Ramblings of an incoherent fool, Charles, (aka NapoleonKaramazov on Cif)

First (and probs only) post of 2012

2012-01-12T04:07:00.004Z

Insomnia....here I am

What was 2011 like for me personally, around me, globally

For me: Depression, not great!
For the UK: Unemployment, crisis, riots
Globally: Arab Spirng various unrest, humans being humans- taking advantage of any sitaution, China colonising Africa for example

2012, for me, domestically, globally.
Myself: have had various depressed feeling, currently on an unsure hiatus (insomniac too!!)
Where will the UK go: politically, economically, socially?
And the world:

Also:

Fuck all that Mayan 2012 shit
Anyaway, could go on with the typical personal development spiel, languages, classical music (play an instrument, maybe) reading books, science and maths, discovering things blah blah. I do this.

Prosit Neujahr.

Somewhat indeterminate suspension

2011-07-21T00:34:00.003+01:00

Lake District, June 11

Somewhat indeterminate suspension

After total ignoring it, taking a hiatus, I think I'll drop the blog. I have many things to concentrate on and my small window on the world won't really add up to much. There are always lots of issues, certainly and 2011 has been eventful so far from a global perspective, less from a more insular perspective and almost not at all from a personal perspective.

Not so great for me, but oh well. Perhaps I am looking for a break- don't know exactly. I'll continue to study and read up in certain fields (pity there's not enough hours in the day), although this will generally go unrewarded due to the general short-sightedness and dully stagnated level of cultural/social sensibilities in contemporary Britain: 'no you can't be a waiter/cleaner/mcjob, you don't have previous experience, no you can't do anything remotely challenging or creative, you don't have a university degree'. Hopefully I'll get a dead end job somewhere- and not be exactly like one of the herd, but still enjoy life's beauties.

So, just occupy myself, as I have said here before I am neither a philosopher nor poet. Languages, various subjects and fields interest me as well as learning things just for the sake of it. Things like setting up my own business, some great visionsry idea etc are unlikely but possible.

Charles.

Sick and down.

2011-05-30T12:22:00.006+01:00

It's a bit of a mix up of thoughts- these are several things I have been thinking about in the last few days/weeks. Disclaimer: I'm neither a poet or a philosopher so don't expect much from my prose.

On work: There is a concept amongst economists and labour theorists that there is an unlimited amount of work available in an 'entity/country/regions/system/whatever', the idea that there is only a fixed amount of work available has been deemed 'a fallacy'. While not true to the exact letter, it is still generally true, a country/entity can only support a certain number of jobs relative to factors like population, natural resources, gdp etc. Witness Egypt, if the LOL fallacy is a fallacy then why does it have massive youth unemployment/people living on $2 a day.

The simple fact is that there are, roughly speaking, only a certain number of jobs to go round, only a certain amount of things to be done, only a certain amount of services that need to be provided. It is not a fallacy. Ergo, it is reasonable to split the working hours of jobs, allow more part time work for example. (Perhaps not in Egypt but in the developed world no probs) Two people working 24 hours is better overall than one person working 48.

Must study economics more. I will consider this- and much deeper than reading 'Economics For Dummies' :)

It's also been a full year since I left my family home and tried to start living an independent life. I've been busy studying (albeit part time) and while looking for employment and not finding any. It's obviously not great nad I haven't really had the chance to socialise as much as I wanted to.

I feel pretty sick right now. I don't agree with all that DSM jazz, but I would view in myself now the early stages of clinical depression. Don't need no psychiatrist though, what I would say to one,
-- I'm down becuase I don't have a job or 'position' in society, lack of money makes it hard to socialise with other people, lack of a place to be at a certain time kills off motivation etc.
Psychiatrist's answer to it all, '-it's your biochemistry'.

And it's bloody annoying. Previously I could get through 100 pages of a book a day, every day, now I can't concentrate on anything for more than 5 minutes, always interrupted by long periods of despondency.

I study environmental science because that was what interested me and also something good for the future, I'm also interested in languages, Russian and German (and perhaps some others in future) history, literature (of many times), art, archaeology, economics etc, to name a few other things-although like I said, again I am being hit by listlessness.

Plus I'm also being forced on to a 13 week, 9-5 every day, unpaid placement in menial low skiled work, to the detriment of any social life I have.

Life just carries on I guess.

The anarchist ship of fools

2011-05-28T12:29:00.004+01:00

Having had several debates and discussions with anarchists, on line and 'IRL', of different natures usually anarcho communists or anarcho capitalists, I've concluded it's easy for them to spit such nonsense without considering any realities. They're as bad as each other and would either turn us into Cambodia under Pol Pot or Yeltsin's 1990s Russia. Anarcho Capitalism is generally more well favoured in the developed world becuase wealthy and successful people adopt it (plus its equally disgusting relative Ayn Rand-ism).... they wear suits and tend to be close to the establishment. They are both the road to ruin

One of their defining hallmarks is what they perceive as the 'organic' reality vs the artificial nature of nations, states and national institutions. To challenge such thought I have posted a simple analogy:

Things that are natural: Geological and geographical formations, migrations of birds, life in general from a natural perspective, psychology and human nature.

Things that are artifical: "The State" may may an abstract noun but so are things like justice, order, healthcare, prosperity and stability.

No borders, 'no one is illegal'

a campaign for open door migration by a soap shop

. Fine, but don't expect a life expectancy more than 35, don't expect to eat anything more than a bowl of plain rice, don't expect any plans or hopes.

--I'd rather have these things.

SNP smash through

2011-05-06T19:49:00.002+01:00

I don't tend to comment on things like current events on here, that is just making mere remarks, there are better formats than blogging, twitter or facebook for example.

But, well done the SNP, totally floored the opposition. Winning an absolute majority in a proportional electoral system. There was a reason, the cynicism and negativity of the three other parties. Even if one is not in favour of independence, one must be in favour of the people of Scotland having a vote to choose their own fate. The SNP won because of this.

In England AV has been rejected. It wasn't a very good choice for electoral reform (something that has always been an issue for me)

Scotland will probably decide to harmoniously divorce itself from the rest of the UK though, as people realise that the Tories will now be undefeatable in every British election, or another 99% similar party like New Labour.

I'm also interested in the international ramifications. Flag of Australia, Falkland islands etc. Seats on the security council, armed forces, EU and NATO. It will all be interesting. An independence referendum won't be for several years yet and it actually has to be accepted by the populace. It's the old north/south divide in Britain it seems- and it has quite a historical precedence.

Watch the future.

The debate goes on.

2011-04-16T19:17:00.011+01:00

It's all getting steaming hot and smoking with the debate on immigration, following David Cameron's speech.

There are openly racist commentators, if you read the comments pages of the Daily Mail, Telegraph and Comment is Free, you will find some blood and soil types, white supremacist types etc. The vast majority however are not, like me they have several concerns, like some reasons below,

1--We already have a large pool of unemployed in this country.

(Much more than the existing figures becuase there are many ways of massaging the figures, like putting people on 'training courses' which even if only for four hours a week, mean the person is not unemployed)

2--If 100,000 working age people came here there would not be 100,000 jobs for them. They would need doctors, nurses, builders to build them new houses, etc. Of this 100,000 there would be skilled traders and entrepreneurs who would probably end up employing some and making money. But there wouldn't be enough jobs created for all of them. (never mind our own pool of unemployed)

3--There is also the issue of unity and cohesiveness.
Russian Nobel winning scientists are fine, but when you have totally separate communities with their own insular outlook it is never good. After all, the 7/7 bombers where British born and radicalised. Also, far right groups like the EDL only started becuase Islamic extremists protested at a homecoming parade of British troops.

4--The argument often resorts to accusations of racism by supporters of unrestricted immigration.
Often these are on the hard left, and spout such sentiment like "borders should not exist". These people are also generally Leninists- they subscribe to the repulsive ideology that 'the worse it gets the better it gets' (Lenin) because apparently it will drive the dispossessed workers into their hands and the revolution, when all it does is drive people to the BNP. Don't trust academic Leninists. Especially considering that the working classes have 150 years of making a concession with the establishment, and gaining decent pay and conditions in return. At least up to Thatcher.

5--There is also the issue of food security and resources.
We are not Egypt, (the protests this year were caused by food prices more than Voltairean ideals), but there might come a situation where the pound is devalued and we are dependant on food imports, which might be very high because of, for example, another occurrence of wildfires in Russia. Better that we can at least feed ourselves. Plus most of us want a quality of life more than receiving a daily handout of food. It's also population as well- the more the population increases, the less there is to share out. That's why I think it is dsireable that most families to have a maximum of 2 kids.

6--There are no jobs that we are too lazy to do.
My main issue with Cameron is that he peddled the line 'the only reason we have to have economic migrants from the EU is becuase they do the jobs the Brits are too lazy to do.'

What there are are 150 years of hard fought for battles to get decent labour pay and conditions. The expansion of the EU in 2004 was a moment of nirvana for employers and business owners, especially as the British government did not impose any restrictions on the movement of labour (only 3 EU countries did that) Cut overheads, reduce wages, condo in Florida, villa in Portugal- great for them. Or need a plumber or a builder, use cheap labour and put honest folk on the dole. Talk to most British workers and they would have at least a passing knowledge of the campaigns their forebears fought for things like decent working conditions and pay. But economic migrants often do not know and do not care- indeed many are content to declare their disgust towards the welfare state- seeing it as some kind of symbol of national feebleness.

Myself-
Politically, I am a Statist and a Gaullist.
That is I believe we need a strong state that can act in the interest of those under it and at the same time in homage to De Gaulle we need to foster a sense of being a sovereign state, not a puppet like we have been in recent years. Call it soft nationalism if you like, but in 2003 France didn't get involved in Iraq because they have regard national sovereignty above all else.

I'm not blazingly anti EU either, but I think one of the problems was it expanding and absorbing the poorer countries of the east, when we should have waited for them to catch up economically first (if ever) before considering expansion.

Finally, an interesting article by Charles Moore in the Telegraph about this subject- him and his cab driver..

