It really was because of Brexit!

[mtravel]

Not to add controversy but our experience says that a single negativity test is not enough to guarantee it.

Our procedures foresee that before being discharged from a hospital, a covid patient must undergo at least two tests, both with negative results and after a few days.

Let's say a week.

 

There have been no rare cases in which the tests necessary to certify the achieved negativity have been three and even four.

Extending the time between the first and final test to three and even four weeks.

[StuartO]

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 2:44 PM

 

It is, IMO, reasonable to expect that when a UK Secretary of State makes a statement that something has been done, it has, and that when they say it will be done, their writ will run.

 

There may be all sorts of reasons or excuses for why something did not happen here and there, but surely no-one in a hospital can still remain unaware that the intention is to discharge bed-blockers to care homes as appropriate, but not before the patient has been tested, and the test result is negative?

 

To plead ignorance of that intention is tantamount to constructive ignorance.

 

The claim that care homes were being protected dates back to March, when Hancock claimed that measures had been in place to shield them from the beginning. The number of deaths, and their growth over time, is surely sufficient to at least raise serious questions about that claim?

 

Your expectation may be that every hint of any sort of target or intention by a politician is a guarantee but this is a national emergency and they are doing their best. It would be possible for my relative to make a fuss about the hospital's failure to test but why add to their problems? Get a life and try to be helpful rather than nit-picking Brian.

 

Don't tell me you're still hoping that despite the referendum and the recent General Election there isn't a majority in favour and Brexit won't happen?

[John52]

pelmetman - 2020-06-15 9:03 AM

......Dontcha like the fact that Scotland and Wales hasn't managed any better than England......and in some cases much worse ;-) ......

 

 

Thats because BoJo is effectively managing it for them.

You seem unaware how much of your money BoJo is giving to us 'Losers' to bribe us not to vote for the nationalists, so BoJo maintains HIS empire at YOUR expense :-S

[Birdbrain]

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 12:17 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-06-15 9:06 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 8:35 AM

Birdbrain - 2020-06-14 7:44 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-14 7:30 PM

So what? One should only retain measures against a possibly catastrophic event when the event is already manifest? Why do you think we maintain armed forces?

We obviously didn't have a 'George Floyd' "catastrophic event in place either did we ??? ... Nasty Boris ... Nasty Tories

There is a significant difference between what is, and was, a foreseen risk (a pandemic) and an unforeseeable event elsewhere in the world (the killing of Floyd). Conflating the two is nonsensical.

I thought there would be a "significant difference" with an "event elsewhere in the world" (China Virus) resulting in a pandemic here which we have had before and another "event elsewhere in the world" (Mr Floyd) leading to race riots we also have had before ... Yup

Are you seriously trying to argue that there is no difference between a pandemic, and the killing of Floyd? :-|

 

Depends ... Obviously protesting , looting , robbing , stabbing , shooting , vandalising and killing in Mr Floyds name is far more serious to thousand and thousands and thousands of folk than sticking to Covid rules while putting our Police , health workers and God knows how many at risk ... I hadn't realised it was a your issue is more serious than my issue carry on anyway

[John52]

StuartO - 2020-06-15 3:27 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 2:44 PM

 

It is, IMO, reasonable to expect that when a UK Secretary of State makes a statement that something has been done, it has, and that when they say it will be done, their writ will run.

 

There may be all sorts of reasons or excuses for why something did not happen here and there, but surely no-one in a hospital can still remain unaware that the intention is to discharge bed-blockers to care homes as appropriate, but not before the patient has been tested, and the test result is negative?

 

To plead ignorance of that intention is tantamount to constructive ignorance.

 

The claim that care homes were being protected dates back to March, when Hancock claimed that measures had been in place to shield them from the beginning. The number of deaths, and their growth over time, is surely sufficient to at least raise serious questions about that claim?

 

Your expectation may be that every hint of any sort of target or intention by a politician is a guarantee but this is a national emergency and they are doing their best. It would be possible for my relative to make a fuss about the hospital's failure to test but why add to their problems? Get a life and try to be helpful rather than nit-picking Brian.

 

Don't tell me you're still hoping that despite the referendum and the recent General Election there isn't a majority in favour and Brexit won't happen?

 

I think Brian is still hoping that common sense will prevail and BoJo won't add a no-deal Brexit to our problems during a pandemic. Especially now he's made it worse than any other EU country. Given that, despite having the advantage of being surrounded by water, we have more deaths than any other EU country. To point that out is hardly 'nit picking' Stuart.

