 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
History Forum / General / British History / May 2004Russian Support For The 80s Miners' Strikes
Does anyone know anything about NUM ties with the Soviet Union and Russian support to the strikers in any form? > Does anyone know anything about NUM ties with the Soviet Union and > Russian support to the strikers in any form? If you do a search make sure you can weed out the black propaganda placed there with my money by my government without my consent and outside the law.  SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines > > Does anyone know anything about NUM ties with the Soviet Union and > > Russian support to the strikers in any form? > > If you do a search make sure you can weed out the black propaganda placed > there with my money by my government without my consent and outside the > law. Scargill received money from Colonel Gaddafi, possible £150,000, also a sum from the miners union of Soviet controlled Afghanistan. He also received aid from the Soviet miners union, Maggie confronted Gorbachev with this, which he of course denied all knowledge of. Documentary evidence has since surfaced that suggest he knew full well and was one of those who authorised it. "The Labour Party is the party which supports every strike, no matter what its pretext, no matter how damaging. But above all, it is the Labour Party's support for striking miners against the working miners which totally destroys all credibility for its claim to represent the true interests of working people in this country." Saint Maggie Your silence on the DUM was deafening John. Jamie > Your silence on the DUM was deafening John. Are we talking about those Spencerist blackleg sh.ts from Nottingham here. The people who made class treason a way of life, they couldn't see a back without stabbing it. And yes, 'Spencerist' is the same bunch as the airhead bitch who married Jug Ears. However in Maggie they found someone more treacherous than they were, she did for 'em all... SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > Are we talking about those Spencerist blackleg sh.ts from Nottingham here. > > The people who made class treason a way of life, they couldn't see a back > without stabbing it. How can there be such a thing as "class treason" when "class" is a construct and even those who recognize themselves as being members of a particular "class" owe it no allegiance? -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) > > Are we talking about those Spencerist blackleg sh.ts from Nottingham here. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and even those who recognize themselves as being members of a particular > "class" owe it no allegiance? Class may be a construct. Nethertheless the miners were undoubtedly a single social unit, and considered themselves so unified. The betrayal of the Spencerist Nottinghamshire miners was as predictable as it was inevitable. Both their betrayal of the rest of the NUM and the subsequent betrayal of them by the Tories. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government >>>Are we talking about those Spencerist blackleg sh.ts from Nottingham > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Nethertheless the miners were undoubtedly a single social unit, and > considered themselves so unified. Rubbish. The miners were never a single social unit. > The betrayal of the Spencerist Nottinghamshire miners was as predictable as > it was inevitable. > > Both their betrayal of the rest of the NUM and the subsequent betrayal of > them by the Tories. That is quite the most bizarre interpretation o events that I've ever heard. Were you ever a miner? Fran > > Your silence on the DUM was deafening John. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And yes, 'Spencerist' is the same bunch as the airhead bitch who married > Jug Ears. So the Nottingham and Derbyshire miners went to work in support of Princess Di, nothing to do with Scargill trying to railroad them into a strike without allowing them a say in a national ballot. > However in Maggie they found someone more treacherous than they were, she > did for 'em all... Nope, Gormley and then Scargill signed the death warrant for the miners. Heseltine closed the DUM pits, most Tories were furious with Tarzan for this, the Chairman of the 1922 Committee called it "totally unacceptable". Jamie > > "Vaughan Sanders" <jamie@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in > message [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > Princess Di, nothing to do with Scargill trying to railroad them into a > strike without allowing them a say in a national ballot. Like I said 'Spencerist'. Those pits were owned by the Spencer family before nationalisation and always were a hotbed of anti-union activists. What ever happened to 'Silver Birch'? > Nope, Gormley and then Scargill signed the death warrant for the miners. > Heseltine closed the DUM pits, most Tories were furious with Tarzan for > this, the Chairman of the 1922 Committee called it "totally > unacceptable". That's what happened to 'Silver Birch' and his mates, sacked for loyalty... You couldn't make this stuff up, nobody would believe even Tories could be that duplicitous. As Norman Tebbit said: 'Nobody with a conscience ever voted Tory'. You can count on the Tories to stab their supporters who aren't rich in the back after they've won just about anything. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > > "Vaughan Sanders" <jamie@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in > > message [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > You can count on the Tories to stab their supporters who aren't rich in the > back after they've won just about anything. Well, Heseltine and Major didn't turn up to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the *Greatest Day in British History* did they? Jamie > > Your silence on the DUM was deafening John. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords > is no basis for a system of government [lights] Did anyone listen to the Radio 4 play on the miners' strike? While it is hard to separate fact from fiction, the (fact) tactic used by the NUM of avoiding the national secret ballot for strike action (as laid down in the law) by getting each area to vote individually and end up with a full scale strike got a large role. That of course allowed the Nottinghamshire miners to vote according to their views and not in line with the national executive's preconceptions. That doesn't make them "class traitors". [/lights] > Did anyone listen to the Radio 4 play on the miners' strike? While it is > hard to separate fact from fiction, the (fact) tactic used by the NUM of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to vote according to their views and not in line with the national > executive's preconceptions. That doesn't make them "class traitors". The means by which the miners were destroyed isn't actually what's important in a historical sense. What's important is that they were destroyed. If it was Scargill and his 'not quite legal' strike or the Tory government with their dubious means of combating the strike doesn't actually matter, except trying to understand why it happened. