I liked your review of Doyle's book, which I have purchased but not yet read. Seeing leftists leave the left over wokery has been one of the biggest sociological phenomena of the last few years, and I am curious to see how it unfolds.
Congratulations on the growing subscriber base, you and Lorenzo are obviously offering the kind of content many people want!
I look forward to the L&L follow-up to your CapX post -- which I've only skimmed at the moment.
But that section 35 seems to be, as I think you mentioned or alluded to, something of a reductio ad absurdum for Sturgeon and company -- they are, usefully, being hoist by their own petards, are being forced into either shitting or getting off the pot -- excuse my French, speaking of "potty" ...
Not sure if you ever saw the movie Pete 'n Tillie with Walter Matthau & Carol Burnett, but there's a scene where they trick a woman particularly vain about her age -- aren't they all? ... 😉🙂 -- into having to publicly reveal it.
Such sticky wickets are often, if not always, the result of profoundly contradictory premises that are frequently rather illuminating, even if not particularly flattering, but of far reaching import and consequence.
I read the thing about sec. 35 last time you linked it from this substack. You said it could go either way, but the the CapX piece left me with the impression that Westminster holds all the cards. What's the other side of the story?
I liked your review of Doyle's book, which I have purchased but not yet read. Seeing leftists leave the left over wokery has been one of the biggest sociological phenomena of the last few years, and I am curious to see how it unfolds.
Congratulations on the growing subscriber base, you and Lorenzo are obviously offering the kind of content many people want!
I look forward to the L&L follow-up to your CapX post -- which I've only skimmed at the moment.
But that section 35 seems to be, as I think you mentioned or alluded to, something of a reductio ad absurdum for Sturgeon and company -- they are, usefully, being hoist by their own petards, are being forced into either shitting or getting off the pot -- excuse my French, speaking of "potty" ...
Not sure if you ever saw the movie Pete 'n Tillie with Walter Matthau & Carol Burnett, but there's a scene where they trick a woman particularly vain about her age -- aren't they all? ... 😉🙂 -- into having to publicly reveal it.
Such sticky wickets are often, if not always, the result of profoundly contradictory premises that are frequently rather illuminating, even if not particularly flattering, but of far reaching import and consequence.
I read the thing about sec. 35 last time you linked it from this substack. You said it could go either way, but the the CapX piece left me with the impression that Westminster holds all the cards. What's the other side of the story?