Jump to content

God I hate the Guardian


????

Recommended Posts

Well I don't have any pride in a history stained by the proceeds of slavery, which incidentally paid for many of the grand buildings we so gleefully sell to tourists.


Not a great post DJKQ - kneejerk perhaps?: It is, of course, the same shared British history that lead the world in abolishing the established slave trade. The peak of Britain's involvement in the slave trade was probably the 17th & 18th centuries - and while Liverpool and Bristol undoubtedly spent on grand buildings - much of the tourist grabbing grand building took place outside this period. Tower of London, Hadrian's Wall, Stonehenge, Westminster Cathedral anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree that it applies everywhere, but just because it does, doesn't make it alright or forgiveable. Nor do I hold any value to the idea that after using the slave trade we were the ones to abolish it...oh well done us! Of course making people work long hours in factories and mines for peacemeal (and making barely enough to feed themselves and their families for a day) while the speculators got rich is not a form of slavery either is it? That went on until the early 20th century.


It is what it is - a stained past with many things to be proud of but equally many things to be ashamed of. The wealth of this country historically was made on the backs of ordinary people who were worked to death and not all of them came from the colonies as slaves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wealth of every country historically was made off the backs of ordinary people who were worked to death etc.


We're still wearing clothes and using smart phones built by slaves and indentured labour.


Its very ubiquity makes it an illogical choice as a stick with which to beat the British.


Incidentally, I don't really understand what this attack on Guardian readers is all about. Toynbee is just one of many columnists, and they don't always reflect the paper's politics. Monbiot is pro-nuclear for example, but the paper is not.


I read the Guardian, but thought the Royal Wedding was a terrific event.


Assuming the Guardian or it's readers all fit into a particular mould is a prejudice worthy of the Daily Mail? ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People read the Guardian for a number of reasons. Take Quids and Snorky for example. They represent the portion of its readership who click through the pages as a masochistic exercise which fuels misanthropic rants.


They?re an under-recognised yet socially important market

Link to comment
Share on other sites

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> .....what a load of cock from Polly Tonybee once

> more

>

> ...Hampstead and your lefty establishment mates

> are not the Voice of the People Polly



Boring.....apart from the notion the Blair held back the forces of conservatism, considering he was the best 'unelected' Conservative we have had in the post in years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The TV listings are much better in Saturday's Daily Mail than they are in Saturday's Guardian.


And there is a much better puzzle section (in the Daily Mail that is).


But don't ask me to take either tablet seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Take it with a pinch of salt.


It is not the Daily Hate, the only truly abhorrent daily. The Express would love to be but nobody reads it. Go out to Bromley and they will say "Oh I read it in the Mail so it must be true" I dunno anyone who says I read it in the Grauniad so it must be true. May get a - did you read that interesting/uninteresting article.


I am impresssed, I only found this thread by mistake but my fans are calling for me, thanks Frankito.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The most recent one did, despite the council making it very difficult for anyone to object (which interestingly they were forced to change for the CPZ consultation and look how that went for them). I will dig out the responses for you when I have more time so you can enlighten yourself.   Ha ha...the language used by councils when they see the results of a consultation and need an out to ignore the views of locals...;-) Did you not notice how this only became a thing once the consultation had been run....one wonders why!? Earl you can bluster all you like but you cannot ignore the fact the council closed the junction to emergency services and put lives at risk and resisted all calls (from the emergency services) to open it for them. Surely you can't defend that  or are you willingly turning a blind eye to that too? Ha ha, which kind of begs the question then why so many of you get so vexed by One Dulwich? Surely you could compartmentalise their work if the above was true? I suspect it has a lot to do with the accountability that they are forcing and the fact some don't like it.
    • I believe around 57% of the 5,538 people who were part of the self selecting sample making up the original consultation, opposed the LTN. So just over 3,000 people. This was around 3 years ago now. I think there’s something like 40,000+ living across se22 and SE21 🤷‍♂️  The LTN is a minority interest at best. Whilst it’s an obsession for a small number on the transport thread who strongly oppose it, I suspect most locals quietly approve of the improvements made to that junction. …and we still haven’t heard who has supposedly been pressurising the emergency services and how (are we seriously going with the far left / the commies)? Is anyone willing to stand up and support the 'One' claim that people are partially covering their plates and driving through the filters due to inadequate signage? Again, it all sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. Feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes.
    • Okay Earl, of those 'consulted' how many voices were in favour of the junction and how many against? Were there more responses in favour or more against? This local junction change is being driven by Southwark Labour Councillors- not as you assert by Central Govt. Also, if consultations are so irrelevant as indicators of meaningful local support in the way you seem to imply, why do organisations like Southwark Cyclists constantly ask their members to respond to all and any consultation on LTN's and CPZ's?  
    • You could apply the same argument to any kind of penalty as an effective deterrent.  Better than doing nothing. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...