Have you ever watched someone from your government recently and thought, “you define a new level of stupidity, pomposity, ignorance, arrogance and plain incompetence, you are an idiot!” Just such a person appeared this week, his name shall shortly be revealed in this blog. Like most of you I have long despaired regarding the levels of nonsense generated by most governments, but this man, wanting to do good, could have exactly the reverse effect just because he’s so vain, self-seeking and stupid.
Two things collided in my consciousness over the last few days. The first was the worsening crisis in Burma following the terrible tragedy brought about by the cyclone of May 2 that destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives in that benighted country. There are estimates suggesting as many as 225,000 dead or missing.
That tragedy has been made much worse by the Burmese regime’s blinkered, stupid and misguided refusal to allow international aid into the country. This is clearly brought about by the paranoia of a dictatorship. There are indications that this stonewall defiance of the world’s wish to help is breaking down. The Burmese authorities are now saying that if the aid comes through the funnel of neighboring Asian countries it will be allowed into the country. So, just when that difficult regime might have been convinced to do the right thing along comes the British diplomat who is anything but diplomatic.
The British diplomatic connection to this terrible story is a man called Lord Malloch-Brown who represents my country as a Minister of State for the Foreign Office as its Asia Minister. He is, therefore, by definition, a diplomat. After listening to his Lordship on BBC’s Radio 4 the word diplomat is clearly not applicable to the Lord.
Malloch-Brown is an old human rights activist. Personally I might share many of his views, but then again I am not a diplomat sent to calm troubled waters, he is. Brown spent this interview purportedly about the Burmese disaster, and many others on the TV news on the previous day, lambasting the Burmese regime. He did this after stating that the situation with the Burmese Government was extremely delicate.
Surely even this diplomatic dimwit can understand that the last thing he should be doing is to try and score cheap human rights brownie points against the regime when his job is to diplomatically enable the aid the world can unleash to save lives via that same regime.
Does this public relations disaster of a man really not understand that the Burmese authorities also have televisions and radios and can and do monitor what is being said about them?
Perhaps Lord Malloch-Brown believes that his voicing his opinions about the odious government’s terrible track record of human rights abuses is more important than saving human lives?
Lord Malloch-Brown, is he a diplomat or a new definition of the word, prat?
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Monday, May 19, 2008
Family and Friends Come First
Family and friends should come first for all of us, and now, for me, they do. There was a time, when I was very young, driven and ambitious, that this might not have been true for me. Now, with the passing of time, it has become my credo.
When I was eight years old I knew what I wanted to be, but not how to achieve this goal. When I was sixteen I thought I knew it all. When I was in my twenties I was sure I knew all the answers, and now, in my fifties I am sure I don't.
When I was about eighteen I drew up a list of things to achieve in my lifetime, and by the time I was twenty one I had ticked almost all of the boxes. Some would say I have had the perfect career, but mostly in reverse!
The truth is that when I had climbed to the top of my first, self imposed, career mountain I quickly realized that I was just in the foothills of the Himalayas, and that there would always be another peak to climb.
It's the same with life. Sadly many of us don't understand we're in a more important race until the whole thing has gone hurtling past us. I began to find this was the case when my family started to grow. Perhaps I lost some of my compulsive drive with the birth of the first of my children, and it reduced more with the next two. But I think I gained more with my love for them than it cost me by reducing my drive for my career. I do believe there is a work / family balance, and if there is a choice to be made you are a fool if you don't choose the latter every time.
This is, I guess, a long winded way of saying I have a family day today, and therefore will not be posting a "proper" blog about a serious issue of the day, but perhaps I shouldn't be apologizing, because I just may have posted the most important blog of all.
When I was eight years old I knew what I wanted to be, but not how to achieve this goal. When I was sixteen I thought I knew it all. When I was in my twenties I was sure I knew all the answers, and now, in my fifties I am sure I don't.
When I was about eighteen I drew up a list of things to achieve in my lifetime, and by the time I was twenty one I had ticked almost all of the boxes. Some would say I have had the perfect career, but mostly in reverse!
The truth is that when I had climbed to the top of my first, self imposed, career mountain I quickly realized that I was just in the foothills of the Himalayas, and that there would always be another peak to climb.
