Turkey was the main topic of conversation for my family over the Christmas break. Not in the usual way, when we discuss which celebrity chef\u2019s turkey roasting technique we\u2019re faddishly going to mimic this year. (The blessed bird always tastes exactly the same, without fail.) On the day my family was first reunited for the holidays, news came of the assassination of Russia\u2019s ambassador to Turkey. \u201cYou don\u2019t want to mess with the Turks,\u201d my youngest brother offered, predictably. \u201cOr the Russians, for that matter,\u201d he said.
The room was heavy with worrying about global politics. With peace in the world so fragile, my father was looking around at his sons and grandsons and thinking of the young men of his 1940s childhood. A week later we shared the announcement of the ceasefire in Syria, brokered seemingly against the odds by Turkey and Russia at the UN. Let\u2019s hope that my brother is right and that no one will mess with the Turks and the Russians, and that the Syrian people, whose lives and losses haunt us all, can have a glimmer of hope for 2017. No one in my family is convinced that peace is on its way, but we made promising noises nonetheless.
Wish upon a star
As I\u2019m sure he will be doing for the next six years, my son demanded a family outing to watch the latest Star Wars flick. Rogue One did not disappoint. We\u2019re a bunch of Star Wars fanatics. My brother Luke was named by our older siblings in homage to Mr Skywalker. My mother vetoed calling me Leia.
The news of Carrie Fisher\u2019s death hit us hard, but none more so than my eldest son, who took to YouTube (as all of his generation do) to watch every interview with her. He sat down at breakfast and said: \u201cCarrie Fisher had a mental health problem, Mom, and she was a really big feminist, did you know?\u201d \u201cYes,\u201d I answered, \u201cI did know, and the fact that she was willing to talk about it made her pretty special.\u201d \u201cShe was pretty ace, wasn\u2019t she, Mom?\u201d he said.
Yes, bab, she really was.
Straight to video
Perhaps until this year I lived under a rock, or was a normal person who didn\u2019t seek out the New Year messages of political leaders. My metamorphosis into a Westminster bubble-dweller must be complete, though, because this year I watched the offerings of both Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May. Next year I mightn\u2019t bother.
I watched Mrs May\u2019s at 1.15am on 1 January \u2013 after returning from an evening out dancing and drinking with my mates. Perhaps this set it up for a fall, because I felt she wasn\u2019t really grabbing the New Year spirit. It left me thinking that although the message of unity wasn\u2019t bad, she could have cheered up a bit.
Jeremy\u2019s offering was hampered by the version I watched sounding as if he was on a building site. I think expectations let this one down, as it had been trailed as the beginning of a new move to grasp the populist nettle. I was expecting the pizzazz of a slogan such as \u201cMake Labour great again\u201d. Aside from mentioning the establishment, the text of his message could have been written by Ed Miliband\u2019s speechwriters.
I think neither of these videos will launch a thousand ships and, alas, the privileged few chided in both videos will, I am certain, be resting as comfily in their establishment beds in 2017 as they were in 2016. I\u2019m not pleased about this, but I am more of a realist than a populist.
All\u2019s fair in love and war
I like to poke fun at the idea of resolutions, and to pretend that I\u2019m a cynic who can\u2019t be won over by the endless \u201cnew year, new you\u201d lifestyle articles about losing weight or becoming a better version of yourself, which are all so heavily gendered in tone. I\u2019ll be the same shape and size and as good as I\u2019m going to get at the end of 2017 as I am at the start. In 2013, inspired by the Boney M hit (\u201cRa-ra Rasputin\u201d), I made a resolution to become Russia\u2019s greatest love machine. Had I put in the effort, perhaps geopolitics today might be in better shape.
Land of hope and glory
Despite my cynicism, I find myself looking forward to 2017 with hope. I\u2019m as terrified of a Donald Trump presidency and the unknowns of Brexit as the next person, but I spent the break with my friends and family, who range from political nerds to people who don\u2019t vote and couldn\u2019t name a single member of the cabinet. I find that most people are just crossing fingers for the best in their own lives. They don\u2019t give a toss about half the stuff that haunts us in Westminster, but they do give a toss about each other.
