tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2481298417819219839.post4885778928923279879..comments2024-03-28T19:27:59.772+00:00Comments on A K Haart: There are forces of madnessA K Haarthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05897490979828603179noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2481298417819219839.post-37893433938265269092022-05-16T17:14:50.248+01:002022-05-16T17:14:50.248+01:00dearieme and James - in Gissing's time, differ...dearieme and James - in Gissing's time, different rules did apply to different social classes and they were not necessarily based on some sort of objective and relevant criterion apart from social class itself. We still see it today when those otherwise inconsequential celebrities are given a public platform on the basis on no objective or relevant criterion apart from their status as a celebrity.<br /><br />Tammly - it could morph into something else as the ludicrous aspects become unavoidable, which could happen via political failures which are too plain to ignore.<br />A K Haarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05897490979828603179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2481298417819219839.post-26057099782056895682022-05-16T15:35:28.838+01:002022-05-16T15:35:28.838+01:00Over at Takimag today, the Z man puts it all very ...Over at Takimag today, the Z man puts it all very neatly. If we really don't want the new woke elites to be ruling us for the next 70 years, they have to be got rid of by any means necessary, as he says. To my mind that involves violent insurection.Tammlynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2481298417819219839.post-50035351041015618402022-05-16T14:49:11.519+01:002022-05-16T14:49:11.519+01:00"Privilege is about different rules applying ..."Privilege is about different rules applying to you than to me, in your favour. "<br /><br />Goodness me, the clarity is devastating.James Highamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14525082702330365464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2481298417819219839.post-20281675034792004972022-05-16T14:00:09.547+01:002022-05-16T14:00:09.547+01:00"privilege included wealth, influence and a p..."privilege included wealth, influence and a public voice": I disagree. I dislike the modern abuse of the term "privilege". Privilege is about different rules applying to you than to me, in your favour. <br /><br />Do we use the expression even if the different rules are based on some sort of objective and relevant criterion? I'd rather not - it seems pointless to say that a doctor has the privilege of prescribing medicines that I do not share - he has had a professional training to justify that power.<br /><br />So if you, AKH, are elevated to the peerage you can pop along to the House of Lords. I can't. That's got nothing to do with our relative wealth or indeed our "public voice" - indeed, lots of otherwise inconsequential celebrities have a public voice, and so do lots of journalists - however stupid, ignorant and unwealthy they may be.<br /><br />Some people would probably described as "privileged" someone who has good health, a happy marriage, and beloved children and grandchildren. That's stupid, or malicious, because it drains "privileged" of any useful, objective meaning.deariemenoreply@blogger.com