The Braying Hordes of British Politics are in the House

Once again, I stupidly switched to Prime Minister's Question Time, expecting reasoned debate by those who do and those who would lead our country in Government. I wanted to hear our Prime Minister answer those questions and our Chancellor to explain the economic plans. None of which has happened.

Once again I am flabbergasted by the inane bickering and disrespectful baying of the most disgusting excuses for human beings that have ever been offered the privilege of life.

These braying loons are the people we are required to offer our votes for. They are the most abhorrent, selfish, wilful creatures on the face of the planet. At least a virus has a point. At least a virus provides a result. These pathetic multi-celled mistakes are an affront to all humanity.

They have elevated "ducking and diving" to an art form. Or, more properly expressed, they have utterly devalued everything worthwhile about politics; debate, reasoning, honour, respect and public service.

There can be no doubt that while they call for respect in society and understanding, tolerance and patience where people, real people, honest, hard working, desperate people are concerned, they are incapable of doing so themselves. Such that what they say and what they "stand" for can never again be trusted or believed.

More than ever before, I am disgusted by the Members of Parliament who deigned to appear in the House today. And even more appalled that not all did.

How dare they.

We live and profit in spite of them. They cannot be allowed to continue in this vein.

Revolution is a word that scares and inspires people. It scares people because of its connotations of violence and destruction. But it inspires because is intrinsically a method for change. And that is what we require. Not just a revolution within public services or the civil services, but a revolution in our thinking and our views for the future. And it must start with wholesale change within government. Our elected leaders must be held more accountable than ever. There must be more inter-party collaboration and more people in positions of responsibility and authority must be allowed and required to use that authority responsibly.

How can we be proud of our country when what our leaders appear to think makes it great and worthy of pride is exactly what is destroying it? You cannot have it both ways. We genuinely need change. And if that change is called revolution, then so be it. There need be no violence. There need be no destruction, except that of old, dead beliefs and unworkable policies.

We have the opportunity to say so much and yet do so little. We need more parity and an understanding that what we want is not necessarily what we'll get, but in the end, what we build will better fit the country in which we live and of which we will again be justly proud, than what we currently suffer with.

I am proud to be part of an amazing country, populated by fabulous people who enjoy incredible freedoms and expect their rights to be upheld and respected. I am not proud of the way all of that is manipulated by the minority for the minority in a country so, apparently, proud of its democratic history.

Do not lose sight of what we can achieve and work together to achieve better.

The only way to kill a virus is to starve it of what it needs. We need to starve this one of greed. That has to start with each of us. If you genuinely believe that what we have is what we must put up with, without ever doing anything to change it except voting for the same policies under a different party's name, then we are lost as a nation, as a people. If we change our own habits and expectations, then we can affect change everywhere.

I look forward to seeing what happens in the future. Let's make it a good one.

Scotland, The Teacher!

Scotland, The Teacher!

A random comment on the outcome of one of the greatest political debates I have ever seen and the impending lasting legacy of true national engagement. 

One good thing about all this is that I now know what the West Lothian Question is. No, I wouldn't want anyone else telling England what to do, either. 

And I know that a Saltire is not the rage that descends on you if you've had too much sodium. I know that clouds can be made to look like anything you damn well like. And I know that we, as a unified Nation of separate identities, have been taught a very important lesson: Apathy in politics is at least as dangerous as extremism. Mobilising a Nation from political lethargy and grumbling to driving extensive and exciting debate and getting people into polling stations to vote not only with hearts but with heads, about issues that genuinely affect us all. Now that's a lesson we should all learn. And that's why, regardless of the outcome, the referendum on Scottish independence has been so incredibly important to politics in the United Kingdom. 

This will, I genuinely believe, lead to much more engagement by many more people throughout Great Britain and Northern Ireland on the issues that affect them not just locally but nationally and internationally. The British Government now knows very clearly that the "Nation" will not sit still and let it happen. Banks and other financial institutions, major corporations (international and home grown) should be very aware that their monopoly as decision makers is no longer as safe as it has always been. 

We can make change happen. It won't be good for everyone. But at the moment we have a situation where it's bloody good for very few, really bad for the majority and practically impossible for the rest. Now, I don't think that's really a way to continue. It's also not democratic!

I do believe that there's more good to come out of this. Much more. And it's not just a case of devolution or self-government. It's not just a case of how much will I get? How safe is my house? 

Now we look further because we have to. Now we see the biggest issue of all. Can you look at your government, wherever you are, and genuinely say with your hand on your heart that you believe that what is being done in your name (whether you agree with it or not) is actually for the benefit of the majority? No? Neither can I. 

