepes wrote:
> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 6:38:11 PM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:
>
>> If she was the greatest ruler who ever lived she still wouldn't have known you. And she would have been the better for it.
>
> It's not surprising that you are the only one who did not understand that by failing to ignore my inane post you stooped lower that a pubic louse, let alone by actually responding to it.

It is true that no one else responded. That's the only thing you are right about.

On Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 8:56:22 AM UTC-4, Frank Berger wrote:

> It is true that no one else responded. That's the only thing you are right about.

Are you implying, somewhat implausibly, that you are not lower than a pubic louse?

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 11:04:04 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 9/12/2022 7:21 PM, Lawrence Kart wrote:
> > On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:02:28 PM UTC-5, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 4:01:31 PM UTC-4, ljk...@aol.com wrote:
> >>> On Sunday, September 11, 2022 at 9:07:01 PM UTC-5, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Monday, 12 September 2022 at 09:20:07 UTC+10, andrewc...mail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 12:57:06 AM UTC+10, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> Thatcher to Truss is no big jump, given her aspirations, but your jump to Mugabe and his thugs to make comparisons shows how desperate the fascist element here will go to make a point, which is?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I couldn't help a chuckle while you were in the midst of telling us about your African brothers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ray Hall, Taree
> >>>>> The point is, that there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in people of African and Afro-Caribbean descent decrying the past and present politics of the UK as fascist and racist when they still continue to live in London, enjoy a very good standard of living and almost unlimited freedom of expression by world standards, and do nothing whatsoever to help their African and Afro-Caribbean brethren, apart from publishing ridiculous articles in the NYT, The Guardian and the New Statesman.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Meanwhile in places like Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the standard of living has fallen rapidly for both black and white citizens, and political freedom is non-existent. Queen Elizabeth II lived to see the former colonies, who had been provided with thriving economies, democratic constitutions and parliamentary institutions fall one by one to military coups or ruthless dictatorships. South Africa has not yet descended to the same level as Zimbabwe - one reason why black Zim economic refugees still bother to go there - but the standard of living for your average black South African is getting worse, and conditions in the notorious 'townships' continue to deteriorate, especially if you're a black Zim economic refugee. Meanwhile, ANC politicians who know the right people are doing very nicely, thank you very much.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why the NYT has chosen to publish this article and others like it from different authors at a time of national mourning in an allied country, I do not know. I suspect they're trying to *sound* radical without having to actually *be* radical.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Andrew Clarke
> >>>>> Canberra
> >>>> One could argue that the timing was unfortunate. in the same way many articles are unfortunate, whether from right or left. But the substance remains nonetheless and is up for debate. All colonialism (Empire building) was based on brutality initially, and I doubt whether that is news to anyone. So for any implication to be made with regard to the late Queen is quite pointless. Whilst not an avid royalist, it is beyond dispute that ERII was absolutely beyond any doubt a loyal servant to her task, and was as near beyond rerpoach as anyone could possibly be. She will be much missed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ray Hall, Taree
> >>> They published it because it was timely -- given that a fair number of British citizens, though they regret the Queen's passing, are not exclusively in deep mourning and moreover are very concerned about their nation's, and their own, immediate and long term fate under a government whose policies are of the sort that Truss proposes.
> >> Posting using the hated Google Groups because Thunderbird is still not working:
> >>
> >>
> >> What do those concerned citizens think the likely "fate" under a Truss or other Conservative government will be? Oh I know they want a more equal distribution of wealth than they are likely to get, and a more open immigration policy, and so forth. But if they don't get what they want, how bad will it be, really? Do they think that UK citizens will be worse off than those in Zimbabwe, Congo, or North Korea?
> >
> >> They're concerned that Truss' "the common people can and should tough it out" economic policies could have grave effects on the quality of life. In particular, heating costs this winter are >expected to raise 60 percent.
> Not being a follower of British politics I don't know what an expected increase in heating costs has to do with politics. Do you mean that a Liberal government would tax the rich to offset increased heating costs and a conservative government wouldn't? Or that some conservative policy is actually going to drive up fuel costs?
>
> In California run forever by liberals they are simultaneously legislating electric cars and rationing the use of electricity.

No --- Truss will do nothing to relieve steeply rising fuel costs. If you think that's not politics, you're mistaken.