John MEARchiavelli

283 posts

John MEARchiavelli

John MEARchiavelli

@mearchiavelli

Budding IR theorist

Katılım Temmuz 2025
24 Takip Edilen4 Takipçiler
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@RaynerUpdates @callumseuk That makes it more interesting I feel, the parties are less centralised and there are more internal rebellions and infighting which makes for good drama. Whereas in the UK it's boring 90% of the time because if the PM proposes a law you know it's going to go through, except now.
English
0
0
0
32
Angela Rayner Updates
Angela Rayner Updates@RaynerUpdates·
@callumseuk It’s quite disjointed because they don’t have a leader of the opposition for 75% of the time
English
1
0
3
254
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@hodge_stick The question wasn't "Was there fighting in the Glorious Revolution", it was "Why is it called the Glorious Revolution". Arguably it is still wrong because it was so named by Protestants who celebrated the defeat of Popery!
English
0
0
155
5.9K
hodgestick
hodgestick@hodge_stick·
doing a british citizen test and currently failing because i refuse to accept "there was no fighting" in the glorious revolution.
hodgestick tweet media
English
13
25
1.2K
49.2K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@AaronBastani If we replaced the Supreme Court... the *exact same people* who are currently on the Supreme Court would become Law Lords. There would be zero change substantially. Please tell me why this is a good idea.
English
0
0
2
601
Aaron Bastani
Aaron Bastani@AaronBastani·
Can’t wait for Britain to scrap the EHRC and Supreme Court. A load of Blair-era nonsense - which Mr Philips was central to creating. Bizarre he poses as some sort of cultural conservative while being responsible for some of the most idiotic developments in British history.
Trevor Phillips@TrevorPTweets

My thoughts on the @EHRC guidance laid yesterday; this is not about non-existent "rights". It is about the safety of women - mothers, sisters, wives, daughters. We men need to hear their voices. Virginia Woolf : "Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes". My intro on @TimesRadio yesterday: Where I live there are two different routes to and from the tube station. One, let’s call it Acacia Avenue, is quiet and residential. The other, London Road, is a busy major route with lots of traffic. At all times of the day, I automatically head for Acacia Road. It’s just much nicer. The women in my family, on the other hand, will never willingly make that walk after dark. They live with an anxiety that most men find it hard to imagine, and frankly, rarely think about unprompted. Last year 739,000 women were sexually assaulted in Britain. Virtually all such assaults - nine out of ten - are perpetrated by men. One in four women have been attacked at some time in their lives. Acacia Avenue is exactly the sort of place in which most women fear that they become vulnerable, and they are right. As the author Virginia Woolf once wrote " Though we see the same world, we see it through different eyes". I think this is the right context in which to understand the furore over the guidance being laid today by the government, over the meaning of the words man and woman when it comes to providing services and facilities in workplaces. Many men think this is about a rather arcane dispute about who gets to use what loo. For their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters, it isn’t. In a previous life, as Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, I had a hand in writing this country’s equality laws, in particular the 2010 Equality Act. It never occurred to any of us that there could be any confusion or dispute over the meaning of the words man and woman. But it has taken a decade of campaigning, a Supreme Court judgement and now hundreds of pages of guidance to settle the issue. This is not about so called trans rights, which are completely unaffected by this guidance, since no-one has ever had the right to walk into a changing room reserved for teenage girls. What it does mean is that women and girls are guaranteed the protection they deserve, and that their safety, which we spent half a decade drafting law to ensure, is protected. But the whole business illuminates some serious issues in our politics. First that many of our institutions, in spite of the fact that they always knew what the right thing to do was, decided to ignore the fears of their women customers and employees, under pressure from noisy pressure groups. Instead, the people who were supposed to be the grown ups behaved as though the law said what campaigners wanted it to say, rather than what it actually said. They settled for what they hoped would be a quiet life. In a democracy, there’s little point in Parliament deciding anything if the law is then made an ass by activists intimidating bosses in companies, schools, universities and the media into doing something different. Second, at the heart of the campaign to undermine the Equality Act is an idea that we specifically rejected in 2010, so called self-identification. That is to say, that it should be up to the individual to decide whether they have what’s called a protected characteristic - are you male or female, are you black or white. The problem is that self-ID would destroy the operation of any law against discrimination. Look, it would almost certainly have been to my advantage as a young man to self-identify as a handsome, white public schoolboy. None of those things is true of me. And at various points I am pretty sure it’s been to my disadvantage. It is certainly statistically likely to have been to my disadvantage. But according to the logic of those who say that self-ID should be the rule and that anyone should be able to decide for themselves whether they are male or female, black or white or Asian, were I to complain about racial discrimination, it would be difficult for anyone prove that I’d been discriminated against because of my race since anybody to whom I’d lost out could just tell the courts that they too were black. I know that sounds like Alice in Wonderland but you can google the case where a chap, both of whose parents are white, insisted he should get money from the Arts Council because he so identified with the black struggle that he considered himself black, and everyone should accept his point of view. In the United States and Brazil exactly such outlandish claims have been made and people rewarded to the disadvantage of people actually born into minority families. I have even been told about firms who, when reporting their gender pay gaps have put men who just happen to like wearing dresses at weekends - nothing wrong with that, let me be clear - into the female column and told their women employees that they really haven’t got anything to moan about because statistically they are paid equally, and they should get back in their box. So today’s guidance isn’t just another tiresome chapter in culture wars. It is , I hope, a halt to the efforts to undermine one of the most important pieces of legislation on the statute book, by people who, for their own reasons, would prefer us to be living in the 1950s world of Mad Men.