Not In My Name could well be a rallying cry! This could be the start of a new age of political engagement. It will be uncomfortable to begin with; there will be no status quo. (Sorry, Rossi et al!) 

We have such a magnificent opportunity as members of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to genuinely change the face of politics in our great countries and rise to the challenge of a new era in a way I never thought would be possible in my lifetime. 

Thank you Scotland, for teaching me the benefit of proper mobilisation and engagement again; for reaffirming my belief that politics is individual, local, national, international; for getting me interested again. 

And I know that I am not alone. 

Good luck UK. It's going to be a heck of a ride!

Scottish Independence - A View From The South

Scottish Independence, yes or no?

Having now taken some time to look at both sides (and read what is actually some pretty racist and bigoted press from each view point,) it strikes me that it all comes down to 2 things: money or community.

Economically it'll be a disaster for a while (no idea if that's a long or short period of "while"). Forget the currency aspect for a moment and just consider that actually Scotland genuinely benefits from the wealth of the Union to a greater degree than it contributes. That's not to say that Scotland doesn't do its bit, but financially it doesn't do too badly out of the Union at all. It depends on how you wish to read the IFS reports on Scotland's ledger, I suppose, since you can do anything with statistics. But add the extra burden of cross border financing, exchange rates, tax and duties (which currently do not apply within the Union which is Scotland's biggest customer) and trade is going to become much more costly. There is no certainty that the EU will accept Scotland as an independent Nation, so any guarantees that Salmond is currently making to that effect are worthless. The economies of scale, special relationships and reputation of the Union to worldwide trading partners will also not be available. The generation of billions of (insert currency name here) of extra income from Trade will need to cover rising costs and paying the National finance requirements, including what is likely to have to be a vast start up debt. All of which, if your main criteria for a decision on Scotland’s independence is financial, points to a definite NO vote.

So, what about the emotional, social and historical impact that this debate has had? From that point of view, it appears, that Scotland has simply suffered centuries of allegiance to the crown and alliance with the Union, and certainly not gladly. “Anyone but England” is a favourite rant, and not restricted to Scots who live in Scotland, either.  The passion with which individuals talk about their national pride, their joy of being from Scotland, their sense of inclusion, socially and historically and their grounded belief in the power of their independent Nation is explosive, joyful, exciting, militant and celebratory and so it should be! That emotional attachment to independence is a strong enough reason to wish to separate from the Union to further the cause of Scotland; benefitting millions of Scots with an increased sense of Nationalism and community; standing out as a strong and exciting Nation, free from the adverse connotations of being part of a Union built on centuries of exploitation, murder, slavery and greed. That being the case your decision must be YES to independence, surely?

I read an article which talked not of giving anything up by leaving the Union but rather stopping the bad stuff; like going from being a smoker to deciding not to smoke anymore. You don’t think about what you lose, but rather what you gain, since you give nothing up if you stop doing something that harms you. The article (mirroring Alex Salmond’s last debate with Darling) spoke of no longer being forced into illegal wars, paying for unnecessary military hardware, making decisions about energy production and trade that only worked for Scotland rather than paying into the coffers of a wider Union. All of which is wonderfully emotive. Who wants to have to cowtow to a government that doesn’t have your specific interests at heart? And who wants to have to accept the corruption, game-playing, financial and political machinations of an elitist ruling class that has only the propagation of wealth at its heart? Does the voting populace of Scotland genuinely believe that their independent government will be free of any of that? God knows there are enough Scots in the UK Parliament and they’re not exactly looking to benefit the masses, are they! A Social Charter is only a name, unless it actually brings benefit. And that’s what the YES campaign is claiming. Alex Salmond’s rhetoric is forceful and jingoistic, as it will inevitably be, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing it’s just Nationalism. Can he and his party be believed? Is it enough for Scottish independence?

Hell, I’m English, what do I know about being Scottish (, or Welsh, or Irish)? And, even worse than that, I’m a Londoner, which even in England makes me an arrogant parasite, apparently. Lord knows I, along with all my other arrogant parasites in the Capital have been spun enough lies by any number of self-serving, self-interested politicians. Whatever happens on the 18^th September 2014, at least the people who should have the decision about their independence will have been given the chance to do just that.

Weirdly, I don’t have an opinion either way about Scottish independence. I did have. I was adamant that it was a stupid idea and would ultimately damage the Nation of Scotand, let alone the Union of Great Britain. Now, whatever happens on the 18^th, the debate that has been forced on politicians and individuals alike will, hopefully, produce wide ranging benefits.