It's the same with life. Sadly many of us don't understand we're in a more important race until the whole thing has gone hurtling past us. I began to find this was the case when my family started to grow. Perhaps I lost some of my compulsive drive with the birth of the first of my children, and it reduced more with the next two. But I think I gained more with my love for them than it cost me by reducing my drive for my career. I do believe there is a work / family balance, and if there is a choice to be made you are a fool if you don't choose the latter every time.
This is, I guess, a long winded way of saying I have a family day today, and therefore will not be posting a "proper" blog about a serious issue of the day, but perhaps I shouldn't be apologizing, because I just may have posted the most important blog of all.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
More Hot Water
We all live very close to the edge of a big hole. This hole should be labeled the unknown. It is a scary, dark place, full of boogey men, and other things that go bump in the dark. We can fall into that hole very easily if we are not lucky.
When I was a young boy my father wanted me to understand his past, where he came from, and how far we had all traveled. He had been born poor, his father a tailor’s presser, living in a small house in London’s Soho district. This was then more like something Damon Runyon might have imagined than the place it is today. Soho was then very heavily populated by two main constituent parts, the Jewish and Irish immigrant populations who had arrived in the 1890’s through to the 1910’s. They lived in hard working poverty.
What set apart my early childhood in Hackney, and later in West Acton from my father’s in Soho, was running hot water. Dad would delight in telling me the tales of his family having to travel to the communal baths, once a week. The tiny houses they inhabited had outside toilets and no bathrooms with running water. I was never aware of such deprivation, as I had been born into a world of limitless hot water on demand. Dad remembered, and told me with relish, his tales of visits to these communal baths. This was a big building in which there were literally rows of baths in separate cubicles for privacy. Each customer would visit each cubicle, and he recalled that there was always some old man who would call out in a middle European accent, “More hot water, number twenty two!”
Today I have my own children and grand children and these passed on memories are even more distant and foreign to them. However, very recently I had reason to recollect them. We have a form of home insurance that covers all our utility provisions. It guarantees that, in the event of their malfunction, they will be immediately fixed. To prevent problems the contractors make annual visits to maintain all the systems in good order. We just had the last such inspection. All went well until the guy inspected our previously lovely boiler. He found a fault, although I still don’t understand it’s exact nature, and he turned it off, for three weeks whilst we have to wait for the necessary part. He further informed us that the boiler could not be turned back on until it had been fixed.
The result is that there will be no heating or hot water via the boiler in Klinger Towers for nearly a month. Luckily we have other, back up heating and hot water systems, and it’s warming up weather wise. However it did make me realize how close we all are to that black hole we’re all so scared of.
This is a wonderful metaphor for how close our economies are to the edge of an abyss. Everyone is tightening their financial belts, and cutting down on their spending on big and small ticket items. What we need to see is more direct, visible help from our governments and banks to the same end.
An obvious suggestion is that it is essential that we keep people unable to meet their mortgage commitments in their homes through this crisis. The banks should be instructed to provide “shared ownership” schemes as an alternative to foreclosure. This would have the effect of reducing monthly payments and stopping the doughnut effect already happening to some American city districts, where entire streets are now unoccupied due to foreclosures. That is going to do no one any good except for the greedy speculators already licking their lips at the prospect of easy money born on the backs of other’s misfortune.
We need to see positive steps by our leaders in the opposite direction, away from the big hole, After all, if we fall into the big hole, we will all fall into it together, as we are all linked. We don’t want a future in a communal bath where we hear the words, “More hot water, number twenty two.” Do we?
When I was a young boy my father wanted me to understand his past, where he came from, and how far we had all traveled. He had been born poor, his father a tailor’s presser, living in a small house in London’s Soho district. This was then more like something Damon Runyon might have imagined than the place it is today. Soho was then very heavily populated by two main constituent parts, the Jewish and Irish immigrant populations who had arrived in the 1890’s through to the 1910’s. They lived in hard working poverty.
