Archive for the 'Labour' Category

14
Dec
12

Stoned, Gay or foreign – When it comes to SPIN, politicians don’t discriminate

can't see the truth for the spin

Can’t see the truth for the spin

A funny old week but great for the talking of bollocks in the media. With the economy still in the doldrums it’s clear what the lead stories in the press should be. So what were the three main parties pontificating about? Gay marriage, immigrants speaking English and legalising cannabis.

Tories? Legalising gay marriage? With their reputation? Yes, David Cameron is apparently trying to push through a policy which could almost be perfectly built to wind up his back-benchers but appeal to Labour supporters. Meanwhile Ed Balls has been banging on about how immigrants should learn English and this has to be tailor made to wind up the racism paranoids in the Labour party. Not to be outdone Nick Clegg wants to legalise Cannabis! What in blue blazes is going on? Why are they all meandering off in weird directions? Perhaps they’re all stoned and next week we will see Ed Milliband munching cookies during PMQs?

From the Tory perspective they probably just want to distract attention away from the economy and consider  promoting gay marriage  will soften their image though this may be backfiring as the backbenchers mobilise. Nick Clegg is also engaged in distraction tactics though his party may be more sympathetic to his cause. Ed Milliband comes off worse. He may be trying to toughen up Labour’s reputation on immigration to counter revelations about their open door policies when in power. However it demonstrates fantastic ineptness and c an only aid the Tories in knocking the economy off the front page.

I heard this week of a book entitled Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion” by Robert Cialdini which outlines “6 key principles of persuasion”. It’s a marketing book which, I heard, was selected by David Cameron for the Conservative party reading list. This is the key to what they’re up to: SPIN. I’m sure we’re all got opinions on Gay Marriage, Immigration and drugs but, as Bill Clinton quite rightly said, “It’s the economy stupid!”

Buy Poppies at Fine Art America

Poppies

About these ads
31
May
12

Left, Right, Left, Right, Left, Right

Irreverent Car Enthusiast or right wing fascist?

Irreverent Car Enthusiast or Right Wing Fascist?

A friend suggested to me recently that The Left have the best comedians and I agreed though we then had difficulty identifying any right wing comedians. We settleed on Stewart Lee, representing the left, and Jeremy Clarkson, representing the right. It’s debatable whether Clarkson is right wing but then it’s debatable whether Clarkson is a comedian. He is a figure of fun, which might make him a comedian, and he’s sceptical about climate change, owns lots of cars and probably votes Tory which are attributes usually associated with The Right.

Stewart Lee performs material excoriating Jeremy Clarkson for his “politically incorrect opinions which he has for money”. On the Indymedia web site Clarkson is even accused of having a “fascist agenda” though you wouldn’t think it from his dress style. I don’t recall Franco, Mussolini or Hitler sporting brown corduroy trousers.

Stewart Lee - Comedian

Comedian

So (I got here in the end), Clarkson is condemned by The Left as a fascist.

It’s interesting that the left feel it acceptable to brand all and sundry as fascist. Often the reason for branding someone as fascist is that they believe in free markets and small government but it’s worth remembering that the Nazis called themselves National Socialists, which seems almost the antithesis of an ideology based on free markets and small government.

It’s also interesting that we go along with the label fascist as derogatory while we never think to yell Commie at those on the left and, if we did, the left would probably not consider it an insult.

Why? European fascism has an appalling reputation due to it’s racist and genocidal activities in the 1930s and 40s but Soviet Communism carried out acts which, if not identical in intent, were equal in ghastliness. One can, of course, argue that the Soviet regime was a corruption of true communism but this is all very well unless you’re one of the poor bastards who suffered under its rule. One may as well argue that Nazism was a corruption of Fascism.

There is a saying in Britain: People in glass houses should not throw stones, and you’d think that the left wing would be more reticent about dragging up the crimes of the second world war yet the communist movement seems to have just shrugged this off.

Why is this? Why is the term fascist used so freely and effectively to abuse those on the right while those on the left act like they hold the moral high ground?

