HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: billp@pcsbst.pcs.com (Bill Potter)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: MAJOR WINS MAJORITY!!!
Date: 15 Apr 92 20:48:19 GMT
Reply-To: billp@pcsbst.pcs.com (Bill Potter)
Organization: PCS Computer Systeme GmbH

In article <1992Apr14.201000.25851@leland.Stanford.EDU>,
rna@leland.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft) writes:
> In article <1992Apr13.095502.8241@bristol.ac.uk> P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk
(Paul Smee) writes:
> >
> >I've noticed the world situation.  The point is that the UK has been
> >slipping faster than most of the (industrialized, at least) world.
> >Thirteen years ago, the UK was near the top of most comparative EEC
> >tables; now it's near the bottom.  Maybe the whole world *is* going to
> >hell in a handbasket, but that doesn't mean that the UK needs to lead
> >the way.
> 
> Total crap.  This was true up until 1979.  Britain's productivity has
> since grown faster than e.g. France, Germany.  See the Economist.

What does this prove?  Surely we're interested in the top speed
not the acceraration. 

A lot of this depends anyway on when you take your snapshot. Didn't
the Guardian deight in telling us in 1989 that, comparing 10 years
of Thatcher to 10 years of Mitterand, the French were winning hands
down. The picture may have changed in the last three years so that
the Economist can say, comparing 18 month of Major to 18 months
of Mitterand, Britain is winning hands down.

=============================================================================
Bill Potter    : unido!pcsbst!billp       : 1992 - 500th Anniv. of a lost
PCS GmbH       : billp@pcsbst.pcs.com     : Italian sailor and 200th Anniv.
D8000 Muenchen : You can't sink a RAINBOW : of the year of the sheep.
=============================================================================
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:6124 alt.politics.british:1
From: gray@rz-berlin.mpg.de
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.politics.british
Subject: Re: Northern Ireland and alledged British propaganda
Date: 6 Apr 92 12:21:19 +0100
Organization: Rechenzentrum MPG Berlin

In article <1992Mar31.113443@mark.enet.dec.com>,
  holohan@mark.enet.dec.com (Mark Holohan) writes:

> In article <1992Mar27.160310.7545@rz-berlin.mpg.de>, gray@rz-berlin.mpg.de
> writes:
> 
> |>  Hear hear, well said (if a little impolite).  How, Jonathan, can you
> |>expect to understand the situation in NI if you refuse to listen to the
> |>people you disagree with.  OK so the man distorts facts, but they should
> |>be worrying enough without distortion.

> If you feel facts are being distorted, then point them out.  I am not
> distorting anything.  Lord Lloyd George, is just a good example of how 
> the British deal with those who tell the truth.

  I'm afraid that Mark's original post has been deleted at this site, if
he really wants a point-by-point assessment he should send me a copy.

  So in general terms here are my pet hates:

  -The use of the word "all" instead of "many"
  -The use of the word "many" instead of "few" or "one"
  -The use of silly labels which only serve to insult the person you are
   talking to, viz "Paddies" or "Goons".

  An example from Mark's post (culled from memory) is the description of
house searches as "harassment".  True harassment certainly occurs, but if
someone set off a large bomb near your house wouldn't you want the police
to look for the person who did it?  Complain about the misuse of the search
power when it occurs, complain about the dodgy attitude of the british courts
to anyone with an irish accent, complain about the daft political system that
allows NI to elect MPs who have no effective power at Westminster, complain
about all these things and rightly too, but this newsgroup deserves better
reasoning than the tabloid headlining contained in Mark's post.

  My point was only that the whole NI debate has degenerated to the level
of name-calling and the application of over-worked labels, and that because
the British Government and the IRA generally accept this because it prevents
discussion of the real issues, the people of NI get seriously screwed.

> |>OK so he uses highly emotive
> |>language, but so do you.  Which came first, the bigot or the bigot?

> First came the British Imperialist, then came the revolutionary.

I rest my case.

