Things you have recently learnt
Comments
-
I think that'll be due to the source of the writing. Youths get fed culture based on the previous generation's (and the generation before that) writings and experiences.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Baby boomers were raised on a diet of war heros. Most knew all the famous battles and heros from the war. I don't think it has much to with world order.rick_chasey said:
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
The downside of glorifying the war in this way without actually experiencing it is it makes people more gung-ho about dropping bombs and wars in general.
It's interesting quizzing my young pupils about films: two of the staples of my youth - Westerns and war films - just don't figure for them, and I think they find the over-representation of those genres in selections of 'great movie themes' rather weird.
For us oldies that means westerns, wars and gangsters as they were prevalent for the previous generations. Less so for the youth of today.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.0 -
morstar said:
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.
0 -
rick_chasey said:morstar said:
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.
I must admit that I'm still struggling to see that red spot in your explanations, so you'll have to excuse me if I miss it.0 -
I always think modern books set in one of the world wars are a bit cheap and don't require much imagination to shockbriantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Baby boomers were raised on a diet of war heros. Most knew all the famous battles and heros from the war. I don't think it has much to with world order.rick_chasey said:
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
The downside of glorifying the war in this way without actually experiencing it is it makes people more gung-ho about dropping bombs and wars in general.
It's interesting quizzing my young pupils about films: two of the staples of my youth - Westerns and war films - just don't figure for them, and I think they find the over-representation of those genres in selections of 'great movie themes' rather weird.0 -
As I understand you point.rick_chasey said:morstar said:
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.
Too many old people prattle on about somebody you consider no more relevant than any other leader.
If that is correct, your position has already been paraphrased by others on here as follows.
Respect the history I tell you to and don't respect the history I'm ill informed about.0 -
Nah.morstar said:
As I understand you point.rick_chasey said:morstar said:
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.
Too many old people prattle on about somebody you consider no more relevant than any other leader.
If that is correct, your position has already been paraphrased by others on here as follows.
Respect the history I tell you to and don't respect the history I'm ill informed about.
Amount old people bang on about Thatcher is disproportionate to her place in history, and old people assume young people feel the same (they don’t by and large).
And anyway she doesn’t get brought up in historical contexts but in contemporary discussions usually when it’s irrelevant.0 -
She personally may be confined to history but her policies are very much alive and working today. You cannot have a political discussion today without it referencing her policies in some way. It would be absurd to reference her policies without mentioning her.
Things may well change in the new era beginning 2021 as Morstar said, but not today.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.0 -
Case in point.pblakeney said:She personally may be confined to history but her policies are very much alive and working today. You cannot have a political discussion today without it referencing her policies in some way. It would be absurd to reference her policies without mentioning her.
Things may well change in the new era beginning 2021 as Morstar said, but not today.0 -
-
Define disproportionate?rick_chasey said:
Nah.morstar said:
As I understand you point.rick_chasey said:morstar said:
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.
Too many old people prattle on about somebody you consider no more relevant than any other leader.
If that is correct, your position has already been paraphrased by others on here as follows.
Respect the history I tell you to and don't respect the history I'm ill informed about.
Amount old people bang on about Thatcher is disproportionate to her place in history, and old people assume young people feel the same (they don’t by and large).
And anyway she doesn’t get brought up in historical contexts but in contemporary discussions usually when it’s irrelevant.
If your working career started in the early-mid 70's, you are currently around retirement age and your entire working life will have been influenced directly by her policies as will your housing situation.
Two absolutely huge, direct impacts on an individuals life. Due to your age, you will clearly understand the cause and effect she had.
I'm 15-20 years behind that generation but old enough to know the things that shape these experiences are her policies as I saw them implemented, I just wasn't working age at the time.
Young people may not be aware of it, that is the only difference.
That a history student is frustrated by it shows you are either ignorant or dismissive of collective individuals personal history in favour of more grand, international political history.
To contrast. Slavery may be a bigger deal in global history but has no direct impact on my life.
If I were a miner in early 80's who later purchased a council house and some shares... Thatcher has had significant direct influence on my life experience.2 -
Sure. You’re not really disagreeing with me.morstar said:
Define disproportionate?rick_chasey said:
Nah.morstar said:
As I understand you point.rick_chasey said:morstar said:
Personally, I don't think I've ever really discussed Thatcher on this forum prior to this thread. I am not hung up on her. She did both good and bad. She was ideologically driven which can mean blinkered but she was principled and consistent.rick_chasey said:
Seriously. Read what I am saying. I’m not saying this. It’s not irrelevant.pblakeney said:
History and nothing more?rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
Okay, good to know that history can be demoted to an irrelevant level.