I have been following Real Time World War 2 on twitter and am finding that the day by day reporting has the effect of placing the events in some kind of context.

At the beginning of World War 2 in 1939 (as counted by the British and the French) the Nazis were rounding up Jews and herding them into ghettos or off to concentration camps. Around the same time the Soviets were murdering thousands of captured Polish soldiers and the Soviet regime was paying bonuses to Soviet soldiers who succeeded in murdering the most Polish prisoners.

In the 1930s and 40s in Europe a clash of ideologies took place. Communism on one side and Fascism on the other. Both were totalitarian, ruthless and evil. In reality both were probably a reaction against free market capitalism which had brought about The Wall Street Crash a few years earlier. I’m making this up as I go along but it is starting to fit together. We are even seeing a resurgence of Fascism and Socialism in Greece which is suffering more than most from the failings of free market capitalism.

The inheritance of the Communist/Fascist clash in British politics is a false left/right dichotomy. A dichotomy that never really existed in British politics because Fascism never gained a real foothold in the UK thanks partly to the Communist Party of Great Britain.

In British politics Labour are portrayed as a supporting policies such as redistribution of wealth and state ownership of industry though Labour have now abandoned the latter. The tories are portrayed as advocating capitalism and a meritocracy. But the Tories have also inherited an association with fascism which may be unfair. It’s pointless arguing that many toffs were Fascists because many working class were too. I wonder if the Tories have much in common with Fascism at all.

This is not to say that the British right is beyond criticism but by branding them fascist we incorrectly identify their failings. The failings of Tory policies is not a dislike of immigration. The Tories represent big business and big business loves immigration because it provides cheap labour. To brand the Tories as fascist is a stupid distraction.

The real criticism of the right wing should be it’s economic race to the bottom. It’s survival of the fittest mentality which leaves those less well able to look after themselves behind. It’s constant drive for profit which turns all human interaction into that of producer/consumer. Seller/Customer. An ideology which gradually erodes any gains we may have made under Labour. None of these things have much relationship with Fascism.

Screaming Fascist at a Tory misses the point. The British Tories are not about to don black uniforms and start marching around with flaming torches and they are absolutely opposed to the Fascist ideal of a strong state.

BBC Radio 4 has been retransmitting old episodes of the famous “Desert Island Discs” program where a famous and esteemed person talks to a presenter and, with the conceit of presenting their favourite music, tells something of their lives, frequently revealing some personal aspects of themselves.

Respected historian or amoral ideologue

Respected Historian or Amoral Ideologue

Recently I listened to a rerun of an edition of the program from March 1995 where historian Professor Eric Hobsbawm was interviewed by Sue Lawley.

Professor Hobsbawn is a confirmed Marxist and was so during the 30s and 40s. In his own words he stated that he was deeply and profoundly committed to the great cause (of bringing about a world wide communist utopia) and that there was not anything that was more important in life than the great cause. When asked if he thought it was worth any sacrifice he answered yes. When asked if all the innocents who had been killed by the soviets were justified he replied yes.

I too have left wing sympathies but listened to this man with mounting horror. It strikes me as an example of our deranged political culture that, while irreverent (and irrelevant) TV entertainers like Clarkson are castigated as fascists, men like Professor Hobsbawn are honoured by appearances on Radio 4.

Even after the horrors of the Soviet Union have been revealed to Professor Hobsbawn he was too arrogant to have any empathy with those who suffered under the Soviets. Men like this do not stand out like Adolf Hitler or Idi Amin or Muama Ghadafi. They sit in institutions quietly following their ideologies without thought for the people who may disagree with their over intellectual claptrap. Today these people may be in universities, in banks or in governments. They may be in the police force or in political parties. In Germany in the 1940s they were operating the gas chambers or compiling monthly statistics at Auchwitz.

There is a beautiful scene in the 1983 film Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence directed by Nagisa Oshima where an English officer visits a Japanese soldier in prison after the allies have occupied mainland Japan. The Japanese soldier has been tried for war crimes and condemned to death.