What, I asked myself, was his “England”? If he had had the misfortune to sit in on my speech that night, would he – even if he spoke the language better – have picked up any joke or reference that I made? Would names like the Duke of Wellington, Tennyson, or William Blake have rung even the faintest bell? “And did those feet…?,” we sang. “What feet?,” my driver might have wondered. Anyway, what is “England’s green and pleasant land” to a man who lives 50 miles from Sussex but has never heard of it? He told me he finds our climate horribly cold, so that when he wants to get out in the country, he flies “back” to Bangladesh.

Here's why I won't be blogging for a while.

2011-03-22T16:54:00.004Z

First of all , I'm somewhat glad that the no fly zone has been implemented in Libya, but I can't see where this will lead. Gaddafi's resistance and the rebels slowness means he might stick around for a while, and we have so far not committed any large scale ground troops to finish the job. What might happen is there is some sort of hazy stalemate in the fighting, a cold peace, and then an Eastern and Western Libya emerging. But what do I know, Gaddafi could be dead next week, or there may be a large scale commitment of ground troops, who knows.

Another interesting thing (whatever the outcome) is the reluctance of the Americans. Could this perhaps be America's Suez Crisis, when all hubris and Imperial pretence is diminished. It certainly seems that way. Contrast the present timidity with the Bush era, (not that I approve in any way of Dubya's actions). What I would hope for is that Europe now starts to take more responsibility for our defence and security, including our radiating spheres of influence (North Africa included) independent of the US.

That's said.
---___---___---___---___---___---___---___---___---___
So, some of my workload.

So, what I'm reading/studying, apart from other thing like literature, languages, mathematics and the book on the Russian Oligarchs, includes things to do with my OU subject- Environmental science, something I've got to crack on With.

On the subject of the OU and distance learning, I read an interesting piece on the BBC website on the growth of distance learning with podcasts of lectures etc (link here), and even universities like Harvard and MIT are throwing their materials online. Regular universities, particularly British ones wanting to charge £9000 per year, must be running scared. Especially for bog standard ones as well. The HE sector in this country is pretty bloated. A huge number of courses can be taken by distance learning, and it suits many of us, like me for example, although I am still unemployed right now.

There has also been evidence that more and more young Brits are simply considering studying in Europe with practically no tuition fees, learning their subjects in English (heh heh, expecting fluency was asking too much I guess). Another BBC report about this in Germany here.

Of course one disadvantage of distance learning is that you don't get the same social opportunities or even the campus feel, when surrounded by a 'community of scholars' and are able to see fellow students and lecturers face to face.

Another interesting read: Graduates, the new measure of international power.

On 'fascism' as a term.

2011-03-14T01:51:00.005Z

While there are so many other things happening in the world, Japan, Libya etc, I would like to devote some space to a common feature on internet fora.

The use of Fascism as a term is used to imply the 1920s-40s model in Italy and Germany. Fair point, these were awful regimes, and for many it is easy to throw it out, Godwinning themselves in the process.

But overuse of that term without accepting it's historical origin is really not on, that's motivated me to write this. Many socialists for example will instantly deride anyone they disagree with as fascists, how to them it's all about unity, how we're all stronger together and weak alone....

...We're all stronger together and weak alone...fascism? The political term derives from the Latin term Fasces, which to quote Wikipedia is:

a bundle of wooden sticks with an axe blade emerging from the center, which is an image that traditionally symbolizes summary power and jurisdiction, and/or "strength through unity"

(The fasces imagery also features in many heraldric places, such as the US senate, the national emblem of France etc-see image)

This leaves a wide interpretation, and almost any movement or ideology could be implied to be "fascist". Which makes it's use in any debate useless. Therefore it's best if we stop throwing it around and only use it in regard to it's historical context and the small avowedly neo fascist groups remaining. It's a Roman hangover, and it does point to a general universal truth that we are stronger together than weaker, however the ghastly 20thc century political interpretations of it must be remembered.

But when people on internet debates start comparing the UK government spending cuts to fascism....

Europe is letting the Libyans down

2011-03-09T02:14:00.007Z

I never thought Gaddafi would still be in power. When he made his mad speech two weeks ago I expected him to be gone in 48 hours. He's still clutching to power.

Libya is now in a civil war.

I am = against the concept of liberal intervention- the concept that Democracy and freedom can be spread at the point of the sword- as evinced in Afghanistan and Iraq, it does not work. Afghanistan in particular is a costly and wasteful exercis emerely designed to preserve the coalitions face and so not look weak running away, but they will anyway.

But the Libyans themselves have chosen Democracy, except that the minority of Gaddafi loyalists are still in control of advanced weaponry, tanks and fighter jet, as well as Tripoli and a few key areas.

Although it is a hazy concept, the uprising itself is the ballot box, especially as they have no other chance to express their choice of political leadership. This is not 'regime change' a la 2001 or 2003, the majority of Libyans (as in Egypt and Tunisia) have 'voted' for regime change, therefore providing legitimacy. The best analogy is the 1991 Iraqi uprising after the first gulf war where the allied powers did nothing.

Thus considered, an intervention in Libya by the regional power bloc, the EU, and/or NATO is the best option for all concerned, and crucially is nothing like Iraq or Afghanistan. There would be no seven or ten year occupation. Generally, no single European country can go it alone anymore, for that specific purpose European battlegroups have been established.

Will Europe let Gaddafi roll back the rebels, surround Benghazi and let his henchmen carry out brutal reprisals? Is this going to be another Balkans on Europe's doorstep where we do nothing.

Simon Tisdall in the Guardian has 4 options, "No fly zone", "bomb first, think later", "covert ops" or "soft power". The first 3 are somewhat attractive but is still not the same as boots on the ground. It will take time for the rebels to top Gaddafi without Western aid and time costs not just military casualties, but affects everyone, hospitals will run out of medication, food shortages will happen and so on. Western forces can also act as observers and reign in any acts of wanton violence and preserve civil law and order, even for Gaddafi supporters.

As for soft power, there is a time and a place for it, now is not the time. Rwanda again?

As to the oil question, which Libya undoubtedly has. That is not why I am saying this. We can hope that a post Gaddafi Libya will have more trickle down from the oil reserves to help them, and all the time this civil war continues Libya gets more impoverished. In the long term Libya also faces the problem of Egypt of having a large and growing population and a weak economy, but is in a better situation.

Mubarak down, Gaddafi soon, could it have been Saddam?

2011-02-23T13:07:00.005Z

With respect to the continuing events in and people still fighting and dying against the Gadaffi regime, this thought has come into my mind,-

Had US/UK not invaded Iraq in 2003 would it be likely that the Iraqis would now be deposing Saddam, which given the inflammatory nature of the protests across the arab world would almost certainly have spread to Baa'thist Iraq?

If the Saddam family could have potentially been ruling Iraq for another 50 years after 2003 then the invasion might have had some justification, but the regime could easily have been toppled 8 years later without the trillion dollars and million plus lives with much more minimal loss of life. Of course that would obviously mean that the Iraqis would have to suffer 8 more years of Saddam but, and though I don't like to say it, compared to the chaos of the post invasion Iraq, is not as evil as it seems.

The military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have nearly bankrupted America and set about their Imperial decline, which makes this question even more prescient. Perhaps a lesson should be that to overthrow dictators a better (and much cheaper in cost and soldier' lives) tactic is to arrange contracts for mobile phone networks and internet access, then let the people overthrow the tyrant themselves. Certainly, many have claimed that the sanctions simply helped keep Saddam in power by isolating the people impoverished and separated from more developed neighbours and the West, just as many people will argue that the US naval blockade in Cuba is precisely what is keeping the Castro family in power.

It's very easy to have the benefit of hindsight like I do here. But the American exceptionalist's and 'liberal interventionalist's' with their notion of 'humanitarian bombardment' have just had one of their sacred cow's crushed, that Democracy can only be spread to dictatorships via a tank barrel rather than the will of the people.

'An Egypt' in Britain.

2011-02-12T00:46:00.005Z

Sorry to sound cynical in my last post, (although I think it needed to be said), perhaps, Egyptians, like Tunisians, will now have more of control in their affairs, following the fall of Mubarak (although it's not over yet). Among the issues like Democratic reforms and assessing the role of the army and security services, they will also have to look at creating stability, economic reforms and tackling unemployment. And yes, population as well will also have to be adressed.

This revolution has seen a display of people power, and many in Britain and Europe will wish to see the same popular outpourings, although preferably at the ballot box. However, such revolutionary fantasies are usually the domain of the dogmatic hard left- who have probably done as much to hinder genuine progress in this country as the Conservative party. The creed, the ideology, means that they often adopt a position of 'no compromise' and what could be a broad social movement of many colours simply becomes the predilection of minority, who scream and force out anyone with a more watered down, pragmatic and compromising (ie getting things done) approach.

Most people don't want the state overthrown, we want the rule of law, functioning health and welfare services etc. It's very easy for some to talk of actions without acknowledging the consequences. I believe we need political and social change within Britain, and that is precisely why I am a pragmatist and not a revolutionary.

Youth unemployment and riots.

2011-02-09T23:08:00.003Z

Interesting article from Bloomberg, 'The youth unemployment bomb'

Particulalrly prescient....

While the details differ from one nation to the next, the common element is failure—not just of young people to find a place in society, but of society itself to harness the energy, intelligence, and enthusiasm of the next generation. Here's what makes it extra-worrisome: The world is aging. In many countries the young are being crushed by a gerontocracy of older workers who appear determined to cling to the better jobs as long as possible and then, when they do retire, demand impossibly rich private and public pensions that the younger generation will be forced to shoulder.

This seems very true to me.
And of course it looks at the situation of unemployment in Europe and North America and it looks at the issue of 'too few graduates'.

However I disagree... having too many graduates was the problem.. it meant that education is devalued. Especially if it is ideologically driven as in Britain, (although I oppose the student fees). The growth of 'graduate employment' that that is the case, and it is precisely because of the growth of education that has made degrees a minimum standard for anything these days, thus increasing non graduate unemployment.. as well as reducing education to a merely utilitarian means to an end.

