there are several, but a definition that has a lot more to with its use in politics is in the sense of “economic liberalism” aka “defenders of capitalism”, hence Neo-liberalism and such
Mühlen Kölsch.
In the 0,33 l bottle, not the 0,5 l bottle.
1 Like
it’s a very aggressive defense,
1 Like
Wealth inequity is greater now than it was in imperial Rome. What social mobility?
The middle class was an illusion, debt not wealth, that very few ever crawled out of.
I genuinely don’t understand what this has to do with what I said. I guess it’s culture translation.
Perhaps my leaving out the confluence of anti-war, pacifism, feminist, workers movements in the list was the issue? It’s a trope that concerns me these years and it really was in my mind but there is only so much you can write on a phone…
1 Like
USA has a binary weighted electoral system.
There is very little wiggle room for trinary at local levels.
There is certainly no chance for trinary at federal levels.
“The perfect is the enemy of the good”
Trinary-believers gave us Trump.*
*With the help of Russians, Gerrymandering, and Voter Suppression.
3 Likes
Well, yes, at the joint request of the Robert Bourassa, Premier of Quebec, and Jean Drapeau, Mayor of Montreal, Liberal Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau suspended civil liberties by invoking the War Measures Act at the height of the October Crisis in 1970, suspending habeas corpus and granting extended powers of arrest to police, which they used to arrest and detain nearly 500 people without charge or bail. This occurred after negotiations had broken off with the FLQ, a separatist terrorist organization that had kidnapped and subsequently murdered a Quebec cabinet minister, Pierre Laporte.
So, sure, that’s a thing that the Liberal party did with 85+% support of the population almost 50 years ago.
Here are some other things the Canadian Liberal Party has done:
- gave Canadians retirement pensions, unemployment insurance, registered retirement savings plans, registered education savings plans, a student loan program, and universal health care
- gave Canadians the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the National Film Board
- gave Indo-, Chinese, and Japanese Canadians the right to vote
- gave the world the UN Emergency Force and established a Canadian legacy of international peacekeeping
- kept Canada out of Vietnam and Iraq
- gave Canada one of the coolest flags in the world
- modernized divorce laws, decriminalized homosexuality, legalized same-sex marriage rights nationally, added gender identity and gender expression to the list of prohibited grounds of discrimination
- gave Canadians the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and our own Constitution
- gave Canadians a gender-parity Cabinet for the first time
- legalized medically-assisted dying
- welcomed over 43000 Syrian refugees in 2015 and 2016
On balance, it’s a pretty good track record.
7 Likes
hahahaha, hilarious comment for the day!
1 Like
The return of fascism
But apart from that, what have the Liberals ever done for us?
3 Likes
Fresh from the tab, actually. =) I’m no longer in the region, but that is one of my favourite beers. However, for your next visit, go to Ehrenfeld: the Braustelle has small batches, and a seriously good Braumeister. They also try out a lot of non-traditional stuff, so their beer menu changes basically every week. Good food, as well, even considering the vegetarian options. And Schamong isn’t far if you want a decent coffee.
From the bottle, try Hellers for a change. Especially if you drink larger quantities, it’s a very good thing. Mühlen is bound to give you some headache: a good part of the good taste is due to their yeast strains, which unfortunately are add flavour due to small amounts of fuselols and secondary fermentation compounds. Tastes great, but gives me trouble when consuming larger quantities.
3 Likes
I’m really surprised that you didn’t taste any difference!
A Chardonnay glass (compared to a water glass, a traditional Römer or a Bordeaux glass, is already the right choice for a Riesling. Correct me if I am wrong, but your choice of comparison leads me to believe that you would agree that there is a different taste if you compare a Chardonnay glass to a, say, Kölschstange?
Regarding statistical testing, I would bet you my 1990 bottle Erdener Treppchen Auslese that I can prove with Fisher’s exact test that a Riesling from a glass with a Säurelippe tastes differently than from a glass without it. Trouble is that you wouldn’t believe me because I could probably have distinguished the glasses haptically.
[quote=“Ryuthrowsstuff, post:134, topic:104113”]More over I’ve never met a wine maker who when in private drinks their wine out of anything besides coffee mugs and small water glasses.
[/quote]
Well. I have.
My uncle is from a wine maker family. Privately, they use nosing glasses, and for a reason - except when it comes to a acidic, mostly young wine or a rich red of any kind. For the former, a glass with a Säurelippe is used, for the latter a voluminous red wine glass. Never ever a glass is filled to more than 1/3, usually much less.
But then, my former colleagues from the southern parts of Europe usually fit the description you gave. They drink their wine mostly young, and they don’t drink it as a delicacy of the finest - it is a staple they wouldn’t want to miss. And they scoff at people who celebrate wine in a way rich northerners tend to do.It’s much more down to earth, but never get them arguing if wine from the neighbouring country can’t be distinguished in taste. Then, its religious. Politics. sigh Its a matter of taste. 
Just as an afterthought, I’ll have a look at the research. What would be sources you recommend? I remember The Whisky Paper on distinguishing distilleries, but nothing on wine.
1 Like
I nearly missed that:
[quote=“Mindysan33”] It’s been years since a left wing party has had that influence on the Democratic party (going back to the progressives really).
[/quote]
For most people watching from the old continent who are not not deeply interested in US domestic politics, I think the US seem to have only two parties, and some independent weirdos. I know this isn’t the case, really, but I still have no knowledge what parties exist and do have any influence, at all.
So, excuse me for asking,: what are you talking about when referring to “the progressives”?
