Saturday, 30 April 2016

Labour's Love Lost

As so often happens when a serious matter is taken up by political interests, the Labour Party's row about anti-Semitism is clouding it further. Ken Livingstone in particular has bigmouthed his way into the debate in a manner that is as unhelpful as it was crass because he has simply given everyone a chance to get all upset.

Far from drawing a line between criticising Israel's policies (legitimate) and attacking Jews because they are Jews (which is what I take to be anti-Semitism, and which is wrong, bad and stupid), we seem right now to be hovering over the matter of the right of Israel to exist and equating this with anti-Semitism. That is at root a political question, although people may - or may not - have anti-Semitic motives for taking it up. It's a unique question too because of the enormous significance it has to Jews, the enormity of the Holocaust, the purpose and manner of Israel's creation, the inevitable disruption it has caused in the region and the effects on those who were there already.

In short, criticism of the existence of Israel CAN be made without being an anti-Semite, and I can't see how the necessary political compromises can be made unless this is allowed to be discussed openly so that real anti-Semites can be seen for what they are.

Sunday, 21 February 2016

Why we need the European Union more than it needs us

Here are the really important questions which need to be answered before deciding how to vote in the British referendum about membership of the European Union on 23rd June.
Compared to other nations of similar wealth in the EU, does Britain have
- a better education system?
- higher levels of literacy and numeracy?
- a better general standard of health?
- a better standard of food and diet?

- higher productivity?
- a more equitable distribution of its wealth?
- a better urban environment?
- better quality housing?
- a better transport system?
- better quality roads?
- more independently run shops and restaurants?
- fewer corporate chain stores?
- higher standards of public behaviour?
- less alcohol-fuelled night-time aggression?

- a better football team?

The answer to all of these questions about vital indicators of a nation's health is "no". With regard to all of them, comparable European nations are ahead of us, often significantly so.
Yet the European Union has no control over any of them.
Things have slipped behind on our governments' - and our - watch. They are our doing. And if this is what we have achieved through exercising our sovereign powers with no European interference, having more of them might not be such a good idea after all.
I am a patriot yet I've never been afraid to say that we have a huge amount to learn from our neighbours about how to live, and to live well, and it has never been more important than now. In short, we need Europe more than Europe needs us.
Little Englanders - those small-minded, queasy, mincing dwarves of whom this great country has always spawned too many and who are to a great extent culpable in the failings above - will waste no words or expense to make Great Britain a lesser place. We will only have ourselves to blame if they win the referendum.
So, on balance, I think I'll vote to stay in the European Union.

Saturday, 30 January 2016

The Eighth Deadly Sin

I hope you'll find the following amusing but even more concerning, because it's worth asking whether we are turning out citizens who can think as well as cram disaggregated and promptly-forgotten knowledge for the purpose of passing exams, leaving a dangerous vacuum thereafter.
I've been covering some Religious Studies lessons at school. One of the lessons was to look at and define Christianity's 'Seven Sins' and their corresponding virtues. The lesson plan said that the pupils should research in their dictionary and then write down the definitions of each Sin. In a class of 25 about a third wrote the following (or a version so close to it as to make no difference):

ANGER: a strong emotion brought on by a person or event that causes one great pain or trouble.
PRIDE: a sense of one's own value that is too high.
GREED: a great desire for more wealth and possessions than one needs or deserves.
LUST: a strong desire for something or someone.
ENVY: a feeling of wanting what someone else has.
GLUTTONY: a habit of excessive eating and drinking.
SLOTH: a mammal that spends its entire life in trees, using its long claws to hang upside down. Sloths live in the tropical rain forests of Central and South America. They move very slowly, and their long fur turns green from algae growing in it. Sloths are related to armadillos and anteaters.

