Non-motoring > Nanny state Miscellaneous
Thread Author: Crankcase Replies: 19
View Threaded 

New Sat 9 Jan 16 16:59 
 Nanny state - Crankcase
Years ago we went to Germany for a holiday. One thing we took from the experience was that there seemed to be a million signs everywhere telling you what you could or couldn't do.

These days it feels as if we've gone the same way now, with exhortations to do this or that in every walk of life.

Also years ago, this advert was on the tv. We still use the last line to each other in discussions sometimes. I think that the Government could today take a leaf from Kellog's book here.

youtu.be/Nt6DgLNSm0k


So, especially for our older readers, do you feel more regulated and nannied than say the sixties, fifties or earlier, or is it just fashionable to think we are and life is better now?
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 17:17 
 Nanny state - Runfer D'Hills
I most definitely feel more regulated and don't mind admitting that I at least mildly resent it.

It seems that common sense has now been somehow quantified and reduced down to lowest common denominator level.

We've bred a society that just loves rules, bans and regulations as we have emerged from one which felt much more self regulating through common courtesy and an understanding of the definition of politeness.

But of course I am prepared to accept that there will be an amount of selective perception and rose tinted retrospective built into my view.

;-)
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 17:38 
 Nanny state - Armel Coussine
>> It seems that common sense has now been somehow quantified and reduced down to lowest common denominator level.

>> We've bred a society that just loves rules, bans and regulations

Yes. Society has evolved in such a way as to promote most people well above their competence, limited by the special status it gives to tiresome stupid fusspots in education and administration.

This attitude is seen as playing safe by movers and shakers, bad cess to the carphounds.
Reply to this message | Report message
      1  
New Sat 9 Jan 16 17:39 
 Nanny state - CGNorwich
"We've bred a society that just loves rules, bans and regulations as we have emerged from one which felt much more self regulating through common courtesy and an understanding of the definition of politeness."

I would argue the contrary. We have bred q society that just ignores rules. From running red lights to fly tipping, from obstructive parking, to loud music played late at night to drunken behaviour in our city centres. It would do be nice to to have a self regulating society but it's not going to happen any time soon. Germany's rules and regulations may seem tedious but everyday life there seems more pleasant in many respects than it does in England. In Germany they enforce rules. Here they are ignored.
Last edited by: smokie on Sat 9 Jan 16 at 18:02
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 18:24 
 Nanny state - Armel Coussine
We've always been a bit like that CGN, since Chaucer's day let alone Shakespeare's.

Alas though modern effeteness is creeping over us. Hypocritical bon enfant stuff.
Reply to this message | Report message
      1  
New Sat 9 Jan 16 18:44 
 Nanny state - Runfer D'Hills
I think it was Douglas Bader, or someone famous anyway, who said something like "Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"

Of course we rely on the compliance with a set of guidelines, the Ten Commandments were actually not a bad start in truth, provided we retain the option to interpret them to suit given situations.

Which increasingly, is not the case.
Reply to this message | Report message
      2  
New Sat 9 Jan 16 19:00 
 Nanny state - CGNorwich
>> I think it was Douglas Bader, or someone famous anyway, who said something like "Rules
>> are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
>
if he had obeyed the rules he would not have lost his legs. The mans was a pompous idiot..

Rules in the form of laws are not something you can pick and choose to suit yourself and justify on the basis you are a "wise man".
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 10 Jan 16 at 00:03
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 19:35 
 Nanny state - Runfer D'Hills
And therein lies the problem ( or the problem as I see it ) too many people have been brainwashed into believing stuff like that. I have no wish to live in an anarchic society, but I would prefer one with less emphasis on regulation.
Reply to this message | Report message
      1  
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:07 
 Nanny state - sooty123
Wave a magic wand, which regulation would you get rid of first?
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:15 
 Nanny state - Runfer D'Hills
Speed humps, and if necessary, replace them with a lowered speed limit where safety is critical.

Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:19 
 Nanny state - sooty123
Fair enough. Mind you playing devil's advocate, they were probably brought in because people ignored the lower speed limit.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:27 
 Nanny state - Westpig
>> Fair enough. Mind you playing devil's advocate, they were probably brought in because people ignored
>> the lower speed limit.
>>
Yeah, so something inconvenient and damaging for the many, is introduced to cater for the odd tit.
Reply to this message | Report message
      2  
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:29 
 Nanny state - sooty123
I did say I was playing devil's advocate ;-) I guess it's all a balance of risk and chance, is it worth it to protect against x % speeding?
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:40 
 Nanny state - Manatee
>> I did say I was playing devil's advocate ;-) I guess it's all a balance
>> of risk and chance, is it worth it to protect against x % speeding?

I don't believe it, for most of them. It's not uncommon for annoyed residents to demand traffic calming and then ask for it to be removed subsequently.

To speed humps/cushions/platforms can be added chicanes/buildouts, pointless traffic lights, islands that are there just to narrow the road and other devilish inventions.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:46 
 Nanny state - sooty123
>> >> I did say I was playing devil's advocate ;-) I guess it's all a
>> balance
>> >> of risk and chance, is it worth it to protect against x % speeding?
>>
>> I don't believe it, for most of them.

Which bit?
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:47 
 Nanny state - Manatee

>>
>> Which bit?
>>

>> >>is it worth it to protect against x % speeding?
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 21:07 
 Nanny state - sooty123
Ahh right, well it was more a question than a statement.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:08 
 Nanny state - Manatee
Two undesirable trends: lots of regulating, and diminishing respect for it perhaps because of that.



Reply to this message | Report message
      2  
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:23 
 Nanny state - Robin O'Reliant
>> I think it was Douglas Bader, or someone famous anyway, who said something like "Rules
>> are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
>>
>> >>

I believe Gary Glitter said pretty much the same thing.
Reply to this message | Report message
       
New Sat 9 Jan 16 20:29 
 Nanny state - tyrednemotional
>> I think it was Douglas Bader, or someone famous anyway, who said something like "Rules
>> are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men"
>>

......yeah, but as far as that argument goes, he didn't have a leg to stand on......



Coat.....

....getting

;-)
Reply to this message | Report message
       
Latest Forum Posts