Seemingly trivial things that annoy you

19019029049069071102

Comments

  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 30,102
    edited April 2023

    By definition not global because it was always about the *empire* and not the rest of the world :)
    Are you sure? The EIC was a private corporation independent of the British government. Likewise the Hudson Bay Company, Muscovy Company, etc. The trade came first and the empire came as the corporations sought to secure their markets from competitors. Only later were these nationalised.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    rjsterry said:

    Are you sure? The EIC was a private corporation independent of the British government. Likewise the Hudson Bay Company, Muscovy Company, etc. The trade came first and the empire came as the corporations sought to secure their markets from competitors. Only later were these nationalised.
    I mean, globalism literally didn't exist as a concept until the fall of the various colonial Empires, so yeah.

    Globalism is a lot to do with international integration, sharing political values, including forms of government (liberal, democratic etc), and that wasn't really on the cards back then.

    International trade has been around forever.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,874
    Globalism is international trade.
    All the other stuff is just what greases the wheels.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    I mean, it is literally not, but OK.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,727

    I mean, it is literally not, but OK.

    I bet you could write a book saying that it is, and that it would be really convincing until you'd read the book that says it isn't. And vice versa.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    edited April 2023
    The whole point of globalisation is that it *isn't* just international trade, but that politics, foreign policies, economic policies, are all intertwined and inseparable, so they must be managed at an international level, not a national level.

    The entire definition is that it is not just international trade. That's the whole point!
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,727

    The whole point of globalisation is that it *isn't* just international trade, but that politics, foreign policies, economic policies, are all intertwined and inseparable, so they must be managed at an international level, not a national level.

    The entire definition is that it is not just international trade. That's the whole point!

    At least in our neck of the woods, wealth = re-election. So like children swarming about the ball during a school football match, the political alignment follows from the international trade.

    Comment.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,874
    edited April 2023

    The whole point of globalisation is that it *isn't* just international trade, but that politics, foreign policies, economic policies, are all intertwined and inseparable, so they must be managed at an international level, not a national level.

    The entire definition is that it is not just international trade. That's the whole point!

    You appear to think that politics drives trade.
    I think the opposite is true. I'm leaving it as agree to disagree.

    Edited for clarity, and timeline.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,727
    pblakeney said:

    You appear to think that politics drives trade.
    I think the opposite is true. I'm leaving it as agree to disagree.

    I'm saying trade drives politics, so we are agreeing. The key word is "follow".
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 22,264

    Right. I'll ask it once more in the vain hope of an answer. If you think we shouldn't judge the British empire, or indeed anything in the past, by today's standards, where in the past do you draw the when we can judge something by today's standards?

    How far back do we have to go before the "modern concepts of morality" are no longer applicable? A day? A week? A year? A decade? a century?

    Presumably you are happy to pass moral judgement on my forum posts, even though every time you read it, you're reading history, as it was written in the past.
    I think where I have sympathy for Pinno's argument is that you consistently ignore the way people were treated in the UK at the same time. For example, UK courts finally determined that rape within marriage was illegal in 1991. Beating children in schools was banned in 1996. Homosexuality became legal in 1967. In 1948 Workhouses were finally abolished. Etc.


  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,874
    edited April 2023

    I'm saying trade drives politics, so we are agreeing. The key word is "follow".
    My comment (which I've edited) was replying to Rick.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    pblakeney said:

    You appear to think that politics drives trade.
    I think the opposite is true. I'm leaving it as agree to disagree.

    Edited for clarity, and timeline.
    *head in hands*.

    We're talking at cross purposes. I'm giving you the definition of globalisation, as you seem to think it is just about trade and the rest is irrelevant.

    Globalisation is the idea that economics, trade, politics, are all inseparable, and must be considered as a whole at an *international level*

    I'm not commenting on what follows another. FWIW, I don't think there is a sequence and it's all the same sh!t and you can't consider them independently.
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,743
    rjsterry said:

    I think you can tie several of those to the early 20th century legacy of the dividing up of the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian empires by the French and British after WW1. If you start dividing up the map with no regard for the local demographics then this is bound to create deep seated and long-standing problems that other people can later exploit.

