The Westminster Arms

The two things can be separated; GR Elton saw the duty of historians as empirically gathering evidence and objectively analysing what the evidence has to say. Even the Walloons manage (just) to acknowledge that Wellington won Waterloo!

People at the time were shocked and horrified when they found out about the concentration camps, so that isn't imposing the mores of today. Are you my son? We have this discussion all the time at home; one of the joys of having a son with a First in History and an MA as well. We can't erase the past; we cannot change it either. We can examine it dispassionately (or not) and see how it shapes us now, what we should take from it, and what we should discard. I don't think we can understand the past if we try to judge it with the mores of today or through the lens of today either.

I had a discussion once online with a 20 year old who was very critical of the WWI generals, and they should have known 'x' 'y' and 'z'. Trying to point out that there were delays in communication, no satellites, radar, very little aerial surveillance etc fell on stony ground. He could not wrap his head around the fact that surveillance and comms were very different in Flanders in 1914-18 from say Kosovo or Iraq all those decades later and that the immediacy of modern communications and computer driven defence analysis were not available. The WWI Generals did not have all the information available to a modern Commander today and thus their decision making was, to his eyes, lacking.

It's not just our mores that we consciously (or unconsciously impose), but we forget at times that there weren't bathrooms, inside loos, quick methods of communications, health care; all the things that we take for granted today. Life was ‘nasty, brutish, and short’ to quote Hobbes and without the scaffolding that shores ours up. We try to judge or examine the past from a place of infinitely greater comfort than ever existed before and I don't think that necessarily works.

At what point does the past become far enough away, in your opinion, that pp shouldn't impose their mores on it?

You don't rate Andrew Roberts, that's fine. I find him readable, but then, I rate David Starkey as well. I read for the history, as opposed to their politics.

Those two things can't be separated. But if you are in tune with their politics naturally you will find them readable.

If people are shocked at Nazi concentration camps would you chide them for imposing the mores of today onto the past? WW2 is the past after all.

I expect the Serbs learned from Goering as well, and the Russians with their internment camps and now the Chinese with the Uiger. I expect that Lord Salisbury learned from all the medieval Jewish ghettos in Europe.

You don't rate Andrew Roberts, that's fine. I find him readable, but then, I rate David Starkey as well. I read for the history, as opposed to their politics.

Please note that I said we can learn from the past, I very carefully avoided saying that we did.

Labour won't win the next election, the Tories will.

5 years is a long time even in 'normal' times and these are very abnormal times politically and socially. 5 years ago we still had a coalition gvt, Cameron was head boy and for all anyone knew we would carry on in the EU til the end of time. Things can change and they can change a lot

Dusty, I can't find the "block " button. Please can you tell me exactly hoe to find it?
And a large whisky for a nightcap please.🥃
And good night.

Ah, the Daily Telegraph, I wondered what Dft stood for as well, all becomes clear!

but he was of his time, as was Lord Salisbury. It drives me batshit when people try to impose the mores of today on the past. We can learn from our past and use that to improve the present and future

According to the article Goering learned from Lord Salisbury so looks like you're right scaryteacher. What lessons would you take from the 'interesting', extreme right-wing Historian?

Copper The Daily Telegraph.The feline overlord was trying to climb me whilst I typed.

Arse I thought it was an interesting article from someone who is rated professionally for their work. My political heroes are Thomas Cromwell, Wellington, Churchill and Baroness Thatcher. I'm not sure I agree with Cromwell sending people to the scaffold, but he was of his time, as was Lord Salisbury. It drives me batshit when people try to impose the mores of today on the past. We can learn from our past and use that to improve the present and future - but how can we say we would have done anything differently had we existed in that time and place, and within that particular social structure?

Night all xxx

“There's a thread in site stuff about a block/hide poster function btw if anyone's interested”

Is there??? What an amazing coincidence...
😉😉😂😱

Copper interesting, thats quite a canny plan by Nissan.

Right! I’m off to bed folks, I can’t be arsed to stick around for more goading and derailing tonight 🥱 . See you all in the AM! Remember, MN say just ignore! Good advice in the absence of any specific site feature allowing one to physically do so.

Strange copper!

The first skirmish of brexit

I've never been to Guernsey etc. I'd like to 1 day.

That's an interesting plan by Nissan copper!

I think as per Andrew Roberts article noted and as most of us who have been battered at times with the general travailles of life, one door closes... Many more open.

Yes that's very interesting Coppersulphate

And interesting news from Guernsey
I am puzzled because they were never in the EU.
It's from Euro News.

in his writings Roberts is even supportive of politicians who take mass punishment to its most extreme conclusion: concentration camps. His political hero is Lord Salisbury, the British prime minister who, during the Boer War, constructed concentration camps in South Africa that inspired Hermann Goering. Under Salisbury, the British burned Boer civilians out of their homes and farms and drove them into concentration camps, so they could grab control of one of the most strategically important parts of Africa. The result was that about 34,000 people – some 15 per cent of the entire Boer population – died in the camps, mainly of disease and starvation.

Roberts presents a very different picture. He says the British introduced "regime change" in Pretoria out of a concern "for human rights". Far from being a "war crime", the concentration camps "were set up for the Boers' protection". The mass deaths there were not a result of British policy. No: they were primarily the prisoners' own fault, because they didn't know how to take medicine or treat disease, and deliberately spread lice.

Some good news for the car industry.
From the FT

Thanks for the article Scary. I read it twice. Very interesting article. Which paper is it from?

Yes, it certainly is interesting. The author is notoriously 'interesting' -
Andrew Roberts is the author of ‘Leadership in War’ published by Penguin.

From an article in the Independent 2009 -
Roberts, who has a new book out this week, describes himself as "extremely right-wing". To understand him, you need to look at a small, sinister group of British-based South African and Zimbabwean exiles he has associated with. In 2001, Roberts spoke to a dinner of the Springbok Club, a group that regards itself as the shadow white government of South Africa. Its founder, a former member of the neo-fascist National Front, says: "In a nutshell our policy can be summed up in one sentence: we want our countries back, and believe this can now only come about by the re-establishment of civilised European rule throughout the African continent."

How interesting

Was there anything in the Queen's Speech about the Fixed Term Parliament Act?

It has to go, but Boris isn't likely to want or need an election any time soon, so I should think it's on his 'When I get around to it' list rather than his 'Urgent' list.

You're half right, Labour won't win the next election, the Tories will.

But they may have a decent opposition at long last which will make a change after the Corbyn years.

Thanks for the article Scary. I read it twice. Very interesting article. Which paper is it from? Couldn't work out what DFt means? 🤔

I think if Sir Static is elected as Labour leader we will certainly have another 10 years of Boris 👏👏👏
That would suit me.

I think Sir S would be ok at the dispatch box...but most people have never heard of PMQs and couldn't care less.
I think he would be toxic to all of the new blue wall.

Boris has charisma and a cheerful, positive personality and put him against Sir S and I know who would win. And Boris has a secret weapon...Classic Dom.

But, that's all well and good but I do hope Labour sort themselves out because we deserve a decent opposition.

I admire Boris' stand with the EU. His ministers will hold the line.
My twitter feed is telling me the senior ministers will be ok in the reshuffle but we can only wait and see.

As ever, Labour won't 'win' the next election; the Tories will lose it.

As is so often the way.