Unless, what I really think, is that history is ultra serious when it suits and irrelevant when it doesn't.
She gets referenced an outsized amount by people of a certain age.
However, you are being completely inconsistent if you think some history is really important whilst she is just a n other leader.
She didn't just coincide with a period of change, she was a driving force behind a radical shift in our country. The bedrock of our current economic policies, many of you which you both benefit from and some you despise came from her.
If you don't want to debate politics in 2020, yes, she can be consigned to history. Seeing as you are highly engaged in political debate and regularly debate UK domestic politics, to dismiss her significance on all ages is absurd. If you want to attack conservative thinking, you need to be able to attack her legacy.
I'd agree she is about to become less relevant. Only now after the transition period will we be truly moving into a new period where her policies are no longer the key influencing factor of our political landscape.
I'm no Thatcher fan but I'd take her visionary leadership over bumbling out of the Eu on a whimsical unsubstantiated ideology.
Too many old people prattle on about somebody you consider no more relevant than any other leader.
If that is correct, your position has already been paraphrased by others on here as follows.
Respect the history I tell you to and don't respect the history I'm ill informed about.
Amount old people bang on about Thatcher is disproportionate to her place in history, and old people assume young people feel the same (they don’t by and large).
And anyway she doesn’t get brought up in historical contexts but in contemporary discussions usually when it’s irrelevant.
If your working career started in the early-mid 70's, you are currently around retirement age and your entire working life will have been influenced directly by her policies as will your housing situation.
Two absolutely huge, direct impacts on an individuals life. Due to your age, you will clearly understand the cause and effect she had.
I'm 15-20 years behind that generation but old enough to know the things that shape these experiences are her policies as I saw them implemented, I just wasn't working age at the time.
Young people may not be aware of it, that is the only difference.
That a history student is frustrated by it shows you are either ignorant or dismissive of collective individuals personal history in favour of more grand, international political history.
To contrast. Slavery may be a bigger deal in global history but has no direct impact on my life.
If I were a miner in early 80's who later purchased a council house and some shares... Thatcher has had significant direct influence on my life experience.0 -
I'm out.0
-
You sound like our mate Donnie across the water.rick_chasey said:Ok you lot since I obviously didn’t make it clear.
Plenty of things have had serious effects on history.
Loads. Seriously. Go study it. It’s loads.
How do you know?rick_chasey said:And sure, she was very important and significant.
We were talking about the relevancy of Thatcher and her continuing influence.rick_chasey said:
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
No, she shapes our lives now.rick_chasey said:For Thatcher it’s partly to do with the fact she shaped *their* lives. She came around a time that there was a lot of change anyway around the world.
That is utterly bizarre.rick_chasey said:But it’s weird that people talk about modern politics with people who were born well after the fact...
Colston - he's history, nothing more.rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
To 'move on' ?! Are we in some sort of mourning? I am not. I have an ambivalence towards her. We 'oldies' (if I can be called an 'oldie' ha ha), witnessed the changes. We are seemingly more aware of what the current landscape is like because we have the 'before' pic and the 'after' pic. You only have the 'after' pic and you seem to have little idea of how we got here - unless by some long passed historical event/reference. Only, some convenient compartmentalisation of facts, a historical pick and mix to suit the argument; the agenda of injustice, discrimination, racism. I am in no way diminishing those issues but you cannot ignore the canvas and the background on which it was created. You cannot omit significant periods in history which are relevant to today.rick_chasey said:There been 40 years of opportunities to move on from what she’s done.
How can you talk about statues, slavery and Empire as having greater importance than the most significant political period in the last 50 years?! More, how can you be so dismissive over that period of time when it has so much to do with the UK today?
Remember this:
None of the above is relevant?pinno said:
80's battles that shaped Employment law, Union rules, Councils, our relationship with the EU, our Nuclear capabilities, tenancy agreements, Council tax (Poll tax), PFI's, privatization, the Housing act, deregulation, the Education reform act 1988, the Anglo-Irish agreement...
.