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > Did anyone listen to the Radio 4 play on the miners' strike? While it is > > hard to separate fact from fiction, the (fact) tactic used by the NUM of [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > -- > William Black [lights] Why it happened? Economic, educational and social reasons. Coal too expensive and too pollutant, too many towns with only one industry, people preferring the dangerous trip down the pit because that's what their fathers did, it paid enough to keep you living in the same style as your grandfather and it was a no-brain choice, global application of economic policies without respect for local variations, the British disease of chronic underinvestment in plant, growth of the financial services sector in London, and so on back into the mists of time. A pedantic point: the miners weren't destroyed. The mining industry was closed down. See Belgium for an alternative method of closing down a mining industry. [/lights] "William Black" wrote in message > The people who made class treason a way of life...... Sir William, I don't comprehend this British class system you refer to. You are obviously intelligent, properly educated without having become a woolly headed intellectual, and served as an army officer. Here that would make you solidly upper-middle class and a member of the possessing class with its political interests. Why would you identify with the laboring or 'blue collar classes? Did you inherit it or choose it for political reasons? From what I can see British society has been sufficiently fluid for long enough to have done away with any real or functional social castes much like we have. Maggie and Major are clearly not 'lairds' of the old aristocracy. -the Troll "Hippo" is roundly confused again. This time he has "Buffaloed" himself. Black has never served in the British army -- much less as a commissioned officer. Black brags about his avoidance of military service and has contempt for many who have served. 'Nuff Said. D. Spencer Hines Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor | "William Black" wrote in message | [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | have. Maggie and Major are clearly not 'lairds' of the old aristocracy. -the | Troll >"William Black" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >to have done away with any real or functional social castes much like we >have. Maggie and Major are clearly not 'lairds' of the old aristocracy. I suspect that William is trying to wind you up. The attitudes he is expressing (or parodying?) here are almost, though not entirely, extinct. Personally, I identify with Keynes's comment on "class war". He said something like "I can be influenced by appeals to my sense of justice, but any 'class war' will find me on the side of the educated bourgeoisie". SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". "Don Aitken" wrote in message > >"William Black" wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > justice, but any 'class war' will find me on the side of the educated > bourgeoisie". I thought it must be that way by now in Britain but you wouldn't know that by reading this NG. Here the 'class warfare' dogma of Marxism never took hold since we have never been a caste society and what 'proletariat' there was was immeasurably better off than the agrarian alternatives and everyone had the sense to understand it. -the Troll > "Don Aitken" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > woolly > > >headed intellectual, and served as an army officer. This didn't make it onto my server. I'm afraid I never served in any army, or indeed, any military service, although I do work with soldiers to some extent. Neither is my education terribly good or at a level that could be described as 'higher', except for some management stuff I did a couple of years ago at the local 'University College'. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government "William Black" wrote in message > "hippo" wrote in message > > "Don Aitken" wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > as 'higher', except for some management stuff I did a couple of years ago > at the local 'University College'. I wasn't referring to 'formal' education. I certainly learned more outside of University than in one as has anyone who didn't stop reading at twenty-one years of age. Your education is betrayed by the way you use the language and form logical argument. Neither is learned in a coal mine. What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has not been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why must miners consider themselves classed and typed and act uniformly just because they do the same job? -the Troll > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has > not been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why > must miners consider themselves classed and typed and act uniformly just > because they do the same job? Britain is still very much a class-bound society. There isn't the slightest shadow of a doubt that I am working class of working class stock despite having a university education, owning my own home, being a teacher, and director of a company - and technically I even went to a Public School! Class in the UK *can* be described in terms of education and/or income but neither are accepted as '*real*' descriptions of what class actually is all about. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines "John Cartmell" wrote in message > In article hippo wrote: > > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has > > not been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > neither are accepted as '*real*' descriptions of what class actually is all > about. Why? It makes no sense at a time when rock stars and one-time housewives are given titles and the old nobility is forced to take land management and tourism at university to pay the electric bills or have already died out from debauchery induced liver ailments. Our old families here, those whose ancestors came over before 1650 or were otherwise important, have the same choices. They can sit around sipping tea in crumbling old houses and complain or get out and rebuild as I have had to do. They have no value outside of their own very small and useless circles. -the Troll > "John Cartmell" wrote in message > > In article hippo wrote: > > > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which > > > has not been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > but neither are accepted as '*real*' descriptions of what class > > actually is all about. > Why? It makes no sense at a time when rock stars and one-time housewives > are given titles and the old nobility is forced to take land management > and tourism at university to pay the electric bills [Snip] I don't know. Is the simple (anything under 25,000 words!) answer. Rock Stars and footballers do *not* change class no matter how rich they become or whatever titles they hold. Baroness Thatcher remains very lower middle class (and jumped-up at that!) and Posh&Becks aren't. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines > I don't know. Is the simple (anything under 25,000 words!) answer. Rock > Stars and footballers do *not* change class no matter how rich they become > or whatever titles they hold. Baroness Thatcher remains very lower middle > class (and jumped-up at that!) and Posh&Becks aren't. But their children will go to Eaton and Harrow and live on their vast country estates and become part of 'the great and the good'. That's how it works, it's why the English gentry never dies out, it just reinvents itself every couple of generations. The best example is the Dukes of Northumberland, family name Percy, except two hundred years ago their name was Johnson and they bought the title and name from railway profits. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.. "John Cartmell" wrote in message > In article hippo wrote: > > > > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which > > > > has not been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > or whatever titles they hold. Baroness Thatcher remains very lower middle > class (and jumped-up at that!) and Posh&Becks aren't. Then the society is not class bound since class does not determine upward mobility, access to wealth, participation in government, entry to the higher education system, management, or anything else important. Gents clubs and the cocktail circuit are not what they once were. Good old Capitalism has been undermining hereditary systems since the early Middle Ages and the beginnings of urbanization. -the Troll > "John Cartmell" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > complain or get out and rebuild as I have had to do. They have no value > outside of their own very small and useless circles. -the Troll Such a proletarian discussion is rather beneath one. :-)) Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > "John Cartmell" wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Such a proletarian discussion is rather beneath one. :-)) Chortle, how can one determine one's social status since none of you guys can agree on either how it is determined or how important it is today. At the turn of the century here it was common to dig up old patents of nobility, register coats of arms, search back to an ancient ancestor so as to join organizations like the Cincinnati or Mayflower bunch. Today it is nothing but a curiosity which bores everyone to tears. It is fun finding one is Welsh in the main line and that the old house is still standing but nothing to crow about so as to increase social status. -the Troll > "a.spencer3" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > is Welsh in the main line and that the old house is still standing but > nothing to crow about so as to increase social status. -the Troll We just *know* my dear fellow, it's far beyond your bits of paper and comprehension. The Mayflower is mere noveau arrivee and an irrelevance. And my Welsh pile is bigger and older than your Welsh pile anyway! Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > > Such a proletarian discussion is rather beneath one. :-)) > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > comprehension. The Mayflower is mere noveau arrivee and an irrelevance. > And my Welsh pile is bigger and older than your Welsh pile anyway! We cheat by moving the clock ahead and discount the original inhabitants as stage props. Quite by accident I happen to have a thousand pages of documents handy on the history of the old Welsh pile. The consensus seems to be that it was begun in the early fourteenth century. Amusingly one of the earlier ancestor's jobs was to seize the goods of Hugh le Despenser in Glamorgan in 1330, presumably by order of the Earl of Pembroke, his uncle by marriage. It only makes sense that the shifty lot I am descended from would stay one step ahead of the law by skulking across the pond several centuries later. -the Troll > "a.spencer3" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > stay one step ahead of the law by skulking across the pond several centuries > later. -the Troll Oh dear. My darling chap, just please refer to: http://www.castlewales.com/caerphil.html Used to play in and around it a lot as a kid. Now I have to bloody well pay to get in! That's what a proper house looks like, not your scruffy little town place - rented from those New Mexico ruffians, wasn't it? Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > We cheat by moving the clock ahead and discount the original inhabitants > as [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > That's what a proper house looks like, not your scruffy little town place - > rented from those New Mexico ruffians, wasn't it? Hmmmm, bit tatty these days. In contrast St. Donats has been unsympathetically restored into a college. How the once-mighty have fallen in state. I have nothing whatever to do with mission Churches in Texas. -the Troll > "a.spencer3" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > in state. I have nothing whatever to do with mission Churches in Texas. -the > Troll Yeh, the wife keeps telling me to paint it up a bit. Thought your St. Donat's Stradling landlords had to do your townhouse for you? (Any web pics?). Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > > That's what a proper house looks like, not your scruffy little town > > place - [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > you? > (Any web pics?). http://www.llantwitmajorvale.co.uk/history/old_house2.htm Click on the thumbnail of 'great house'. Aside from the road winding around it looks pretty grand if not quite a castle. I intend to visit it next year in May......a pilgrimage of sorts to visit the gravesites of the ancient forbearers before I become one of them myself. -the Troll > "a.spencer3" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > in May......a pilgrimage of sorts to visit the gravesites of the ancient > forbearers before I become one of them myself. -the Troll Nice - mainly Tudor? Newsflash - I'll be in Caerphilly tomorrow (Thursday). First visit to the pile in some 10 years. Must admit I'm looking forward to it, even if the reason for the visit is the inevitable family funeral! Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > > Yeh, the wife keeps telling me to paint it up a bit. > > > Thought your St. Donat's Stradling landlords had to do your townhouse [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > pile in some 10 years. Must admit I'm looking forward to it, even if the > reason for the visit is the inevitable family funeral! The place was built about 1600 which would make it Tudor. The idea of walking in the actual steps of the forbearers is immensely appealing especially for us who have to travel so far. The family is unusual since it was mostly native Welsh and connected straight through to the ancient Welsh king lists of Glamorgan and clas clergy of Llandaff, likely even to St. Iltid himself, but which somehow managed to maintain itself and become wealthy in the midst of Norman South Wales. Iltid is a given name used by the family until the 16th century usually seen in its Latin form 'Iltutus'. I suppose your family is Norman. Sorry about the reason but I envy you your ability to hop in the car and drive right down to ancestor country. I'll be gone too for several days. One of the kids is graduating from our parachute school at Fort Benning on Friday and another from a military 'public' high school in Camden on Sunday. The chances are I will be driving over a lot more ground than you will. -the Troll > > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has > > not been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > neither are accepted as '*real*' descriptions of what class actually is all > about. Well John, you are certainly a classic class-warrior of the Old-Lab Dinosaur variety, but you don't convince me on your working class claim. What days work have you ever done that would qualify you for this esteemed title?, I think, just like Tony Benn, you are a fraud with delusions of grandeur. Me, I would retire from the working class tomorrow if I could, little chance of that in Loony Toon land is there? Btw, you don't appear to have answered my question on the DUM, do you consider these miners working-class? Jamie Ps, the phone has been kaput for a few days, report a fault to BT and you end up spending a fortune talking to India on a mobile. The engineer must have missed his plane, considering the time it took to get it repaired, don't tell me, this was Maggie's fault as well. > you don't convince me on your working class claim. What days work have > you ever done that would qualify you for this esteemed title? What would convince you? Petrol pump attendant? Brewery labourer? Shop assistant? Wallpaper mnfs labourer? Clerk? Salesman? Designer? Supplementary Benefits Officer? Teacher? Editor? Market trader? Regional Organiser (students)? Company director? IT support? Employment Officer? Not exhaustive and not in any particular order. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines > > you don't convince me on your working class claim. What days work have > > you ever done that would qualify you for this esteemed title? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Not exhaustive and not in any particular order. Part time Uni jobs only get about half a brownie point John dear boy. Btw, I don't make the rules on your planet, but I was listening to man who does just the other day. You know one of the old duffers who masquerades as an MP from your part of the world, and assumes he is an authority on your mythical working class. Joe Ashton I think was his name, MP for Barnsleydale or somewhere, you know, the sort of place where the mediaeval archers were social workers rather than thieving poachers. Making a living with your hands was a must apparently, a time served apprentice moved you up the pecking order, and any official union position moved you right up the scale. According to him I was almost Royalty :-)) but I did get the feeling that UCAT didn't quite have the street cred of the Wheel-tappers and Shunters union Lets see if we can get you some more brownie points to move you off the bottom rung. Pet Whippet by any chance?, Pigeon loft in the back garden would be good, but might upset the Tory neighbours, how about a council allotment? In my time John I have had all sorts carry the hod for me, from drunken Paddies to qualified Barristers. The one who is doing it at the moment is a multi millionaire and has had his bus pass for some time now, how would you class him? I notice I still can't draw your opinion on the DUM, tut tut, you will never make it to working class status without holding an opinion on everything. Jamie That DOES seem to be the single most important qualification for "working class" status. A grossly UNINFORMED opinion preferably ---- something to flaunt drunkenly at the pub. DSH [...] | I notice I still can't draw your opinion on the DUM, tut tut, you will | never make it to working class status without holding an opinion on | everything. | | Jamie > That DOES seem to be the single most important qualification for > "working class" status. > > A grossly UNINFORMED opinion preferably ---- something to flaunt > drunkenly at the pub. You seem to be the expert. Teach us more. Surreyman > You know one of the old duffers who > masquerades as an MP from your part of the world, and assumes he is an [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > apprentice moved you up the pecking order, and any official union > position moved you right up the scale. The last Labour MP who was a time served apprentice was Ian Mikardo, and he's been dead for a decade or more now. The rest of your article is similar bollocks. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > You know one of the old duffers who > > masquerades as an MP from your part of the world, and assumes he is an [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > The rest of your article is similar bollocks. I thought that was my point, it was certainly the opinion of most of the callers to radio 2 when this subject was aired. Or did you mean the mediaeval archers from your neck of the woods really were social workers? Jamie > Or did you mean the mediaeval archers from your neck of the woods really > were social workers? The medieval archers we actually know about seem to have been respectable townies who joined the town militia. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > Or did you mean the mediaeval archers from your neck of the woods really > > were social workers? > > The medieval archers we actually know about seem to have been respectable > townies who joined the town militia. Well, lets put it this way William, if Robin Hood had known about a *Compound Bow*, there wouldn't have been a lot of *Bambi's* left. Jamie > > "Vaughan Sanders" <jamie@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in > message [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Well, lets put it this way William, if Robin Hood had known about a > *Compound Bow*, there wouldn't have been a lot of *Bambi's* left. So you have evidence that English twelfth century hunting weapons were inadequate in some way? I'd love to see it. What evidence there is seems to suggest that people had absolutely no problem killing deer, they had problems afterwards though... A compound bow has loads of range and power, and there's no evidence at all that they'd be any good at hunting deer in a medieval English forest. Actually the later 'artillery' bow so beloved of medieval historians was probably not a terribly good hunting weapon either, it's far too long to wander around a deciduous forest with. With ranges of around thirty yards or so the most effective weapon was almost certainly one that could shoot an arrow that far with enough power to kill a deer and make as little noise as possible. Something like the shorter bows shown on the Bayeux Tapestry would seem almost ideal. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > > "Vaughan Sanders" <jamie@chalkwell-windsurfing.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in > > message [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > I'd love to see it. Well lets put it this way William, I have a Win&Win Recurve, I shoot against a Compound every week. The Bambi's are in a lot less danger from my Recurve than they are the Compound. Jamie > What evidence there is seems to suggest that people had absolutely no > problem killing deer, they had problems afterwards though... [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Something like the shorter bows shown on the Bayeux Tapestry would seem > almost ideal. > Well lets put it this way William, I have a Win&Win Recurve, I shoot > against a Compound every week. The Bambi's are in a lot less danger from > my Recurve than they are the Compound. That's you, not the bow. Get rid of the orthopaedic bow and buy a proper one made of wood with no sights or metal bits. One bit of string, two bits of wood, three feathers, all the rest is propaganda. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > Well lets put it this way William, I have a Win&Win Recurve, I shoot > > against a Compound every week. The Bambi's are in a lot less danger from [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > One bit of string, two bits of wood, three feathers, all the rest is > propaganda. I do intend to get one, there's no law against having more than one bow is there :-)) I watched someone with a 75 lbs longbow this morning William, a vastly more experienced archer than me. The Bambi's are in far more danger from my 35 lbs orthopaedic bow, I wouldn't have thought there was that much difference in the velocities either, but obviously his wooden arrows are a lot heavier than my carbon darts. A sight on a longbow of this weight would be useless, he was taking up a stance like a weight lifter, he was a big fellow but he would never have held the draw long enough to use a sight. The friend I shoot with has a Compound of 45 lbs, he is only holding about 25 lbs at full draw, he gives me two circles handicap. Jamie > I watched someone with a 75 lbs longbow this morning William, a vastly > more experienced archer than me. The Bambi's are in far more danger from > my 35 lbs orthopaedic bow, I wouldn't have thought there was that much > difference in the velocities either, but obviously his wooden arrows are > a lot heavier than my carbon darts. About four or five times the weight, but your arrows will probably be going an awful lot faster, and probably do as much damage if you put serious arrow heads on them, except you'd need some serious matterials technology to make something light enough not to unballance the arrow that would actually do any damage. It doesn't matter anyway. They're both way over specified for hunting deer. Your bow is too complicated to aim and shoot. His is just too long to take into woodland. The ideal bow for hunting on foot in woodland would be short and very fast with a draw weight of about 35 pounds. Something like those Hungarian bows Eagle Classic Archery import ( http://www.eagleclassicarchery.co.uk/rep.htm ) would be very good. Now all we've got to do is to get the government to allow bow hunting again... > A sight on a longbow of this weight would be useless, he was taking up a > stance like a weight lifter, he was a big fellow but he would never have > held the draw long enough to use a sight. You don't with a real longbow, the 'draw/shoot' action is one single movement. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has not > been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why must > miners consider themselves classed and typed and act uniformly just because > they do the same job? -the Troll Because they are repressed in a way that forced them into a classic 'class struggle'. The only solutions open to their leaders seemed to be the time worn weapons of classical class warfare. Unfortunately their opponents had thrown away the rule book and used the mechanism of the modern technological state, along with the surveillance and police systems of the state along and also its vast array of media manipulation techniques to destroy not the workers but the whole industry. The radical left learned and adapted the new technology to their own ends. This allowed the radical left to win a series of 'physical' victories after the miners strike in the anti-poll tax protests. The more conventional left in the form of 'New Labour' used the communications and technologies themselves, remember the stories about 'control freakery' and beeping pagers in the House of Commons? The anti-globalists who are the new enemies of the vested interests aren't stupid either and use these modern systems themselves. The Internet and the GSM telephone have made everyone equal in a way that before was the province of Colonel Colt. Now everyone has high speed reasonably secure reliable communications, and what's more everyone knows it. The tragedy of the miners is that if they'd waited five years they could have used the technologies as well, their telephones wouldn't have been tapped, their tactical communications would have been as effective as those of the police and security services that fought them and their ability to react would have been as good as the government's. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government "William Black" wrote in message > "hippo" wrote in message > > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has not > > been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why must [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Because they are repressed in a way that forced them into a classic 'class > struggle'. I don't understand that. 'Repressed' means to me they are forced to do the jobs they do and underpaid for it much like medieval serfs. That hasn't been the case in Britain that I know about since doing away with conscription. Government no longer artificially supporting a non-competitive, dangerous, and dirty early Industrial Age industry is hardly repressive. The anti-globalists are wasting their time. The behemoth international corporations have the seed of their own demise already built in as I have explained to you time and again. It is competition which has always done for them in the past and will continue to do so as they become fatter, more complacent, and bound by their own bureaucracies. That's why capitalism works. -the Troll > "William Black" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Government no longer artificially supporting a non-competitive, dangerous, > and dirty early Industrial Age industry is hardly repressive. Because the mine owners built the housing and inculcated a community spirit/extended family system of a peculiar type that mitigated against people leaving home. For example in many small mining communities the only social amenities were those provided by the colliery and recruitment agencies only advertised mining jobs. It was a clever trap, work in the mine and you'll have a house and social facilities, work elsewhere and move away and leave your extended family, from a place where extended family was the only form of pre school child care that was available and you didn't know what was available elsewhere... SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government "William Black" wrote in message > "hippo" wrote in message > > "William Black" wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > from a place where extended family was the only form of pre school child > care that was available and you didn't know what was available elsewhere... I understand exactly what you are saying. The mine owners and early industrialists over here did the same thing for the same reasons and with the same result. Krupp was notorious for employee paternalism even to setting up car dealerships exclusively for his people which hired their wives and sold at cheap prices. Ford did much the same. Early industrial societies were poorly educated and immobile with few options but the sea or return to agriculture. The opposite is true today. Paternalism is wrong and debilitating whether practiced by individuals, industries, or governments. Saying that I have to admit to having run an employee oriented company. I did it as a reaction against earlier of my own bosses who didn't give a damn. It is hard to get the balance right. Bosses are human too. -the Troll > > "William Black" wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > from a place where extended family was the only form of pre school child > care that was available and you didn't know what was available elsewhere... It was that but much more. The communities then also developed their own massive self-support social system that I've never experienced elsewhere - I'm talking of Welsh mining here - maybe it was similar in mining communities elsewhere ... other industrial communities elsewhere? But I cannot imagine a more close-knit self-support and, in its own way, wonderfully happy community than the Valley mining people that I knew (this was post-private days). The sometimes scoffed chapel/choir society may well have had a vicious, tragic and lethal side but, within its context, produced a society to which I always looked forward to returning. It's disappeared now, of course. The remnants are there and retained in cases (chapel, male voice choirs, etc.) but the whole society that formed and supported them is totally diluted. One cannot regret the disappearance of the vicious work life that was the root, but I regret the loss of the accompanying society. It is poignant to me at the moment, and of no