Did you forget to criticise the press for having the audacity to question politicians, and belatedly find out they had shut down the pandemic control department to concentrate on Brexit?

Don't you think its just a little bit sinister its taken so long for us to find out?

[John52]

Birdbrain - 2020-06-15 4:00 PM

 

 

Depends ... Obviously protesting , looting , robbing , stabbing , shooting , vandalising and killing in Mr Floyds name is far more serious to thousand and thousands and thousands of folk than sticking to Covid rules while putting our Police , health workers and God knows how many at risk ... I hadn't realised it was a your issue is more serious than my issue carry on anyway

 

The ones I saw weren't doing it in Mr Floyds name.

They were apparently doing it to save statues of racists and slave traders.

[Nicepix]

malc d - 2020-06-14 10:26 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

 

 

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

 

 

According to the dictionary - democracy is a government chosen by the people - and populism is putting the interests of

the ' ordinary people ' before the interests of the elite in society.

 

 

:-|

 

So basically any candidate who got more votes than the others was the most popular? That is what democracy has been all about; getting more votes than the others by being the most popular. And now it seems that only some of those who won elections are regarded as populists.

 

It has simply become a derogatory term used by bad losers.

[John52]

Nicepix - 2020-06-15 4:48 PM

 

(populism) has simply become a derogatory term used by bad losers.

 

There are varying definitions of 'populism'.

Some would say its doing what is popular - but flawed.

Like selling off public owned assets like housing, railways and utilities cheaply.making windfalls for some.

Popular amongst the current generation who got a cheap house, shares etc, and disastrous for the next generation rent.

Or De-Mutualising the Building Societies - that was popular but ultimately disastrous

Or inventing a foreign enemy and blaming them.

Like Hitler blamed the jews for everything - that was popular.

Invent a problem and offer a solution - thats popular.

[Bulletguy]

Nicepix - 2020-06-15 4:48 PM

 

malc d - 2020-06-14 10:26 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

 

 

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

 

 

According to the dictionary - democracy is a government chosen by the people - and populism is putting the interests of

the ' ordinary people ' before the interests of the elite in society.

 

 

:-|

 

So basically any candidate who got more votes than the others was the most popular? That is what democracy has been all about; getting more votes than the others by being the most popular. And now it seems that only some of those who won elections are regarded as populists.

 

It has simply become a derogatory term used by bad losers.

That applies to both sides as there have been right and left wing leaders of countries as well as parties considered 'populist'.

 

[Birdbrain]

John52 - 2020-06-15 4:08 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-06-15 4:00 PM

 

 

Depends ... Obviously protesting , looting , robbing , stabbing , shooting , vandalising and killing in Mr Floyds name is far more serious to thousand and thousands and thousands of folk than sticking to Covid rules while putting our Police , health workers and God knows how many at risk ... I hadn't realised it was a your issue is more serious than my issue carry on anyway

 

The ones I saw weren't doing it in Mr Floyds name.

They were apparently doing it to save statues of racists and slave traders.

 

Well thats something else The Tories and Boris should have known about before the event ... Thanks

[Brian Kirby]

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

Bulletguy - 2020-06-14 5:17 PM

Ah but the DM becomes a "lefty loser" paper run by "Remoaner" Geordie Grieg when it publishes articles that don't dance to the Brexiteers narrative. ;-)

Interestingly UK has been knocked down into third place on the world stats for Covid-19 deaths as Brazil hit over 41,000 to become the second worst with US well out in the lead. More than a coincidence all three countries led by populism.

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

I think the above question is based on a false premise. Populism is a form of democracy. I think the question is really, "what is the difference between representative democracy and populism".

 

Representative democracy is what we presently have, where candidates to be MPs are elected by us on the basis that they will have access to information that most of us will not see, and will decide together whether government (the "executive") proposals should be implemented. So we pay them to do that work for us, and trust them to do so to the best of their judgement and ability.

 

Populism, on the other hand, seems more akin to government by permanent referendum, where the MPs become delegates of their constituents, bound to do as instructed by them. The executive merely makes proposals, the proposals are taken by the MPs back to their constituents, who vote on them, and then return the results to parliament where the MPs will vote collectively as individually instructed, with the result becoming an instruction to the executive to proceed accordingly. So, the decision is moved closer to the people.