Sergeant Hara:   “I am ready to die, but I don’t understand, my crime were no different from any other soldiers.”
Lawrence:   “You are the victim of men who think that they’re right. Just as one day, you and Captain Yonoi believed absolutely that you were right; and the truth is, of course, that nobody’s right.”

“Men who think that they’re right.” – It’s a good phrase. Yes, it’s applicable to Hitler but, more than that, it’s applicable to the Hobsbawnes of this world. It’s applicable to the English Defence League shouting abuse at immigrants and it’s applicable to the ignorant left wing zealot screaming “Fascist” at people with whom he disagrees.

.

.

.

The following is a partial transcript from the March 1995 episode of Desert Island Discs with Professor Eric Hobsbawm.

Sue Lawley (SL):   So your saying that such was your commitment and your dedication that if there was a chance of bring about this communist utopia, which was your dream, it was worth any kind of sacrifice?

Eric Hobsbawm (EH):   Yes I think so.

SL:   Even the sacrifice of millions of lives?

EH:   Well that’s what we felt when we fought world war 2 didn’t we?

SL:   Isn’t there a difference between killing someone in war and killing your own?

EH:   We didn’t know that, dead is dead.

SL:    Let’s have record number 3

Artwork of Nigel Chaloner at Fine Art America

Artwork of Nigel Chaloner at Fine Art America

12
May
12

Glorious Britain

For sale; The British soul

For sale; The British soul

“If you’re not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at forty, you have no brain”. This quote is, possibly mistakenly, attributed to Winston Churchill. In the 21st century perhaps we should swap Labour for Liberal.

I was left wing when I was young. I had ideals of fraternity and equality. As I aged, I veered to the right. I started to understand that economic is real; that the government has no money except the money we give it; that ultimately it is us that pays for everything.

In the early years I agreed with Thatcher’s privatisations. Why should the state own industry? But as Thatcher’s changes gained traction and as New Labour mimicked and exaggerated her ideology I found myself disgusted with the whole hyper-commercial edifice which was Britain. During the Thatcher years I recall seeing a TV play about “the future” where kids sold electricity to their parents. I thought this ridiculous but this can now happen. If one buys one’s electricity and gas from Utility Warehouse one can earn money buy introducing new customers.

Britain has sold its soul for cafe latte and I find myself moving back to the Left. I want my society to have a sense of community. I want my society to look after the poor and infirm. I want the streets to belong to people and not be just an advertising platform for corporations. I want to roll back the privatisation of public space. My culture should be lived not used to sell trinkets to coach loads of tourists.

I return to my left wing ideals but, depressingly, find that the leaders of the left are either shits, idiots or delusional. I have come to the conclusion that the Left in Britain do not really want to raise up the working class. They do not really want to change society. Instead they are content to be the eternal griping dependents of the Tory elite who they claim to despise.

Today I stumbled across the web site of the The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition. The strap line on their web site is: “No to Cuts and Privatisation! Make the Bosses pay!”.

“Make the bosses pay”.

Not “let’s take control!”. Not “let’s change the way Britain works”. No, let’s just cadge a bit of lolly off the toffs. They’ll still be in charge but at least we’ll get a couple of pints and a bag of chips. The cardinal attributes of the British left is not empowered leadership. It is not optimistic energy. The cardinal attribute of the British left is a bitter determination to squeeze the rich and a heartless obsession with control.

In the 90s New Labour were content to leave the capitalist system intact, milking it for funds, while planning more and more idiot schemes to micromanage our lives. Some of the schemes favoured by the last Labour government were: the militarisation of the civil servants who man our border control, identity cards, satellite tracking of cars by the state, mass interception of emails, presumed consent to remove organs for transplantation, holding people for 48 days without charge, a DNA database for whole population and ubiquitous CCCTV.