Just as people like Jared Diamond looked at the genocide in Rwanda from a population/carrying capacity perspective, (agrarian economy where land was divided amongst the offspring) perhaps it is fair to look at the events of Egypt, Tunisia, as well as student protests in Europe and America through the framework of demand v actual resources (Although it is fair to point out that many of these regimes- including our own- have corrupt elites hiving off the resources making it more of a caged rat situation). The past revolution in Egypt, of course focused on overthrowing a corrupt autocracy, is just as driven by unemployment, no money, no opportunities.

2010 in books. Part 2. Non Fiction.

2011-01-22T01:18:00.005Z

This section is much bigger and more varied and so I will group books into several fields, with of course a miscellanious one. This should convey what I've been reading, the areas I'm interested in, (whether related to my studies or not) and I'd be very interested in looking at recs for the future reading.

Categorising aside, this will be more detailed than just the bare list in my fiction section.

Science/Popular Science
Steven Jay Gould- The hedgehog, the Fox and the Magister's Pox- a true tribute to a great man, fantastic story and narrative looking at the conficts between arts and science. One fo the books that inspired me to start studying.

James Lovelock- Gaia and the Revenge of Gaia. Actually read revenge first, but ok. Doom mongering or pragmatic prescient thought. At least JL has some cards on the table, ignored by our short termist political class though.

Richard Dawkins- The Greatest Show on Earth. An interesting book showing evidence for evolution, don't agree with his militancy but it was an interesting read. Particularly liked the Lenski experiment.

Rose Shapiro- Suckers- Fascinating and hilarious but tragic expose of the quackery in the health and alternative therapy industry, similar I suppose to Goldacre's Bad Science, which I read a while back

Bryan Sykes- The blood of the Isles.Interesting read, about genetics and the peoples of Britain.

Charles Darwin: The Voyage of the Beagle and The Origin of Species. Didn't actually get these finished, but included here anyway as I will soon.

Sean F Johnstone- A History of Science
Just the facts really, just what I wanted to read, but also somewhat philosophical.

Russia-sphere
The New Cold War by Ed Lucas- didn't agree with it, felt I had to read it though.

Anne Applebaum, Gulag good factual book but let down by the fact that she can't understand why starving pensioners and families are nostalgic for the Soviet Union she seems to think that is wrong.

Craig Murray- Murder in Samarkand- not quite Russia, but I'll lump it here as it's related.

Derek Wilson- Peter the Great- just a standard biography, what relevance might that era have to today?

Asne Seiserstad- The Angel of Grozny, not 'in depth analysis' but very heart pulling, exposing brutality of Kadyrov regime.

Anna Politkovskaya- A Russian Diary. Although I didn't finish it what I read was excellent and heart warming given the tragic circumstances.

Current affairs/analysis/history
Jared Diamond:
Collapse
Guns Germs and Steel

Two excellent books, both of which complement each other. I coincidentally read Collapse around the time of last years Haiti earthquake, which looked at 'why' Haiti was so poor. Very interesting reading and obviously massively popular books, GG+S particularly.

Medialens: Newspeak in the 21st century- fascinating book from an interesting British media analysis group, can get a bit Marxist and rhetorical but a fascinating expose of Brit news journalism issue.

Misha Glenny- The Balkans. Epic and fascinating tome about the powder keg of Europe from 1804-1999.

Adam Zamoyski- Rites of Peace- deals with the fall of Napoleon after 1812 (his previous book) and the postwar Congress of Vienna and the histroical and political boundary changes resulting from it. Unforunately did not finish!

Literary
Sir Ifor Evans- 'A short history of English lit' - One of those old blue covered pelican classics paperbacks that I'd picked up for a pound years ago and needed reading. Exactly as it says on the tin, but good for gleaning a basic knowledge of English lit.

Various- 'The Complection of Russian Literature'- same situation, old book that needed reading. Collection of short essays by emigre writers about various Russian literary figures.

Dostoevksy- Winter notes on Summer Impressions
- Interesting just to get some backround on Dosto the man. Documents his travels round Europe.

Sean McEvoy- Shakespeare: the Basics- Companion to my study of some of the bard's works.

Edwin Moore- Brief Encounters- a good book given to me by the author, gripping narrative of historical encoutners between great personages in history, ie Einstein and Freud.

Miscellanious
'Companion to Geography: South America'-19th century school textbook (published 1871 I believe, interesting window on the past, socially and culturally a product of it's times, think 'native heathen savages'

James Bruges- The Little Earth Book. Quite a light read, essentially a collection of small essays on the environemnt, economics, government etc. From rather a hippyish perspective.

Levitt/Dubner- Freakonomics. The book that everyone's read, a million reviews out there. Interesting enough read, good for boosting critical thinking.

2010 in books. Part 1. Fiction.

2011-01-20T23:13:00.007Z

Ok, we're 20 days into the new year- this is typical of me. Why I would simply share all the books I've read last year to the world is a bit curious (ego?), but it gives a general idea to me and the world what I'm interested in.
Here we go.

Part 1 is Fiction

A Christmas Carol- by Dickens
Lolita- Nabokov
The Secret Agent- Joseph Conrad
Lord Jim- Joseph Conrad
Brighton Rock- Graham Greene
Metamorphosis and other stories- Franz Kafka
Romeo and Juliet- Shakespeare
The Taming of the Shrew-Shakespeare
Life and Fate- Vasily Grossmann
Notes from the house of the dead- Dostoevsky
On Chesil beach- Ian McEwan.
Jude the Obscure- Thomas Hardy
Wessex Tales- Thomas Hardy
Master and Margarita- Mikhail Bulgakov (the graphic versions, already read original)
The Hunchback of Notre Dame- Victor Hugo.
L'etranger- Albert Camus
The jungle- Upton Sinclair.
Germinal- Emile Zola

на русском языке
Евгенйи Онегин- Пушкин/ Eugene Onegin- Pushkin
Реквием- А Ахматова/ Requiem- Anna Akhmatova
(To be fair when reading both of these I had an English translation at hand)

фром хиз харт/from his heart.

2011-01-15T23:33:00.007Z

In my absence from blogging I missed this speech from Russia sport's minister, making his pitch for their successful world cup bid, speaking, from hiz hart......

Russians are now being instructed to learn English. But what about the bastardisation and anglicisms in their language? Understandable for certain terms, computer related for example, often pointless and incompetent. As an English speaker, I don't want any bizness launches, feis control or tineydzery.
Let mi spik from mai hart.....Sheer laziness. There are plenty of decent Russian words which can be used!

Back.

2011-01-07T01:55:00.005Z

Ok, nice sabbatical :). I was browsing youtube and caught a video, a news story to be exact, about the growth of higher education in America and the reulting con.

Choice quote, paraphrasing roughly, 'now a bachelor's is worthless and a masters is necessary and in 10 years a PHD will be the minimum'. It also looks at the alternatives to a 4 year college education, including various vocational courses where many young people end up earning much more money than going than going through college, with none of the debt.

Of course in any society education should always be cherished, be nourished, but there has to be a division of labour. I have long been arguing that Britain needs to be more like Germany, that is has a tiered (but generally meritocratic) education system that is not designed to get 50+% of youth through the academic cloisters. What they have is very high tech vocational education, this is reflected in their industry, their innovation. Their Mercedes and Sennheiser's fetch a high export market (so much so that China only over took Germany as largest exporter in 2009 and is three times higher than the UK's). This allows Germany to remain in the black during the recession and also to fund a first world European social welfare state, which in turn brings results in it's people as they achieve their outflowing of creativity and innovation which is added to the German body of knowledge and development.

We will just witness a tragedy of the commons situation, as I've said many times with university education often relegated merely to a rite of passage. I'm certainly against the obscene student fees planned by our present overlords (doffs cap) but at the same time the utopian idea of getting all young people to university and learn about academically questionable subjects (which as I have said before were once available FREELY as 'on the job' training) is one of the reasons why we are in our present situation. It is also a massive con.

Video-

Back in a while

2011-01-06T13:29:00.003Z

Due to a combination of being busy with many things, and ill health, I'm suspending blogging for an indeterminate period.

Happy new Year
Charles

The guns are out. They're pointing the wrong way.

2010-12-06T03:42:00.005Z

I've been out of the blogospere for several months due to various personal things, and too busy/apathetic to blog, despite so many goings on in several of my 'interested' fields, journalism and the media, particularly perceptions/reportage of Russia and the recent Wikileaks release.

So, a Lib Dem MP, Mike Hancock has been caught employing a Russian assistant. And people, the intelligence services I presume, are suspicious. Aw hell. Perhaps we can handle this in a calm way.

Edward Lucas out. Check. The media establishment, the political sphere, pundits, even admirals. All jump into this affair, reaching conclusions before evidence. It's a very easy story to sell because of course the Russians are always the bad guys right, the gullible public will buy it.

Coming just a few days after the Wikileaks revelations revealed the appalling sycophancy by our dear old Tory party, reading to take the backside kissing of the Blair years even further. Yes.. the 'staunchly Atlanticist''Children of Thatcher' have promised to run a...... pro American regime.

The issue is, that while there may well be a legitimate issue which the security services have with Ms Katia Zatuliveter, (of course I do no have the confidential information), the fact is that the hysteric shrieks from the media about a 'foreign power' trying to subvert our honest and uncorrupted democracy ignore the Wikileaks revelations of a few days ago regarding the extent of American control over our body politic, defence apparatus and foreign and domestic policy. It is this, dear reader, this hypocrisy which has driven me out of my near three month hiatus from blogging.--This might be a dark corner of the internet, but a candle in the dark is better than darkness.

Another wee piece for Cif.

2010-10-12T09:32:00.003+01:00

I got the chance to write a small piece for the Guardian on university life- here it is. It had to be quite short, and the print edition is even smaller, but at least I managed to get my argument across, as I have been arguing about universities as a rite of passage, and also the collapse of work based skills and training, plus of course the 'graduate jobs' bollocks.

What is the big society?

2010-10-06T22:20:00.007+01:00

As the vampires, sorry Tories, have just assembled and our dear Etonian leader has adressed his audience, we still don't know what this 'big society' is because it is bollocks.