French connections
My brother and sister-in-law are classic examples of what Theresa May calls the \u201cjust about managing\u201d, or Jams. When we chatted about it on Christmas Day, they rolled their eyes at being the new Tory target audience. They want things to be easier and better for them and their young son, but they wouldn\u2019t use their vote to damn other people. My other brother and his family live in France and, for them, 2017 brings an impossible choice between a Continental version of Thatcherism and the BNP. They are both convinced that libert\u00e9, \u00e9galit\u00e9, fraternit\u00e9 will remain in their lives and in those of their neighbours, regardless of the vote.
Critical events
This year could see a huge crisis in the world, for all sorts of reasons. My mother used to say, \u201cNever waste a crisis,\u201d and I hope we won\u2019t. If we do our best, 2017 and all the possible macro horrors will be counteracted by simple British shrugging and getting on with making sure that the way we live does not look like the crazy hate fuelled by figureheads like Trump.
I expect that most people wouldn\u2019t call themselves socialists, yet deep down we all believe that we are all better off when we are all better off \u2013 and I hope that in 2017 we show it. It\u2019s the only chance we have to clear out the gloom.
Jess Phillips is the MP for Birmingham Yardley (Labour)
When the UK voted to leave the EU, many assumed that Scotland would soon vote to leave the UK. In contrast to the rest of Britain, Scots backed Remain by 62 per cent to 38 per cent. On the day following the referendum, Nicola Sturgeon warned: „It is a significant and material change in circumstances – and it is therefore a statement of the obvious that the option of a second referendum must be on the table. And it is on the table. “
But six months later, the SNP leader is striking a notably different tone. She told the BBC’s Good Morning Scotland programme that she was prepared to „put aside“ her „preferred option of independence“ if a „hard Brexit“ could be avoided. „Am I going to stop arguing for independence or believing in independence? Am I going to stop believing that Scotland is on a journey to independence?
„No, but we’re talking here about the particular context and timescale of Brexit – and I’m putting these proposals forward in good faith. I’m deliberately saying, ‚put my preferred option to one side‘ and asking people if we can find a consensus and compromise option. “
What’s Sturgeon’s game? It’s unsurprising that the First Minister isn’t rushing towards a second referendum. Contrary to expectations, polls have shown no rise in support for independence since the Brexit vote. A BMG\/ Herald survey last week put the Yes side on 45.5 per cent, almost identical to the 2014 result. As long as the polls remain static, the SNP will not stage a second vote. Party strategists believe that they would need a 20-point lead to be confident of victory (owing to the likelihood of a Unionist swingback). Mindful of the fate of Quebec’s secessionists, the nationalists will not re-run the battle under current conditions.
But if Stugeon is not ruling a referendum in, she is also not ruling one out. As the First Minister well knows, a „soft Brexit“ of the kind she seeks is unlikely. Theresa May has consistently vowed to achieve control over immigration, a demand that would force the UK to leave the single market. The EU 27 have long made it clear that they regard the „four freedoms“ (of goods, people, services and capital) as indivisible.
The rise of nationalists such as Marine Le Pen, Alternative f\u00fcr Deutschland and the Dutch Partij voor de Vrijheid (Party for Freedom) has made the EU less, rather than more, amenable to British demands. In this hazardous climate, the UK cannot be seen to enjoy a cost-free Brexit.
For Sturgeon, then, the reasonable demand for a „soft“ withdrawal is a tactical ploy. Its likely rejection offers her a new chance to maximise nationalist support. If Sturgeon has taken one step back, it is only, like Lenin , in order to take two steps forward.<\/p>\n

\n

\nSimilarity rank: 0.1\n<\/div>\n

Sentiment rank: 1.4<\/div>\n

\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n