Wednesday, 9 December 2015

Never judge a book by its contents

Apparently the National Insane Society is campaigning to ensure that books which may have disturbing content bear a warning on the cover in case some readers may be upset. I immediately thought that this would confine to the top shelf of bookshops and libraries titles like 'The Old Curiosity Shop' (childhood death), 'Jude the Obscure' (childhood suicide, deathbed scenes), 'Slaughterhouse 5' (mass immolation), 'Anna Karenina' (at least two people in front of trains), 'Accidental Death of An Anarchist' (use of word 'death' in title) and more or less all the plays of Shakespeare, given that even in the comedies one is occasionally exposed to mild teasing and even incidences of ridicule.

But according to Radio 4 the campaign was initiated by university English students, so unless 'The Little Prince' and Kahlil Gibran's 'The Prophet' are a bit tastier than I thought, I apologise for having been a little quick off the blocks on this occasion.

Friday, 27 November 2015

I'm Dreaming of a Black Friday

I'm dreaming of a Black Friday
Just like the ones we used to know
With markets crashing
And brokers thrashing
On the ends of ropes from Kensington to Bow.
I'm dreaming of a Black Friday
Just like the ones there used to be
With grown men sobbing
And bankers bobbing
All the way from Traitors' Gate down to the sea.
I'm dreaming of a Black Friday
Just like the ones when I was there
With earnings slumping
And tycoons jumping
From thirty-eighth floor windows everywhere. .
Yes, I'm dreaming of a Black Friday
With every chainstore that I see
May their profits crumble and crack
And may all their Christmases be Black.

Sunday, 27 September 2015

Dislike THIS.


Facebook is thinking of introducing a 'dislike' button.


Not, it says, so that you can register your disagreement with or dislike of what someone writes. I imagine that this is because it might cause offence: no one these days likes to be disagreed with, particularly if they're wrong, when it often swiftly escalates to become a matter of that curious notion 'the right to an opinion'. Worse - I imagine -  it could be damaging to the writer's self-esteem with all the costs of medication, litigation and, who knows, self-immolation that might follow.

No, it's so that you can AGREE with them, which I had naively taken to be one of the more obviously incontestable functions of the 'Like' button.

So, for example, if I post a picture of a rich, obese American lording it over an elephant he has bravely turned into an omelette with a Krupp field gun from a mile away, people can register their shared disgust by pressing 'Dislike'.

OK, but what if I were to criticise an odious government policy or racist pressure group? Half of you may agree with my impeccable sentiments and press 'Like'; the other half may agree with my impeccable sentiments and register their disapproval of the matter under discussion by pressing 'Dislike'.

What a load of mushy - and dislikeably confusing - rubbish!

I might know exactly what I mean by 'Like' and 'Dislike', and you - and you, and you - will each know what you each mean by them too. But the meaning stops there, thus making both actions pointless in terms of actual communication, which is what Facebook is meant to enhance not diminish.

I know, let's do away with 'Likes' and 'Dislikes' altogether. Instead, let's say what we mean, not pour open minds into empty vessels.

Monday, 14 September 2015

Corbyn has a chance.

Some early, not-very-comprehensive and not-entirely-thought-through thoughts and I may come back to revise and/or add to them, but I’d like to know what people think ...

How far Labour has hollowed itself out was clearly shown this weekend when the carcase imploded.

It is no alternative to a Conservative Party which knows the price of everything but has never in my lifetime shown it knows the value of anything - even conservatism - and has prostituted a nation before the corporate kerb-crawlers of international business.

Labour under and since Blair has lost both its heart and its core voters, most of whom despise it and from whom it runs scared. It has forgotten its founding principles - socialist principles - of solidarity, mutual obligation and duty to others that also lay behind the creation of the Welfare State. Complexity has replaced simplicity, but the principles remain sound even though the world has moved on. Sadly, Labour has been so desperate to catch up that it's forgotten them altogether.

