This is Bound to End in Tears

[french frank]

See post #97

Yes, I'll try not to mention ... but it's the reason I asked you what you meant by the term you used, because I'm having a discussion with you. When we use words they're always coloured by the contexts in which we encountered them and our own reaction to them. Enough …

And another thought, because things turn up. I said I thought xenophobia was associated with low education. I was impressed by the places you said you’d lived (you didn’t include Turkey either) while claiming a lower education level than me. But living abroad, widening horizons and knowledge of elsewhere (wider than mine, incidentally), is precisely the ‘education’ that is relevant in the discussion of ‘oikophobia’. More important than formal education and qualifications.

And why did this occur to me. This in this morning's news. What is shocking is that these were college students, yet there is a depth of ignorance not penetrated by formal education. You can be called Treretola or Murphy and be as American as that ol’ apple pie. Yet they see a US Vet who’s an American Indian, they ridicule him and most incredible of all, they chant, “Build the Wall”. The ‘educational level’ of these college hooligans is nil. This is what I call xenophobia. They only know their own oikos.

[Beef Oven!]

Please do try!

I have spent between 3&7 months of many years living in Turkey, but I was thinking about formative years, growing up.

Ok, that article that you link to is something I happened on this morning. I was going to mention it, but anyway, force majeure

Yes, I'll try not to mention ... but it's the reason I asked you what you meant by the term you used, because I'm having a discussion with you. When we use words they're always coloured by the contexts in which we encountered them and our own reaction to them. Enough …

And another thought, because things turn up. I said I thought xenophobia was associated with low education. I was impressed by the places you said you’d lived (you didn’t include Turkey either) while claiming a lower education level than me. But living abroad, widening horizons and knowledge of elsewhere (wider than mine, incidentally), is precisely the ‘education’ that is relevant in the discussion of ‘oikophobia’. More important than formal education and qualifications.

And why did this occur to me. This in this morning's news. What is shocking is that these were college students, yet there is a depth of ignorance not penetrated by formal education. You can be called Treretola or Murphy and be as American as that ol’ apple pie. Yet they see a US Vet who’s an American Indian, they ridicule him and most incredible of all, they chant, “Build the Wall”. The ‘educational level’ of these college hooligans is nil. This is what I call xenophobia. They only know their own oikos.

[Conchis]

Yes, I'll try not to mention ... but it's the reason I asked you what you meant by the term you used, because I'm having a discussion with you. When we use words they're always coloured by the contexts in which we encountered them and our own reaction to them. Enough …

And another thought, because things turn up. I said I thought xenophobia was associated with low education. I was impressed by the places you said you’d lived (you didn’t include Turkey either) while claiming a lower education level than me. But living abroad, widening horizons and knowledge of elsewhere (wider than mine, incidentally), is precisely the ‘education’ that is relevant in the discussion of ‘oikophobia’. More important than formal education and qualifications.

And why did this occur to me. This in this morning's news. What is shocking is that these were college students, yet there is a depth of ignorance not penetrated by formal education. You can be called Treretola or Murphy and be as American as that ol’ apple pie. Yet they see a US Vet who’s an American Indian, they ridicule him and most incredible of all, they chant, “Build the Wall”. The ‘educational level’ of these college hooligans is nil. This is what I call xenophobia. They only know their own oikos.

Whatever they're taught, they're probably ignoring it, or forming their own interpretations based on 'manifest destiny' or some such bull.

The Federation of Conservative Students behaved in much the same way before Norman Tebbit disbanded them.

[gradus]

... and so it did.

[Lat-Literal]

I'm now beginning to understand the areas that give you and Scruton problems. Rather more than 'culture' in general, we're speaking of British institutions (one could add the Church of England to the list).

What I see here is a set of symbols. The 'oikophiles' perceive them as assuring stability, safety, the unchanging aspects of British life. Which, not surprisingly, would be associated with a conservative (or 'right-wing') outlook. So all Scruton is really doing with his invention of 'oikophobia' is attacking 'leftists' who denigrate these well-loved pillars of British society.

It seems to me that he is simply putting an emotive label on those 'leftists' who see society as needing to be fundamentally changed, who threaten what he has referred to as 'the survival of our way of life.' They might agree with that …

I have been reading your posts and those of others with interest but have not as yet read all of them in full. Which I will do - especially as I have seen some things with which I very much agree. But I don't think oikaphobia is the opposite to xenophobia. I believe the opposite to xenophobia is an intense dislike of foreign politicians and foreign political institutions. These, I feel, are as separable from a dislike of foreign people as an intense dislike of British politicians and British political institutions are separable from an outlook on British people.

Incidentally, we keep being told by the media that it is highly ironic to be opposed to any overly strong arm of Parliament when the argument is that Parliament must have a greater say. While the use of terminology may have often been loose, I don't think many people give two hoots about parliaments, national or supra-national. What they actually debate is where executive power should reside. One of many conclusions I have come to since autumn - it had been hovering in my head for almost a decade - is that there aren't many further steps to go now until executives as well as legislatures are seen as unworkably outmoded. Then we shall have all decisions made by voters at the flick of a switch much as dancing fans ring in votes and six million are on internet fantasy football. The role of MPs will be simply to nod through whatever questions the civil servants put to them as requiring a public vote.