History is linear, not some concatenated store where you pick x, y and z off the shelf to create a picture conducive to what patchwork quilt that you want to assemble.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!2 -
Funny how neither Stevo nor Bally ever bring up Anthony Eden.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Thatcher has some great quotes whatever you think of her.0
-
Or maybe the more simple explanation is that Thatcher and Churchill were seen by many to have done great things while in office and Rick doesn't like that?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
And some less great things if you grew up in South Wales, for example.1
-
Either way, they're impact is significant. At least consideration.kingstongraham said:And some less great things if you grew up in South Wales, for example.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Sounds like you're in the Rick camp herekingstongraham said:And some less great things if you grew up in South Wales, for example.
I did say 'seen by many'...."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I think its a personal choice as to who we choose to admire. Unless there is a centre-leftie approved list of great PM's that we have to use to be 'on message'?rjsterry said:Funny how neither Stevo nor Bally ever bring up Anthony Eden.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
OMG, you have a thin skin on this.Stevo_666 said:
I think its a personal choice as to who we choose to admire. Unless there is a centre-leftie approved list of great PM's that we have to use to be 'on message'?rjsterry said:Funny how neither Stevo nor Bally ever bring up Anthony Eden.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
Nope, you missed therjsterry said: "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
They dont need defending really, their greatness says it allrjsterry said:
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Is that a long winded way of saying that we appear to have learnt that a degree in history doesn't seem to be worth a w@nk?pinno said:
You sound like our mate Donnie across the water.rick_chasey said:Ok you lot since I obviously didn’t make it clear.
Plenty of things have had serious effects on history.
Loads. Seriously. Go study it. It’s loads.
How do you know?rick_chasey said:And sure, she was very important and significant.
We were talking about the relevancy of Thatcher and her continuing influence.rick_chasey said:
For Churchill it’s obvious; a lot of folk have not gotten over winning the war, even if they were born well after the fact. They’re grasping for some kind of relevance for the U.K. in the world order.
No, she shapes our lives now.rick_chasey said:For Thatcher it’s partly to do with the fact she shaped *their* lives. She came around a time that there was a lot of change anyway around the world.
That is utterly bizarre.rick_chasey said:But it’s weird that people talk about modern politics with people who were born well after the fact...
Colston - he's history, nothing more.rick_chasey said:She’s history and nothing more.
To 'move on' ?! Are we in some sort of mourning? I am not. I have an ambivalence towards her. We 'oldies' (if I can be called an 'oldie' ha ha), witnessed the changes. We are seemingly more aware of what the current landscape is like because we have the 'before' pic and the 'after' pic. You only have the 'after' pic and you seem to have little idea of how we got here - unless by some long passed historical event/reference. Only, some convenient compartmentalisation of facts, a historical pick and mix to suit the argument; the agenda of injustice, discrimination, racism. I am in no way diminishing those issues but you cannot ignore the canvas and the background on which it was created. You cannot omit significant periods in history which are relevant to today.rick_chasey said:There been 40 years of opportunities to move on from what she’s done.
How can you talk about statues, slavery and Empire as having greater importance than the most significant political period in the last 50 years?! More, how can you be so dismissive over that period of time when it has so much to do with the UK today?
Remember this:
None of the above is relevant?pinno said:
80's battles that shaped Employment law, Union rules, Councils, our relationship with the EU, our Nuclear capabilities, tenancy agreements, Council tax (Poll tax), PFI's, privatization, the Housing act, deregulation, the Education reform act 1988, the Anglo-Irish agreement...
.
History is linear, not some concatenated store where you pick x, y and z off the shelf to create a picture conducive to what patchwork quilt that you want to assemble. 2 -
From previous page.rjsterry said:Funny how neither Stevo nor Bally ever bring up Anthony Eden.
I suppose I could be considered an oldie. I have referenced the great lady quite a few times on this forum to get a rise out of lefties and I have rarely been disappointed.
Again, she delivers.
1 -
ballysmate said:
From previous page.rjsterry said:Funny how neither Stevo nor Bally ever bring up Anthony Eden.
I suppose I could be considered an oldie. I have referenced the great lady quite a few times on this forum to get a rise out of lefties and I have rarely been disappointed.
Again, she delivers.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Indeed, yet up you pop every time they are mentioned. I'm intrigued, given your views on European integration and the importance of winning elections that you pick out Churchill for praise. Also, given we are now 4 Conservative PMs on from Thatcher, it's rather unflattering to them.Stevo_666 said:1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0