On the 14th April I listened to BBC Radio 4′s Any Questions and someone asked: “Should cigarettes come in plain packets and would it make a health difference?”. The Secretary of State for Justice and former director of British American Tobacco, Ken Clarkek, spoke first (0:38:18) and said “people now understand the dangers” and went on to say “the point at which you so police somebody else’s wellbeing that your are prepared to order them, put penalties on them, if they wont stop doing something which you think they shouldn’t do is a step one should take cautiously”.

When it was Labour MP, Harriet Harman’s turn to speak (0:42:12) she lectured us at length about the dangers of smoking. She explained that it causes heart and lung decease. This patronising tirade epitomised the attitude of left wing politicians. They can talk for hours about stuff that, as Ken Clark pointed out, we already know. They arrogantly assume that they are more informed than we are. They consider that the warn out cliches which they trot out are pearls of wisdom to the ignorant masses. They cannot conceive that we may have heard all of this before yet reached a different conclusion because our values are based on individual liberty.

The root cause of the British political dichotomy is probably the British class system. The toffs are indoctrinated in special schools to have unjustified self confidence. They believe that they are born to rule and so they find ruling easy. They do not have to be competent, they just have appear confident because we, the working class, still have an ingrained and erroneous respect for toffs.

You deny it but you do! We all do. We may hate the middle class middle manager but we love the eccentric old toff. Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart in Doctor Who, General Mike Jackson in The Balkans. When British troops went into Iraq Colonel Tim Collins gave a speech and said: “…Iraq is steeped in history. It is the site of the Garden of Eden, of the Great Flood and the birthplace of Abraham. Tread lightly there…”. We loved it. We lapped it up. We British are romantics. We listen to these well educated, confident men and we sneer at the egalitarian Americans. We British are content to send our sons to die on the other side of the world as long as we have some Eton educated idiot fill our heads full of romantic nonsense. “Play up! play up! and play the game!” It is our pride and our curse.

Of course the Thatcher years were supposed to change all this. We were told that we were upwardly mobile. The factories were closed and we were sold cheap suits and sent to work in offices. We were now middle class.

Bollocks!

Upwardly Mobile

Upwardly Mobile

Yes, we’ve had a bath and are materially better off but we office wallahs are still working class. We still talk of nothing but football. We still ridicule education, imagination and individuality. “They hate you if your clever and they despise a fool”. We go on Britain’s Got Talent and tell the pundits that we want to express our individuality but we do it by copying every other fucker who wants to express their individuality.

At heart we still respect the toffs and we still need them to tell us what to do. Crucially, we still prefer to swing the lead rather than get off our arses and take control. The toffs are afraid of hard work while the working classes think that being in charge is too difficult and prefer to throw a sicky.

The status quo has existed for centuries and, rather than upsetting it, the left just shout and scream and demands concessions. Rather than reducing the working class to abject poverty the elite throw us a treat now and then to stop us from rising up and doing any real damage.

After a 13 year run by Labour finishing with a plunge into the biggest economic fuck up since World War 2 Labour turned on a sixpence and reverted to demanding that the government stop the cuts. The working class fell for this nonsense and people, who were not politically aware during the Thatcher years, are now expressing hatred of the Tories. Yet where were these hypocrites during the New Labour years? Where were these charlatans when New Labour wanted to introduce super casinos, built by large American corporations, in areas of deprivation with the ludicrous excuse that this would provide jobs?

Ah, but the left attracts idealists and romantics. This week I heard a great old song on the radio: “Letter From America” by The Proclaimers. According to Wikipedia The Proclaimers are socialists and the background for this song is that Thatcher had shut down Scotland and people were all leaving for America. Great song. Great sentiment.

But hang on. Thatcher is blamed for creating mass unemployment right? So the poor Scottish people were forced to emigrate to another country which, presumably, was not run according to a heartless capitalist ideology. Well great. So, which country did they choose? Cuba? Ukraine? North Korea? No, they chose The United States of America. A country which considers universal health care to be communism.

