29 May 2021
Well, this week I again beat John Rentoul. He scored 6/10, I scored 7/10. The questions to which I did not know the answers were questions 1, 8, and 10.
30 May 2021
True…(though Cummings was right about the stable of incompetents now posing as a government)…https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/08/10/les-eminences-grises-of-dystopia/; https://ianrobertmillard.org/2020/01/03/dominic-cummings-a-government-of-dystopia-and-lunacy-posing-as-genius/.
As to Vietnam, the war could only have been won by the South (with American help) had there been a massive ground invasion of the North, with the attendant risk of superpower non-proxy conflict. There were Soviet fighter pilots actually on service in North Vietnam (I met one myself in 1996).
Whether that sort of ground invasion of North Vietnam would have succeeded long-term is of course doubtful (cf. Afghanistan and Iraq in the post-1989 era). In the end, war is a method of achieving political goals (in most cases). Peace is usually achieved via political consensus or victory.
This is pretty bad news for Labour, though unsurprising if you think, like me, that Labour now has no reason to exist except as a rather niche party, one for blacks, browns, and some of those who work in the public sector.
I am not yet ready to blog about Batley and Spen, the by-election for which is set down for 1 July 2021. If Labour loses, at it did at Hartlepool recently, Starmer is probably a “dead man walking”, politically.
At the moment, I incline to the view that Batley will be an uphill struggle for Labour, bearing in mind that George Galloway (under aegis of “Workers’ Party”), and the Yorkshire Party, are both standing. Galloway is rather a busted flush, but still has his supporters. The Yorkshire Party seems to have support as well. Those two together will probably get about 5%, which might make the difference between Labour holding on or not.
The Labour vote there has been declining since the rigged by-election of 2016 (in which Labour was not opposed by the other System parties).
The “right royal” circus
I find this all hilarious. Harry is now effectively a critic of the whole “right royal” circus, yet he himself is of course a major recipient and beneficiary of it. After all, take away the “royal prince” thing, and what is Harry? A youngish man (37 this September) who only became an Army officer because he was “helped”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Harry,_Duke_of_Sussex#Education, and who would have had no chance of high rank based on merit (he held the rank of Captain at the end of his active service).
Indeed, without his birth privilege, Harry would probably have drifted into some line such as car salesman, Hooray Henry estate agency, or similar.
I doubt that Netflix etc would take any interest in him at all were he not supposedly “royal”…
Actually, thinking about Harry’s “help” in passing exams at Eton (he ended up with two “A” levels, a “B” in Art, and a “D” in Geography), I am reminded of a story I heard a long time ago (about 1981) about a similar “royal” educational straggler.
The young lady in question was a relative of the Queen who struggled academically. She needed intensive personal tuition in languages in order to gain entrance to an Oxford college. This was in the late 1970s, as I understand it. The college in question had bent over backwards to accommodate the Palace, but insisted on the young lady having the special private tuition if they were going to offer her a place.
In the end, she was accepted by that Oxford college, after having been worked on for weeks, perhaps months, by an elderly White Russian resident in London. All under cloak of secrecy, but of course there are no secrets, as such, just levels of secrecy.
“President Macron has just welcomed to the Elysée two YouTubers called Carlito and McFly, both of whom dressed down for the occasion with one appearing to have a tea cosy on his head. The pair are all the rage among that section of society who get their kicks on YouTube, although despite their adolescent antics Carlito and McFly are actually a couple of middle-class men in their mid-thirties.
What followed was excruciating, what one conservative commentator described as ’36 minutes of soft barbarism… [which] erodes the verticality of power and deconstructs the state’. All of which begs the question: what was Macron thinking in inviting Carlito and McFly into his palace?
To win the youth vote, perhaps? A poll last month suggested that the 25 to 34-year-old demographic is more inclined to vote for Marine Le Pen in next year’s presidential election than for Macron. But they would not have been won over by what they saw, a president ill-at-ease in his suit and tie, a fixed grin on his face as he exchanged wooden banter with two lowbrow clowns.
There is a feeling among the French I speak to that the country is nearing a tipping point and that voters, alone in the booth, might decide that with no dignified politicians left, they might as well give Le Pen a go.” [The Spectator]
My take from early 2019, examining Macron’s background in more detail than I have seen in most places: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2019/01/09/on-recent-events-in-france/
More tweets seen
As in the example of Alison Chabloz. People should stop and think what kind of tyranny imprisons people for singing satirical songs, or for posting a few cartoons about Jews or others.
The System and its msm handmaidens may not have thought through what might happen down the line if the British people are denied any peaceful political expression. Even the Soviet tyranny was toppled in the end, even the Albanian tyranny was toppled in the end, even the Romanian tyranny was toppled in the end. Our Ceaucescus may look different, but they too exist.
By force, hath overcome but half his foe.” [Milton, Paradise Lost].
Europe! Reflect on the disaster that is unfolding in front of your very eyes! Even those 2019 figures are well out of date; and those statistics do not include births to non-European mothers themselves born in Europe (esp. applies to UK).
Look at Switzerland! Austria! Germany! Sweden! This is a combination of madness, an ethno-cultural death wish (fostered by the “occupied” msm), and a transnational conspiracy.
Late tweets seen
I myself never use the outdated “Left”/”Right” terminology unless qualified or in jest, but Hitchens’ basic view is correct. The only thing he has left out is the ubiquitous and malign Jewish influence on our society and its culture.