   Struan
From: mfriley@wpi.WPI.EDU (Margaret F Riley)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Gas stoves
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:46:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: wpi.1992Apr9.164658.15289
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute

In article <34376@ttidca.TTI.COM> jackson@soldev.tti.com (Dick Jackson) writes:
>>In article <pwe.702655289@slipknot> pwe@slipknot.mit.edu (Paul W. Emery) writes:
>....
>>She'll have bigger problems with the flour, which never seems to
>>be quite right in the US - different kind of wheat or something.
>
>Very true -- you've put your finger on it.  Even if I go to a local
>"French" bakery (where I assume they try to do the right thing) and buy a
>loaf that is nary an hour old, it is still of indifferent quality compared
>with the real thing.  A couple of years ago I visited England after a long
>time away.  The taste of the bread there was a revelation -- I remembered
>how bread shold really taste.  Any flourologists out there care to explain
>how the Merkans have managed to de-flavor the stuff so effectively?
>
>Dick Jackson

Well, it's not necessarily the flour we use as much as the recipe for 
the bread.   My husband spent some time touring England and has since spent
several years trying to match the bread he ate there.   After hundreds of
recipes and many many cookbooks, he finally found a bread recipe that does
*not* use sugar.   Removing the sugar makes the bread come out much closer
to the European breads he remembered.   Apparently sugar aids in rising
and making the bread into the bubblegum stuff sold in the US groceries.
Stuff lasts forever too since sugar is a type of preservative.

Margaret
mfriley@wpi.wpi.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: nickh@CS.CMU.EDU (Nick Haines)
Subject: Re: Election Fraud by the Conservatives
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 21:15:17 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Apr10.130407.29177@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Originator: nickh@VOILA.VENARI.CS.CMU.EDU

As far as I know, no poll tax collectors use the electoral roll to
gather names and addresses. Several people I know were on the
electoral roll in Cambridge for more than a year, with a (deliberate)
typo in their name there (so they could identify that source of the
information) but were never found by the poll tax people.

This doesn't rule out the idea that the (very common) notion (of
the electoral roll being used in this way) was deliberately spread by
Tory supporters of one sort or another (eg Central Office, the
tabloids, or MI5) in order to keep anti-Torys off the roll.

Nick
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Emmigration after the Tory win on April 9th
Date: 12 Apr 92 05:37:00 GMT
Organization: sgi

In article <11APR199223593597@zeus.tamu.edu>, pac9897@zeus.tamu.edu (SO MUCH FOR DEMOCRACY IN BRITAIN) writes:
|> 
|> Surely this is a hollow win for the Tories if everyone who didn't vote
|> for them is so sick of it all that they want to leave?

Too true.   Go for it.  I won't tell a soul until you get well clear.

jon.
From: martin.baines@uk.sun.com (Martin Baines - Sun UK - SE Manager Cambridge/Gatwick)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Why wait 5 years?
Date: 16 Apr 92 11:33:42 GMT
Reply-To: martin.baines@uk.sun.com
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: bottomdog.uk.sun.com

In article jjk94t8@zola.esd.sgi.com, livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) 
[deleted earlier thread]
>Am I the only one who is beginning to think that whatever the Scots
>claim to want, in practice they act so as to minimize achieving it,
>and to maximise the opportunity to whinge afterwards.

I know how you feel! However, I suspect that the "whinging" we see
comes from a fairly small percentage of the population, but one with
a load voice. The non-whingers may or may not like what has happened:
the Scotish election results seem to me to indicate a sufficient
diversity of views in Scotland, that trying to coble together a
working government from the factions north of the border would
be a very interesting* exercise.

Martin

* As in the old Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times".

---
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment"

Martin Baines, Sales Support Manager,
Sun Microsystems Ltd, 306 Science Park, Cambridge, CB4 4WG, UK
Phone: +44 223 420421                 Fax: +44 223 420257
JANET:     Martin.Baines@uk.co.sun    Other UK:  Martin.Baines@sun.co.uk
Internet:  Martin.Baines@UK.sun.com
X.400:     g=martin s=baines prmd=sunir admd=mci c=us
From: arf@otter.hpl.hp.com (Andrew Farmer)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Farewell to Kinnock
Date: 14 Apr 92 23:18:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: otter.21780566
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.