The next British general election is due in May 2015 and I doubt that the economy will have recovered by then and so Labour will probably get back in. Though most of the leaders of New Labour conveniently slipped away before the shit hit the fan there were more than enough lackeys to grasp the reins of power. So when Labour do get in they will doubtless manage the economy as badly as before.

Is the situation hopeless then? Are we British doomed to alternate between Tory and Labour. Are we condemned to eternally stagger from boom to bust? Shat on by Tories, shoveled up by Labour.

There is hope. Other countries manage to combine competent financial and economic management with liberal social polices and they are just a quick hop over the North Sea. Perhaps Scandinavia is a model for Britain’s future?

First we need to ditch the class system which underpins the oscillating nature of British politics and even here the left are too stupid to make progress. When Tony Blair had the chance he botched the House Of Lords reform instead stuffing it full of cronies. Now the Liberals are trying to introduce elections and Labour are using the occasion for political point scoring. They think that parliament is too busy sorting out the debt crisis to worry about reform. Over 600 MPs sitting on their arses all day in the Palace of Westminster can’t handle two things at once? As usual Labour are TALKING BOLLOCKS. Labour should support reform of the House of Lords and once that is out of the way they should start thinking about reducing the power of the monarchy. Notice I don’t suggest abolition as I consider the continuity provided by the monarchy to be useful.

And there is the real problem. We British cling to the past and are not brave enough to strike out for something new. But change is coming. Recent immigrants to Britain don’t fall for this working class romanticism drivel and Scottish independence may be less than a decade away. Perhaps the break up of the United Kingdom will be the kick up the arse that the British need?

Fulking Bonfire

Fulking Bonfire

03
May
12

Blair? Back in Politics? With his reputation?

Look back in anger

Look Back In Anger

The Guardian is reporting that Tony Blair is keen to ‘re-engage’ with UK politics and has apparently hired a spin doctor as part of an attempt to raise his domestic profile.

You couldn’t make it up. Blair always played his role as if he were an actor, making loud speeches while leaving the scripting and the work to someone else. Now this delusional narcissist thinks that he can make a come back. Like some ageing movie star surrounded by sycophants he thinks he will make one last movie.

Even after the New Labour years have been shown to be a drunken binge funded by borrowing from the next generation; even after the Iraqis have been shown not to have had weapons of mass destruction; even after the MPs have been shown to have had their fingers in the till; even after his Director of Communications and Strategy (Alistair Campell) has revealed that he was suffering from alcoholism and depression during the Blair years; even after the press that supported Blair have been shown to be breaking laws and lying and the police conniving with the press and the bankers have been shown to have been funding lavish lifestyles by taking huge risks with investors money; even after Brown ran a deficit during boom years, sold half the UK gold reserves at the bottom of the market and shafted everyone’s pensions this scurrilous shit still thinks that everything was fine and Britain just needs another dose of New Labour bullshit.

I was surprised when the guy who brought war to the Middle East was made the UN Peace Envoy but I was not surprised that he went into banking after he left politics. And I am not surprised now that he wants to make a come back. When he was PM I was astonished at the gall of the man. I recall one time when he ran out of arguments he justified what he’d done by saying he had to do what he thought was right as if he had some special religious powers to tell us what was right. Remember that ghastly self riotous and patronising grin? – “Ah, OK Tony, as long as you think it’s right”.

The fact that he thinks he can return is ample proof of the delusional and narcissistic nature of the man. He thinks that his unending claims to be “passionate” about everything is sufficient substitue for practical policies. He thinks that it was him that held power and he forgets the lackeys and spin doctors that really held him in place and are now scrambling around trying to get power for themselves.

Get the old team back together…..we’ll make a comeback……it will be like the old days……yeh right! Only this time the economie is in a mess and everyone will remember how they all shafted each other last time around.

If Blair comes back then his admirers may support him thus splitting the vote for the next leader between Blair, Milliband 1 & Milliband 2. Hopefully this will finally drive a stake through the comatose, stinking remains of New Labour and that can only be a good thing. It’s almost worth getting him back just to see the fragile reputation which he retains amongst the stupid torn to shreds and the fact that he doesn’t see this coming is more proof of his tenuous grasp on reality which will only add spice to the spectacle.