[oddoneout]

The role of MPs will be simply to nod through whatever questions the civil servants put to them as requiring a public vote.

And given the rate at which privatisation(overt or covert), outsourcing and such like are being accomplished,together with the influence of lobbyists, there wouldn't be many such questions with which to trouble themselves I imagine.

[Serial_Apologist]

Incidentally, we keep being told by the media that it is highly ironic to be opposed to any overly strong arm of Parliament when the argument is that Parliament must have a greater say. While the use of terminology may have often been loose, I don't think many people give two hoots about parliaments, national or supra-national. What they actually debate is where executive power should reside. One of many conclusions I have come to since autumn - it had been hovering in my head for almost a decade - is that there aren't many further steps to go now until executives as well as legislatures are seen as unworkably outmoded. Then we shall have all decisions made by voters at the flick of a switch much as dancing fans ring in votes and six million are on internet fantasy football. The role of MPs will be simply to nod through whatever questions the civil servants put to them as requiring a public vote.

So long as the general public is transparently and accurately informed, this will be all to the good, but only as far as it goes or can go. I for one will no longer gleaning what information is to be gleaned about the ways of the world and people's attitudes to them from the British Biassed Corporation, which has now forfeited the little credibility they ever had for me, but getting it from Channel 4 News.

[Lat-Literal]

And given the rate at which privatisation(overt or covert), outsourcing and such like are being accomplished,together with the influence of lobbyists, there wouldn't be many such questions with which to trouble themselves I imagine.

I don't really understand your point about privatisation/outsourcing which has its supporters and its opponents. Lobbyists, I think, have greater power in relation to a small number of MPs with the power they have currently - bear in mind it would be possible to accommodate all of them on just one long road in any town - than in relation to the millions of people who are voters. Trump is a good example of their limits. Far fewer votes than Mrs Clinton and not an especially high number of votes in comparison with Republican candidates in the past.

Many questions would be decided in ways I disliked. The death penalty would be reintroduced and for a wider range of crimes than I would wish. But I am more uneasy now about our systems - which consistently do not respect the opinions of the majority of people - than I am of any such consequences. Until this point, I could accept them and the idea that MPs provided a reasoning on arguably a higher level because they were both functioning and functional in other areas. This is no longer the case. Hence, the oiks must have their way.

A good time for the change will be when MPs move out of Parliament so that it can be renovated. This will reveal clearly to the public that it is the buildings which represent solidity and security rather than who is in them. Simultaneously voters will acknowledge that the two had combined quite well in British history. And yes - I would want to retain the monarchy as would the majority of people when voting electronically under the new system. Personally, I would vote weekly just before or after I updated my fantasy football squad. I do, of course, accept that there is no football in the summer and on rare occasions I am on holiday. But that doesn't represent any problem as MPs in olden times were not in Parliament then either.

[Serial_Apologist]

A good time for the change will be when MPs move out of Parliament so that it can be renovated. This will reveal clearly to the public that it is the buildings which represent solidity and security rather than who is in them.

[Lat-Literal]

[french frank]

Then we shall have all decisions made by voters at the flick of a switch

I do think that national decisions should be taken at a remove from the purely personal. We know that the 'will of the people' has become a useful political tool, but it doesn't really exist in any meaningful way.

[vinteuil]

.

... I do not think submitting to The General Will is a clever idea at all

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_will

.

[french frank]

.

... I do not think submitting to The General Will is a clever idea at all

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_will

.

"The law is the expression of the general will. All citizens have the right to contribute personally, or through their representatives, to its formation."

The UK being a representative democracy, citizens have the the right to contribute through their representatives. Which I presume is why, constitutionally, referendums are purely advisory - unless a special Act is passed which makes one binding.

[oddoneout]

there is no football in the summer

That's not always what it seems like to me - but then I'm not interested in it so I suppose I notice its domination of news programmes(one of the reasons I stopped watching the so-called local TV news programme was that 'sport' meant football 90% of the time year round and took up a large chunk of the ever-decreasing airtime allocated to the whole programme) , TV schedules and the local paper more than might otherwise be the case.
My comment about privatisation/outsourcing concerned the situation whereby, as I see it, once 'services' become the preserve of commerce they are driven and controlled by factors with which politicians are reluctant(to say the least) to involve themselves in any way that might have negative impact on their(MPs) personal/party interests, and therefore don't. Hence not many questions...

[oddoneout]

"The law is the expression of the general will. All citizens have the right to contribute personally, or through their representatives, to its formation."

The UK being a representative democracy, citizens have the the right to contribute through their representatives. Which I presume is why, constitutionally, referendums are purely advisory - unless a special Act is passed which makes one binding.

Trouble is FPTP tends to make something of a nonsense of the 'representative' part of that for many voters.