In soc.culture.british, rjc@cstr.ed.ac.uk (Richard Caley) writes:

> By this reasoning the next
> conservative prime minister should be either Jeffery Archer or Chris
> Patten. 

	Oh god, don't even think it...Next thing you know, we'll
 have Fred Housego or Eddie the bloody Eagle as PM...

	arf
From: albion@bnr.ca (Alan Buchanan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: British Bill: of Rights? of Goods?
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:14:23 GMT
Reply-To: alanbu@bnr.ca
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd, Ottawa
Originator: albion@bcrks63


In article <1992Apr13.142400.20476@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:
> 
> If you don't have a written Constitution that requires some kind
> of super-majority to amend, then what is there to stop the current
> government from changing the election rules any which way it wants (besides
> fear of riots). 

Very little, although the Queen might recognise the situation as a now or
never time to dissolve parliament on her own initiative. This would
kill the Bill and force an election. Almost inevitably, as a result, a
constitutional republic would follow.

Many people would like to see such things more clearly described
in a written document, but you will have noticed that Peru merely
suspended it's constitution. At least such actions are more overt and can
justify external reaction.



                            Alan.

--
Alan Buchanan       Bell-Northern Research, Ltd       Ph.: (613) 763-2750
Silicon Design      P.O. Box 3511, Station C          Fax: (613) 763-3970
  Methods           Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1Y 4H7  

alanbu@bnr.ca        

        Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.
                         - William Butler Yeats
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,uk.politics
Subject: Re: political parties
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:17:23 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1992Apr14.021733.6149@leland.Stanford.EDU> rna@leland.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft) writes:
>
> 
>In article <JIM.92Apr13115230@hunter.cs.strath.ac.uk> jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr11.022452.4346@leland.Stanford.EDU> rna@leland.Stanford.EDU (Robert Ashcroft) writes:
>>
>>   The real problem is that Labour is simply not a natural majority party.
>>
>>So how come there have been 4 Labour governments since WW2?
>>
>
>The last one being voted in in 1974.  That's 18 years ago.  

Just to drive the point home, some more stats from the Guardian.  From
1950 through to 1970, both the main parties consistently achieved over
40% of the vote.  In the two 1974 elections, they both had less than
40% of the vote.  At each election from 1979 onwards, however, the
Conservatives have had over 40% of the vote, but Labour has had less.
In fact, Labour's current level of 34.4% is less than it managed in 1979.

--
Guy Barry	Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 | University of Cambridge
		  Fax: +44 (0)223 334678 | Computer Laboratory   
	   JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl | New Museums Site, Pembroke Street
        Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk | Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK
From: bob@castle.ed.ac.uk (Bob Gray)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Secrecy (Was: Re: Election Fraud by the Conservatives)
Date: 16 Apr 92 11:55:34 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh Parallel Computing Centre

ceci@lysator.liu.se (Ceci Henningsson) writes:
>Isn't there something like the German informational right to
>self-decision (informationelles Selbstbestimmungsrecht) in the UK? The

Don't be silly, This is Britain. The Government doesn't like
the idea of people finding out what information is held on
them. Secrecy is an government obsession.

>computerized data as for traditional card-index systems. It states
>that authorities musn't collect or trade information about the
>citizens without their expressed consent.

<burst of hysterical laughter...>

The British Government REQUIRES local authorities to sell
this information. The local electoral rolls are regarded
as a source of income. Any local authority which doesn't
sell the information is deemed not to be maximising sources
of revenue, and will be penalised by having the support
grant cut.
	Bob.
From: egpv29@castle.ed.ac.uk (JHenderson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Gas stoves
Date: 13 Apr 92 11:41:26 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

I'm rather mystified by all this talk of how good British bread is compared
with USAn bread. Horrible white "Wonder Bread" seems to be widely available
in both countries, but other varieties such as different types of rye bread
are much more common in the US - even in supermarkets.