 

The problems I see with populism are that it caters to the lowest common denominator, and not to the highest common factor. It also makes holding a settled policy almost impossible as moods and events swirl and shift within society. And finally it also seems to me overly prone to being hijacked by charismatic manipulators with dubious agendas.

[Barryd999]

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 5:54 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

Bulletguy - 2020-06-14 5:17 PM

Ah but the DM becomes a "lefty loser" paper run by "Remoaner" Geordie Grieg when it publishes articles that don't dance to the Brexiteers narrative. ;-)

Interestingly UK has been knocked down into third place on the world stats for Covid-19 deaths as Brazil hit over 41,000 to become the second worst with US well out in the lead. More than a coincidence all three countries led by populism.

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

I think the above question is based on a false premise. Populism is a form of democracy. I think the question is really, "what is the difference between representative democracy and populism".

 

Representative democracy is what we presently have, where candidates to be MPs are elected by us on the basis that they will have access to information that most of us will not see, and will decide together whether government (the "executive") proposals should be implemented. So we pay them to do that work for us, and trust them to do so to the best of their judgement and ability.

 

Populism, on the other hand, seems more akin to government by permanent referendum, where the MPs become delegates of their constituents, bound to do as instructed by them. The executive merely makes proposals, the proposals are taken by the MPs back to their constituents, who vote on them, and then return the results to parliament where the MPs will vote collectively as individually instructed, with the result becoming an instruction to the executive to proceed accordingly. So, the decision is moved closer to the people.

 

The problems I see with populism are that it caters to the lowest common denominator, and not to the highest common factor. It also makes holding a settled policy almost impossible as moods and events swirl and shift within society. And finally it also seems to me overly prone to being hijacked by charismatic manipulators with dubious agendas.

 

That will be President Cummings then that nobody voted for but is somehow running the country and above the law.

[Brian Kirby]

Barryd999 - 2020-06-15 6:17 PM.....................That will be President Cummings then that nobody voted for but is somehow running the country and above the law.

You might think that: I couldn't possibly comment! :-D

[Birdbrain]

Barryd999 - 2020-06-15 6:17 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 5:54 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

Bulletguy - 2020-06-14 5:17 PM

Ah but the DM becomes a "lefty loser" paper run by "Remoaner" Geordie Grieg when it publishes articles that don't dance to the Brexiteers narrative. ;-)

Interestingly UK has been knocked down into third place on the world stats for Covid-19 deaths as Brazil hit over 41,000 to become the second worst with US well out in the lead. More than a coincidence all three countries led by populism.

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

I think the above question is based on a false premise. Populism is a form of democracy. I think the question is really, "what is the difference between representative democracy and populism".

 

Representative democracy is what we presently have, where candidates to be MPs are elected by us on the basis that they will have access to information that most of us will not see, and will decide together whether government (the "executive") proposals should be implemented. So we pay them to do that work for us, and trust them to do so to the best of their judgement and ability.

 

Populism, on the other hand, seems more akin to government by permanent referendum, where the MPs become delegates of their constituents, bound to do as instructed by them. The executive merely makes proposals, the proposals are taken by the MPs back to their constituents, who vote on them, and then return the results to parliament where the MPs will vote collectively as individually instructed, with the result becoming an instruction to the executive to proceed accordingly. So, the decision is moved closer to the people.

 

The problems I see with populism are that it caters to the lowest common denominator, and not to the highest common factor. It also makes holding a settled policy almost impossible as moods and events swirl and shift within society. And finally it also seems to me overly prone to being hijacked by charismatic manipulators with dubious agendas.

 

That will be President Cummings then that nobody voted for but is somehow running the country and above the law.

 

Im confused again ... It really grinds you that Mr Cummings broke lockdown rules , you have mentioned it and complained about it quite a lot , yet you found if "funny" when others broke lockdown rules to vandalise and throw history in the sea ... let me in to your logic

[Nicepix]

Prime Ministers have had advisors for years. Remember Tony Bliar and Alistair Campbell? Cumins is just the latest in a very long line.

 

Regards Populism; It seems, as I said earlier, to be a derogatory term used by sore losers to describe the people who threaten them and their principles. The EU are terrified of anyone who thinks out of their box getting into power. Marine le Pen for example has been called 'Populist' by the EU leaders but she doesn't for into the description Brian Kirby posts. She has a long standing agenda that has hardly wavered in years ad follows the ideals of her predecessors. She has a loyal and solid party membership. And she does not bow to public pressure, quite the reverse, she remains 'on track'. Same could be said of Nigel Farage.