Today, Cameron has continued his 'we are all in this together' bollocks. In a Lord Kitcheneresque turn, 'your country needs you'. Perhaps so. But what the country needs more than us mere peasants is the collective mass of bankers, tax evaders and non doms(how funnily that the chief of the taxpayer's alliance was found to be a non dom)to do their patriotic duty and come back and pay their taxes. Lord Ashcroft, multimillionaire Tory donor, perhaps?

Ultimately, yes the big society, or as many of us call it, the BS, standing of course for something different, is precisely that- BS. I volunteer at two different places. I enjoy it, it is interesting and at least I learn some skills and get to be around people. Obviously this is not a long term thing for me and it is certainly not going to keep a roof over me (the BS bollocks is perhaps simply a way of getting a workforce of millions working for £65 a week). I am under absolutely no illusions that the BS is a load of BS, there is a difference between a workforce and a volunteer force. As I said, will the bankers, hedge fund managers and nondoms do their patriotic duty by paying tax (I see a pig flying) then perhaps I might swallow all this 'we're all in this together' nonsense.

Will British employers consider employing British workers again, for example. As Cif's 'poster of the year said to me a few days ago, better to sack any striking workers and bring in a load of Romanians. The needs of the market take priority. Employers know that, migrant labour will not seek high wages becuase they are happy and it is worth a lot when converted to their own currency. Secondly, they also are less likely to be assertive, they know little about British workers long struggle to get decent pay and conditions.

So, what is the big society, apart from what I've said above, a massive con. Well, nothing else, a con. The high priest of the BS himself, former theology lecturer Philip Blond, self defined 'Red Tory' descends from upon high to tell us... excpet he doesn't, he spew out some empty platitudes, some quotes from politicians and a few random statistics.

In other words BS.

Some related Issues.
1. The complicity and spinelessness of the media, including the Guardian and the BBC. Especially in the light of the NOTW phone tapping scandal, where politicans where afraid to bring to account becuase the Sun editor threatened to bring up details of their private lives. Democracy indeed!
2. Certain media outlets, ie Murdoch families, engaging in contentious dog whistle journalism, smearing like hell. Yes, there are a few individuals and families who ' We claim X thousands a year and have seven kids in a five bedroom £1 million council house and we have no intention to work ever', but the vilification and distortion is madness. Almost no-one is like that, most of us have a sense of pride and civic duty and memories of what we have fought for to get a welfare state in this country.

Meanwhile, I have another 'piece' (ie 300 words) writing on 'university life', which is something I have been talking about here, on Cif and to friends in real life.- My view that universities seem to many to be a rite of passage, and this is of course related to the growth of 'graduate jobs' and the loss of training on the jobs. Obviously this is not long enough for me to expound a lot of what I have to say on this issue, as I have blogged here before, but I think it is good to get my point of view out anyway.

BBC withdraws panorama programme about Lord Ashcroft.

2010-09-28T02:28:00.005+01:00

Quelle surprise.

Lord Ashcroft of Belize, a serial tax evader and citizen our former central American Carribean colony of Belize, where he stashes his money,and large scale donor to the Tory party.

Still at least today, well tonight- we have another programme about Scientology, following the infamous 2007 documentary where mad Scientologists caused John Sweeney to explode (rightfully IMO). Should be broadcast if they can manage to hold off their lawyers, the infamous Carter Ruck are no strangers to controvrsy, and here they are engaging with Scientology whackos.

Mr Khordokovsky writes............

2010-09-19T19:00:00.005+01:00

The guns were out in full force at the Observer today, a letter from Khordokovsky (Mikhail Khodorkovsky: 'Russia's democratic future lies with Britain')- yes seriously, a Luke Harding article reporting on this and finally an editorial.

Quite why this gangster sees Britain as a shining example of human rights remains to be seen*.

This is all I had to say....

Liberalism, liberal interventionism and the concept of universal western liberal democracy (to be spread in an apocalyptic/messianic fashion) resulted in the deaths of over one million Iraqis. It's close relation, neoliberal shock therapy, resulted in the extra deaths of perhaps up to 25 million people in the years following the collapse of communism in Russia and the post Soviet states- unemployment, disease, prostitution, alcoholism, drug addiction, collapse of health and social and healthcare provision, re-emergence of ethnic tensions and conflcits.

Russia does not need to listen to Western liberals, including those of the Observer who acted as cheerleaders for the invasion of Iraq.

There are no doubt serious issues on the Russian domestic/political front, but the entity we call the west (ie US and UK) has little right to preach.

Khordokovsky's warning is a joke. One example in many things- he talks of a Russia of 150 million people, becuase of what the oligarchs like him did to Russia, there are only 140 million.

*And now I realise we gave asylum to Chechen Warlord, Akhmed Zakhayev. Now I see why Khordokovsky like Britain.

The inevitable decline of the British intellectual tradition.

2010-09-14T19:56:00.005+01:00

To anyone living in contemporary Britain willing to place their brain outside the nihilistic orgy of consumerism and 'me me me' individualism hysteria, it has been evident that the values of many in our country have slipped away from education, to seeing it as something to be frowned on.

Ironically enough, the internet, the academic experiment designed to spread greater connectivity of intellect, may well be the catalyst. It certainly mirrors our petty mindset/political establishment.

Mainstream British society has nearly always been anti- intellectual, (not withstanding a few notable exceptions like our long history of working class education movements). This has for me come to a head yesterday during two online debates on the Guardian.

As I have written about on here before, the worshipping of CVs and the growth of 'qualificationism', a very important issue that I follow frequently. We live in an era of Bureaucracy beyond Kafka's mind, Britain is almost ground to a halt, not just metaphorically. I could go on with a series of lazy clichés, 'style over substance' etc, but the issue is this, that the bureaucratic hurdles are driving the country to a halt, and causing people like me to despair. Some of us want to work, we are willing to work, to bring some money to support ourselves in while do other things, as is my case.

CV's are absolute bollocks, they tell next to nothing about the person and they can be so easily edited to look good with a few choice words- even by me!. But I object to them becuase I think they are akin to prostitution, in essence you are selling yourself, at the very least creating an artificial image. And the sad thing is that people, employers, actually take these seriously. This is why everything has stagnated in Britain, and I feel that using such clichés such as 'style over substance' is relevant, because their is no other way to describe the brain-dead vessel that is our island.

As I said on that particular piece (linked above)

This is interesting, but you missed the elephant in the room.-- Why do so many jobs need degrees in the first place? We are not talking about doctors and lawyers here, but positions in councils, in marketing in sales, etc, ie anything that would be considered 'white collar'. I am asking 'why in the rehortircal sense, becuase I already know the answer, it is simply a trend to keep people getting ideas beyond their station.

Previously, for example, there might be someone who started work at a supermarket at 16 or 18. If he worked hard enough over time he could have expected oneday to be the manager of that supemrarket. Now however there is a glass ceiling- a 22 year old graduate can be parachuted in and boss everyone about, even those who have worked there for decades. Madness.

... which continues what I have said earlier about graduate jobs.

The full extent of what I though was further reinforced yesterday when Marianne Gilchrist, my friend who has a PHD, cannot get even a lowly job becuase she is overqualified and is undervalued. In this country, employment must fill the needs of the market. Reading the comments, worse than Thatcherism-- 'it is your own fault for studying for a PHD instead of getting a job like the rest of us', or 'a PHD is not needed in the marketplace'.

Quite clearly the British traditions of anti intellectualism are alive and well. It can fit into the new moral scorning and taking individual responsibility (which is ok in moderation) to extremes, comments such as it is the person's own fault for educating themselves (how dare they) instead of finding a job that fulfils the needs of hte markets. Nothing mentioned about the ingrained anti intellectualism which means many people are suspicious of those with in depth intelligence.

How this will work out for the future of Britain in the coming decades is unknown, but I predict we will be a laughing stock on the world stage. There are plenty of young people in Brazil Russia, India, China etc who are committed to the virtues of education, as are their societies as a whole.

Unsurprising News

2010-09-12T21:41:00.009+01:00

Today it has emerged that British troops stationed in Afghanistan are being investigated for drug smuggling.

Quelle surprise.

Many of us will bw rolling our eyes in derision. We know what happens in Kosovo, garrisoned by NATO/US troops, with large airbases like camp Bondsteel- reportedly 40% of Europe's heroin flows through this backwater of Europe, and some would suggest up to 95%.

But of course the BBC would rather not report that, even though in a report on drug smuggling among NATO troops it is a verifiable precedent. I wonder why... well actually of course I don't, I know why. The beeb presents itself as being holy and unbiased, but of course it is not.

The 'Balkan route' for Heroin smuggling.

Of course there are questions as to how complicit NATO commanders in this drug smuggling. Heroin flooding Europe and especially heroin flooding to Russia have led some to conclude, especially in the Russian establishment that there may be a deliberate intention.

Whether or not this is true remains to be seen. I am naive perhaps, but it could well be individual soldiers acting on their own rather than a fantastical conspiracy theory. Even so, countries like Russia have every right to be pissed off as the flower of their youth succumbs to this cancer.

new designs.

2010-09-07T22:41:00.003+01:00

I'll be sorting out my blog, changing the layout, adding more links, focusing on various interests etc, pretty soon. (No more tumbleweed!)

My interests are-
--Russian contemporary domestic and geopolitical sitaution, and her culture in general, including my continued studying of the language, plus perceptions of Russia in the west.
-- British centric topics, current affairs etc, culture and society- namely I feel that Britain is essentially a dystopia, we have no sovereignty, a client state of America etc.
--Science and technology- particularly things like climate change and new technology.
-- various other miscellaneous things.

It is also roughly my first aniversary of blogging, started out pretty disjointed at first- I wanted to extend my online presence beyond newspaper discussion boards, and now I post under my own name.

I shall see how things go...........

He thinks what I think!

2010-09-02T19:38:00.002+01:00

As I have posted before on the scam that is higher education in Britain, this youtube video is good to to watch.

I'm taking a sabbatical from blogging.

2010-08-14T22:28:00.005+01:00

Due to many things piling up in my personal life I not going to blog for a while.

I have also quit posting on Cif, a lot of it seems just to be middle class posturing, identity politics, militant feminism and blandness prevail. It is a waste of time. Or idiotic things like David Miliband lecturing us on Burma, yet anyone who pointed out Mr Milibands complicity in Iraq and Afghanistan got deleted, although the first poster 'twoplustwoequalsfive' (this sounds like a Dostoevsky reference), got in with criticism of Miliband undeleted and garnered over 100 recommends.

