not middle earth, but you enlish folks might know the answer to m y question

mepbmlist
#1

Ok.

A person in this olympic city (two days left to flee), would like to know
how london got the olympic games in 1948. The war was only three years over,
and I reckon the country would still have been in terrible state.

Methinks it was
a) a reward for winning the war
b) england wanted to show the world they won the war
c) europe was even more stuffed then england
d) the yanks didn't want it, or
e) london was to have hosted the game during the war years when it was
cancelled.

thanks
m

p.s the war was World War II for those people who studied a different
history than I.

#2

A person in this olympic city (two days left to flee),

Out into the "bush" eh? Go crack some crocodile heads and eat grubs for
a fortnight. (No stereotypes here.)

would like to know
how london got the olympic games in 1948. The war was only three years over,
and I reckon the country would still have been in terrible state.

Methinks it was
a) a reward for winning the war
b) england wanted to show the world they won the war
c) europe was even more stuffed then england
d) the yanks didn't want it, or
e) london was to have hosted the game during the war years when it was
cancelled.

A fascinating question, and not the sort of thing that many will know -
Maggie Thatcher banned the teaching of post war history in schools in
the 80's. She said it wasn't history. People were beginning to put the
Falklands war on the curriculum, which meant teachers giving their
opinions on HER to kids. She really didn't like that.

A guess though: The 1936 Olympics, Berlin as everyone knows, should
have been followed by a 1940 event. Following the current pattern, this
would have been decided even before Berlin i.e. 1935. At any event, it
would have been decided by 1937, before war was considered inevitable.
If the venue for 1940 was London, might it simply have been postponed?

The postwar government was a tremendously optimistic one. It introduced
radical social, industrial and welfare reform, including the National
Health Service, something of which many British People are still proud.
At the same time they were clinging to the idea of Empire, something
which was to crumble away in the next few years. There is no way that
in the spirit of progress and reconstruction of the time that this
government would have turned down the chance to stage the games, despite
the fact that times were hard, some food rationing was still in place
etc. Continental Europe was in ruins, an Olympic game there was
unlikely. Asia was in political turmoil. No Olympic games had ever
been held outside Europe or the USA, and the last-but-one had been USA
(Los Angeles 1932).

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Michael Peters <MPeters@nskomatsu.com.au> wrote

#3

Send reply to: mepbmlist@egroups.com
Date sent: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 13:58:04 +1000

Ok.

A person in this olympic city (two days left to flee), would like to know
how london got the olympic games in 1948. The war was only three years over,
and I reckon the country would still have been in terrible state.

Methinks it was
a) a reward for winning the war
b) england wanted to show the world they won the war
c) europe was even more stuffed then england
d) the yanks didn't want it, or
e) london was to have hosted the game during the war years when it was
cancelled.

thanks
m

There are a few issues that come into play here.
(a) post war, lots of redevelopment and building, little
unemployment.
(b) lots of people lost good athletes in the front line and the British
stood a chance of winning an event or two.
(c) the Germans and French had lost every male over the age of 14
and as traditional enemies of the Brits, it gave the Brits a chance
to rub it in.
(d) with London being bombed day and night for a month straight,
there was lots of open space to put sporting venues in. I mean look
at the number of soccer grounds and cricket pitches for such a
small country.
(e) in the sad days of post war corruption they still had nothin on
the current IOC and olympics didn't bankrupt your nation in those
days. I mean we have 10,000 athletes and 35,000VIP hangers on.
In 1948 that was the numbers at the whole opening ceremony,
crowd and all.

So my answer is that it was probably option (d) it was GB's turn
but that (a)We Won!! (b)We Won!! and (d) the Yanks were being
'isolationist' in a kind of militant expansionist way.

Adrian.

···

To: "'mepbmlist@egroups.com'" <mepbmlist@egroups.com>
From: A. Sheridan sheridana@rpamail.cs.nsw.gov.au
Subject: [mepbmlist] not middle earth, but you enlish folks might know the answer to m y question

p.s the war was World War II for those people who studied a different
history than I.

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

#4

>A person in this olympic city (two days left to flee),
Out into the "bush" eh? Go crack some crocodile heads and eat grubs for
a fortnight. (No stereotypes here.)
>would like to know
>how london got the olympic games in 1948. The war was only three years

over,

>and I reckon the country would still have been in terrible state.
>
>Methinks it was
>a) a reward for winning the war
>b) england wanted to show the world they won the war
>c) europe was even more stuffed then england
>d) the yanks didn't want it, or
>e) london was to have hosted the game during the war years when it was
>cancelled.
A fascinating question, and not the sort of thing that many will know -
Maggie Thatcher banned the teaching of post war history in schools in
the 80's. She said it wasn't history. People were beginning to put the
Falklands war on the curriculum, which meant teachers giving their
opinions on HER to kids. She really didn't like that.