For GOOD bread, it's necessary to go to, say, Denmark, or France.


-- 
-jeremy henderson        | I do wonder that so brave a prince as King James 
egpv29@uk.ac.ed.castle   | should be born in so stinking a toun as Edinburgh
                         | in lousy Scotland.
From: simon@cs.city.ac.uk (Simon Brock-Gunn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: The Liberal Party (was Re: Natural Law)
Date: 14 Apr 92 09:36:00 GMT
Organization: City University, London

In article <1992Apr13.122702.7674@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew 
Huntbach) writes:

>The best results for a small party, and so far as I can see
>completely unreported in the press, were those obtained by "The
>Liberal Party". Not to be confused with the Liberal Democrats,
>this consists of members of the old Liberal Party, mainly from
>its left wing, who refused to join in with the merger with the
>Scoial Democrats. They stood in about 70 seats, in many places
>getting 1000 or more votes, despite getting zero national
>publicity. The fact that people were prepared to vote for these
>rather than the Ashdown fan club is further evidence that Paddy
>Ashdown is to blame for the poor third party results.

I don't want to be too pessimistic here, but considering Major and Kinnock
went through the entire campaign referring to the Liberal Democrats as
"The Liberals", would it be out of line to suggest that a lot of the people
who voted Liberal didn't know there was a difference, and thought they
were voting for Paddy Ashdown's party (or even David Steel's)?

==============================================================================
|| Simon A. Brock-Gunn | Computer Science Dept. | You can't have everything ||
|| simon@cs.city.ac.uk | City University, Nort- | - where would you put it? ||
|| Tel +44 71 477 8000 | hampton Square, London |---------------------------||
|| Fax +44 71 250 0837 | EC1V 0HB, England, UK. |   (THIS SPACE FOR RENT)   ||
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: dweeb?
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 02:42:30 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <1992Apr12.002852.21905@cs.yale.edu> horne-scott@CS.YALE.EDU (Scott Horne) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.153946.17825@sun.pcl.ac.uk>, marcus@sun.pcl.ac.uk (Marcus Harvey) writes:
><
><I've always held the belief that the reason you spell "centre" c-e-n-t-e-r
><and suchlike is because the original settlers were better with a spade and a
><plough than a pen and paper...
>
>Fortunately, not everyone in this country fits that characterisation (note
>the correct spelling--no `z').  Two or three of the quarter-billion (or
>quarter-milliard :-)) of us eschew the vile orthographic revisionism of
>Noah Webster.
>
>(To ignorant Yankees out there:  Yes, it's `plough', not `plow'.  Learn to
>spell.)
>

I hope you are correct in stating that there are only two or 
three of you.  Sickening suck-up Anglophilic Yankees are grotesque
aberrations, and should be kicked in the head at regular intervals.
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Any minority candidates?
Date: 13 Apr 92 11:07:17 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
>As well as Keith Vaz, Bernie Grant and [help! I've forgotten her name] who
>stood and won for Labour in 1987, and are standing again, Labour have four or
>five other ethnic minority candidates in winnable seats, as well as some
>losers. I don't know about the Libdems, but the Tories have a couple of Asian
>candidates in constituiencies with large Asian populations. And, as Francis
>suggested, they are popular amongst the self-made restaurant/corner-shop
>owning small-business people. They also have, famously, a black barrister in
>white middle-class little England Cheltenham. When he was selected last year,
>there was a great hoo-hah in the local party, with several openly racist
>members resigning. He is likely to lose, a result of the Libdem gain in the
>region and of the racist vote against him.

Labour also have Ghanaian Paul Boateng, and the Asian member
who won the Langbaurgh by-election earlier this year and kept
his seat. The Tories have their first Asian member, elected for
Brentford and Isleworth in the general election.

