Thing is never expect middle class liberals to fight a class war
Bingo. Asking middle class liberals to be more class-conscious and at the same time expecting them to fight or care for the working class is a contradiction.
But the proles, if only they could somehow become conscious of their own strength, would have no need to conspire. They needed only to rise up and shake themselves like a horse shaking off flies. If they chose they could blow the Party to pieces tomorrow morning. Surely sooner or later it must occur to them to do it? And yet-! Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.
Also, having Russia and Nato spend their time and money probing each others defences with planes and warships isn’t such a bad idea.
Here in the UK, the government is steaming ahead with their intended replacement for the Trident sub-launched nukes, for no easily-discernable rationale. Possibly the old ones weren't shiny enough. I'm sure the billions spent on being able to pound Russia into slightly more radioactive dust will be a comfort to those civilians on hospital waiting lists, people and prgrammes who rely on subsidies or grants, anyone using the aging intrastructure, and so on.
For what exactly? Are you really implying that the only way of achieving a stable nation-state is through achieving racial/cultural purity?
All the empirical evidence of the last 200 years – in Europe at least – points to that. So the answer to your question is yes, that is what I am saying.
I would be very interested to hear how you think that could or should be applied to New Zealand society.
This doesn't look good.
Hope you and yours are OK, Simon.
Paris Hilton is starting a political party? There’s literally no hope for us.
But I don’t think being 8km/h above the speed limit is actually the point of the ad.
If it's not the point, why show it? It's an easy and understandable conclusion to jump to that this would fit the prevailing contextual pattern of focussing on speed as the prime problem. And clearly that's a conclusion that quite a few people are jumping to.
’m utterly astounded by the comments of (seemingly intelligent and otherwise rational) people here that speed doesn’t matter.
Of course it matters. But focussing on speed to the absolute exclusion of all other factors that the driver can control is counter-productive. I can only recall one ad off the top of my head that didn't focus on speed* - 'drive to the conditions, when they change reduce your speed'. And I've never heard anyone spend time and effort trying to pick holes in that one, either.
*alcohol excepted, but that's a different story.
To be honest, watching it, when I see the other car from the perspective of the speeding guy, my own instinct is that he’d be able to stop in time, even at 108km/h. You don’t have to wait until the road is fully obstructed by the other car before you even begin slowing down. Indeed, personally, I begin slowing down automatically that I even see a car at all in that exact situation, just on the presumption that they might pull out for whatever reason. I have my eye pretty much fixed on that car as the most likely danger, and my foot is already on the brake. So inattention would have been a big factor in this accident.
Bingo. My first thought was 'why isn't the guy in the car covering the brake? He's got plenty of visibility, he can see the potential hazard. Why isn't he already checking his speed and possibly scrubbing some off from around 200m away?'.
The focus on speed as the risk in all of these campaigns seems to give rise to these really oddly illogical inconsistencies. There's been a series of campaigns that have all but come out and said that if you're going over 100, you're a death-dealing psycho, but under 100, you're sweet. It's an arbitrary line on the clock, not a blinkin' forcefield switch.
what i find amazing about Colorado is that nobody who grows or sells… can open a bank account, because it’s against federal law. So they all have these safes and run on a cash economy