What set apart my early childhood in Hackney, and later in West Acton from my father’s in Soho, was running hot water. Dad would delight in telling me the tales of his family having to travel to the communal baths, once a week. The tiny houses they inhabited had outside toilets and no bathrooms with running water. I was never aware of such deprivation, as I had been born into a world of limitless hot water on demand. Dad remembered, and told me with relish, his tales of visits to these communal baths. This was a big building in which there were literally rows of baths in separate cubicles for privacy. Each customer would visit each cubicle, and he recalled that there was always some old man who would call out in a middle European accent, “More hot water, number twenty two!”
Today I have my own children and grand children and these passed on memories are even more distant and foreign to them. However, very recently I had reason to recollect them. We have a form of home insurance that covers all our utility provisions. It guarantees that, in the event of their malfunction, they will be immediately fixed. To prevent problems the contractors make annual visits to maintain all the systems in good order. We just had the last such inspection. All went well until the guy inspected our previously lovely boiler. He found a fault, although I still don’t understand it’s exact nature, and he turned it off, for three weeks whilst we have to wait for the necessary part. He further informed us that the boiler could not be turned back on until it had been fixed.
The result is that there will be no heating or hot water via the boiler in Klinger Towers for nearly a month. Luckily we have other, back up heating and hot water systems, and it’s warming up weather wise. However it did make me realize how close we all are to that black hole we’re all so scared of.
This is a wonderful metaphor for how close our economies are to the edge of an abyss. Everyone is tightening their financial belts, and cutting down on their spending on big and small ticket items. What we need to see is more direct, visible help from our governments and banks to the same end.
An obvious suggestion is that it is essential that we keep people unable to meet their mortgage commitments in their homes through this crisis. The banks should be instructed to provide “shared ownership” schemes as an alternative to foreclosure. This would have the effect of reducing monthly payments and stopping the doughnut effect already happening to some American city districts, where entire streets are now unoccupied due to foreclosures. That is going to do no one any good except for the greedy speculators already licking their lips at the prospect of easy money born on the backs of other’s misfortune.
We need to see positive steps by our leaders in the opposite direction, away from the big hole, After all, if we fall into the big hole, we will all fall into it together, as we are all linked. We don’t want a future in a communal bath where we hear the words, “More hot water, number twenty two.” Do we?
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Blog or Article?
Sometimes I'm not too sure whether this is more of an article than a blog. This is one of those times. I have tried to analyze the difference between the formats because I write both. However, there are times, many of them, when something I have written for the one format finds its way, comfortably, to the other.
It seems to me that the main differentiator that other writers impose is that blogs are written more from a personal perspective, based on the small scraps of everyday life, whereas an article is, perhaps, written about the issues of the day. The latter with less use of the perpendicular pronoun, I.
As I use I in both formats, without fear or trepidation, and write of the universal from my scrappy and personal perspective, I don't see much difference. Perhaps the only real separation that exists is that which exists between where you read these blogs or articles. If you read them on a screen they become a blog, and if you read a printed version they magically morph into an article.
Does the different title, article or blog matter? Yes, in a way it does, to the reader, not the writer. A blog betokens to many readers a certain immediacy that is not implied by the word, article. The latter word suggests more sober reflection, more time spent in composition. Sorry to disappoint, but for this writer, the same time is spent on both formats. As with all forms of writing, and I try my hand at most, the methods used by different writers are dependent on our ways of thinking and working and not the end use of what we write.
A question I often get asked is how do I make the time to write most days? This is a bit like asking many of you how do you make time for eating or breathing. Writing is what I do, it makes me what I am. Everything else flows from that source. I don't find it any harder than anything else I do, it's an entirely natural process. Sometimes it works out better or worse. As for the time it takes there is no simple answer. Our brains are like a sponge, and are constantly taking in information and mulling over issues, my mother used to call my dad and me, scrambled egg brains. Whether we like it or not we are mentally masticating our world view constantly. My way of dealing with the results is to write down my conclusions and to share them with you, whether it's in this format, or a screenplay or in prose.
I also get asked how I make money out of this and my answer is that this is nothing to do with anyone but me. What I found, in blog and article writing, as with my writing in all other formats, is that you don't write to make money, but if you write reasonably you can and do make some money, sometimes.
Today's offering has taken me about the same to write as it has taken you to read. Someone who bought a screenplay from my then agent said he was shocked he had to pay so much when he had discovered that this particular script had only taken me two weeks to write. My agent, a very wise man, responded, "yes, it took Tony two weeks, two weeks and thirty years before that to learn how to do it in two weeks."