During my time away in the real world I will be doing many things, some important, some not. I will continue my studies, of various things, such as Geopolitics and economics, improving my русский язык, doing various voluntary work and including getting my head down for my maths and science courses.

I will also continue to be grinded down by the British labour market, and steadily, every day in fact, my self esteem goes down- I cannot even get a job in Mcdonald's or as a shelf stacker. In fact this is really why I am temporarily quitting the blogosphere, my real life situation is pretty awful right now.

Maybe I will come back. Either way my influence in the blogosphere is minute. I just got started based on my Cif posts, and often elaborating more here. Most traffic here came from Cif, now I no longer post there. Oh well, I suppose.

Dystopian views of Britain.

2010-08-08T20:42:00.020+01:00

(credit Banksy)

Following half arsed attempts on here (it's summer) about living in contemporary Britain I said I would continue and wanted to write about the factors which make Britain a dystopia. Forgive for my rambling nature (ramblings of a fool) I said I wanted to do a few more blog posts over the summer about contemporary Britain, including various social, cultural and political aspects.

Although my theory is rather sketchy, I am willing to stake 'my reputation' (ie none) by saying that Britain as a nation/entity bears the hallmarks of 3 dystopian systems, perhaps 4. This is somewhat a different from what I said in March, that we are in a Huxleyan dystopia, based on Aldous Huxley's pleasure principle. (although that is still true- we ironically have the most freedom, technologically, the same time that we have the least- politically and individually)

Orwellian.
There is a reason why I chose the Banksy piece, sums things up aptly. We have more CCTV cameras than anywhere else on earth. We nearly got ID cards, and a huge number of personal details are on varying databases by government departments and private sector organisations. Although new labour is associated with the introduction of control and management culture is out of power, I am not fooled by the new coalition. Just a few cosmetic policy changes, we are still the most watched people on earth. The most heavily on databases too, many of which get lost in various places. Also on a much smaller level, there are many other things, things like ideas for taxes of fat people etc.

The media establishment is also complicit in lying to us and presenting us a distorted view of the world. One example in an ocean of them---- On the BBC news I have hear politicians say 'we are fighting in Afghanistan to keeps the streets of Britain safe.' The BBC takes this quote from politicians but never challenges this. Most Afghans we are fighting have not been outside their home regions, let alone their country.

Doublespeak and unspeak prevail- we all laugh at management culture and their silly acronyms, but we have to play along with their game, in things like applying for employment etc, we are expected to 'sell ourselves' creating an ersatz American style individualism. Incidently, we supposedly have a special relationship with America- namely America will always demand something, we will always 'request'.

Neoliberal
'There is no alternative', espoused Thatcher. I am certainly not a socialist, but to say that there can only be one political/economic situation in Britain (and America, and the world) is absurd. The erosions in pay and conditions, mass privatisations and collapse in homegrown trade and industry are evident. Neoliberal economics also call for massive disestablishment of the public sector, often to be replaced by outsourced private subcontractors intent not on providing a service but making money. This also mirrors the rise of the managerial culture, and the consultancy sector, most evident in hospital managers.

Another aspect has been the erosion of labour markets and national boundaries. In Britain, eastern Europeans especially have become a byword by employers as hard working labour who crucially do not question their employers. There is nothing wrong with them as people, but the fact of the matter is that there are limited resources in this country, in any country in fact, many millions of people want to emigrate. What has simply happened is that they have driven the pay and conditions of labour down. A flexible and transient workforce is what is wanted, there are many anecdotes of British employers actively preferring to hire foreign labour because 'they work harder', ie they do not know their rights.

Neoliberalism is also tied to the growth of qualification-ism and degree-ism, the setting of universal 'skills' and the denial that people have the individual capacity to think for themselves- we have to conform... I have written a short piece on Cif about this, well my own position in the search for employment.

Huxleyan/Nihilism
People are consumed by pleasure. Crassness and vulgarity reign supreme. This is what I wrote about in March.- a response to a CIf article by a young lady who was proud of her political apathy. Choice quote- "I'm young, I've never voted and I probably never will"

The worst aspect however, surely must be the collapse of political activism and indeed political consciousness and the triumph of apathy. This has perhaps been encouraged by technological developments, the internet, computer games, entertainment on demand. This is the pleasure principle, because of these developments can completely wrap ourselves up in a bubble of our own making and stay within it, having a totally distorted world view. Ironically the internet, which should have ushered in a new era of political and social awareness has largely not- many instead people can find their niche, find friends only in that and live oblivious to the outside world.

Aldous Huxley in Brave New World envisioned a society where pleasure was the principle, a dose of soma was the cure to all problems. Barbaric 'John the Savage' confined to a 'savage reservation' has the temerity to read Shakespeare and even more disgustingly is born of a woman!

As I said with Orwellianism we are at our most free technologically, but we are most enslaved with lack of engagement and ability to escape from society. We can witness the recent ipad factory suicides to show who pays for our blissful ignorance.

As I said, or rather greater minds than me said, Huxley was right. I add Nihilism to Huxleyanism because they are very similar, apathy and ignorance, pursuit of hedonistic pleasure for not meaning. -- I used to think of myself as a Nihilist, but really I am not, consumer society is Nihilist, what I perceived as my Nihilism was because I was on the fringes of mainstream society. But some people can 'keep the torches shining'.

These are the three dystopian influences we have in Britain, which one is the most prominent is up for debate. I think they are all equally prominent and equally nefarious.

The Scottish question.

2010-08-03T21:36:00.007+01:00

To sum up the issue of Scotland and it's relationship with Britain then observe one thing, the al Meghrahi release. The British government protested, the American government protested, but on health grounds he was compassionately released. (Of course the Libyans putting on a celebration for him was untoward, but crucially had nothing to do with Scotland.)

This one event is symbolic of the wider cultural attitudes in Scotland. A justice system exists to prescribe and deliver justice, not to deliver revenge, as is common in America, and even in England, especially among the right wing tabloids.

Also similar is the Scots traditional community minded approach, Tory style individualism does not do well up here. Parties like the Scottish National Party are based on consensus and community. Here, there is a much greater sense of consensus, and respect for difference of opinions, and the ability to work together for a common cause. This is generally true in smaller more isolated communities.

There is much to write on this and far greater than in a simple blogpost, but as an issue in contemporary Britain it is relevant-- especially as the catalyst for independence may well be neoliberalism and the devaluing of people's conditions. Scotland and the human centred policies of the SNP act as a counterbalance to this.

This humanist tradition in Scotland can perhaps be ascribed to the influence of the local strains of Christianity (not the shcismatic ones though), and also to the philosophical traditions of thinkers like David Hume. Politcally Scotland has been an interesting place, there are many socialists and conservative. Until 1979 Scots voted Conservative in reasonable numbers. But then came Thatcher. Thatcherite individualist ideology is the opposite of the collective/community model, which even 'small c' conservatives in Scotland espouse.

Hume would have supported the decision of Scottish justice secretary Kenny Mckaskill, as do many Scots. We also have this unique situation where relatives of the victims killed in Lockerbie made public calls for Megrahi to be released- there is almost no 'let them rot' thought in Scottish discourse. We believe in man's capacity for redemption- I suppose like Dostoevsky. In this issue, a man has terminal cancer. Release on compassionate grounds is not related to the crime or it's nature, rather on the quality of life of the criminal. No one benefits from revenge.

My own position has drifted from being staunchly Unionist, anti independence, to open minded pragmatism. Perhaps being ethnically English with English surname and accent (although born and lived my life mostly in Scotland) might have discouraged , but realistically the hardcore nationalist element is minuscule.

It is indeed unfortunate that Britain mat well have to be broken up, but the powers that be have brought it upon themselves. Of ocurse we share many things as an island, but when it comes to such a fundamental issue of worldview and social attitudes, rahter than economics and geograpihcal location, I think the 'island marriage' may need divorcing, for the benefit of both parties.

digital divide and discrimination

2010-08-02T09:22:00.003+01:00

Digital discrimination -- those who have credit cards, internet access, and are technologically savvy can get cheaper deals on many goods and services. Those who do not have these- usually most vulnerable in society do not. This has always been evident to me, and I only got my first credit card this year.

Not everyone has internet access or a current account. But I suppose they are just seen as collateral damage in our neoliberal dystopia.-- 'Everyone has to look out for themselves'- If the poor old woman is not savvy enough to work a computer or a person on benefits can't afford a credit card, then it is their own problem- seems to be the current thought.

I too, would prefer not to use my credit card and give details away, registering my personal details on a company's website that is all too susceptible to be hacked/exploited, as has demonstratively happened many times in Britain.

But realistically, I have no choice. When I was in the south of England, I bought my train ticket for £7.50 with my credit card, a week earlier paying at the station on the day I had to pay 3 times as much.

The simple solution is to simply flatten out the pricing system and make public transport cheap and accessible for everyone. But I guess that such thinking is not in vogue.

1. The growth of higher education in Britain.

2010-07-26T00:21:00.011+01:00

I said I would post on some Britain related topics. Here is the first one.

On countless threads (only in the last few days as well), threads on the Guardian's comment is free have come up about univeristies, here, here, here, and here.

On these, and many other threads this year I have said what I feel is wrong with the higher education system in the UK and it's links with current affairs and social issues in Britain.

1. The university as a 'rite of passage'
I have said this so many times on here and cif that it hardly bears repeating. In short many young people go to university simply because it is the done thing, their parents, peer group and milieu in general create the atmosphere and expectations of going to uni. Universities know this and many prospectuses will actually market the universities based on things like cafes, nightlife and shopping. This ties in with...

2. Universities allied to neoliberal consumer culture.
Aspirational, it is also anti meritocratic, and designed to keep people in their place. The idea of 'graduate jobs' that only graduates can do

3. The collapse in 'on the job training'.
Now we are expected to pay for skills/training, no free or even paid apprenticeships. There are countless anecdotes on web forums like Cif, of people who got skills training for free, or even paid for it. Now, the most simple and insane qualifications are required for even the most basic jobs- as I have found out.