Bring it on!

05
Jan
12

Thank God for Diane Abbott

Only an idiot would consider her a racist

Only an idiot would consider her a racist

Having followed the career of Diane Abbott MP for some years I consider her to be a great benefit to the House of Commons. While she is not as technically learned as some, she has a common sense approach that slices through bullshit like a knife through butter and, most of all, I believe that her heart is in the right place.

Now we hear that she has tweeted that “white people love to play divide and rule” and she is being lambasted as a racist. What are we to think?

Personally, I’m getting a feeling of Déjà vu. Back in March last year TV producer Brian True-May was suspended after being accused of racist comments relating to the ITV series Midsummer Murders. When speaking in an informal situation, he was asked if his Ms Marple style/chocolate box program should have ethnic minorities. He answered no and added that “..it wouldn’t be the English village with them”. A friend of mine told me that suspension was not enough and that Mr. True-May should be imprisoned!

The comments of Mr. True-May and Dianne Abbot do nothing to show racism. If we held ourselves to the same standard as we hold other people we would all be behind bars. On the face of it both comments ARE racist but only an idiot would depend on these words in isolation to judge a persons character and the calls for the resignation of Ms. Abbott are merely political opportunism.

As a white man, I understand Dianne’s comments while welcoming her clarification. In truth the baying mobs who chant RACIST have more in common with real racist than do the, usually innocent, people who stumble into these mine fields laid by the mean spirited and the lame witted.

This is not to say that all who utter remarks such as these are not racist, just that the judging of people by a handful of isolated remarks shows a bigotry and prejudice more in keeping with the likes of the BNP. The accusations come from a “them and us” mentality. They are supported by the simplistic idea that racism is a simple yes/no analysis. That anyone whose commitment to anti-racism is called into question must be immediately rejected as evil. Often, I suspect, this attitude is propelled by the fear of the finger of racism being pointed at anyone who dares defend such people.

This week real racism was in the news in the form of the conviction of Gary Dobson and David Norris for the murder of Stephen Larwence. When confronted with events such as this, we may be forgiven for wondering whether hypocrisy in the racism debate really matters? While Brian True-May might have lost a few weeks pay and Dianne Abbot a few voters this is nothing when compared to the horrendous suffering by many black people in this country as demonstrated by the murder of Stephen Lawrence..

I believe that hypocrisy in the racism debate does matter. While not knowing anything about Brian True-May I am not willing to brand him as racist for the handful of comments I have been fed during a media frenzy. Similarly nobody with any intelligence or sincerity who follows politics can seriously consider Dianne Abbott a racist.

If we continue to turn on each other every time one of us is accused of racism then we will all learn to disguise our opinions and this will not be a good thing. I am told by English friends who work in America that it is almost impossible to have an intelligent conversation at work. Nobody even tries as they are all afraid of tripping up over racism, sexism, agism or any other bloody ism. Yet do we consider America to be the least racist of countries? The election of President Obama would suggest that they are yet the disgraceful attacks on Mr. Obama indicate otherwise.

The debate on racism has become stilted and the two extremes monopolise debate. The outright racists at one end and the bigoted anti-racist at the other. Each side can be recognised by their obsession with hate. Their insistance on dividing humanity into absolute good and absolute bad. This leaves the rest of us walking on eggshells.

The intermittent witch hunts betray a society desperate to prove it’s anti-racist credentials while neglecting some very real forms of racism which exist in the world today. For example the monopolising of racist victimhood by Israel allows it to settle fundamentalist Jews on Palestinian land while simultaneously throwing the accusation of racist at anyone who dares to criticise. While the Israelis carry out ethnic cleansing Newt Gingrich refers to  families who may have lived in Palestine for longer than America has existed as “so-called Palestinians”.

Dianne Abbot has done us all a favour by showing that ANYONE can be caught out saying something stupid which, when one is too lazy to pay attention, can be branded as racist. We should all, therefore, calm down and stop flinging accusation of racism about in such an indiscriminate manner.