interest to anyone else here (as are many of my posts, no doubt!) but this coming Friday I have to travel down to Swansea for the funeral of the last of my relatives who worked in the mines. My 90-year-old mother will be with us. She, of course, lived through the whole thing, from before the Strike and onwards. But perhaps the saving grace is that I know that after the chapel funeral, there will be a wonderful reunion of many loved relatives and several hours of the most glorious singing one can hear anywhere in the world. (Start of next discussion - at least it's OT for brit. hist.!!!!) I have to confess, despite the sadness of the occasion, that I cannot help but very much look forward to the whole thing. Gawd, I'm part of folklore! Surreyman > "William Black" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > miners consider themselves classed and typed and act uniformly just because > they do the same job? -the Troll Can I please Suggest that you read Corelli Barnett's Pride and Fall series, which details the working class mentality in Britain well. I see this in my grandparent's generation, they are working class and know their place. "Representative Trantis" wrote in message > "hippo" wrote in message > > What I asked was how one classes ones self in modern Britain which has not > > been a classed society in the caste sense for a very long time. Why must [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > which details the working class mentality in Britain well. I see this in my > grandparent's generation, they are working class and know their place. I probably don't have to having seen it here in my own youth and amongst more recent immigrants from Latin countries which still have peasant classes. That's then, this is now. Eisenhower was born in a mid-west farm shack and I think Ms Thatcher came from solidly middle class stock. How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not been from the upper classes? -the Troll > How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not > been from the upper classes? What do you mean - since Churchill? Churchill was certainly not upper-class - he was half-colonial. SignatureJohn Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 Qercus magazine & FD Games www.finnybank.com www.acornuser.com Qercus - a fusion of Acorn Publisher & Acorn User magazines > > How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not > > been from the upper classes? > > What do you mean - since Churchill? Churchill was certainly not upper-class > - he was half-colonial. He may well have been, but he was born at Blenheim into that odd extended family that has always lived there. He was an aristo through and through, the aristocracy have always been prepared to bed rich or pretty (or both) girls no matter what their origin. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government >> > How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not >> > been from the upper classes? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >He was an aristo through and through, the aristocracy have always been >prepared to bed rich or pretty (or both) girls no matter what their origin. Indeed, he was at one time heir presumptive to the Marlborough dukedom. There is a story that another member of the family urged the then duke to hurry up and procreate, since "it would never do for that little upstart Winston to become duke". I think the "upstart" tag related to his age, rather than his American ancestry; the daughters of American millionaires had been marrying into the higher reaches of the British aristocracy for a couple of generations by then (three successive dukes of Marlborough married them), but the upper class does not trust anyone who becomes nationally famous before the age of thirty, especially if they do it largely by writing for the newspapers. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". Do you have some details on that? DSH | Indeed, he was at one time heir presumptive to the Marlborough | dukedom. There is a story that another member of the family urged the | then duke to hurry up and procreate, since "it would never do for that | little upstart Winston to become duke."... | Don Aitken >| Indeed, he was at one time heir presumptive to the Marlborough >| dukedom. There is a story that another member of the family urged the >| then duke to hurry up and procreate, since "it would never do for that >| little upstart Winston to become duke."... >Do you have some details on that? Checking, I see that it comes from "The Glitter and the Gold", the memoirs (written many years later) of Consuelo Vanderbilt Balsan, wife of the 9th duke and mother of the tenth. Her mother in law, the dowager Duchess, on meeting her for the first time, is reported to have greeted her thus: "Your first duty is to have a child, and it must be a son, because it would be intolerable to have that little upstart Winston become Duke. Are you in the family way?" As quoted by Masters, "The Dukes". SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". > > > How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not > > > been from the upper classes? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > He was an aristo through and through, the aristocracy have always been > prepared to bed rich or pretty (or both) girls no matter what their origin. For Gawd's sake, he was the eldest son of Lord Randolph (3rd. son of the Duke). Of course he was 'aristo', and brung up as such, whether or whenever he hoped we'd forget the fact! Surreyman OF COURSE Winston was an aristo. He was the very best sort the Emerald Isles produce ---- bar none. Only an ignorant pogue could think otherwise. Pogue [Alan] Spencer, of Horsell Village, gets one right. Well, even a blind marmot occasionally digs up a corncob. DSH | > > > How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have | not [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] | | Surreyman > OF COURSE Winston was an aristo. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Well, even a blind marmot occasionally digs up a corncob. Oirish, was he? Surreyman > OF COURSE Winston was an aristo. > > He was the very best sort the Emerald Isles produce ---- bar none. He was Irish? Nope. They are ALL Emerald Isles in my book -- not just Ireland. I said ISLES -- not ISLE. "Sceptered Isles" or some variant is very pogueish and declasse. Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum. DSH | > OF COURSE Winston was an aristo. | > | > He was the very best sort the Emerald Isles produce ---- bar none. | | He was Irish? > Nope. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > "Sceptered Isles" or some variant is very pogueish and declasse. ahhhh, rewriting history and geography now. OK everone, Hines has spoken, the UK is now officially the Emerald Isles > Nope. > > They are ALL Emerald Isles in my book -- not just Ireland. > > I said ISLES -- not ISLE. Oh dear, he can't even slide out of that one with any class. Surreyman >> Nope. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Oh dear, he can't even slide out of that one with any class. It's all in the game for him. He wants someone to respond and makes this little tricks as bait. It seems to give him some sort of sense of superiority. -- Julian Richards medieval "at" richardsuk.f9.co.uk Usenet is how from the comfort of your own living room, you can converse with people that you would never want in your house. THIS MESSAGE WAS POSTED FROM SOC.HISTORY.MEDIEVAL > >> Nope. > >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > this little tricks as bait. It seems to give him some sort of sense of > superiority. At least he actually replied to a specific. One of his cardinal rules shattered! Surreyman > How can > Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not been from > the upper classes? -the Troll I am in fact quite interested in this whole topic, but refrain from getting too involved since it is so darned complex and intuitive. I suppose the short answer to the above is that the UK is still 'class conscious' (rather than 'class bound') because we still *realise* the class status of PMs etc. Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > How can > > Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not been from [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > conscious' (rather than 'class bound') because we still *realise* the class > status of PMs etc. That makes more sense. It was Sir William making the claim of 'class bound' which may have been true in the thirties or even forties but could hardly be true today. Here a politician gets ten points for being from the working classes and will boast of it from the stump. In fact both Bush are Kerry are constantly having to apologize for their wealth. It's hard for Kerry to connect with his working class constituency when he owns five houses and has never had 'dirty hands'. Oddly it is easier for Bush who is at least a part-time rancher, only owns one, and has a folksy southern accent and way of expressing himself. It is a quirk of modern American politics that Mr. Bush will probably get more votes from the 'proletariat' than Kerry will even to include the members of trade unions. -the Troll > "a.spencer3" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > will probably get more votes from the 'proletariat' than Kerry will even to > include the members of trade unions. -the Troll Yep - same silly system here. I never understand why it's so PC to pretend having been at the bottom of the stack - look at dear old Weggie, for Gawd's sake!! It doesn't fool the masses for a second, who just deride such posturing. So what's the point? PS: I am, of course, of immensely exalted status and will tell everyone who'll listen to me ......... the only thing Hines and I have in common! :-)) Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > Here a politician gets ten points for being from the working classes and > > will boast of it from the stump. In fact both Bush are Kerry are [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > who'll listen to me ......... the only thing Hines and I have in common! > :-)) It still counts here. There is an abiding suspicion of wealthy intellectuals amongst the electorate in the US. We prefer solidly grounded pragmatists with the life experience and a value system similar to the majority needed to make important decisions. That's why candidates at least maintain the outward appearances of being practicing Christians whether they are or not. Your family must be one of the greatest in Britain. Does it have a common stem? -the Troll > "a.spencer3" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Your family must be one of the greatest in Britain. Does it have a common > stem? -the Troll Questions, questions! Re your family given name, Iltyd, is of course the source of Llantwit, which all follows to some extent, but I expect you knew that. Our Welsh lot are Lewis, which makes it virtually impossible to track back into the 18th.C! They're certainly 'old Caerphilly', though, traced to the early 1800s. It's a family joke that while the de Spensers were in Caerphilly Castle, the Lewises were in the mud huts outside the walls! The modern connection was purely an accident, though, of my mother 'emigrating' as a young girl between the wars into Spencer country! I've never had the time to trace the family back properly, but 'my' Spencers were certainly in Wimbledon in the 1700s, which suggests they were fairly static (e.g. before the mass migrations into London). The Lords of the Manor were the Spencers, so there's probably a connection there one side of blanket or t'other! (In fact I used to live in Spencer Hill Road there, which added a certain lustre!). A many times great grandfather left some bits which ended up with me, with the Spencer crest, so there's something there somewhere. The original de Spenser was a fraud (a family trait!). He's up there on the Battle Abbey plaque, supposedly showing the names of those who came over with Billy. But the plaque is very dubious, of course. Especially since, story is, that de Spenser arrived a bit late, smashed the original plaque, and recast the 'new' one, now including his name! Apparently even the dodgy plaque itself is now lost, but I have the touristy pseudo-parchment showing the list of names as was. You probably know much of the rest. A bit of treason, a few beheadings, the banishment of one de Spenser 'beyond the Welsh' where he set up what is now Little England in Pembrokeshire, etc. etc. But one of my retirement projects will certainly be to try and tie all this up. In fact my whole branch only survived through me, but luckily I have 2 sons who now need to do their duty! Enjoy your own trip. Surreyman "a.spencer3" wrote in message > hippo wrote in message > > Your family must be one of the greatest in Britain. Does it have a common > > stem? -the Troll > > > Questions, questions! > Re your family given name, Iltyd, is of course the source of Llantwit, which > all follows to some extent, but I expect you knew that. I do and am descended from Bp.Nicolas of Llandaff, reputedly himself a son? of Bp. Urban (Gurgan) who more-or-less established it as a recognized See and built the first Cathedral, part of which remains visible in the fabric of the present building. The Welsh clas clergy, which is an institution worthy of study by itself, was mostly related to one another and to the local kinglets. They were not chaste and Welsh practice did not require formal marriage for offspring to be considered legitimate. The blood relationship to St. Iltyd is most likely spurious but the possibility certainly exists. My ancestors believed they were descended from him which leads to the possibility of tracing the family back to the seventh century in Glamorgan and at the same time would account for my saintly nature. > Our Welsh lot are Lewis, which makes it virtually impossible to track back > into the 18th.C! They're certainly 'old Caerphilly', though, traced to the [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Enjoy your own trip. That's cool. Tracing this stuff back is much easier than it once was with computer access to the thousands of data bases available. You will find most of the work already done. All you have to do is connect the lines to yourself and verify, verify, verify. It's even fun. I'd advise a software program which keeps your research tidy by assigning a unique number to each ancestor and gets rid of the necessity for the vast fans of lines on huge sheets of paper that used to be the only way to keep the generations straight. A word of warning, sometimes you will not be very happy with what you dig up. Even the 'best' of families has a scoundrel or Tory politician lurking in the mists to be uncovered. Enjoy yourself. -the Troll > A word of warning, sometimes you will not be very happy with what > you dig up. Even the 'best' of families has a scoundrel or Tory politician > lurking in the mists to be uncovered. Enjoy yourself. -the Troll Nothing could be much worse than the early de Spensers! Surreyman > > A word of warning, sometimes you will not be very happy with what > > you dig up. Even the 'best' of families