For the next couple of days, here's the more classically blog section, I shall be out of sight as I work out of town taking part in a validation process for a large group of degrees at an English education establishment. I'm confident that will give me new writing opportunities.
It seems to me that the main differentiator that other writers impose is that blogs are written more from a personal perspective, based on the small scraps of everyday life, whereas an article is, perhaps, written about the issues of the day. The latter with less use of the perpendicular pronoun, I.
As I use I in both formats, without fear or trepidation, and write of the universal from my scrappy and personal perspective, I don't see much difference. Perhaps the only real separation that exists is that which exists between where you read these blogs or articles. If you read them on a screen they become a blog, and if you read a printed version they magically morph into an article.
Does the different title, article or blog matter? Yes, in a way it does, to the reader, not the writer. A blog betokens to many readers a certain immediacy that is not implied by the word, article. The latter word suggests more sober reflection, more time spent in composition. Sorry to disappoint, but for this writer, the same time is spent on both formats. As with all forms of writing, and I try my hand at most, the methods used by different writers are dependent on our ways of thinking and working and not the end use of what we write.
A question I often get asked is how do I make the time to write most days? This is a bit like asking many of you how do you make time for eating or breathing. Writing is what I do, it makes me what I am. Everything else flows from that source. I don't find it any harder than anything else I do, it's an entirely natural process. Sometimes it works out better or worse. As for the time it takes there is no simple answer. Our brains are like a sponge, and are constantly taking in information and mulling over issues, my mother used to call my dad and me, scrambled egg brains. Whether we like it or not we are mentally masticating our world view constantly. My way of dealing with the results is to write down my conclusions and to share them with you, whether it's in this format, or a screenplay or in prose.
I also get asked how I make money out of this and my answer is that this is nothing to do with anyone but me. What I found, in blog and article writing, as with my writing in all other formats, is that you don't write to make money, but if you write reasonably you can and do make some money, sometimes.
Today's offering has taken me about the same to write as it has taken you to read. Someone who bought a screenplay from my then agent said he was shocked he had to pay so much when he had discovered that this particular script had only taken me two weeks to write. My agent, a very wise man, responded, "yes, it took Tony two weeks, two weeks and thirty years before that to learn how to do it in two weeks."
For the next couple of days, here's the more classically blog section, I shall be out of sight as I work out of town taking part in a validation process for a large group of degrees at an English education establishment. I'm confident that will give me new writing opportunities.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Learning in England
When I was in charge of a film degree programme at an English university I was once confronted by the parents of a student. My first question was, why are the parents of a 20-year-old student confronting me, when it should be the student talking to me? The student had failed the year, and the parents would not accept the situation. Their questions betrayed everything about current British social attitudes. The attitude of these concerned parents was aggressive and ill informed. They felt that they could legitimately demand that their child’s grades be reconsidered on the basis that, as they were paying something towards his education, they were customers or consumers, and therefore the fault must be with the suppliers, not their child. As we had “failed” to provide the student with sufficiently good teaching to pass the year we should be penalized, rather than the kid.
I had the unhappy task of informing the parents that their offspring had missed many classes, failed to deliver course work on time, failed tests and exams, missed lectures and been disruptive. Their response astonished me. Despite all this evidence of their child’s failings, they didn’t think we were entitled to have failed him. This was not a one off instance. These are the consequence of a society where people have been educated to believe there should be no winners or losers, just participants.
For those of you living in Britain today is another day of national educational testing for our children. In this country there are such tests for all children and all educational establishments all the time. I should declare an interest here, other than having been an academic myself. I am also part of the testing establishment as I have worked as an External Examiner at various UK universities, and still validate degree programs at others. In addition I have marked student papers both for universities and evaluation boards. I know that our systems are rigorous, fair and as good as anything to be found internationally, and better than most. I do not question that we need such a systematic approach to evaluation. The questions I am raising are about how these systems are being employed.
There is a perception in other countries that the English are arrogant. It might have been true in the past, but now, I think the truth is the opposite. The English tend to undervalue some of their finest accomplishments, such as its university system, and this has led to over scrutiny of their institutions. As a consequence the country does more than it needs by way of constant checking and double-checking. This is certainly true in education where it is becoming very difficult to deliver normal teaching.