The words of Rudyard Kipling may be worth considering:

If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build’em up with worn-out tools;

…..Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!
………daughter…I mean man..woman……..person….human…oh bollocks!

Buy Poppies at Fine Art America

Poppies

16
Oct
11

Alistair Darling Quacking Like A Duck

Quack Quack - Alistair Darling speaking at The Old Market

Quack Quack - Alistair Darling speaking at The Old Market

Last Thursday evening I saw the ex-chancellor, Alistair Darling, speaking about his new book: Back From The Brink, at The Old Market in Hove. These talks are organised by City Books, a small but very active, book shop on Western Road.

The room was pretty packed with a few hundred people who had all paid a fiver to see Mr. Darling. He gave a short speech where he summarised his view of the collapse of Western Banks and how he considered that New Labour had rescued the situation. He claimed that at one point “The system had reached a stage where we were within hours of total collapse” and later said that he had “written a cheque for, effectively, 500 billion pounds”.

Not much was said about the cause of the crisis and he took the opportunity to point out some of the more favourable aspects of Tony Blair’s leadership such as reducing child poverty.

He spoke calmly and reasonably and with a trace of wry wit. He seemed to me a sincere politician. As with Jack Straw, people may claim that. though he seems sincere and reasonable in fact, behind the scenes, he is conniving to do so. Like a swan, on the surface complete calm and poise, while beneath the surface there’s frenetic activty. However, after years of the obviously insincere and calculating politicians such as Peter Mandelson, it strikes me that this is a little like the Chinese Room argument in philosophy. Or if you prefer another ornithological analogy: if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it’s a duck. Mr. Darling spoke reasonably and apparently sincerely so perhaps he is a sincere and reasonable man.

In fact I was quite surprised at my reaction. As a serial political ranter, who is quite capable of condemning Tony Blair as the devil incarnate, I found myself thinking more sympathetically about politicians in general and, though Mr. Darling’s manner may have helped this, I think the act of occupying the same room helped establish a more empathic rapport as it allowed the audience to see the man as well as the politician.

After the speech Mr. Darling took questions which were mainly about the financial crisis. He made the point that Germany has benefited from the Euro by having a comparitevly weak currency helping German exports to China and he pointed out that these exports will decline if Germany leaves the Euro. He said “If you want the Euro, you have to accept the consequences of the Euro”. This is a very interesting argument and it made me consider the United States. Though California has screwed its economy there is no talk of California leaving the dollar.

City Books

City Books

11
Aug
11

The riot bandwagon

The Riot Bandwagon

The Riot Bandwagon

One thing about a riot is that EVERYONE has some bollocks to say about it and I am no exception. Labour are banging on about the riots being a reaction against the cuts. I don’t think that Labour even know what cuts. Ed Milliband has jumped on the issue like he jumps on every bandwagon and is talking bollocks about the “absolute priority” for citizens to go about their lawful business while using the disturbances to call for cancellation of the cuts which were due for the police force. The trouble with Ed is that his absolute priority is always the last thing anybody said to him. This week it’s the police next week it will be something else.

I have heard people blaming the immigrants though I’ve seen bugger all evidence that immigrants were involved in any greater proportion than anyone else and though sociologists warned that racism thrives during times of poverty and violence we are now seeing the insidious way this is being acted out. I heard about a group of vigilantes in Enfield protecting their area and to start with had some sympathy for what they were doing. I heard that they termed themselves the Enfield Defence League, a named strikingly similar to the racist English Defence League (EDL). Later I heard that the EDL had amassed in south London also to defend the area against rioters. We should be wary of this sort of thing. Their next step will be uniforms and we should remember that we want security and not fascism.

We British are a bunch of yobs. Every time there is a recession something like this kicks off. I wonder if this may be partly due to our class centred culture. Despite what the “blitz spirit” crowd would have us believe, when things get tough we Brits don’t pull together, we just blame the other classes.

