1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
YOU CAN NOT BEAT A GOOD STAKE, 26 Jun 2010
james eves "WOUIFE"
This review is from: The Blood of Alexandria (Hardcover)
This is my first outing with Richard Blake Aelric,the young British clark who has become a senator and trusted henchman of Emperor Heracluis and i found that it kept me page turning all the way to the end of this politcal intrigue in 612AD Egypt.The one character i was not sure of was the Mistress who seem to float through the story but was not notice by anyone except Aelric and who had powers that seem to take us into the world of fantasy.The man who i grew to like was Priscus,the old enemy from Constantinopl who has a drug habit and a passion for a nice stake,but not all ways on the plate,which along with his pet cat,was not unlike that of a Bond villain.I also throught the Amazon Nuns was a nice touch in the final outcome,so perhaps not so far from fantasy.So to sum up,a good read that makes me want to explore the first two books by Blake and the ending leads one to believe we will have more adventures with Aelric yet to come.
Amazon.co.uk: james eves "WOUIFE"’s review of The Blood of Alexandria
I agree. Clever people tend to have clever children. Stupid people tend to have stupid children. In a society where birth counts for everything, there will be a gradual tendency towards an even distribution of intelligence among the classes. In any reasonably open society, however, clever people will rise from the bottom. Over time, there will be a decline in the average intellectual quality – among much else, perhaps – of the lower classes. Welfare policies that subsidise the proliferation of the unfit will make things worse.
I am willing to accept a system in which those who are able to pass certain rather stiff examinations can go to university, and receive financial assistance if their own family means are insufficient. Indeed, though my own interest is not necessarily a guide to what is right, I am a beneficiary of this system. But I see nothing but national harm and individual shame in the system we now have. SIG
“In an open society, people will be recruited to jobs largely on the basis of their ability. This means the brightest people will tend to be found in the higher occupational classes. These people will tend to produce relatively bright children so, in the next generation, middle-class children will be over-represented in the higher positions. In a meritocracy, therefore, we should not expect equal success rates among children from different class origins.”
More at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7144765.ece
By 1909, Chesterton was contemplating the prospect of the decline of the United States, especially in light of its war against Spain over the Philippines. The decline of the British Empire after the Second Boer War of 1899-1902 was a given.
It may be said with rough accuracy that there are three stages in the life of a strong people. First, it is a small power, and fights small powers. Then it is a great power, and fights great powers. Then it is a great power, and fights small powers, but pretends that they are great powers, in order to rekindle the ashes of its ancient emotion and vanity. After that, the next step is to become a small power itself.
Chesterton, G. K. (2010). Heretics (265). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
Says it all really, doesn’t it?
Although he wrote the following passage in 1909 about the United Kingdom and the question of Irish Home Rule, G.K. Chesterton might just as well have written it about the EU and UKIP. Enjoy:
union is no more a good thing in itself than separation is a good thing in itself. To have a party in favour of union and a party in favour of separation, is as absurd as to have a party in favour of going upstairs and a party in favour of going downstairs. The question is not whether we go up or down stairs, but where we are going to, and what we are going for? Union is strength; union is also weakness. It is a good thing to harness two horses to a cart; but it is not a good thing to try and turn two hansom cabs into one four-wheeler. Turning ten nations into one empire may happen to be as feasible as turning ten shillings into one half-sovereign. Also it may happen to be as preposterous as turning ten terriers into one mastiff. The question in all cases is not a question of union or absence of union, but of identity or absence of identity.
Chesterton, G. K. (2010). Heretics (255). Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
Chesterton wrote the above in the context of correcting the idea that older politicians like Gladstone were idealists whereas newer ones like Joseph Chamberlain were materialists. In fact, he noted, the real difference between them was that Gladstone thought of his ideals as things he would like to change reality to resemble, whereas Chamberlain thought his ideals simply described the way things were in any case.
Truly, there is nothing new under the sun.
Posted in Calssical liberal, Culture War, Liberty, Minimal-Statism
Tagged Chamberlain, EU, European Union, G.K. Chesterton, Gladstone, Home Rule, Ireland, UKIP, United Kingdom
That Diane Aboot woman is a scream. First, she clams up in front if Andrew Neil (not a good position to be in) saying “Andrew, I have nothing more to say” many many times over her taser fares. And then she thinks that not having tenure in your job is “cruel”. Well look love I farm pigs, and if no sod wants to eat them, or I don’t get the money for them I need to pay our way, then I’m thrown out of here by the Bank and by your governmint. What do you suggest I’d do then Diane.