I shall give you one example of this. When I was teaching at Further Education level recently it has become standard practice to break down lectures into twenty minutes sections, and each of these mini sections had to be planned, within the length of the whole lecture or class. This could mean, in a three-hour lecture, that there were, in fact, nine mini classes to prepare. In addition the lecturer has to prepare a lesson plan for each class, each student, and this all had to fit within the course curriculum and the annualized plan for the subject. I could continue but your heads would spin with this huge paper over indulgence. I was teaching, face to face, on a part time basis for twenty hours per week, and it took almost another twenty hours to prepare and assess the results of our labors. This is both disproportionate and wasteful. We would have been much better employed working more effectively with the students, but this is the result of being more worried about box ticking than it is about teaching and learning.
What undoubtedly started as a method to make sure everything was fair and appropriate has degenerated into an effort to evaluate everyone and everything as if it were meeting an almost mythical target composed by a bureaucrat who knows nothing about the teaching process but a great deal about how you best tick a box. Believe this or not, it is very possible to tick all the right boxes in education and still not deliver what you should, and the opposite is equally possible.
Yesterday it was reported that there are schools and colleges in Britain who conduct their classes in eight-minute sections. After each eight minute section the class is distracted intentionally by being told to get up, play some basketball and then, after fifteen minutes, return to the next eight minute section of study. They do this because a study told them this would be a more effective method for students to retain information. The results, apparently, support this finding. I frankly want proof that this is so, and even then, would argue against this method. Having worked with a twenty-minute version of this system I can report that it does work with some students, sometimes, depending on what you’re trying to do, the subject matter, and the part of the curriculum you’re trying to teach or learn. It is both foolish and destructive to adopt a one size fits all mentality.
Clearly the teaching process and its evaluation is a question of balance, and for the present I am compelled to report that we are still seeking to achieve something approximating this. The aim remains right, but the methods employed are, on occasion in England, too intrusive, change too often and are inappropriately harsh in many instances.
I had the unhappy task of informing the parents that their offspring had missed many classes, failed to deliver course work on time, failed tests and exams, missed lectures and been disruptive. Their response astonished me. Despite all this evidence of their child’s failings, they didn’t think we were entitled to have failed him. This was not a one off instance. These are the consequence of a society where people have been educated to believe there should be no winners or losers, just participants.
For those of you living in Britain today is another day of national educational testing for our children. In this country there are such tests for all children and all educational establishments all the time. I should declare an interest here, other than having been an academic myself. I am also part of the testing establishment as I have worked as an External Examiner at various UK universities, and still validate degree programs at others. In addition I have marked student papers both for universities and evaluation boards. I know that our systems are rigorous, fair and as good as anything to be found internationally, and better than most. I do not question that we need such a systematic approach to evaluation. The questions I am raising are about how these systems are being employed.
There is a perception in other countries that the English are arrogant. It might have been true in the past, but now, I think the truth is the opposite. The English tend to undervalue some of their finest accomplishments, such as its university system, and this has led to over scrutiny of their institutions. As a consequence the country does more than it needs by way of constant checking and double-checking. This is certainly true in education where it is becoming very difficult to deliver normal teaching.
I shall give you one example of this. When I was teaching at Further Education level recently it has become standard practice to break down lectures into twenty minutes sections, and each of these mini sections had to be planned, within the length of the whole lecture or class. This could mean, in a three-hour lecture, that there were, in fact, nine mini classes to prepare. In addition the lecturer has to prepare a lesson plan for each class, each student, and this all had to fit within the course curriculum and the annualized plan for the subject. I could continue but your heads would spin with this huge paper over indulgence. I was teaching, face to face, on a part time basis for twenty hours per week, and it took almost another twenty hours to prepare and assess the results of our labors. This is both disproportionate and wasteful. We would have been much better employed working more effectively with the students, but this is the result of being more worried about box ticking than it is about teaching and learning.
What undoubtedly started as a method to make sure everything was fair and appropriate has degenerated into an effort to evaluate everyone and everything as if it were meeting an almost mythical target composed by a bureaucrat who knows nothing about the teaching process but a great deal about how you best tick a box. Believe this or not, it is very possible to tick all the right boxes in education and still not deliver what you should, and the opposite is equally possible.