 

So how are they 'Populist'?

[Barryd999]

Birdbrain - 2020-06-15 6:58 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-06-15 6:17 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 5:54 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

Bulletguy - 2020-06-14 5:17 PM

Ah but the DM becomes a "lefty loser" paper run by "Remoaner" Geordie Grieg when it publishes articles that don't dance to the Brexiteers narrative. ;-)

Interestingly UK has been knocked down into third place on the world stats for Covid-19 deaths as Brazil hit over 41,000 to become the second worst with US well out in the lead. More than a coincidence all three countries led by populism.

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

I think the above question is based on a false premise. Populism is a form of democracy. I think the question is really, "what is the difference between representative democracy and populism".

 

Representative democracy is what we presently have, where candidates to be MPs are elected by us on the basis that they will have access to information that most of us will not see, and will decide together whether government (the "executive") proposals should be implemented. So we pay them to do that work for us, and trust them to do so to the best of their judgement and ability.

 

Populism, on the other hand, seems more akin to government by permanent referendum, where the MPs become delegates of their constituents, bound to do as instructed by them. The executive merely makes proposals, the proposals are taken by the MPs back to their constituents, who vote on them, and then return the results to parliament where the MPs will vote collectively as individually instructed, with the result becoming an instruction to the executive to proceed accordingly. So, the decision is moved closer to the people.

 

The problems I see with populism are that it caters to the lowest common denominator, and not to the highest common factor. It also makes holding a settled policy almost impossible as moods and events swirl and shift within society. And finally it also seems to me overly prone to being hijacked by charismatic manipulators with dubious agendas.

 

That will be President Cummings then that nobody voted for but is somehow running the country and above the law.

 

Im confused again ... It really grinds you that Mr Cummings broke lockdown rules , you have mentioned it and complained about it quite a lot , yet you found if "funny" when others broke lockdown rules to vandalise and throw history in the sea ... let me in to your logic

 

We weren't under lock down when they decided to chuck the statue in the drink. We were in the middle of the first wave and lock down when Cummings who is the most powerful man in the country decided to break his own rules and go for a jolly as well as breaking many other rules and then trying to cover it all up.

 

I said from the off the protests should not have been allowed to go ahead and were a bad idea but I was pleased to see that statue go and yes it was funny. I liked the Clanging noise and splash. Bit Monty Python. Should have maybe left it at that though. That was enough of a statement really.

[Bulletguy]

Nicepix - 2020-06-15 7:54 PM

 

The EU are terrified of anyone who thinks out of their box getting into power. Marine le Pen for example has been called 'Populist' by the EU leaders but she doesn't for into the description Brian Kirby posts. She has a long standing agenda that has hardly wavered in years and follows the ideals of her predecessors.

Her predecessor was her father, Holocaust denier, Nazi sympathiser and antisemite convicted and fined a number of times for inciting racist hatred, so i'd have hoped his daughters political ideology does not follow his. In fact i thought they fell out as she needed to moderate the FN's jackbooted image?

 

Same could be said of Nigel Farage.

Yes his far right views from his days at Dulwich College are well known, his admiration of Mosley, and singing songs about gassing Jews. Good job he's never been in power.

[John52]

StuartO - 2020-06-15 3:27 PM

 

Your expectation may be that every hint of any sort of target or intention by a politician is a guarantee but this is a national emergency and they are doing their best. It would be possible for my relative to make a fuss about the hospital's failure to test but why add to their problems? Get a life and try to be helpful rather than nit-picking Brian.

 

 

The Editor of the Lancet has described the Government handling of Covid 19 as 'Catastrophic' :-(

Wheras you describe criticism of it as 'nit-picking' 8-)

What sort of a Doctor were you 8-)

 

edited to add link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/lancet-editor-attacks-uk-government-for-catastrophic-handling-of-covid-19-pandemic

[Birdbrain]

Barryd999 - 2020-06-15 10:33 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-06-15 6:58 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-06-15 6:17 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-06-15 5:54 PM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-14 8:24 PM

Bulletguy - 2020-06-14 5:17 PM

Ah but the DM becomes a "lefty loser" paper run by "Remoaner" Geordie Grieg when it publishes articles that don't dance to the Brexiteers narrative. ;-)

Interestingly UK has been knocked down into third place on the world stats for Covid-19 deaths as Brazil hit over 41,000 to become the second worst with US well out in the lead. More than a coincidence all three countries led by populism.

