(no subject)
пока у меня тут свободное время, вернее, когда я слышу от начальника очередное "Ань, у меня для тебя новая задача", я уже предвкушаю его следующую фразу: "Творческая". - ну так оно обычно и случается. сейчас моя задача - оформить его кабинет.
поскольку мой ноутбук, который прошел со мной огонь, воду и медные трубы, может меня покинуть, я начала разгребать "мои документы". и нашла несколько своих статей 3хлетней давности. меня удивило даже не то, что я (омг) читала об истории евреев в России (щито?!), сколько то, насколько лучше был мой английский и насколько он деградировал сейчас.
тематики в основном - усыновление, англичане, английская поэзия как истоки панк-рока, история как политический инструмент.
The Essence of being British
We are all used to the classical image of an Englishman, that can be characterized by being conservative, to a certain extent old-fashioned, a little meticulous in carrying out daily affairs and, no doubt, home-loving. It was created by centuries of classical literature and, though it may not be absolutely true (in fact, stereotypes never are), one is likely to have heard this sort of description. Do stereotypes alter in the course of time? How often does it happen, if it does at all? Aren’t we at the moment witnessing this process?
Since 1997 the Labour party has been the party in power in Britain. 3 times the Conservative Party could not win the office. As far as I know, preliminary public opinion polls show that it is steadily regaining its positions. So why are people becoming less content with the policy of the Labourists? A widely-levelled criticism of Blair and his subordinates is that they make use of spin to such an extent that his government has fundamentally lost credibility with the British public. It is also claimed that the Government has on occasions crossed the line between selective presentation of information and deliberate misleading. As far as I can judge from today’s press and my basic knowledge of Tony Blair’s policy, the latter seems to be very controversial. While the Blair government has introduced social policies supported by the left of the Labour Party, Blair is seen on economic and management issues as being to the right of much of the party. Some critics describe Blair as a reconstructed neoconservative or Thatcherite. He is occasionally described as "Son of Thatcher", though Lady Thatcher herself rejected this identification, saying that in her opinion the resemblances were superficial.
In their ambition to modernize the country, by the motto “The party renewed, the country reborn” we can see an evident wish to agree with as many views as possible. I have always considered it not the best technique in politics for a number of reasons. First of all, it proves a lack of a steady party line. Secondly, for me it is some kind of cheating on people: whatever views you may have, they agree with you. Thirdly, it involves such hackneyed techniques, as we can see in the film “Wag the Dog”.
This bulldog thing, promoting Princess Diana as the “People’s Princess”, numerous mottos, the choice of words - a good job of speech-writers (people, public, common, modern,renewed, contemporary, young etc.) are to my mind just populism, which is the result of the Party’s declining electoral favour.
I still can not understand how one can create a “young country” with an orientation to traditional values. I think, it is to some extent a wish not to radically discard the ideas of the Conservative Party. Being respectful and tolerant and broad-minded is attractive to people, isn’t it?
So it seems to me, that in the ambition to hold to traditions, the Labourists obviously neglect them. Do the questions of homosexuality, one-parent families and the war in Iraq have something to do with traditional values? That’s the question.
поскольку мой ноутбук, который прошел со мной огонь, воду и медные трубы, может меня покинуть, я начала разгребать "мои документы". и нашла несколько своих статей 3хлетней давности. меня удивило даже не то, что я (омг) читала об истории евреев в России (щито?!), сколько то, насколько лучше был мой английский и насколько он деградировал сейчас.
тематики в основном - усыновление, англичане, английская поэзия как истоки панк-рока, история как политический инструмент.
The Essence of being British
We are all used to the classical image of an Englishman, that can be characterized by being conservative, to a certain extent old-fashioned, a little meticulous in carrying out daily affairs and, no doubt, home-loving. It was created by centuries of classical literature and, though it may not be absolutely true (in fact, stereotypes never are), one is likely to have heard this sort of description. Do stereotypes alter in the course of time? How often does it happen, if it does at all? Aren’t we at the moment witnessing this process?
Since 1997 the Labour party has been the party in power in Britain. 3 times the Conservative Party could not win the office. As far as I know, preliminary public opinion polls show that it is steadily regaining its positions. So why are people becoming less content with the policy of the Labourists? A widely-levelled criticism of Blair and his subordinates is that they make use of spin to such an extent that his government has fundamentally lost credibility with the British public. It is also claimed that the Government has on occasions crossed the line between selective presentation of information and deliberate misleading. As far as I can judge from today’s press and my basic knowledge of Tony Blair’s policy, the latter seems to be very controversial. While the Blair government has introduced social policies supported by the left of the Labour Party, Blair is seen on economic and management issues as being to the right of much of the party. Some critics describe Blair as a reconstructed neoconservative or Thatcherite. He is occasionally described as "Son of Thatcher", though Lady Thatcher herself rejected this identification, saying that in her opinion the resemblances were superficial.
In their ambition to modernize the country, by the motto “The party renewed, the country reborn” we can see an evident wish to agree with as many views as possible. I have always considered it not the best technique in politics for a number of reasons. First of all, it proves a lack of a steady party line. Secondly, for me it is some kind of cheating on people: whatever views you may have, they agree with you. Thirdly, it involves such hackneyed techniques, as we can see in the film “Wag the Dog”.
This bulldog thing, promoting Princess Diana as the “People’s Princess”, numerous mottos, the choice of words - a good job of speech-writers (people, public, common, modern,renewed, contemporary, young etc.) are to my mind just populism, which is the result of the Party’s declining electoral favour.
I still can not understand how one can create a “young country” with an orientation to traditional values. I think, it is to some extent a wish not to radically discard the ideas of the Conservative Party. Being respectful and tolerant and broad-minded is attractive to people, isn’t it?
So it seems to me, that in the ambition to hold to traditions, the Labourists obviously neglect them. Do the questions of homosexuality, one-parent families and the war in Iraq have something to do with traditional values? That’s the question.