Yesterday it was reported that there are schools and colleges in Britain who conduct their classes in eight-minute sections. After each eight minute section the class is distracted intentionally by being told to get up, play some basketball and then, after fifteen minutes, return to the next eight minute section of study. They do this because a study told them this would be a more effective method for students to retain information. The results, apparently, support this finding. I frankly want proof that this is so, and even then, would argue against this method. Having worked with a twenty-minute version of this system I can report that it does work with some students, sometimes, depending on what you’re trying to do, the subject matter, and the part of the curriculum you’re trying to teach or learn. It is both foolish and destructive to adopt a one size fits all mentality.
Clearly the teaching process and its evaluation is a question of balance, and for the present I am compelled to report that we are still seeking to achieve something approximating this. The aim remains right, but the methods employed are, on occasion in England, too intrusive, change too often and are inappropriately harsh in many instances.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Oh Happy Day!
This is a very happy day, one on which the sun seems to shine brighter, and the world glows with a special warmth. Of course, to those of you who know me well, the reason will be obvious. My team, Manchester United, the best football team on the planet, has won the Premier League in England. It was a glorious season, made all the better for our having won out over three of the best teams in Europe, all of whom play in the same English League. Well done to Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool for staying so close, and making such a fight of it.
The club has played exceptionally over the season, scoring more goals and letting in fewer than any other team. They won the league by going out for each game with total self belief, knowing that they would score. They were exciting, entrancing and better than all the rest. Not easy in the best league in the world. The same league that supplied four (each country in Europe is entitled to a maximum of its four highest placed teams into the European Champions League) of the quarter finalists and three of the semi finalists of the Champions League.
Now, with an allowable party period of a day or two to get over, the mighty Manchester United will fix their eyes on trying to win the European Champions League Final in Moscow against Chelsea in a little more than a week. It will be a tough game, but it seems appropriate that Man U are in the final fifty years after the Munich air crash decimated the club. That team will be watching over the progress of their successors, and they will be smiling.
The club has played exceptionally over the season, scoring more goals and letting in fewer than any other team. They won the league by going out for each game with total self belief, knowing that they would score. They were exciting, entrancing and better than all the rest. Not easy in the best league in the world. The same league that supplied four (each country in Europe is entitled to a maximum of its four highest placed teams into the European Champions League) of the quarter finalists and three of the semi finalists of the Champions League.
Now, with an allowable party period of a day or two to get over, the mighty Manchester United will fix their eyes on trying to win the European Champions League Final in Moscow against Chelsea in a little more than a week. It will be a tough game, but it seems appropriate that Man U are in the final fifty years after the Munich air crash decimated the club. That team will be watching over the progress of their successors, and they will be smiling.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
This, Our Fascist Future?
The Fascists in pre-War Italy and Germany took away liberties whilst re-directing the attention of their populations. It was the same kind of cheap trick that a magician might use, the trick of sleight of hand, misdirection. In the UK and the USA this is again becoming fashionable, indeed politically correct in the UK.
On British television the Government’s department, DVLA, the motor vehicle licensing authority are running an advertisement that graphically shows a couple’s car being crushed because they had not paid their annual car tax. I can understand a fine, even a very large fine, but why crush their car? This is beyond an acceptable charge allowing people to use their cars, this is Draconian.
In the States the actor, Wesley Snipes, didn’t pay his tax. The Internal Revenue Service prosecuted him for this. He is undoubtedly wrong, and surely he’s a fool. Snipes offered to pay the court all the money that was due, and he offered fines and penalties. His offer to pay was accepted and, in addition he has been sentenced to 3 years imprisonment. Why, what does this achieve except to demonstrate to the rest of us what could happen to us all in other words they are making an example of the very stupid Mr. Snipes. Making examples of idiots is not the intention or design of the law.
The British Foreign Minister, David Miliband, was on The Politics Show this morning and stated, with a straight face, that “There is less chance of your being affected by crime now that at any time since 1981.” What planet is David on? If the government has statistics to back this claim, then they are fixing the statistics to suit their argument. The first casualty of our diminishing democracy is clearly the truth.
