Thank you Ireland. Today the citizens of that fair country voted against ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. The rules were that if one country out of the entire 27-country membership of the European Union voted against this second version of the previous constitution, it would be abandoned. As there was only one country that allowed its citizens the right to vote, you can guess that in reality the EU was trying not to allow its voters any chance to be contrary. Because Ireland’s constitution doesn’t permit such alterations without a public vote there was no alternative, it was unavoidable. The Irish were allowed to vote and they rejected this treaty, again. Perfect justice has been served.
This is the same treaty that was previously voted against, as a constitution by several countries and had been supposedly abandoned as the rules had stipulated. However, like Dracula, it leapt out of its coffin, bloodied but unbowed. It then morphed from a rejected constitution into a series of parliaments rubber-stamping the new version, now called a treaty. Last time round, when it was called a constitution, we were, you will recall, also told it would be abandoned if any of the countries voted against it. The politicians in Brussels simply changed the rules when they lost. They did a bit of judicious cutting and pasting and regurgitated the same constitutional dinner, re-heated. They clearly can’t believe they are in the wrong, and frankly they don’t care what their people think.
The European President has announced that the ratification process of the now twice rejected constitution / process will proceed despite promises to the contrary. What’s a twice broken promise between old European friends? Public shame should be heaped on all such arrogant, pumped up tin-pot dictators. However, I bet you that this same set of nonentities would accept any vote in their favor.
The EU leadership is demanding further and deeper integration of the European Union but every time the electorate has been allowed to vote on this issue they have responded by rejecting the proposed changes.
The reasons for this continuing objection by the populace are obvious to anyone with a democratic bone in their body. No one wants this constitution or treaty, nor understands it, nor sees the justification for it.
Ladies and gentlemen of Brussels, take your constitution or treaty, and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine, and please, don’t forget the staples!
Friday, June 13, 2008
Feeling Lucky?
Today is Friday the 13th. Some consider this a super unlucky date. I’m not worried by this because in my Jewish religious tradition, the number 13 is thought to be lucky, and as Friday is the start of Sabbath, the most holy of days, it should be doubly lucky today!
It appears obvious to me that our moral decline is both steep and rapid, furthermore there seems to be no end in sight. I am fond of forecasting that this disintegration of our moral core will have dire consequences. I’m also aware that if I keep predicting dire consequences sooner or later I shall turn into a prophet when I eventually get something right!
There are two additional facts that should also be borne in mind; I’m not into any organized religion nor am I superstitious. My being Jewish is what I am culturally, tribally and by tradition. I do, nevertheless fervently believe that we must preserve the moral and ethical dimensions of our civilization. In other words I can sometimes do something wrong, but I do try not to. I admit to weakness, not wickedness. I try very hard to keep within the laws and general rules and conventions of our world.
This goes as far as my trying my utmost not to get a speeding or parking ticket and never to park in a disabled parking space. In fact I once made a citizen’s arrest of someone who did this despite his being a very fit and healthy young man who just didn’t want to bother with parking legally. Yes, I am a pain, but if we don’t draw a line and allow anything, we are doomed to live in a very unpleasant world.
I understand and envy faith in others, and although I’m agnostic about such things I am open to be convinced. I have to admit that when I nearly died I didn’t see any white lights, chaps with wings or hear the chorus fantastic. In fact there was nothing and I was, I admit, most disappointed. Maybe I wasn’t quite ill enough, but I would hate to test the theory just to prove a point.
Despite my lack of religious belief I am a traditionalist. During my childhood my family vigorously taught me the difference between right and wrong. I don’t know if that’s the reason I find it impossible to take a stamp from work, and always have done. I don’t see the difference, other than degree, between the one stamp and several, or some money and where do you draw the line? This has resulted in my being an absolutist in these matters. I would instantly sack anyone for stealing, and indeed I have done so.
Some, who have known me, will tell you that I can be a pain in the bum about such matters. The reason for me raising this matter now is that this week saw the climactic selection of the successful Apprentice, in the TV show of the same name. The winner was a young man called Lee McQueen. He seems a personable, rough diamond sort of fellow. Not especially brilliant, but not total losers like some of his colleagues. During the penultimate weeks show Lee’s CV was exposed. There were many spelling and grammar errors, too many to be excused by most employers I suspect. More importantly, his interviewer asked Lee, did he stand by his statement that he had attended Thames Valley University for 2 years as it stated in his CV? He repeated this claim. His interrogator then showed him a letter he had received from that university which stated that he had actually, only attended for 4 months, “how do you respond to that?”
The young applicant hardly turned a hair. His attitude was OK, I got caught, but he clearly felt no guilt. When the inquests took place this incident was mentioned, but Sir Alan Sugar, the grand inquisitor, didn’t consider the matter to be of sufficient concern to worry him. I was shocked. I have always considered Sir Alan to be a moral man, but his attitude was that he’d probably done the same kind of thing when he was a young man and, to him, it was not an end of the world situation.
It was pointed out to Sugar that the incident proved that Lee would lie when he felt it necessary, and his response was that he could deal with that. His response seemed to indicate that he felt he could still trust Lee, and this wasn’t such an important matter. As Henry Ibsen said so accurately, “Don’t use that foreign word ideals. We have that excellent word lies.”