What is the difference between populism and democracy? *-)

I think the above question is based on a false premise. Populism is a form of democracy. I think the question is really, "what is the difference between representative democracy and populism".

 

Representative democracy is what we presently have, where candidates to be MPs are elected by us on the basis that they will have access to information that most of us will not see, and will decide together whether government (the "executive") proposals should be implemented. So we pay them to do that work for us, and trust them to do so to the best of their judgement and ability.

 

Populism, on the other hand, seems more akin to government by permanent referendum, where the MPs become delegates of their constituents, bound to do as instructed by them. The executive merely makes proposals, the proposals are taken by the MPs back to their constituents, who vote on them, and then return the results to parliament where the MPs will vote collectively as individually instructed, with the result becoming an instruction to the executive to proceed accordingly. So, the decision is moved closer to the people.

 

The problems I see with populism are that it caters to the lowest common denominator, and not to the highest common factor. It also makes holding a settled policy almost impossible as moods and events swirl and shift within society. And finally it also seems to me overly prone to being hijacked by charismatic manipulators with dubious agendas.

 

That will be President Cummings then that nobody voted for but is somehow running the country and above the law.

 

Im confused again ... It really grinds you that Mr Cummings broke lockdown rules , you have mentioned it and complained about it quite a lot , yet you found if "funny" when others broke lockdown rules to vandalise and throw history in the sea ... let me in to your logic

 

We weren't under lock down when they decided to chuck the statue in the drink. We were in the middle of the first wave and lock down when Cummings who is the most powerful man in the country decided to break his own rules and go for a jolly as well as breaking many other rules and then trying to cover it all up.

 

I said from the off the protests should not have been allowed to go ahead and were a bad idea but I was pleased to see that statue go and yes it was funny. I liked the Clanging noise and splash. Bit Monty Python. Should have maybe left it at that though. That was enough of a statement really.

 

Quick recap ... Mr Cummings is now "the most powerful man in the country" and you found vandalism and thuggery "funny" ... That just about sums up the mess of the last few weeks

[Nicepix]

Bulletguy - 2020-06-16 12:00 AM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-15 7:54 PM

 

The EU are terrified of anyone who thinks out of their box getting into power. Marine le Pen for example has been called 'Populist' by the EU leaders but she doesn't for into the description Brian Kirby posts. She has a long standing agenda that has hardly wavered in years and follows the ideals of her predecessors.

Her predecessor was her father, Holocaust denier, Nazi sympathiser and antisemite convicted and fined a number of times for inciting racist hatred, so i'd have hoped his daughters political ideology does not follow his. In fact i thought they fell out as she needed to moderate the FN's jackbooted image?

 

Same could be said of Nigel Farage.

Yes his far right views from his days at Dulwich College are well known, his admiration of Mosley, and singing songs about gassing Jews. Good job he's never been in power.

 

All that may be true, but it does not correspond with the stated definitions given of what is populism. It is just another attack on the people who the establishment would rather not face in the ballot boxes.

 

I'll tell you what Populism is; it is a term designed to undermine anyone who stands for power who does not fit into the establishment mould. It has been made a derogatory term to protect the clowns who think they have a right to rule.

[Birdbrain]

Nicepix - 2020-06-16 6:41 AM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-06-16 12:00 AM

 

Nicepix - 2020-06-15 7:54 PM

 

The EU are terrified of anyone who thinks out of their box getting into power. Marine le Pen for example has been called 'Populist' by the EU leaders but she doesn't for into the description Brian Kirby posts. She has a long standing agenda that has hardly wavered in years and follows the ideals of her predecessors.

Her predecessor was her father, Holocaust denier, Nazi sympathiser and antisemite convicted and fined a number of times for inciting racist hatred, so i'd have hoped his daughters political ideology does not follow his. In fact i thought they fell out as she needed to moderate the FN's jackbooted image?

 

Same could be said of Nigel Farage.

Yes his far right views from his days at Dulwich College are well known, his admiration of Mosley, and singing songs about gassing Jews. Good job he's never been in power.