We are witnessing the politics of envy writ large. In the UK there are a new range of car tax charges that escalate with the size of the car’s engine. This is meant to encourage us all toward the use of smaller engine capacity vehicles, which have a lower carbon emission. Added to this we will soon see a similar system of Congestion Charging for cars entering London. For myself, with two cars to pay for, I have no hesitation in stating that I shall have to downsize my cars, not because I want to, but because I am being compelled to do so through these stealth taxes.
There is yet another Government advertising campaign on British television in which the average citizen’s lifestyle is demonstrated as leaving a literal carbon footprint, as each footfall leaves a trail of oil on the floor. The message is that we should all use less energy. This would be laudable if there was evidence attached, telling us in real, forensic terms, the benefits and costs of such a policy. Right now the entire hypothesis is founded on the unproven theory that global warming is man made. Following that argument we should all be compelled to reduce our use of fossil fuels and therefore we could put into reverse global warming. I repeat there is no undeniable proof, just a politically correct argument.
The way we live our lives should be our choice in a democracy. If we want to live a certain way, perhaps eating more vegetables and fruit or being more “green” then that is our right. It should not be allowable for our governments to make such behavior compulsory. That is the clear trend in the UK and it is wrong. We are on a slippery slope of decreasing liberty and increasing compulsion. It is time for everyone to wake up and tell the politicians to back off.
It used to be that what happened first in America was soon followed by us in Britain, and now it feels as if that has reversed itself. So watch out in the States, this "Big Brother" society is something we all need to be aware of and to combat, before it grows too big to resist.
On British television the Government’s department, DVLA, the motor vehicle licensing authority are running an advertisement that graphically shows a couple’s car being crushed because they had not paid their annual car tax. I can understand a fine, even a very large fine, but why crush their car? This is beyond an acceptable charge allowing people to use their cars, this is Draconian.
In the States the actor, Wesley Snipes, didn’t pay his tax. The Internal Revenue Service prosecuted him for this. He is undoubtedly wrong, and surely he’s a fool. Snipes offered to pay the court all the money that was due, and he offered fines and penalties. His offer to pay was accepted and, in addition he has been sentenced to 3 years imprisonment. Why, what does this achieve except to demonstrate to the rest of us what could happen to us all in other words they are making an example of the very stupid Mr. Snipes. Making examples of idiots is not the intention or design of the law.
The British Foreign Minister, David Miliband, was on The Politics Show this morning and stated, with a straight face, that “There is less chance of your being affected by crime now that at any time since 1981.” What planet is David on? If the government has statistics to back this claim, then they are fixing the statistics to suit their argument. The first casualty of our diminishing democracy is clearly the truth.
We are witnessing the politics of envy writ large. In the UK there are a new range of car tax charges that escalate with the size of the car’s engine. This is meant to encourage us all toward the use of smaller engine capacity vehicles, which have a lower carbon emission. Added to this we will soon see a similar system of Congestion Charging for cars entering London. For myself, with two cars to pay for, I have no hesitation in stating that I shall have to downsize my cars, not because I want to, but because I am being compelled to do so through these stealth taxes.
There is yet another Government advertising campaign on British television in which the average citizen’s lifestyle is demonstrated as leaving a literal carbon footprint, as each footfall leaves a trail of oil on the floor. The message is that we should all use less energy. This would be laudable if there was evidence attached, telling us in real, forensic terms, the benefits and costs of such a policy. Right now the entire hypothesis is founded on the unproven theory that global warming is man made. Following that argument we should all be compelled to reduce our use of fossil fuels and therefore we could put into reverse global warming. I repeat there is no undeniable proof, just a politically correct argument.
The way we live our lives should be our choice in a democracy. If we want to live a certain way, perhaps eating more vegetables and fruit or being more “green” then that is our right. It should not be allowable for our governments to make such behavior compulsory. That is the clear trend in the UK and it is wrong. We are on a slippery slope of decreasing liberty and increasing compulsion. It is time for everyone to wake up and tell the politicians to back off.
It used to be that what happened first in America was soon followed by us in Britain, and now it feels as if that has reversed itself. So watch out in the States, this "Big Brother" society is something we all need to be aware of and to combat, before it grows too big to resist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