4. The "symbiotic relationship" university expansion has, parasites feeding off it.
things like private companies offering student accommodation like Unite Students, or just smaller things like private accommodation with inflated rates pressing out locals, or student ghettos. As universities expand offering questionable courses, so grows the need for these money making schemes. I feel it is all a big con. This symiotic relationship is furthered of course by more and more subjects requring university education, thus 3/4 years of a person not working, paying tuition, paying for accomadation, paying for a loan.

5. Universities acquiescing to the needs of the market.
In any British city, you will see universities expanding, acquiring more land and the cranes going up as universities build new developments, often questionable things like Business schools.

6. The rise of 'I'm special' culture, privileges and the death knell of meritocracy
There is now barely any concept of people rising through hard work and on their own merit, now there is frequently a glass ceiling. On a more personal level, I often feel alienated from society, as many in my peer group seem to think they have an automatic 'right' to many things- ie they expect people and institutions to bow before them.

All in all, this is profound evidence of the neoliberal dystopia, and whether universities are blind sheep or active collaborators remains to be seen. Either way, people in Britain and society at large suffer from it.

An addition- combining all of the above.
7- Universities marketing a consumerist dream/lifestyle.

Set of posts to come.

2010-07-21T09:57:00.003+01:00

I have been away on holiday, and in the course of that time, have had chance to see several British cities, or at least pass through them- there are many things I want to write about- about domestic British issues for a change. I may not have time to write all of them, but these are the topics which interest me at the moment.

1. Reflections on the south of England- more personal/my own opinions about the most crowded corner of Britain, the 'centre of wealth' etc, and the social conditions there. Related to other posts, see below, like my dystopian view of Britain. The stratification of wealth and the pursuit of the Murdoch/Neoliberal dream. The sham of the property bubble, and the complete lack of producing anything tangible, and even no sense of community in many places. This is often related to poor urban design and planning.- ie sprawling endless nihilistic suburbia.

2. The digital divide- how the poorer often do not have credit cards or internet access, so can't get cheaper products or services. For example, railway fares, if I didn't have a credit card (I only got mine this year) I would have to pay £22 for a train ticket, with it, it is only £7.50. This hurts the most vulnerable in society, the poor, the old etc.

3. Restricting public transport availability as a means of social control- or at the very least simply gross negligence which increases social stratification. Train fares for example, Britain has I believe has amongst the highest ticket prices in the world. When theoreticians talk about getting poor people to have more social mobility, what about something as basic as physical mobility.

4. Petty minded nationalism- this is somewhat obvious in England, and Scotland too. There is nothing wrong with it, but it is distasteful. The world cup is over, that is not the issue though- other things, like the media and aspects of society calling anyone who has served in Afghanistan 'a hero', whether they are or not.

5. 3 ways Britain is a dystopia- Orwellian, (authoritarian state) Huxleyan (amusing ourselves to death), and Neoliberal (mass privatisation, devastation of communities and workers rights).

6. The Scottish question- is Scottish independence an inevitability, due to Scotland's more socially conscious and communitarian attitude to Laissez faire capitalism?

7- the sham of higher education- wrote about this a bit- the growth in "degree-isation" and also that universities are expanding to fill this, shiny building sites, private companies building student accommodation. I feel it is just a con. Plenty of money flowing around from tuition fees which can then be invested in shiny new builidngs to teach subjects/vocations which now require a degree, like paramedics, or to be spent on building postgraduate 'business schools' where you can learn the delights of jargon. Plenty of money flowing in from the government too fund these shiny new buildings too, doesn't matter if the degree is worthless or shouldn't be a degree subject- closely related to what I see as universities functioning as a 'rite of passage'

8- the sham of 'urban renewal'. From my own observations the shiny plate glass yuppie style flats seen in places like Manchester or Glasgow seem to be of no benefit other than to a rich subset- also the sham of buy to let and the property bubble in general..

US economy and war.

2010-07-13T12:54:00.004+01:00

When this article broke in the Telegraph in April. I meant to write about it, but was busy.

Obesity among US schoolchildren 'a risk to national security'
The US army is facing a recruiting crisis as the current generation of American schoolchidren are "too fat to fight", according to a group of retired officers who believe national security is at risk as a result.

Now another interesting article has appeared in the Guardian, 'America hooked on War and getting poorer, by Clancy Sigal- about the demands of fighting an unwinnable war and the economic cost. Sigal imagines 'M60 machine guns are shooting ammunition belts full of $1,000 bills'. There is a similar situation in Britain, as we, in the midst of a recession, continue to waste money in Afghanistan, in order to pursue a pipe dream and a fantasy that we can spread Democracy there.

The US economy has a symbiotic relationship with it's it's military machine, which is quite funny when there is so much talk of the free market. In the Telegraph article, we hear from a group of retired officers and think-tanks who are complaining about high levels of obesity among children having an effect on the cannon fodder they can recruit. This is where the US Military industrial complex, which we are all familiar with, spills over into the socio/political/economic complex. In this case filling young Americans with crap food was good for the fast food industry, and ultimately good for the the privatised American healthcare service. Now however, they have suddenly decided this is not good- the only paradigm in America that the trumps the free market is the interest of the (socialist style) military and 'national security'*.

Even the great John Dolan of the exile has pointed this out, in his first ever article, 'In the land of the Heroic Leeches' writing about the 'military pensioners' who enjoyed the closest thing America has to socialism. All you have to do is sign up, and you get free college, free healthcare, pension, world travel. There is a deliberate reason why military service is made to have added perks, and domestic life in America is so harsh. The result- a continuous supply of soldiers. Or, as Dolan also writes, about how most 'small government' right wingers and Republicans in America are of an ex military background, and often enjoying the full perks of 'retirement'. As I have consistently maintained (by the influence of Dolan) the only socialist organisation in America is it's military.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*somewhat related to this is the justification of the war in Afghanistan on the grounds of 'National security'.... why young men are dying in Afghanistan 'to make the streets of Britain safer', killing peasants who will never come to Britain, most will never even leave their regions. Instead we get radicalised Muslims in Britain. It is hard to speak objectively, but the fact of the matter is that there hot headed people in every community, young men usually. The British Muslim community is no exception, and we are fuelling the flames of anger. (Of course it is not and never will be 'our fault' if an adult human being decides to exercise his individual free will and callously murder innocents)

Inertia.

2010-07-10T21:34:00.006+01:00

I would love to post more, and on interesting topics, but I am tied down with many things at the moment. Each time I blog, I have to justify the reason why I do so-- to what end I ask myself.

The blogosphere is sometimes interesting and fascintating, other times soul destroying.-- We all have voices.

I spend a lot of my time reading, usually in areas that interest me, for example, Russia, the contemporary situation but also historically/culturally as well as the actual language.

I have just read an interesting biography of Peter the Great.

Verily much doth ' I love thee, city of peter's creation' - th great city of St Petersburg, fantastic and grotesque, built of the iron will of one person, 'the most abstract and artifical city in the world' as Dostoevsky put it.

There is also a hypothesis that the Peter the Great set the authoritarian tone in Russia that would culminate in the Stalinist personality cult, although others including the great Sergei Eisenstin, attribute it to Ivan IV, 'the terrible'. It is an interesting debate.

'Graduate Jobs'

2010-07-04T23:49:00.007+01:00

~I don't just want to fill bandwidth by repeating my posts from Cif, but the issue is an important one and has been subject to debate recently.

During my many months of job searching, it appears that many jobs are ring fenced for graduates. Are they science, engineering or technology jobs? Mostly not. They are jobs that anyone who is reasonably comptetent could perform after some on the job training and supervision.-- Things like working in sales or marketing, junior estate agent, manager of a supermarket.

So, why is this happening. I hypothesise....

1. Universities are largely rites of passage, a holding pen for young people as thry go through a transitionary period. Those who haven't been through them are assumed not to have complteted the transition.
2. The employers and recruiters are themselves graduates and thus more sympathetic to them, rather than the 'unknown' non graduates. They cannot comprehend that non graduates can be intelligent too.
3. Universities themselves have a corporatist structure. Browsing the Guardian I saw an advert for a 'head of undergraduate recruitment'. Recruitment.... dear God. How this links in to employers demanding degrees, (I hypothesise) that universities running themselves on business lines is more attractive to employers, graduates are less likely to be rebels and more likely to be corporate whores.

As I have constantly maintained, this degree-isation of employment society is creating a two tiered labour force. Previosuly in the great post war years of social mobility a young man in employment (somewhat less with women of course) could expect to rise to a senior position simply by the merit and talent of his labour. Now however, there is a glass ceiling, which is getting lower and lower. Degrees are now needed for even the most mundane jobs- a 'smoking cessastion officer' for example, or junior supervisory positions. I am in the front line of this- I do not have a degree, therefore it is assumed I cannor think for myself.

This country is losing out on many talented innovaters and skilled people, who just don't happen to have a degree.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it is also bad that a sign of one's intellect has been reduced to a few high profile 'benchmarks' for example, having read Proust or War and Peace. This is bad for society and is commodifying and stratifying intellect, even though I actually benefit from this, having read W+P when I was 17 ;).
- But I still think it is bad. People actually deliberately go and try and read War and Peace 'for the challenge' rather than an interest in Tolstoy or Russian literature.

On an exceptionally hot evening during early July...

2010-07-03T11:12:00.004+01:00

В начале июля, в чрезвычайно жаркое время, под вечер, один молодой
человек вышел из своей каморки, которую нанимал от жильцов в С-м переулке,
на улицу и медленно, как бы в нерешимости, отправился к К-ну мосту.

In July I always get nostalgic for Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishement. I have read it three times previously, each time in July. Usually there were memorable situations attached, the first time, four years ago, I was 18, and in the grips of a rather serious state of depression (more like teenage angst, but still.) The second time I read it, in July 2007, I was actually in St Petersburg- walking in the same back streets where the book was set. Then I read it again in 2008, that also was a 'memorable' event. I had just emerged from another recurrent state of depression and had managed to stop taking awful medication which was a straightjacket on my soul.
In 2009, I did not read it, as I was far too busy with various things, but I suppose reading it 3 tinmes by the age of 20 is enough.