has a scoundrel or Tory politician > > lurking in the mists to be uncovered. Enjoy yourself. -the Troll > > > Nothing could be much worse than the early de Spensers! There's nothing too wonderful about the current lot (present company not resident in Hawaii excepted) SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > > A word of warning, sometimes you will not be very happy with what > > > you dig up. Even the 'best' of families has a scoundrel or Tory [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > There's nothing too wonderful about the current lot (present company not > resident in Hawaii excepted) I think I've just been insulted. I'll work it out. Surreyman > How can Britain be class bound [sic] if most of your PMs > since Winnie have not been from the upper classes? - the Troll Twaddle! This American pogue doesn't know his Prime Ministers. Eden, MacMillan, Heath and Douglas-Home were certainly neither lower class nor middle class. No one EXPECTS the LABOUR Prime Ministers to be Upper Class -- only an abject fool would buy into that fallacy. Whereas the Tories have had two Prime Ministers who were NOT Upper Class -- Thatcher and Major. Amusingly, in America even Pogue Gans, my pet marmot, who is QUITE class-conscious, insists he is NOT middle class or "working class" but UPPER CLASS. Hilarious! And "Buffalo" aka "Hippo" makes all sorts of remarks about his Anglophilia. Ignorance Writ Large = "Buffalo" aka "Hippo" D. Spencer Hines Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor | > How can Britain be class bound if most of your PMs | > since Winnie have not been from the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] | | Surreyman > > How can Britain be class bound [sic] if most of your PMs > > since Winnie have not been from the upper classes? - the Troll [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Eden, MacMillan, Heath and Douglas-Home were certainly neither lower > class nor middle class. Heath! Grammar school boy. SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > > How can Britain be class bound [sic] if most of your PMs > > since Winnie have not been from the upper classes? - the Troll [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Eden, MacMillan, Heath and Douglas-Home were certainly neither lower > class nor middle class. You don't know yours, either. Heath was (is) nuffink. Surreyman Twaddle. Heath is the son of a carpenter and builder but he graduated from Oxford, Balliol College. Heath rose and so did his class standing. He has excellent artistic talents as well, conducts symphonies -- and artists are classless -- just ask them. Besides, Heath may be homosexual, some say, so that gives him additional Brit Upper Class/Classless cachet. Pogue [Alan] Spencer doesn't even know the Rules of the Game in his own society. 'Nuff Said. DSH | > > How can Britain be class bound [sic] if most of your PMs | > > since Winnie have not been from the upper classes? - the Troll [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] | | Surreyman > Twaddle. > > Heath is the son of a carpenter and builder but he graduated from > Oxford, Balliol College. > > Heath rose and so did his class standing. Bollocks, the public school boys at Private Eye nicknamed him 'The Grocer' because of his strangulated vowels. And you can't be a 'carpenter and builder'. They are two separate trades. Actually, 'builder' isn't technically a 'trade'.A builder is the proprietor of a building company. I imagine that Mr Heath's father ran a building business. As in 'J Smith and Company, Carpenters and Builders'... SignatureWilliam Black ------------------ Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government > Twaddle. > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > 'Nuff Said. Well, that all proves what we knew about Hines already. Hilarious twaddle! Surreyman > I probably don't have to having seen it here in my own youth and amongst > more recent immigrants from Latin countries which still have peasant > classes. That's then, this is now. Eisenhower was born in a mid-west farm > shack and I think Ms Thatcher came from solidly middle class stock. Grocers and their daughters might be thought to be middle class in the U.S., but not in the U.K. of the 1930s and '40s when Thatcher was growing up. > How can > Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not been from > the upper classes? -the Troll <cynicism> Because electoral politics is a dirty business, and better left to those who are willing to tolerate such dirt in order to have influence. They can then be bought off by controlling their access to the resources that allow them to carry on in politics, e.g. party funding. They will operate in a way that accommodates elites. </cynicism> -- Andrew Chaplin SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO (If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.) "Andrew Chaplin" wrote in message > > I probably don't have to having seen it here in my own youth and amongst > > more recent immigrants from Latin countries which still have peasant [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > U.S., but not in the U.K. of the 1930s and '40s when Thatcher was > growing up. They would have been because we really do not have a merchant lower class. Any lower class we do have is made up of the unemployed and urban and rural employed but meeting the government income definition of legal poverty. Anyone from the self-employed merchant class would have always been considered middle class. > > How can > > Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not been from [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > funding. They will operate in a way that accommodates elites. > </cynicism> Raw ambition which breeds corrupt practices in politics and everything else is not class conscious. The rich can be bribed with fawning toadyism even more cheaply than the poor with money. -the Troll >"Representative Trantis" wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >Britain be class bound if most of your PMs since Winnie have not been from >the upper classes? -the Troll That isn't actually true. Eden was from the higher ranks of the landed gentry, Macmillan was a duke's son-in-law, and Home was an earl, the head of a family prominent in Scotland since the 14th century. All entirely upper class. Blair, if not quite upper class, is from the topmost fringe of the middle-class, the first public-school educated PM since Home. SignatureDon Aitken Mail to the addresses given in the headers is no longer being read. To mail me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com". "Don Aitken" wrote in message > >I probably don't have to having seen it here in my own youth and amongst > >more recent immigrants from Latin countries which still have peasant [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > topmost fringe of the middle-class, the first public-school educated > PM since Home. I thought your upper class was made up of Royals, titled nobility, and Church prelates? I forgot Home. If Home was an Earl, how did he manage to get into Parliament? -the Troll > I thought your upper class was made up of Royals, titled nobility, and > Church prelates? Nope, that's a mistake lots of people make. The nobility (and royalty) come and go, what remains is the 'gentry', sometinmes called the 'squirearchy'. There are people out there who, when offered a peerage, refuse them on the grounds that getting one from people whose family has only been noble for a quarter of a milenium 'just isn't really |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message