In the case of the riots the yobs blame the rich, the politicians, the police and the press. One difference this time is that they are perfectly justified and any dispassionate observer listening to David Cameron declare that the rioters will “feel the full force of the law” is forced to ask why the bankers, politicians, police and press did not feel the full force of the law over the past few years.

Another difference this time around might be technology. An outbreak of civil disorder 20 years ago would probably remain an isolated incident. In the 21st century these cretins can instantly tell their friends who will tell their friends who will tell their friends and a flash riot will ensue. For this reason the police probably need to react more swiftly than they have done in the past and there are dangers here that they may overstep their authority leading to tragedies such as the death of Ian Tomlinson.

There was a discussion on Radio 4′s PM program this afternoon where some bloke speculated that two years ago, during the G8 demonstration, the police were too heavy handed leading to the death of an innocent man. He thought that perhaps the police had reacted by becoming more restrained.

If this is true then somebody should explain to the police the difference between a legal demonstration and a riot.

A little bit of British folk law that has knocked around my brain ever since I can remember is the phrase “reading the riot act”. According to Wikipedia, the Riot Act was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain introduced in 1714 that authorised local authorities to declare any group of twelve or more people to be unlawfully assembled, and thus have to disperse or face punitive action and remained on the statute books until 1973.

It seems to me that there may be a case for bringing it back.

23
Jul
11

Where was Milliband when Cable declared war?

Where was Ed when Cable declared War?

No Balls?

Looking back over the past decade and more the United Kingdom seems now to be emerging from a period of temporary insanity. Perhaps the rot started with Thatcher and the Greed Is Good mentality but it really took off when New Labour gave up on substance and focused entirely on appearances. Blair, Mandelson and Brown. The sultans of spin.

These days the whole bullshit Britain edifice seems to be collapsing. First it was the bankers who were exposed as incompetent and greedy charlatans. Then the MPs were found to be seedy little fraudsters fiddling their expenses. Now we find that the press have been routinely breaking the law and the police have been colluding with them! In a way it was obvious. Both the press and the police use private investigators and for the same reason: To employ illegal methods without getting their hands dirty. Now we just need proof that the monarchy orchestrated the killing of Princess Dianne and the whole of the British establishment can be considered corrupt. To put it another way we just need a Queen for a full house – baboom. Oh, please yourselves.

Ed Milliband is getting good press for his stance on News International and his calls for new media ownership rules but, once again, Mr. Milliband is behaving like a hypocritical chancer without conviction or a coherent strategy.

In December 2010 Ofcom was considering the attempt by News International to buy outright British Sky Broadcasting (BskyB) and the Business Secretary, Vince Cable, was caught off guard saying that he had “declared war on Mr Murdoch”.

There were calls for Mr. Cable to resign and Mr. Milliband joined in saying “David Cameron has made the wrong judgment and he has kept Vince Cable on, not because of the national interest but because his Conservative-led Government needs the prop which Vince Cable provides.”

Yet now Mr. Milliband appears to have declared war on Mr. Murdoch himself. The BBC quotes an interview for the Observer in which Mr. Milliband says:

“I think that we’ve got to look at the situation whereby one person can own more than 20% of the newspaper market, the Sky platform and Sky News. I think it’s unhealthy because that amount of power in one person’s hands has clearly led to abuses of power within his organisation. If you want to minimise the abuses of power then that kind of concentration of power is frankly quite dangerous.”

Pity Mr. Miliband didn’t have the courage to condemn News International before Rupert Murdoch’s fall from grace but I suspect he didn’t have the balls. Talking of which we haven’t heard a squeak from Ed Balls for a while.




Enter email address to receive notifications of new posts.

Join 138 other followers

Jonesxxx on Twitter

Images

Palace of Culture and Science

Palace of Culture and Science

Palace of Culture and Science

Palace of Culture and Science

Triumph of Technology Over Tradition

Window

Self Portrait

Sunset

Low Tide

Low Tide

More Photos
May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 138 other followers