Dahl here is a very hardy man who approaches these issues in a very practical and logical way. But this was also in the post WW2 era where millions died, people lost their families and possessions, and had to start their life anew. It was a period of rebuilding after the devastation of war and hard times build hard people.
Today, all this feels like too much because we were all mostly born and brought up in wealth and prosperity. We have not seen any real hard times and there is no need for mettle.
He wasn't "only" a fighter pilot.
He was a fighter Ace, having five confirmed air-to-air kills. (And possibly more unconfirmed in the Battle of Athens).
And also talented, intelligent, and witty. Read all his damn books as a kid.
If you happen not to have to deal with any of this, it is still just providence.
Eerily ominous.
In the US, vaccination for it is prevalent for years now (in a rare win for preventative health there).
Many other countries: "Chickenpox (and risk of shingles) will be good for you..."
The JCVI might have recently changed recommendation but whether it is worth the cost/benefit is another matter.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/two-for-one-chick...
For me it was a no-brainer. For a small amount of money, I avoid the kid being bedridden for potentially weeks, and the kid avoids scarring from the disease. Even though it isn't going to kill the kid, it's still awful to be ill.
Shingles won't be a problem for a long time afterwards, and medicine will advance. There's already shingles vaccines.
So it was an easy decision to spend about 100 pounds on vaccinating each kid.
I remember parents wanted kids to get chickenpox as early as possible so they could put mittens on them so they wouldn't scratch themselves.
I think so. Better not to let them be tempted by something like that.
The shingles vaccination programme (for older adults) has existed since 2013.
The JCVI recommendation from 2023 took into account new evidence that had emerged since the original decision in 2009, using a new model to evaluate cost-effectiveness and better evaluate the impact on QALY from infection.
The original 2009 reasoning's decision is available here: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20130107105...
It seems quite the other way around.
Some other countries just lack the possibilities to vaccinate while the US could but people refuse in favor of „natural“ immunity.
Hence two dead children because of measles.
I don't have a stance on the matter, other than "I and everyone I know caught chickenpox as a kid and we turned out alright".
I don't have an opinion on whether the council properly weighted all the costs and benefits. I just want to include this reference make the point that the Dutch policy stance is not based on lack of means or on ignorance of our politicians or health authorities. The advice includes plenty of references to many international studies and experiences with chickenpox vaccination.
[1] https://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/documenten/adviezen/2020/10/0...
Germany is one of the blue ones.
The other context around Israel invading Lebanon in 1982 was given to me (I was too young at the time to have a clue about anything) by another (Jewish) friend, a biographer of Primo Levi, who said, "I believe Israel had the sympathy of the world until they invaded Lebanon," in a conversation about how those who claim to be virtuous by invoking victimhood.
Dahl never invoked that himself, but with wider knowledge of his life and a more critical view of Israeli history, we can see what a complex polarized mess this is with little chance of redemption for either, although it is interesting that one man has generated disproportionate column inches compared to a country.
I'd like to read what you're saying in the most graceful way possible, but it really sounds like standard antisemitic beliefs about how it's really the Jews' fault that people are antisemitic, and that they control the media anyway.
Whether or not you agree with the state of Israel's actions in recent years, it's very concerning to me to see comments like this that seem to justify or explain away racial hatred. You have to disentangle the two.
Apply the same to hyper aggressive bees. The hive is the only thing dangerous, but you correctly say you hate bees, not this specific hive, or this specific bee.
I personally hate the (ficticious rhetorical) culture of the southern states because I disagree with their position and beliefs about human rights and other ethical problems. Am I wrong to do that? What nuance am I unable to see?
A Jewish person has no agency in their ethnic or cultural heritage. US citizens do have a choice in voting and US citizenship can be revoked. You cannot change your ethnicity.
I don't agree with this. The behavior of a hive is distinctly different from the behavior of a bee. The way a hive behaves is bigger than the sum of the actions of the bees. The US as a country also has this same emergent intelligence to it.
> [...] an indistinguishable mass, is the very definition of bigotry and prejudice.
You'll notice I said hate Americans, and not hate Sally, or Bobby, or Jane. I'm not targeting nor blaming individuals, I agree with you, that is wrong for me to assign someone into a group they don't belong in. But is it wrong to hate the behavior and intent of said grouping? Is it wrong to blame people who willingly self-select to associate with said group?
Quoting from above
> it's wrong to be anti-Russian because of the actions of Putin
Is it? If I'm mad at Russia, so I refuse to interact with any russian company. That's being anti-russian, I'd assume? Is that wrong?
What if I don't like the family next door because they lived in Russia before the moved to the US. That would be wrong; until I point out they're still proudly Russian, and they support their former country. Then is it wrong to dislike them in that case? That's still anti-russian, no?
I don't even know what this means. What does it mean to hate Americans if you don't hate, you know, Americans, like Sally or Bobby or Jane? What exactly are you hating?
You don't hate Americans, you hate Trump and his cabal. You hate the people who voted for him. Good for you. Do you also hate the Americans who voted against Trump because of the ones who voted for him? If yes, then that's absolutely bigotry. If no, then you could just as rationally say you love Americans, because, I mean, look at all the Americans who opposed Trump?
You say you don't hate Sally or Bobby or Jane, but that's exactly what you do when you hate Americans.
> That's still anti-russian, no?
No. That's anti-fascist, or anti-authoritarian, or anti-belligerent, or anti-whatever it is about their support that you don't like. That's judging them as individuals because of what they as individuals think. Disliking them just because they're Russion, regardless of that they think about Putin's government, that would be bigotry.
Individual Russians may or may not have much to do with Purim’s invasion of Ukraine - the same way individual Americans may or may not have much to do with Trump’s fumbling of supporting Ukraine’s defense efforts.
I'm an American you truly hates Trump and is suffering under his rule as mach as anyone.
I am not trying to explain away Dahl's comments, merely illustrating the complexity underlining all these arguments, and especially ones which allow Israel and its lobbyists to swarm over the arts in the UK and bully them if showing any sympathy for the Palestinians, which is no better than the torrent of antisemitic abuse meted out when there's sympathy for Jewish people.
This is facially untrue: there are over two million non-Jewish Israeli nationals[1].
The second sense is the one I’m interested in, and in that one there are plenty of non-Jewish Israeli nationals. They have every right (and plenty of cause) to not identify as such, but that’s the situation as it concerns citizenship, voting rights, etc.
TL;DR: nationality gets used with at least two different meanings in the I/P conflict; one is intractable and the other is straightforward. The straightforward is worth remembering, because far-right Israelis have a vested interest in eliminating it and imposing an ethnic definition of nationality.
On your final point, I think we may well be seeing a theocratic majority there quite soon, will be interesting to see how that goes.
This lie lies at the heart of all of the state's attempts to color fundamentally anti genocide, anti genocide and antiracist criticism of the state as anti semitic.
The country does not represent Jews, just a rather abhorrent form of racism.
Or when he said the United States is "utterly dominated by the great Jewish financial institutions over there"?
Or when he said "I am certainly anti-Israel, and I have become anti-Semitic"?
Or are there others?
https://www.nytimes.com/1990/12/07/opinion/l-roald-dahl-also...
I hope most of the pain and death we see in the world today seem like solved problems many years from now. Much like the health issues faced by his family.
> "Measles: A Dangerous Illness" is an open letter written by the children's writer Roald Dahl in 1986 in response to ongoing cases of measles in the United Kingdom at that time despite the introduction of an effective measles vaccine in 1968.