1 Like
That’s certainly the extent of my knowledge too (two very right wing parties by European standards at that).
I’d also really appreciate rundown on what other parties are out there.
1 Like
Clegg said that they picked AV because that was in the Labour manifesto to make it easier for them to support it. Of course, Labour chose (very) short term political gain instead.
1 Like
Nope. In fact I drink my wine out of glasses that are very much like short Kölschstange. I prefer a stemless. Straight sided tumbler in the 8-10oz range. They take up less space, are difficult to knock over. Make me feel like Roy Schieder in that one scene from jaws. And that style of glass is actually really traditional in certain wine regions. Especially Italy and Greece. Which is why all of the wine makers I know have some, and use them when not conducting public events.
More over Glass manufacturers would disagree with you re: glass choice for Reisling. As would most service standards that use varietal glasses. Where that’s bothered with Riesling is typically served in a glass that is taller and narrower than Chardonnay.
Most of your variations in glassware come from regional variations in glassmaking and design traditions rather than any ability to enhance the drink. So if there is a “proper” choice for Riesling then its whatever the glass shape was in those parts of Austria, Germany, and France that have traditionally made Riesling. Which IIRC is the hock glass. Which are traditionally quite short with a roughly cylindrical body, but these days often have a long stem with a very wide globular body.
Most of the wine glass shapes we see today are derivative of wine glasses that were traditional in either Burgundy or Bourdoux. Which again were simple regional variations in design. With burgundy favoring wider goblet styles and Bordeaux favoring a taller narrower shape. More recently, complex table etiquette had a shorter, smaller glass for white vs red. Mostly so you could tell which was which when the glass was empty. Marketing has spun those two types of glasses out into thousands of variations. And generated “facts” about how these shapes effect and enhance the taste of the wine.
But all of these shapes, even the basic ones are incredibly derived and modern. Previous to the 20th century (and even into the 20s) most wine glasses looked like this. A lot of them were derived from English designs, that were themselves derived from hock glasses.
But under rigorous testing few of the claims pan out. And physics doesn’t really allow for much of it. Unless the volume is very low (as in a brandy snifter) your hand can’t possible appreciably warm up the liquid. Shape can’t magically “channel” aromas to your nose without some sort of airflow to direct it. And the aroma effect on flavor comes though the back of the throat not through the front of the nose. So long as the opening of the glass isn’t so restricted that you can’t get your nose in the area while sipping you’ll get the same dose of aroma. The exceptions are: Taller narrow glasses preserve carbonation. So Champagne flutes drink better than coupes (and the Kölschstange is appropriate for aggressively carbed Kölsch). And thinness of glass is important. But that effect is about perception, it has no effect on actual flavor of the wine or the dynamics of how it hits our mouths. We feel classier and enjoy the wine more with thinner glasses, especially a thinner lip. Because we associate that with refinement and class. Especially when it comes to wine.
Whiskey nosing glasses fall into this too. They’re a very modern variation of the brandy snifter. With roots in the English tradition of using brandy snifters for scotch. Which was predominantly a class thing. Traditional whiskey glasses were very similar to modern old fashioned glasses. Or looked a bit like a cylindrical sherry glass. Basically a narrower, shorter old fashioned glass on a very short stem.
Honestly you can probably just type “wine glasses debunk” into google and find all you need. There have been so many exposes of the subject over the last decade. Including several linked by Boing Boing. I remember a few very good long form articles from American magazines. Most based in collating a lot of both specific research and on basic facts the story of magic glassware doesn’t acknowledge. Like the fact that the “tongue map” at the heart of the claims isn’t a thing. This is one of the major ones:
http://www.gourmet.com/magazine/2000s/2004/08/shattered_myths.html
There was also a major one a few years back I can’t seem to locate. But traced the history of the idea. Essentially Reidel was in a bit of trouble back in the 70’s. Needed to find a way to get people to buy more than one set of wine glasses. Their marketing firm created the concept of shape effecting flavor and aroma from whole cloth. And hired science people and market research companies to validate and spread the idea.
Basically they took existing ideas that were entirely about etiquette and class distinction and scienced them up a bit.
3 Likes
The party line in the US is that third parties are important and are represented, because they present and popularize ideas which are absorbed into bigger parties.
…Well I guess you could say that the Constitution Party gives the Republicans ideas.
Except it was getting better by degrees. And the gains made are eroding pretty quickly. Nor do I think that prejudice is just created by the elites. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that people embrace various kinds of isms, even when the elites are pushing against it.
3 Likes
I’d say the only third political party to have an influence now is the libertarian party. You can see it’s finger prints in the GOP’s tax and monetary platforms (less so on it’s social policies). Back in the 90s (to early 2000s), the Greens sort of rose a bit to prominence with Nader as their candidate, but haven’t been taken seriously since they split.
That’s a good question. I think that today it would mean both Sanders and his backers as well as groups like Black Lives Matter. Sanders has much more of a focus on class issues, but groups like BLM have been focusing on systemic racism. There were attempts to bridge the gap back in the recent election (during the primaries), when Sander’s campaign took on a BLM activists as their part of their communications team. I think that also working with Killer Mike was also an attempt to bridge that gap (though Mike himself has much more of a class view on things than does BLM).
But back in the 19th and early 20th century, many of the figures who were part of the progressive movement came to have some influence over FDR’s presidency in the 1930s and 1940s.
4 Likes
Just a quick side note to say that I think this thread has gotten heated at times, but it’s been almost entirely respectful, even when we’re disagreeing.
6 Likes