I’ll just finish with 2 things.

Firstly, early on in his campaign, Salmond spoke of never getting the government we vote for in the UK, but that opportunity will come to Scotland if you say YES to Independence. Well, here’s a little something for the record, I’ve never actually got the government I voted for either. According to the statistics, only 39% of the UK got even close to what they voted for in the previous administration and NO ONE got what they wanted last time round, so what makes the Scots think they’ll definitely get it in the future?

Secondly, and this, I fear , is where I kick the hornets’ nest, there’s an awful lot of talk about Scottish independence from Scots living in the South. But they’re not resident in Scotland and therefore, as I understand it, ineligible to vote: yet they’re some of the most vehement voices in support of independence. Will they all be rushing off back up North as soon as the decision comes in or will they stay South and suck at the putrid teat of the UK’s corrupt, corporate, capitalist, greed-centred, mono-political, self-serving society; proud in absentia of “their” country’s independence?

I’d just like to say, Good Luck. If you don’t get what you want, Scotland, then I hope you get what you deserve. And I genuinely wish you success. (Not that what I say makes a blind bit of difference, but I just felt like saying it!)

Burning Oil on Freezing Water – (one person’s view of the extreme reactions to the Ice Bucket Challenge)

The Ice Bucket Challenge has led to a massive debate about whether what is being done to raise money is right. From champions of water politics to anti vivisectionists, more and more people are progressively militant with their reactions. So I thought , in the spirit of debate, I’d give my opinion.  And why not. Enough other people are giving their’s, I’ll just disappear into the background.

So people with MND / ASL should just die, with no help at all, is that right? Cancer. AIDS. Malaria. Would you have them stop research on those? More people know more people who have those than MND. Hey, there are more sufferers. But should those with MND have fewer rights to better treatment as a result of the disease they suffer from? You either condemn and stop research outright - which would please a few - but be accused of murder for not doing enough, or you develop the platform for research (you could pay students or those who choose to be tested - actually not a bad idea) away from the current methods, but they are the current methods. You're right, animal cruelty is an abomination. There must be better ways to do it. I don't know the answer.

 I'm not saying that this method of funding a charity is right, or that the charities involved are terribly well organised (because, of course, all other charities are BRILLIANTLY managed, aren’t they?) or that all the work the charities involved do is, as is now so regularly pointed out, ethical or moral, but if you really have met someone with MND and had a relationship with them that goes beyond merely knowing that they've got it, then you'll realise just how horrible it is and to be able to do something worthwhile to alleviate their pain, fear, loneliness, their progressive incapacity and enable them to live with a greater quality of life and die with dignity is a GOOD thing. Having said that, I presume I have now invited damnation and all the anti-vivisection vitriol you see fit to rain down upon me.

In which case I'll just pour oil on the fire and, without lambasting him because what he’s doing is great work, add that MATT DAMON did his challenge in a drought ridden area. So, of course, he will be careful with the water he uses (although taking water from multiple toilets isn’t actually using less water. He might just as well have poured it from the tap since it all comes from the same place!) He is also a champion of Water.org. Another GOOD thing. Although, taking water from the water table in a drought area like many countries in Africa, removes it from water holes and underground lakes that feed many other places, too, adversely affecting another ecosystem, so humanity destroys more in the search for continued existence. Yin and yang do not necessarily balance here, either. The arguments have many sides.  

However, in a country where water is available - and currently in abundance! - why shouldn't we? For example, in Gaza they've been doing the Rubble bucket challenge. In Egypt the Sand bucket challenge (albeit making different points!)  And before anyone really weighs in, the fact that we can even have this debate is because of where we live and the opportunities afforded to us. Not all of which have been built entirely on moral or ethical ground. Despite what some people think, I do not have a soap box to stand on or a high moral ground to mount, but there seems to be a lot of one-sided propaganda.

I’ll close with a response to people saying that this whole exercise is unethical, immoral and offensive.

The fact that we're all in a position to do something worthwhile and debate the efficacy of it is a good thing. I'm sure that most people haven't looked at the facts, or the financing. I'm pretty sure that most people don't do that any of the time, just think of the number of times you click on Ts & Cs without reading them. They just do what they think is right. And they do it, mostly, for the right reasons. And they do it because it makes them feel better.  That doesn’t make people bad.

There are as many sides to an argument as you care to propose and each of us has a right to our opinion whether everyone agrees or not (thank God we don’t, how boring would that be?) So could we stop the vitriolic ranting and the ritual, sanctimonious justifications, please?

Thanks

.

M