I had recent experience of both good and bad examples of behavior by colleagues. A “friend” and co-worker, behaved very badly, to my detriment after ten years of our being friends and working together. He told me that the excuse or motivation for his actions was his personal financial situation. Compare that to another ex-colleague and friend in America who felt it appropriate that he gift me shares in his new enterprise, not because he had to, but because he wanted to. Which of these examples will Lee follow, the knife in the back of the former or the generosity of spirit of the latter? I believe Sir Alan should carefully watch his back.
Sir Alan comes across as a shrewd, tough businessman, self confident to the point of arrogance. If you asked Sugar how he sees the future with Lee and he would no doubt tell you that he has the money and business experience to deal with any situation. But ask him in a year’s time, I wonder if Sugar will still have all his money and whether he will rue his disregard for the discredited value of honesty? You can’t buy good character but being able to totally trust your colleagues is still a vital, but increasingly rare virtue.
It appears obvious to me that our moral decline is both steep and rapid, furthermore there seems to be no end in sight. I am fond of forecasting that this disintegration of our moral core will have dire consequences. I’m also aware that if I keep predicting dire consequences sooner or later I shall turn into a prophet when I eventually get something right!
There are two additional facts that should also be borne in mind; I’m not into any organized religion nor am I superstitious. My being Jewish is what I am culturally, tribally and by tradition. I do, nevertheless fervently believe that we must preserve the moral and ethical dimensions of our civilization. In other words I can sometimes do something wrong, but I do try not to. I admit to weakness, not wickedness. I try very hard to keep within the laws and general rules and conventions of our world.
This goes as far as my trying my utmost not to get a speeding or parking ticket and never to park in a disabled parking space. In fact I once made a citizen’s arrest of someone who did this despite his being a very fit and healthy young man who just didn’t want to bother with parking legally. Yes, I am a pain, but if we don’t draw a line and allow anything, we are doomed to live in a very unpleasant world.
I understand and envy faith in others, and although I’m agnostic about such things I am open to be convinced. I have to admit that when I nearly died I didn’t see any white lights, chaps with wings or hear the chorus fantastic. In fact there was nothing and I was, I admit, most disappointed. Maybe I wasn’t quite ill enough, but I would hate to test the theory just to prove a point.
Despite my lack of religious belief I am a traditionalist. During my childhood my family vigorously taught me the difference between right and wrong. I don’t know if that’s the reason I find it impossible to take a stamp from work, and always have done. I don’t see the difference, other than degree, between the one stamp and several, or some money and where do you draw the line? This has resulted in my being an absolutist in these matters. I would instantly sack anyone for stealing, and indeed I have done so.
Some, who have known me, will tell you that I can be a pain in the bum about such matters. The reason for me raising this matter now is that this week saw the climactic selection of the successful Apprentice, in the TV show of the same name. The winner was a young man called Lee McQueen. He seems a personable, rough diamond sort of fellow. Not especially brilliant, but not total losers like some of his colleagues. During the penultimate weeks show Lee’s CV was exposed. There were many spelling and grammar errors, too many to be excused by most employers I suspect. More importantly, his interviewer asked Lee, did he stand by his statement that he had attended Thames Valley University for 2 years as it stated in his CV? He repeated this claim. His interrogator then showed him a letter he had received from that university which stated that he had actually, only attended for 4 months, “how do you respond to that?”
The young applicant hardly turned a hair. His attitude was OK, I got caught, but he clearly felt no guilt. When the inquests took place this incident was mentioned, but Sir Alan Sugar, the grand inquisitor, didn’t consider the matter to be of sufficient concern to worry him. I was shocked. I have always considered Sir Alan to be a moral man, but his attitude was that he’d probably done the same kind of thing when he was a young man and, to him, it was not an end of the world situation.
It was pointed out to Sugar that the incident proved that Lee would lie when he felt it necessary, and his response was that he could deal with that. His response seemed to indicate that he felt he could still trust Lee, and this wasn’t such an important matter. As Henry Ibsen said so accurately, “Don’t use that foreign word ideals. We have that excellent word lies.”
I had recent experience of both good and bad examples of behavior by colleagues. A “friend” and co-worker, behaved very badly, to my detriment after ten years of our being friends and working together. He told me that the excuse or motivation for his actions was his personal financial situation. Compare that to another ex-colleague and friend in America who felt it appropriate that he gift me shares in his new enterprise, not because he had to, but because he wanted to. Which of these examples will Lee follow, the knife in the back of the former or the generosity of spirit of the latter? I believe Sir Alan should carefully watch his back.
Sir Alan comes across as a shrewd, tough businessman, self confident to the point of arrogance. If you asked Sugar how he sees the future with Lee and he would no doubt tell you that he has the money and business experience to deal with any situation. But ask him in a year’s time, I wonder if Sugar will still have all his money and whether he will rue his disregard for the discredited value of honesty? You can’t buy good character but being able to totally trust your colleagues is still a vital, but increasingly rare virtue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