As both ballast and compensation it filled the vacuum left by its departed socialism with a shallow, mawkish and far from progressive language of social rights as claims upon others, a barely-disguised transcription of market consumerism as social policy. Victimhood has been the only thing Labour has nationalised since the 1970s, not least in the long years of fruitless opposition. It enshrined it in a bureaucratic managerialism that turns the stomach whether you suffer under it, work in it or just rage at it from the outside. A belated effort under Blair to link "rights and responsibilities" just pointed up the poverty - no, the absence - of Labour's conception of society.

Most of Labour’s traditional and potential voters, like most people in Britain and beyond, and including many socialists, are and always have been conservative with a small ‘c’. Corbyn mustn’t ignore that. People like to live in a reasonably predictable world; they like a sense of continuity in their communities; they like to know on what terms they deal with other, and they like to have a say about how it’s done. They aren’t on the whole racist and believing all the above things doesn’t make them so. Above all, far from being mere economic units, they have a pretty honest sense of what’s fair and what isn’t.

Many have turned away from Labour because they think they are unfair; that they have forgotten, ignored or perverted the principles I mentioned above. Because of this sense of unfairness, and joyously egged on by other clarions of victim culture like The Daily Mail, many who would once have voted Labour have retreated into a nasty, defensive and sullen nationalism. Others have been seduced by small-minded organisations like UKIP or overtly racist ones like Britain First. The Scots have simply told Labour to eff off, good God!

Britain has indeed become a notoriously unfair society which the historical dominance of the Conservative Party has done so much to create. We have the biggest and most visible discrepancies in wealth of any major European nation; an often squalid public environment for which many people have ceased to care and behave accordingly; low aspiration (even after all these Tory years - think about that next time a Government spokesman laments its absence in Corbyn's programme!); spectacular social cleavages between the well-educated minority and a badly educated majority; often appalling and preventable health problems. As a people we have been long and unlovingly prepared and indoctrinated for a low-skill, low-aspiration service economy while our major European competitors still actually make things – and by God it shows.

That the nation’s outrage should therefore be directed against foreigners and other Europeans instead of our own ordure is the most obvious testament to Labour’s failure to offer real opposition.

Corbyn can at last open up a debate and set out a clearly different approach. That’s to say an approach that doesn’t require Labour first to find out what the Conservatives want to do so that it can then make a few policy tweaks and then try to sell it as something fresh and different.

He can point up the real unfairnesses:  BANG! BANG! BANG! - it won’t be hard! He can direct our attention away from a narrowly economic to a broader quality-of-life approach (one of the great illusions, as I am starting to appreciate, is that happiness necessarily begins at a certain level of income – especially if you can cook).


Anyway, here are some ideas that I think might bring people back to Labour, and that may be compatible with what Corbyn believes, or might come to believe:
  • Commit to membership of the European Union: we have much more to learn from our neighbours than we like to think and much to lose if, as for too long, we refuse to do so. This is no time for hair-shirted, insular British socialist exceptionalism: that is and has been part of the problem up to now.
  • Commit to remaining in NATO but not to renewing Trident: they aren’t dependent on each other and the money can be better spent on the public and wider environment, and on start-ups for groups and businesses that can carry this work forward.
  • Commit to the principles behind the original welfare state, which was based on contribution not unconditional access except in clearly stated cases, and explain clearly why this is. Nothing incompatible with socialism there!
  • Commit to welcoming genuine refugees at the same time as (1) working internationally to resolve the Syrian and other wars and the disputes that give rise to them and (2) having, along with European partners, a clear exit strategy: that is, for refugees’ to return home when it’s safe to do so except in clearly defined and reasonable cases.
  • Make the rich pay more tax, for no better reason than that they can afford it and it is therefore FAIR.
  • Nationalise the railways, for God’s sake, and do it properly. If in doubt, ask the French.
  • Have a school system that isn’t afraid to value what both academic and non-academic kids can offer and achieve, even if this requires streaming and even an element of separation. Because you don’t have to be academic to be a craftsman. If in doubt, ask the Germans or the Dutch.
  • Support that last one with a return to MAKING THINGS.
And at this point I must hand things over to the economists, if he has any. I certainly haven't.