I may or may not re read it this month, as I am quite busy, but some time this year I will be reading it in Russian, probably in November or December to delay it as long as possible so I have a better command of the Russian language first.

There is a heap of literary and even poilitical/physchological/philosophical analysis of Dosteovsky's creation, and I have not much to add other than my own personal views. Crucially of course, I adore the positive message, Fyodor Mikhailovich's belief in man's capacity for redemption. Man's conscience too- Raskolnikov cannot overstep his conscience.

So, in this dark and spider webbed corner of the internet, I will put this. I am devoted to too many things at the moment, but I thought I would insert this here

Interns, employment and our desire for rites of passage,.

2010-07-02T14:49:00.004+01:00

On the Guardian, and in the wider British 'talking shop', there is a debate going on about interns, whether or not they should be paid. This misses the issue, why do interns exist at all, and why are so many jobs.
Also the need to create a false sense of identity is obvious, as is what I see as universities being simply holding pens and 'rites of passage'. A glance at any university prospectus reads more like a tourist information.

This is creating a new sense of social stratification as universities simply serve as lifestyle choices alienating many working class and lower income people who have no experience of the university bubble- yet in employment, a degree from a university is sacrosanct- gone are the days when you could start in a humble position and rise through the ranks. Now there is a glass ceiling

The idea of merit and individual capacity for people to rise up out of whatever situation no longer applies.

My take on the interns debate, as I said on this piece.....

The Graduate entry scheme for many jobs and interns is the biggest load of bollocks in the world. This is creating an apartheid division in the world of work, where people like me who do not have degrees are seen as incompetent and incapable of thinking for themselves, yet someone who is a graduate is seen the opposite. This is the apartheid, and I am the victim of it. Why should I have to go through 3-4 years of university, funding myself, studying an abstract theory, when I have the intelligence and critical faculties to get a 'graduate job' right now. - As I have said before, many universities just seem to be holding pens and finishing schools, and helped to reinforce the elite nature of job division, making sure the 'educated' elite get top access to employment.

I speak to graduates, not just fresh ones, but from a while back so with life experience. Right now there are graduates in their new robes going through their ceremonies five minutes from where I am. They are my contemporaries, I am the same as them, I am on the same level as them, but I do not have the magic bit of paper.

Of course, doctors, vocational professionals et al would need degrees, but the degree requirement for 90% of jobs is bollocks. - I once saw a job for an NHS smoking cessation advisor requiring a degree (in anything). Related to this, my father has been teetotal for 30 years and during those 30 years has helped alcoholics at AA meetings, he has no degree but has helped many more people get their lives back on track than a degree educated 'professional' and he does it for free out of the good of his heart!

I see no reason for it other than a way of keeping the plebs down and stopping them getting ideas above their station. -- These same universities which were once hotbeds of student radicalism are now arch conservative institutions designed to reinforce social stratification and privilege. This is getting worse with the “degree-isation” of intellect. This is my view. I have applied for many jobs and only graduates are considered. Many more jobs I simply won't apply for because I do not want to be disappointed. So thanks to this I will have to go through four years of unemployment, paying to support myself, until I get a degree, just to prove to employers that I am 'competent'.

In that police intern ship you [The article writer} refer to, why can't a hard working bobby on the beat work his way up into the administrative position. Previously in this country he could, now their is a glass ceiling for those without a degree- even if they are intelligent and competent. Sure he could go and get a degree, but that is 3 years out of the employment market and supporting himself on his own expense. Why couldn't the hypothetical graduate who wants to work in the police become a bobby on the beat?, and work their way up over time? Or do people not want to get their hands dirty or do jobs below their station?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally- on rites of passage (as universities function as) this is also filtering down to things like school proms, a recent and ghastly trend from America, related to our individualist capitalist society. Shockingly, I even heard on the bus last week some women talking about how their neice had 'graduated' from nursery, that is they had a little ceremony to mark the 'occasion'.

Have we lost our collective identity that we have to reduce things to these silly milestones?

Organised crime in Glasgow, - my observations and miscellany.

2010-07-01T00:26:00.005+01:00

(Sorry to be cathartic and this piece will probably be unstructured. A collections of my views and opinions of observing my local area, and also following a newspaper report in yesterday's Glasgow Herald.)

This article looked at how gangsters have set up front companies to launder money and the police are struggling to keep up with the paper trail. They are however, actively trying to combat this plague, and I wish them all the best. Some quotes...

[Detective Inspector] "McKerns unveiled the proposals after Strathclyde Police revealed the true scale of criminal infiltration in Glasgow’s business world. The force identified nearly 300 firms – as varied as nail salons and second-hand car dealerships – as gangster fronts.”

“Then, in a six-week operation called Enterprise, its officers froze £3.5 million in assets and seized more than £300,000 in goods and cash. “

This is really disastrous for the city. Disastrous for people living in the community, like me.
In another article on the same subject.

“There is an old joke about how well-known gangsters are in parts of Glasgow. Even the dogs, they say, bark their names.
Go to almost any street, especially in the poorer areas, and ask who owns the local garage, the hairdresser or the pub. Who really owns it, that is. Almost anybody will tell you which businesses are dodgy and which are not.”

So, crimilaity is blatantly obvious, even all the local residents know who's who, but the police do nothing. Crime even extends to the legal aspect....

But there are real challenges. Last year it emerged that Strathclyde Police was bracing itself for a human rights backlash against its attempts to hit at the soft underbelly of organised crime, its legitimate front businesses.
Gangsters, according to one internal memo, are recruiting lawyers to fight “new and lawfully audacious tactics” being adopted by the police and partner agencies, including licensing authorities for taxis and security firms. These tactics include going after the licences of front firms.

Continues....

Strathclyde’s chief constable, meanwhile, has tried and failed to prevent a company he said had crime links, Network Private Hire, from obtaining a £2m NHS taxi contract. It has also lost its licence but is still trading as it appeals the decision. Its owners say they are the victims of a police vendetta and have vowed to take their appeal to Europe.

£2 million pounds of NHS money is going into gangsters hands! This is absolutely terrible.
And the irony is that they are protected by human rights legislation, yet they are happy to violate the human rights of their victims they extort and threaten, of the communities they infect with drugs, of the women who they enslave into prostitution.

Other things-

-The growth of 'yuppie flats' and gated communites. While strictly speaking they are not actually gated, in practice they are. These high end flats are walled off (with pretentious architecture out of keeping with their location) with one entrance that is monitored by CCTV. I suppose legitimaltely anyone could walk in the courtyard/grounds of these flats, but they are so imposing and self confident that any of the 'little people' would be deterred as they would feel out of place (and watched by the CCTV). Conveniently for the inhabitants they are located next to the main bus routes into the city, thus they can avoid any interaction with the local community whatsoever, working, shopping and socialising in the city centre. This is particularly evident in Calton, not far from where I live, it has the lowest male life expectancy in the UK at 54, 'worse than the Gaza strip', alcoholism, provided of course by the criminal gangs

-The whole gentrification process is itself a sham, it all seems to be about stealing as much EU funding for whatever pipe dream du jour, and I would suspect that much of the money ends up in illegitimate hands anyway. Plus the irrelevance of these projects to local people, like the yuppie flats above. Another example is a local contemporary arts centre full of fashionistas which is totally ignored by the local populace, the champagne quaffers likewise ignore the locals. Luckily for the delicate souls it is located next to a bus and railway station, so they can easily leave.

-The above links into CCTV. There is far too much. A week or so ago, the Guardian made a big fuss about CCTV cameras being installed in predominantly Muslim areas, as they were viewed as spying on a community and impying that the whole community was suspect. Fair enough. Here in Glasgow, in residential streets with no shops, no warehouses/businesses and no traffic (generally the only use for CCTV) there are CCTV cameras. These are mounted on massive poles far bigger than lamposts, as big as 4 storey tenements and are fully rotatable, potentially even being able to see into people's bedrooms. These cameras serve no purpose, they are in residential areas.
Except of course there might be crime.... but that is the role of the police to act properly, it would also help if these communities were not decimated by the cancer of organised crime.

-Glasgow still has the highest number of gangs in the UK, more than London. True, many of these are street gangs rather than sophisticated money laundering operations, but it is still an unenviable record.

So, that is it for now. I try my best to observe my local environment and it's interactions. It is true that the people of the east end Glasgow have had a hard time, but it is as much by the criminal element as the uninterested political class. The area is not something I know too much about, having only lived here for two months, and is a departure from my usual blogging oeuvre but there are many blatant injustices here, and my voice at least will be one to add to the chorus of dissent.

Midsummer

2010-06-22T00:42:00.007+01:00

At the time of writing, tonight is the shortest night of the year, long summer days etc. In this spirit I am too busy too blog, I am doing far too many things, although blaming long summer days as an excuse not to blog is a rather weak arguement- I suppose I can blame it on being out and active more . A pity as so many important things are going on, domestically and internationally.

I wish I was in St Petersburg again at this time of year...

..the white nights are exhilarating. One day perhaps, I will return but I have missed them this year.

C. 'NapoleonKaramazov'

ATL on the People's panel

2010-06-11T12:19:00.004+01:00

Here.
Perspectives on Employment

The discussion is still ongoing, but there are many interesting strands being followed, with the general agreement being the job centres are useless, and too much emphasis on useless qualifications.

As the thread develops, I will add various thoughts, and theories here.

(OK, i never really updated it, too busy all week- but many interesting things were discussed below the line. We almost all agreed that Job Centres are hellish places.

I will be doing some volunteering for the moment, by the looks of things.

Murder in Samarkand.

2010-06-11T00:00:00.006+01:00

I have not really been very active in the blogosphere, too busy with real life.