 

All that may be true, but it does not correspond with the stated definitions given of what is populism. It is just another attack on the people who the establishment would rather not face in the ballot boxes.

 

I'll tell you what Populism is; it is a term designed to undermine anyone who stands for power who does not fit into the establishment mould. It has been made a derogatory term to protect the clowns who think they have a right to rule.

 

Populism is mainly down to and a result of the likes of our very own squad on here and beyond so I thank them and say please carry on what you are doing and never stop as your your hatred does more for the growth of populism than any Nigel Farage could

[StuartO]

John52 - 2020-06-15 11:30 PM

StuartO - 2020-06-15 3:27 PM Your expectation may be that every hint of any sort of target or intention by a politician is a guarantee but this is a national emergency and they are doing their best. It would be possible for my relative to make a fuss about the hospital's failure to test but why add to their problems? Get a life and try to be helpful rather than nit-picking Brian.

 

The Editor of the Lancet has described the Government handling of Covid 19 as 'Catastrophic' :-(

Wheras you describe criticism of it as 'nit-picking' 8-)

What sort of a Doctor were you 8-)

 

Well you know what they say, ask a dozen doctors for an opinion and you'll get at least 13 different answers - and the Editor of the Lancet could be a lot cleverer and better informed than I am. Nevertheless I think Brian is wrong and I'm entitled to say so. Come to think of it I've occassionally thought you were wrong too.

[StuartO]

Populism is covered very well in Wikipedia so I suggest you read that - and take your time because its not easy to get your head around.

 

Populism is a political approach to gathering support rather than a particular ideology, so it has been employed by people at both extremes of the left/right political spectrum. It's been around in one form or another for over a century, so it's not been invented recently.

 

Essentially it is an "us and them" way of charactarising problems; "we the people" are right and "them" (the priviledged elite, the big corporations - or alternatively the soppy liberals currently in power) are the corrupt and devious abusers of the people - so that if the people listen to me, their saviour, they will be saved and we will triumph. Charismatic leaders can make effective use of populism. Arguably it targets the 50% of the people who are more gullible than the rest rather than trying to convince the 50% who are cleverer.

 

Arguably it is the enemy of true democracy because it can lead to the election of dangerous people like Donald Trump and Arthur Scargill.

[Guest pelmetman]

John52 - 2020-06-15 11:30 PM

 

StuartO - 2020-06-15 3:27 PM

 

Your expectation may be that every hint of any sort of target or intention by a politician is a guarantee but this is a national emergency and they are doing their best. It would be possible for my relative to make a fuss about the hospital's failure to test but why add to their problems? Get a life and try to be helpful rather than nit-picking Brian.

 

 

The Editor of the Lancet has described the Government handling of Covid 19 as 'Catastrophic' :-(

Wheras you describe criticism of it as 'nit-picking' 8-)

What sort of a Doctor were you 8-)

 

edited to add link: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/lancet-editor-attacks-uk-government-for-catastrophic-handling-of-covid-19-pandemic

 

More importantly what kinda doctor is the editor of the Lancet? ;-) ........

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Horton_%28editor%29

 

He appears to have spent just 3 years on the the frontline as a doctor 8-) ........

 

Seems like he's another example of those who can..... do.....those who cant preach *-) .........

 

 

[Birdbrain]

StuartO - 2020-06-16 7:37 AM

 

Populism is covered very well in Wikipedia so I suggest you read that - and take your time because its not easy to get your head around.

 

Populism is a political approach to gathering support rather than a particular ideology, so it has been employed by people at both extremes of the left/right political spectrum. It's been around in one form or another for over a century, so it's not been invented recently.

 

Essentially it is an "us and them" way of charactarising problems; "we the people" are right and "them" (the priviledged elite, the big corporations - or alternatively the soppy liberals currently in power) are the corrupt and devious abusers of the people - so that if the people listen to me, their saviour, they will be saved and we will triumph. Charismatic leaders can make effective use of populism. Arguably it targets the 50% of the people who are more gullible than the rest rather than trying to convince the 50% who are cleverer.

 

Arguably it is the enemy of true democracy because it can lead to the election of dangerous people like Donald Trump and Arthur Scargill.

 

Scargill wasn't a populist ... He was a die hard Labour man appealing to die hard Labour voters on a Tory hate ticket which pretty much sums up most of the squad on here who fight populism ... Why is Donald Trump dangerous