RD: D'you mean to tell me that Mrs T was unpopular with teachers? Were
teachers amongst the seditious few who dared to whisper that the Falklands
war was wrong? Or even that Mrs T deliberately provoked the war so as to
divert attention from domestic problems? Whoever thought that one up had
surely been reading too many novels!

···

Michael Peters <MPeters@nskomatsu.com.au> wrote

A guess though: The 1936 Olympics, Berlin as everyone knows, should
have been followed by a 1940 event. Following the current pattern, this
would have been decided even before Berlin i.e. 1935. At any event, it
would have been decided by 1937, before war was considered inevitable.
If the venue for 1940 was London, might it simply have been postponed?

The postwar government was a tremendously optimistic one. It introduced
radical social, industrial and welfare reform, including the National
Health Service, something of which many British People are still proud.
At the same time they were clinging to the idea of Empire, something
which was to crumble away in the next few years. There is no way that
in the spirit of progress and reconstruction of the time that this
government would have turned down the chance to stage the games, despite
the fact that times were hard, some food rationing was still in place
etc. Continental Europe was in ruins, an Olympic game there was
unlikely. Asia was in political turmoil. No Olympic games had ever
been held outside Europe or the USA, and the last-but-one had been USA
(Los Angeles 1932).

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

Middle Earth PBM List - Harlequin Games
To Unsubscribe:www.onelist.com
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/harlequin.games/list.htm

#5

A fascinating question, and not the sort of thing that many will know -
Maggie Thatcher banned the teaching of post war history in schools in
the 80's. She said it wasn't history. People were beginning to put the
Falklands war on the curriculum, which meant teachers giving their
opinions on HER to kids. She really didn't like that.

RD: D'you mean to tell me that Mrs T was unpopular with teachers? Were
teachers amongst the seditious few who dared to whisper that the Falklands
war was wrong? Or even that Mrs T deliberately provoked the war so as to
divert attention from domestic problems? Whoever thought that one up had
surely been reading too many novels!

I wouldn`t put it past the old bag. But i think it more likely that she was
deliberately hardline in our negotiations rather than starting the war
single-handedly! god knows what the Argies were thinking. i know we`re
hardly a superpower anymore, but i think we had the capability of sinking a
few WW2 ships [even if they were sailing AWAY from the Falklands]. It was a
timely boost to the old popularity ratings though, wasn`t it? Actually the
insane old dragon did provide me with one of my fondest memories of Uni. I
was in some dull lecture on the 8th floor when we heard cheering from
outside on the ground. it was the day she finally bit the bullet and
realised she wasn`t the benevolent empress she imagined. what a part we had
that day. it was like the fall of the Berlin Wall. Nearly. i still think
she thinks she was harshly treated: "WE" were not amused at the jubilant
reaction of the common people to our resignation. Bummer.

···

######################################
Nigel Tufnel: You can't really dust for vomit.
David St. Hubbins: Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under
such heavy sedation.
Nigel Tufnel: It's like, how much more black could this be? and the answer
is none. None more black.
[Reading a review of the album "Shark Sandwich"]
Marty DiBergi: Two words: shit sandwich.
######################################
Biglyx,
David Murray.

#6

Oh no, FAR, FAR worse than that. Some of them wanted students to be
allowed to consider facts and make up their own minds. It was called
"Trendy Sixties Teaching", and is now permanently dead and buried thanks
to the Iron Lady and her Soul Mate, Blunkett the Destroyer.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote

RD: D'you mean to tell me that Mrs T was unpopular with teachers? Were
teachers amongst the seditious few who dared to whisper that the Falklands
war was wrong?

#7

>RD: D'you mean to tell me that Mrs T was unpopular with teachers? Were
>teachers amongst the seditious few who dared to whisper that the

Falklands

>war was wrong?
Oh no, FAR, FAR worse than that. Some of them wanted students to be
allowed to consider facts and make up their own minds. It was called
"Trendy Sixties Teaching", and is now permanently dead and buried thanks
to the Iron Lady and her Soul Mate, Blunkett the Destroyer.

Regards,

Laurence G. Tilley http://www.lgtilley.freeserve.co.uk/

RD: Ah yes, I remember that from my brief spell at college. At college we
were told, 'these are the facts. The examiners won't mind what opinions you
express as long as you can back them up.' A world away from school where we
were given both facts and opinions.

Regards,

Richard.

···

Richard John Devereux <devereux@lineone.net> wrote