[RedSparrows]

It's why libertarianism is an utterly useless philosophy as a social phenomenon, irrespective of the (specious) philosophical underpinnings.

Either you're not rich and you believe in it because, frankly, you can't be arsed/are incapable of thinking about things beyond immediate appearances
Or you're so super rich you believe in it because you can actually build your own island with blackjack and hookers

Hardly the basis for a sensible world.

And NOBODY has EVER answered the question, to my mind, of why someone's liberty can be shat on by someone else because that person is 'stronger'. Why one person's desire for a libertarian hellhole should somehow override others for... uh, anything else.

Hell, Nietzsche's whole shtick rests on the contradiction that the 'weak' overpowered the 'strong'.

Que?

[RedSparrows]

Double-post: David Runciman writes in the current LRB on a book about Peter Thiel, gargantuan (and very rich) cockwomble. Runciman makes the very interesting point that for all the liberatrian chatter of people like Thiel, their modus operandi is to get state contracts. That's where the money is. It's not necessarily hypocritical, but it - and other things, like the whole internet's state origins, for instance - does show yet again that 'libertarianism' of this kind is a wooly bit of window-dressing on the ability of a handful of people to make bank off the back of a world fundamentally built on states.

[Nigredo]

Or maybe I'm over-complicating things and the basic reality is that we've somehow created a society in which instant gratification is the only thing that matters, and fuck anyone in my way.

That, and certain institutes of society get taken for granted just because they've always been there and it is presumed they always will be.

How many people were out banging pots and pans for the NHS every Thursday last summer then dove straight into pubs the moment they reopened, to wind up in A&E either needing stomach pumps or tending to wounds from a completely avoidable punch up with strangers?

[Samanfur]

As I've said at work a few times: the 99% of the time that a service is working well, there'll be no feedback, because people take for granted that certain services will always be there, and're simply supposed to work.

But for that 1% of the time that things don't work, people will holler to high heaven.

The same people will inevitably be very confused and saddened when services're suddenly withdrawn, despite having never told The Powers That Be how appreciated they are, or how any flaws could be improved.

[Crabcakes]

Also, something I've noticed over the years from the "PC gornmaaad" brigade is the belief that if only The Caahncil would stop tellin' us what to do, everything would be fine and harmonious. That by defining racism, society creates racial tension. That by supplying a grievance procedure, it encourages vexatious whingeing. That any conflict in society is in effect a protest at being told how to behave.

This kind of person is, of course, hankering after the wrong thing. It’s always been wrong to be racist, just like it’s always been possible to have a grievance and attempt to take action for it.

What they mourn and want back is the lack of consequence such actions used to have. Freedom not to be bombarded by woke requests to respect people’s pronouns, but to make casually racist jokes and have people laugh politely. Freedom to run a company with few concerns for the safety of your employees. Freedom to smoke in people’s faces, pinch women’s bums and openly sneer at gay couples.

What bothers them is people demanding the right not to be bothered by their laziness - and being granted that right.

[Abernathy]

See also : “Elfin Safety” . Absolutely no need for it, ya know.

[mattomac]

“Minister for London” (yeah I’m not sure why either) was on the television before telling us we must expect higher energy bills for a period (not sure what period he was expecting) but I assume months if not years.

[Bones McCoy]

“Minister for London” (yeah I’m not sure why either) was on the television before telling us we must expect higher energy bills for a period (not sure what period he was expecting) but I assume months if not years.

It sounds a little like their "March through the institutions".

Of course London has a Mayor, but the Mayor's not one of us.
So we create an overlapping role in a higher echelon of government, put our guy in.
We can then interfere when we fancy, but blame Khaaaaaan!! for the fuck ups.

See also BBC, their guys at the top, but anything wrong and the tweets storm's all about "The Boy Line-Acre".

[Youngian]

There was a minister for London under Labour, its a post that pre dates the mayoralty but no one abolished it.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Poor old Nick Raynsford was landed with Minister for London when Blair was trying to make sure Livingstone wasn't the mayor.

[Tubby Isaacs]

As someone who moved to London from my home town of Cheltenham, I confess my part in the moral and spiritual fall of mankind.

Would you like to guess where Danny Kruger was born? Clue- same place as David "somewheres" Goodhart.

[Bones McCoy]

Dunning did all the best work in that pairing.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Isn't Ben the bouncy optimist?

For some reason I don't understand, it's much harder than it should be to find regional growth figures. I suspect Ben can find them though. Funny we don't hear more about these aggregate numbers, isn't it? You'd think he were doing the old George Osborne trick of appearing at a lot of building sites or something.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Hmmm.

[Tubby Isaacs]

"By the Power of Grayskull!"

[Bones McCoy]

"Who weren't familiar with the battle of Thermopylae"

There was this film: Bloke gets booted down a well, battle rhinoceroses, lobster clawed hookers...
The battle is quite well known.

[Bones McCoy]

The Supermarket shelves and filling station forecourts are certainly looking Spartan.

[Malcolm Armsteen]

A key element, laconic delivery.

[MisterMuncher]

Their massive over-specialisation into hoplites, and more or less only hoplites also meant that they were caught flat-footed when war changed, and more mobile foes or those with better technology could run rings around them. Still fighting yesterday's battles, they ultimately became irrelevant.

I'm sure that part isn't important.


(Also, their economy didn't function at all without slavery, as no Spartan engaged in actual work beyond the military. So they never could conquer much or consolidate, because they constantly had to quell rebellion or replace runaways. This probably isn't important either)

[Bones McCoy]

Spartans:
Came for the BUMSEX!
Stayed for the slavery.