Jump to content

Normal Island


Recommended Posts

It still mystifies me that millions of people appear to have loved a woman they never met, who couldn't have given less of a shit about any of them, and that they only know about purely because she married somebody even more wealthy and famous.

Monarchists are nothing short of mentally ill, and I don't even mean that as a pejorative. I just don't know how else you explain that behaviour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few people have mentioned Diana's death and I think that the societal changes that lead to the reaction to that were probably in 'play' well before then.  I was 16 when she died and I remember being kind of shocked by the reaction to it.  Every radio station and TV channel with sombre music and tone for the whole week.  People queuing up to sign books of rememberence, people leaving flowers in Inverness and Edinburgh.  I remember Peter SIssons breaking down in tears when reading the news - has anyone ever done this before, reporting on genocides, murdered children etc?  Then you had the rush release of the Candle in the Wind song - this was a big undertaking in 1997, you could just throw out a release, it was a huge thing.  The BBC News showed footage of one of the record shops in London opening, I'll never forget it, and a middle aged woman ran under the railings as they went up and just started grabbing armfuls of CDs so she could buy them all.  I wonder if she still has them.

One difference between then and now is the influence of the media.  Oddly, given their indirect involvement in her death, the media became the principal cheerleaders of the cult of Diana and for a few years afterwards would put out hit pieces on anyone who voiced contrary views.  Conservative philospher Anthony O'Hear wrote at the time about how he didn't think Diana was admirable and was attacked in pieces by both left and right leaning tabloids.  Today, we would have social media and the reaction would be more nasty to ordinary people.  You'd have the snarky seething hatred you see people routinely express for the amorphous general public for their grief but then you'd have the people routinely policing grief and emailing your boss your attempt at a sick joke on Twitter.  We have outsourced the witchhunt the public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People talking about monarchy and monarchism are really off the mark when it comes to Diana.  The whole thing is probably the closest Britain has ever come to being in favour of abolition.  The Queen's reaction was openly attacked and criticised, although with the benefit of hindsight she was a lot saner about it all than her subjects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Day of the Lords said:

Aye, Diana's death was the first one I remember seeing loads of griefers rocking up at memorials crying floods of tears about a total stranger. Radio stations refusing to play actual music for days, DJ Nicky Campbell publicly naming and shaming someone on air who called in to ask when music would be back etc. It was probably the first time I remember seeing people being called out by these griefers for "not showing enough respect" - like a practice run for the Poppy police. 

There was some of that very type of behaviour on this website this very week. It seems to have been normalised amongst the weak and encouraged by the powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her death made the headlines because she was already making the headlines.  Her affair with Dodi meant pictures on  the front pages every day.  
Then in an attempt to escape the people taking those photos, she died.
In a sense, the people who greatly mourned her death were also indirectly the ones that caused it.
No indirectly about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Peter Grant said:

https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/13511435.fife-police-to-take-no-action-against-sammy-the-tammy/

Local police chief and an MP step in to condemn a bear for reckless behaviour. 

image.png.d403a3ef6a1ac69755166fc4e5ab38b5.png
 

He could have killed someone! My claim is still pending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dunfermline Don said:

I would say it goes back to the election of a certain PM in 1979 who went on to destroy the power of the unions and start the selling of all the publicly owned industries and services which though much maligned helped to connect and unify people on these islands. We all used BT for our telephones

We all used The GPO for phone calls.  BT was the offshoot communications successor, privatised by Thatcher

Edited by Monkey Tennis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

People talking about monarchy and monarchism are really off the mark when it comes to Diana.  The whole thing is probably the closest Britain has ever come to being in favour of abolition.  The Queen's reaction was openly attacked and criticised, although with the benefit of hindsight she was a lot saner about it all than her subjects.

They'd all decided she was to be their next God Empress, and were furious that the one they were left with was such a disappointment by comparison.

But what a thing to be upset about. I can't imagine a more bland, inoffensive human being than Diana Spencer. Virtually nothing for anyone to get annoyed or excited about, other than the immense privilege she enjoyed, but millions of folk managed it nonetheless. This desire to be ruled is bizarre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

Cant pin point it to one specific thing, but the outrage culture which emerges with what is in reflection quite minor things or social media man hunts after even relatively minor infractions or offences are committed. The idea that peoples lives are destroyed by one isolated incident for a second of momentary gratification of the person looking for social media clout. 

Hiya Janey, hiya pal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://news.sky.com/story/pets-considered-part-of-the-family-census-shows-10436356

The British family has changed in modern times - with pets widely considered to be much-loved members, according to new research.

The findings from Ancestry.co.uk, the family history website, show 90% of pet owners think of their animal as part of the family.

A third (33%) of those even claim to prefer their pets to real life members of their family, with one in six (15%) considering their pet more important than their cousin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://news.sky.com/story/pets-considered-part-of-the-family-census-shows-10436356


The British family has changed in modern times - with pets widely considered to be much-loved members, according to new research.
The findings from Ancestry.co.uk, the family history website, show 90% of pet owners think of their animal as part of the family.
A third (33%) of those even claim to prefer their pets to real life members of their family, with one in six (15%) considering their pet more important than their cousin.



For me, the only odd thing about that is the percentage is relatively low. As this thread so dutifully identifies, humans - especially residents of this here normal island - are, by and large, absolutely fucking awful.

Give me a sound dog over a tabloid reading, Facebook memeing, thick, bigoted uncle any day of the week.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...