As for Cheltenham, there is a fair chance the Conservative
would have lost whatever his colour. The Conservatives lost the
very similar seat of Bath to the LibDems despite the fact that
the Conservative candidate was a government minister who had
represented the seat previously and the LibDem candidate was an
outsider who had only been selected at the last minute. In Cheltenham
they had the advantage of a well-established local candidate.
It was not the Conservative's colour that brought him down,
it was the fact that he came from Brirmingham and didn't
seem to have much to say for the people of Cheltenham.

Matthew Huntbach
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: uk.politics,soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Why wait 5 years?
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:07:50 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1992Apr16.123723.18718@rdg.dec.com> potter@movies.enet.dec.com (Alan T Potter) writes:
>
>In article <RJC.92Apr15203550@brodie.cstr.ed.ac.uk>, rjc@cstr.ed.ac.uk (Richard Caley) writes...

>>And, to take the other end of this statment, there is no extra layer
>>of government involved in a Scottish or Welsh parliament -- the layer
>>is already there (Scottish office, Welsh office and all the quangos
>>associated with them). All that is involved is a new level of
>>representitives. Representitives are (relatively) cheap -- they want
>>the job and get low wages, all that is needed is some offices. 
>
>We have the representatives - they work in Westminster.  Are you saying that
>either i) a TAX-RAISING assembly or ii) a NATIONAL GOVERNMENT can be run with
>no staff more than is required to run the Scottish or Welsh offices?  Surely
>not.

The answer to (i) is probably yes; there are already Inland Revenue and
Customs & Excise staff working in Scotland (I'm not quite so sure about
Wales), and they would simply become directly answerable to the relevant
Scottish or Welsh minister.  (ii) would require more staff in Scotland
or Wales, though this would be partly offset by a drop in the number
of civil servants in London.

--
Guy Barry	Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 | University of Cambridge
		  Fax: +44 (0)223 334678 | Computer Laboratory   
	   JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl | New Museums Site, Pembroke Street
        Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk | Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK
Xref: sparky soc.culture.british:6553 alt.politics.british:23
From: rjc@cstr.ed.ac.uk (Richard Caley)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.politics.british
Subject: Re: The Decline of Britain (was Re: Great Britain as a malfunctioning democracy)
Date: 15 Apr 92 22:05:23 GMT
	<1992Apr14.235946.25884@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Apr15.142359.67222@cs.cmu.edu>
Organization: Centre for Speech Technology Research

In article <1992Apr15.142359.67222@cs.cmu.edu>, Nigel Goddard (ng) writes:

ng> Of course there are many factions within the business community, all
ng> agreed that capital accumulation is the major goal and divided only
ng> on means to that end.  I'd say the free-trade faction is overwhelmingly
ng> dominant.

Well, all the calls for protectionist measures come from somewhere,
and it usually isn't the local DHSS office.

--
rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk	Most businesses are in favour of their own
			freedom to trade. Free from such things as
			imports and startup competition.
From: marcus@sun.pcl.ac.uk (Marcus Harvey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Manipulative election broadcasts
Date: 7 Apr 92 13:20:27 GMT
Organization: Polytechnic of Central London

In article <2090@nlsun1.oracle.nl> mlemmerm writes:
>In article <1992Apr3.110309.11169@newcastle.ac.uk> Trevor.Kirby@newcastle.ac.uk (Trevor Kirby) writes:
>
>Heres a quick run down on the election posters spotted on the way home last 
>night.
>
>1) A picture of a porcupine with Tory defence policy under it, next to a picture
>   of a hedgehog with labour defense policy under it. I don't know if this is
>   meant to indicate that the tory policy has more bite or that they intend to
>   buy American weapons.
>
>	I think it has something to do with which party has the most pricks!

Which is probably why the one on Tottenham Court Road near the Warren St.
tube end has P R I C K S spray painted on it!

Marcus Harvey, Polytechnic of Central London IRS
marcus@uk.ac.pcl.sun - JANET  marcus%sun.pcl.ac.uk@ukacrl - BITNET/EARN

                                                          ...Bubble Up!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british