Guardiola fined £20,000 for wearing yellow ribbon (p140)

[Shaelumstash]

It was and I agree with nearly all @Shaelumstash has posted, apart from the Magna Carta precipitating unfettered free speech on this island. Something upon which I expect James Bainham and Thomas Cranmer would agree with me. It took several centuries for it to take any meaningful hold.

He’s absolutely right about the US Constitution being ossified and anachronistic, though. It will become that nation’s ultimate Achilles heel as it’s becoming increasingly unfit for purpose. I can see States seceding from the Union before the century is out as a result of the inflexibility of the US Constitution.

I bow to your vastly superior knowledge mate, I'm just riffing on the bits that I do know and my own opinions.

I think there's a bit of a misconception generally that no laws = more freedom. It's not always true. We have our own issues with the "freedom of the press" which again is abused and taken out of context beyond belief by the gutter press.

Similarly with the complete non-regulation of the internet. A fine idea in principle, but the drawbacks are many and obvious. I very much doubt we will have a completely open and free internet in the decades to come.

I completely agree with the Constitution being anachronistic. It will be interesting to see whether states will start to look to secede. I know there was talk of it with California in the past.

I think the problem is that the US is such an economic and military powerhouse, would individual States ever take that leap? It is rather perverse though, that generally the states that generate the most income are generally the states with the highest populations, are most democratic in their politics, yet with the collegiate system, their votes essentially count for the least. And conversely, the States who are most hawkish are generally the smaller states who generate least income and under the collegiate system, their votes count the most.

 

[oakiecokie]

So perhaps people who choose to wear the ribbon should do so with an explanation as to why they are wearing it and then we can all decide if that person is wearing it for the right reasons. Or we could run an education programme to enlighten the lesser intelligent members of our support so they can make the right decision and only wear the ribbon if they are truly in support of the Catalonia politicians and not just wrongly attempting to support our manager.

But we keep being told by certain people that is isn`t a political stance by Pep.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I very much enjoy the ongoing discussion but this thread seems to be marching rather quickly to the realm of the Off Topic forum.

 

[dom]

What about the “Northern Powerhouse “.

Pathetic Tory illusion based upon a lie with no funding to match it....so London’s latest rail project keeps its massive funding whilst one of the first casualties was the electrification of the main trans Pennines link... I just wish I could summon up an iota of surprise....

 

[VOOMER]

Geez Franco staged a military coup financially backed international banking and military backing from Nazi Germany and even the Soviet union. From and including Franco, every Spanish since is an illegal one.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I bow to your vastly superior knowledge mate, I'm just riffing on the bits that I do know and my own opinions.

I think there's a bit of a misconception generally that no laws = more freedom. It's not always true. We have our own issues with the "freedom of the press" which again is abused and taken out of context beyond belief by the gutter press.

Similarly with the complete non-regulation of the internet. A fine idea in principle, but the drawbacks are many and obvious. I very much doubt we will have a completely open and free internet in the decades to come.

I completely agree with the Constitution being anachronistic. It will be interesting to see whether states will start to look to secede. I know there was talk of it with California in the past.

I think the problem is that the US is such an economic and military powerhouse, would individual States ever take that leap? It is rather perverse though, that generally the states that generate the most income are generally the states with the highest populations, are most democratic in their politics, yet with the collegiate system, their votes essentially count for the least. And conversely, the States who are most hawkish are generally the smaller states who generate least income and under the collegiate system, their votes count the most.

I think there’s been a small but vocal independence movement in California for a while, but it’s a long way from even approaching mainstream. If States seceding happens, it won’t be for a long time; being part of the US brings huge benefits in terms of security and commerce, but the world is very different now from the 1950’s (never mind when the US Constitution was conceived) and the age we live in today means the manifest differences between the broad beliefs and outlook of people in different parts of the States is now much more conspicuous than hitherto. That will increasingly give rise to questions being asked about the net benefits of remaining within the Union, among more and more US Citizens, especially when the Constitution is starkly at odds with their own core beliefs.

The second amendment is most likely to precipitate this breakdown imo. If school shootings continue to rise in frequency and brutality (which I expect they will) there will come a point where significant numbers of US Citizens (in the north eastern and western States) will start to view being wedded to the Constitution in increasingly negative terms, upon which fault lines in the Union will start to develop and accentuate. I don’t believe the US Constitution, as it currently stands, is flexible enough to cope with a turn of events along those lines.

If it happened over slavery, why can’t it happen over gun control?

Nothing lasts for ever. Just ask any rag.

 

[Shaelumstash]

I think there’s been a small but vocal independence movement in California for a while, but it’s a long way from even approaching mainstream. If States seceding happens, it won’t be for a long time; being part of the US brings huge benefits in terms of security and commerce, but the world is very different now from the 1950’s (never mind when the US Constitution was conceived) and the age we live in today means the manifest differences between the broad beliefs and outlook of people in different parts of the States is now much more conspicuous than hitherto. That will increasingly give rise to questions being asked about the net benefits of remaining within the Union, among more and more US Citizens, especially when the Constitution is starkly at odds with their own core beliefs.

The second amendment is most likely to precipitate this breakdown imo. If school shootings continue to rise in frequency and brutality (which I expect they will) there will come a point where significant numbers of US Citizens (in the north eastern and western States) will start to view being wedded to the Constitution in increasingly negative terms, upon which fault lines in the Union will start to develop and accentuate. I don’t believe the US Constitution, as it currently stands, is flexible enough to cope with a turn of events along those lines.

If it happened over slavery, why can’t it happen over gun control?

Nothing lasts for ever. Just ask any rag.

Superb, as always mate.

 

[Healdplace]

Wasn't the American constitution modelled on the Magna Carta anyway, so they obviously recognised its fundamental value.

But the difference between UK and US is obvious from the response to the school shooting in Florida.

Nobody in the UK, or I suspect in most civilised countries, would regard the solution offered by Trump to be an improvement like many in the US seemingly do - just give all the teachers a gun - that will stop the violence!

Um, yes, just as encouraging countries like Korea to arm themselves with nuclear bombs in response to the US, UK and others having them has made the world a safer place.

I think we can see that solution has worked well.

Or not.

Surely most sane people would far rather not see both certified nutters and certified world leaders arming themselves with weapons that will destroy many innocent lives if either side gets trigger happy.

Creating a situation like that always ends well, doesn't it?

That's the trouble with undiluted rights. You end up giving them to everybody. The cowmen versus the native Americans, the cops versus the gangsters, the teachers versus the madmen, Trump versus the next Hitler.

 

[Eebo]

Man up mate,he will stick to his guns and so he should,if you don't know about the catalans google the police shooting them and keeping them in prision all for wanting independence from spain,thats his people

I know all about what the Spanish police did, it was on the TV and in the newspapers.

I never said he was wrong to do it or that he should back down. The general opinion on the first several pages of the thread was that the FA were out to disrupt our Caraboa Cup preparations, which is the standard paranoia for this forum. I was trying to point out was that this had the potential to become a far more serious issue than that because Pep wouldn't back down and now the FA have a way to get at him.

Man up?? WTF is with all this macho posturing on here - even from the women.

 

[Eebo]

To be fair mate I think it’s you that needs to give your fanny a wipe

Go on then clever dick, how do you think this will pan out then?