    Similarly, if you take over and run a country for a long period, then leave at short notice with no handover to another authority, that will leave a gap to be exploited.
    I do not disagree with any of that.
    There was a handover in Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and Zimbabwe (of the one's I know of).
    In Zimbabwe, it was agreed (and signed by Mugabe) that:

    1. 70% of farmers paid compensation for the land they occupied and could keep it.
    2. 20 seats in parliament were retained for white representation and to ease the transition.

    Mugabe rescinded the agreement. Agriculture in Zimbabwe was the economic spine of the country and when Mugabe stirred up further anti-white farmer animosity it was in contravention of the above. Once they took over the farms, both the economy and farms collapsed. Prior to that, they removed the 20 parliamentary seats previously reserved.

    Jomo Kenyatta (the 1st president of Kenya) became the 1st Prime minister before becoming president. His continuous use of reconciliatory prose and policy was part of a co-ordinated hand over. See my post above about Churchill's transitionary commission, which started almost 10 years before the actual handover.

    Where it went badly wrong was in places like Kashmir and Pakistan where the British exit was too rapid and lines were drawn without proper consideration.
    The 2nd WW bled Britain dry. Who knows what various handovers would have been like had Britain not had to withdraw so hastily.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 30,102
    edited April 2023

    *head in hands*.

    We're talking at cross purposes. I'm giving you the definition of globalisation, as you seem to think it is just about trade and the rest is irrelevant.

    Globalisation is the idea that economics, trade, politics, are all inseparable, and must be considered as a whole at an *international level*

    I'm not commenting on what follows another. FWIW, I don't think there is a sequence and it's all the same sh!t and you can't consider them independently.
    Exactly. Not sure that is something new, though, although the scale has undoubtedly increased. Despite on paper there being various competing empires there was still a fair amount of international coordination.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Wheelspinner
    Wheelspinner Posts: 6,726

    Open One+ BMC TE29 Seven 622SL On One Scandal Cervelo RS
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 30,102


    Ah, there are other threads if you don't like this one. And it is supposed to be annoying 😛
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,923
    rjsterry said:

    Ah, there are other threads if you don't like this one. And it is supposed to be annoying 😛
    Supposed to be trivial too!
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,284
    Will it ever stop?

    Yo, I don't know.


    Vanilla Ice, 1990.

  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 30,102
    Pross said:

    Supposed to be trivial too!
    The initial post about that headline was. Blame that Mr Pinno for arguing with me 😀.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • focuszing723
    focuszing723 Posts: 8,284
    How far back will AI judge humanity, probably more relevant.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660

    How far back will AI judge humanity, probably more relevant.

    I think that's Terminator 2: Judgement Day.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,923
    The use of unnecessary words e.g on the cycling commentary now “the young 19 year old” or the hairdresser opposite the building my choir rehearse in has a sign “Ladies and gents unisex hairdresser”
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,923
    People asking the same question others have already asked and had answered. The rugby club I support are in a cup final on Saturday and there have been numerous posts every day recently asking what time is kick off and how to get tickets.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,874
    Shrinkflation.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • Wheelspinner
    Wheelspinner Posts: 6,726
    Pross said:

    The use of unnecessary words e.g on the cycling commentary now “the young 19 year old” or the hairdresser opposite the building my choir rehearse in has a sign “Ladies and gents unisex hairdresser”

    There's a tradie van I see locally some days... "Specialist in all kinds of tiling"

    Grrrr.

    Open One+ BMC TE29 Seven 622SL On One Scandal Cervelo RS
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,923
    pblakeney said:

    Shrinkflation.

    The word or it happening?

    I reckon duo bars of Snickers etc. are now the size that individual bars used to be. I’d rather pay more and get the proper size.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,874
    Pross said:

    The word or it happening?

    I reckon duo bars of Snickers etc. are now the size that individual bars used to be. I’d rather pay more and get the proper size.
    It happening, becoming more prevalent and obvious.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • briantrumpet
    briantrumpet Posts: 21,448
    pblakeney said:

    It happening, becoming more prevalent and obvious.

    It's a good word to describe a really annoying practice.
  • Tashman
    Tashman Posts: 3,502
    Pross said:

    The word or it happening?

    I reckon duo bars of Snickers etc. are now the size that individual bars used to be. I’d rather pay more and get the proper size.
    6 mini bars for 79p in Lidl - Happy days

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.