English
33
23
242
40.5K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@air_intel Funny how you consider the Germans the more likely saboteurs than the French. Heard of FCAS?
English
3
0
3
1K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@brownliberite Please, please find better arguments than "we did it in the 1800s". Government decisions worth tens of billions of pounds are not assessed for value of money based on whether we did it 200 years ago or not.
English
0
0
0
7
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@brownliberite These nostalgic appeals to the 1800s don't really work anymore. If China can build the world's most efficient high speed rail network at a speed *slower* than what HS2 is planned to be, then it's clearly *already* fast enough without needing to go faster.
English
1
0
0
16
Liberite 🇬🇧 🇪🇺
Liberite 🇬🇧 🇪🇺@brownliberite·
Because we are home of the Industrial Revolution? The same Revolution that saw us advance 100 years ahead of European counterparts? Because innovation is ingrained in the British way??
UK House of Commons Committees@HoCcommitteesUK

'Why we needed to build the fastest train in the whole world, I don't know' Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, and Chair of the Transport Committee, Ruth Cadbury, discuss unanswered questions around HS2.

English
3
2
42
1.7K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@strixperegrinus The government *could* make trains run more frequently if they didn't listen to online critics whose only complaint is that the livery doesn't look like the GWR livery enough, which judging by how frequent their posts are seems to be the only thing they dislike about the scheme.
English
1
0
0
14
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@strixperegrinus The only people obsessing over the livery are people who *dislike* it. It only cost £32k to make and probably a week or so to design. It's bizarre how people who obsess over it now accuse the government of spending too much time on it...
English
1
0
0
28
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@bnzchr Actually Burke was famous for not caring about what his constituents thought...
English
2
0
1
181
Anton Hofmiller
Anton Hofmiller@bnzchr·
He wouldn't have left the people of Bristol unrepresented in Parliament because of "burnout" btw
Anton Hofmiller tweet media
English
3
12
217
7.7K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@troughsbeside If rape and murder had the same sentence, rapists would be more likely to murder their victims. They would receive the same sentence, and it would have the bonus (from their perspective) of getting rid of the witness, where there is no incentive to doing so currently.
English
1
0
2
68
Tim Stanley
Tim Stanley@timothy_stanley·
@_paullay I note that it's the choice of southerners (the correct answer is Glasgow).
English
9
1
26
2.2K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@DefenceSenseUK @RobertClark87 Nobody expected it to be attacked, that's why. Not even the UK- otherwise they would have sent Dragon *before* it was attacked. The reason why they weren't there was because nobody (not even the UK) predicted the attack, not because they don't want to defend the UK.
English
2
0
0
22
Robert Clark
Robert Clark@RobertClark87·
*checks notes* It took 3 weeks once RAF Akrotiri was attacked to reinforce with a single 🇬🇧 destroyer. By the time it left Portsmouth, the French had already arrived in 🇨🇾 with their sole aircraft carrier & 2 frigates. Not only were we forced to deploy alone, we did so late.
British Army 🇬🇧@BritishArmy

“We will never fight alone.” From across the globe, senior Warrant Officers came together at the Regimental Sergeant Majors’ Convention in Sandhurst. Alongside UK Defence and @NATO Allies, discussions focused on leadership, readiness and how we fight together 🤝 Read more ⬇️ bit.ly/4tCb3jP

English
4
3
42
2.2K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@shashj The problem isn't carrying out such a review, it's actually following it and using it to guide your decisions. I don't think Hegseth actually read it.
English
0
0
0
610
Shashank Joshi
Shashank Joshi@shashj·
The admin could avoid these situations by performing a careful consideration of America's military footprint around the world. A review of some sort, of posture, perhaps global in nature. Can't think of a catchy name.
Alex Ward@alexbward

NEW: Trump asked Hegseth in a recent phone call why the troop deployment to Poland was canceled. Trump told Hegseth that the U.S. shouldn’t treat Poland poorly, given it is an American ally with close ties to the White House.  wsj.com/politics/natio…

English
12
27
236
47.4K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@DefenceSenseUK As I said, not a case of us 'needing' to fight alone. Britain was not under attack or under threat. It was a voluntary, conscious decision to get involved in a conflict.
English
0
0
0
16
CommonSense Defence
CommonSense Defence@DefenceSenseUK·
Painfully naive. Of course allies and relationships are vital, and the nature of them means we’re unlikely to fight alone. But of course that’s always a possibility. 🇫🇰 Falklands - Operation Corporate 🇸🇱 Sierra Leone - Operation Palliser/Barras Two contemporary examples.
CommonSense Defence tweet mediaCommonSense Defence tweet mediaCommonSense Defence tweet mediaCommonSense Defence tweet media
British Army 🇬🇧@BritishArmy

“We will never fight alone.” From across the globe, senior Warrant Officers came together at the Regimental Sergeant Majors’ Convention in Sandhurst. Alongside UK Defence and @NATO Allies, discussions focused on leadership, readiness and how we fight together 🤝 Read more ⬇️ bit.ly/4tCb3jP

English
4
4
37
2.8K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@CromRedoubt Not the question though, is it? The question wasn't "what is the second city of the empire", it's "what is the second city of the UK". You're just wilfully misreading a question to try and project your nostalgia onto a clearly modern population.
English
0
0
1
97
Politics Global
Politics Global@PolitlcsGlobal·
🚨🇯🇲 WATCH: The moment Jamaican Speaker stopped an opposition MP from speaking Jamaican in her maiden speech The ruling by Holness to enforce English-only rules has sparked debates over colonial legacies and post-colonial identity [@guardian]
English
12
27
408
46.1K
John MEARchiavelli
John MEARchiavelli@mearchiavelli·
@mimikkiki How is that relevant at all? The question isn't "What is the second city of the UK historically", it's "What is the second city of the UK now". This doesn't prove that people don't know history, it proves that history is in the past and things have changed?
English
1
0
0
30