I have just finished reading Craig Murray's murder in Samarkand, about his time as British ambassador in Uzbekistan from 2002-2004. His book is a few years old, and as things move quickly in politcs there may be slight differences. For example, the USA no longer has a military base there anymore, and Uzbekistan no longer goes with the premise of fighting the 'War on Terror'

A very good book. I am not providing a reivew but the key points
-Uzbekistan saying made up bollocks the IMF, development agencies etc about it's economic progress. Moribund state industry and corruption.
-Lying as well to human rights organisations/NGO about abuses.
-Exxagurating threats of 'Islamist' fundamentalists and helping in the 'War on Terror' by allowing a US airbase.
-Investigation gained under torture from these 'Islamists'. Murray criticising human rights abuses. Very graphic descriptions of barbarity.
-British establishment attempts to silence Murray, British loss of sovereignty to America. Eventually Murray is dimissed. The legaility of the Iraq war and comparisons with Saddam Hussein and Karimov

Generally seems to be fawning of the 'colour revolutions' and George Soros investments, but I will let him off that.- After all, he accepts that the situation in the Soviet Union was better than contemporary Uzbekistan, under the clutches of the Karimov regime. It is also tragically ironic that the only power keeping him (and I presume all of central Asia) in power is Russia- yet he has embarked on an anti Russian campaign, despite all the intellectual elite of Uzbekistans being the Russian speakers. Closing down theatre's, universities etc that use Russian, banning Russian books.

It is no wonder that many of the prostitutes of Dubai are ethnic Russians from central Asia. At least 'Russian Russians' would get acess to educational facilties and institutes, and save them from the clutches of prostitution, yet those who got stuck on the wrong border after the collapse have less choice.

The question surely has to be raised as to the possibility of the Russians establishing physical hegemony again over the region, rather than the idiotically corrupt local regimes. The locals respect the Russians (H/T Anatoly Karlin) as this poll suggests, '67-89% of central Asians view Russia as a friend and ally'. It is a win win situation. Russia gets physical hegemony, the Uzbek and other ex USSR 'stans get greater human rights and economic development

Craig Murray has an excellent blog, here. He has been particularly active during the last few days, with regards to the Gaza flotila

Chekhovian Humanism redux, Life and Fate

2010-05-26T21:06:00.005+01:00

Apologies for inactivity- been rather occupied sadly. This shall be a bit cathartic as well.

I have just been reading Vasili Grossman's Life and Fate (in translation). An excellent book covering many bases, somewhat like War and Peace, but set in the Great Patriotic war.

There is one piece I could not leave out. In true (or maybe cliched?) Russian style, the protagonists gather round to discuss literature. The conclusion is that Anton Pavlovich Chekhov represents the highest pinnacle of Russian acheivement, in literature and in society in general. He portrayed everyone as a human first, then social position afterwards. His talks of a unity of humanity and equality, which in a class bound society like Russia was truly revolutionary. He could descibe any scene, from a lord's plate, to a peasant, from the extraordinary to the petty and banal. Of course Chekhov's background as a Physician helped him see all aspects of humanity and human nature. Grossman too observed great numbers of people as a war correspont between 1941-45.
So much so is Grossman in awe of him, he says, through his characters.....

А Чехов знаменосец самого великого знамени,
что было поднято в России за тысячу лет ее истории, - истинной, русской,
доброй демократии, понимаете, русского человеческого достоинства, русской
свободы.

But Chekhov is the standard-bearer of the greatest banner, which has ever been raised in Russia for thousands years of her history, a true, Russian, humane democracy, you understand, of Russian human dignity, Russian freedom.

It continues....

Chekhov said, let's put God – and all those grand progressive ideas – to one side. Let's begin with man. Let's be kind and attentive to the individual man – whether he's a bishop, a peasant, an industrial magnate, a convict in the Sakhalin islands or a waiter in a restaurant. Let's begin with respect, compassion and love for the individual – or we'll get nowhere.

The piece of writing is extraordinary. A heartfelt ode to the playwright. I am generally attached to this idea, if we can get a sense of unity of people, seeing man as man, then perhaps we will get somewhere. And apply this to social and politcal situations as well, of course.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn would mock Chekhov. In his extraordianry Gulag archipelago, so interpersed with irony and black humour in anecdotes and wittiscisms, he will describe a particularly lamenting scene or tragedy. Then he will dryly insert a remark about how those of Chekhov's time and Chekhov himself could not imagine such a fate befalling things to come, in a very mocking tone. After all Chekhov's plays and stories talk of 'better things to come', of a brighter future his generation was supposedly on the cusp of grasping. The characters talk about petty mundane things, hardly going to impress the zeks in the Kolyma. Of course Chekhov died only 13 years before the Bolshevik revolution, making his view of a peaceful world to come fall short.

We must remember too, all the potential works of literature, philosophy, physics. that 'went up the chimneys of the Lubyanka', in the words of Solzhenitsyn. (but of course 'рукописи не горят')

Grossman also catches the antisemitism that was starting in the Soviet Union at the time, even when they were fighting the Nazis, a foreshadow of the doctors plot ten years later, and the still lingering anti semitism during the Kruschev/Brezhnev era. He was wriring this book from the perspective of a Jewish person, a large number of his characters are Jewish, altohugh none of them are religious. There is a particular scene that traces some capture Jews journey from Ukraine, all the way into the gas chambers of Aushwitz, as an innocent, young child oblivious to the world departs from the earth.

-Other intreresting parts.
There was an extremely funny part where one of characters, a comissar at stalingrad, is under arrest and interrogation at the Lubyanka. The interrogator is beating and torturing him to get a confession. Just then the phone rings- it is his wife and tehy discuss household matters like priveliged foods from the special store. . Krymov (the character)also shouts they are a load of swine who hide in the rear, of couerse he is beaten. Indeed he remarks on their immaculate military uniforms, showing how far away they are from the front lines.

Many other anecdotes and witticisms. Probably some of it was lost in translation, but in this novel, I canno overlook the brevity of vision and overall humanistic spirit of Grossman. I will have to read more of his works soon.

*Finally, I would like to critiscise the Luke Harding article where he uses Vasily Grossman to criticise modern Russia, just as he used Leo Tolsoty to that efffect earlier this year. His premise, that the books are so popular round the world, but less so in Russia. He talks about him 'awaitng redemption' which is a load of bollocks, this is Soviet style language. Russians can read L+F onliine at lib.ru. Yes there is a lot of fatigue of reading heavyweigt novels in Russia, but most British young people don't read Shakespeare anymore once they have gone through it at school.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/jan/29/anton-chekhov-anniversary
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/feb/06/anton-chekhov-short-stories
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/may/09/life-fate-vasily-grossman
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/16/chekhov-150-celebration-hampstead-theatre
http://lib.ru/PROZA/GROSSMAN/lifefate.txt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_and_Fate

Luke Harding again.

2010-05-19T20:22:00.011+01:00

Ok, I thought the article on Grossman was an insult, the 'snubbing' overexxagurated, I thought his use of Tolstoy to attack modern Russia was crude, but this...

Does he simply plagiarise the Moscow times, slighly modify his content, and despatch it? Considering his track record..... . Ah, yes, the latest despatch from the Graun's man in Moscow was probably made after he read the MT with his morning coffee, deadline was looming etc.

The article's title....

Russian president adds enduringly sinister Soviet-era ZiL limo to wish list. Dmitry Medvedev's nostalgia for superpower trappings extends to trading in his Mercedes and bringing back the ZiL

sayeth Harding. At least the Moscow Times doesn't describe the car, an inanimate chunk of metal as being 'sinister'.

Thats right, the Zil. As we saw a week and a half ago, on день победы/Victory Day, the Russian defence minister tools around red square on one of them, looking, I have to admit, rather foolish. It is essentially a modern version of a military review, when the general would ride around on horse, surveying his men (At least Marshal Zhukhov could ride a horse though). Slighly silly, but of course no noone would disrespect such a solemn occasion.

Apparently Dmitri Medvedev has decided to exchange his German Mercedes for one of these old Zils, therefore according to Harding, we are back in the USSR.

(And of course so much so were Mercedes and BMWs so associated with the recklessness, death and destruction of the 90s that they actually made a film, ,Бумер, the Russian slang for a BMW, that dealt with, as Wikipedia says...

Corrupt cops, street gangs, "Bratki" in "Bimmers" (BMWs) steal and "Merins" (Mercedeses), angry truck drivers, beautiful women and death are what four friends in a black Bimmer who go on a mission from one region of Russia to another are about to face in the wasteland of small-town Russia. A critique of the policies of Yeltsin, it depicted the economic crisis that followed Russia's transition towards a free market economy, and with it, a lost generation, with no job security, who are pushed into a world of crime and rebellion.

If Mercedes and BMWs represent that chaotic era, then calling the Zil 'sinister' is rather laughable.
A quick textual analysis reveals the following words and phrases, which when littering an article betray his worldview...

They were the ultimate symbols of Soviet power,.

He also creates a logical fallacy by listing of all the Soviet leaders who had a Zil. Therefore anyone who has a Zil must be a Soviet ideologue, he is trying to say.

in what appears to be the latest attempt by Russia's nostalgic leadership to turn the country into a Soviet theme park. Again, nonesense

Until now, the prime minister, Vladimir Putin, has expressed a preference for German vehicles – a love affair that may have begun when he was a KGB spy in east Germany. He has been keen to restore the emblems of superpower status, including the Soviet national anthem and showing off tanks and intercontinental missiles at the annual Red Square parade.

etc, etc. In a similar vein.

Read both articles and compare.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/medvedev-wants-russian-made-limousine/406266.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/19/russia-president-dmitry-medvedev-zil

I will write more of his snubbing of Grossman as part of what I will write when I finish life and fate, next week.

Hung Parliament.

2010-05-08T11:42:00.004+01:00

Maybe now we can grasp the oppurtiniy for electoral reform and get to live in... a Democracy. Even countries in Europe that 20 years ago where under the anvil of totalitarian one party regimes today have a more representational electoral system than 'the mother of all parliaments'.

Update.
1) I attended a protest by a group calling for elected Demcoracy. 'Take back parliament' is their name. The colour is purple, symbol of the suffragettes. Not many people turned out, but I had an intersting few conversations with them. These are principled people, of varied politcal persuasions, who simply want to live in a functioning democracy.

2) In london, this group marched, with extraordinary scenes.

Sky news, of course owned by Rupert Murdoch, the one person who is the biggest stumbling block to living in an accountable Democracy.

Our country, supposedly the 'mother of parliaments' is less democratic than countries that less than 20 years ago were part of the Soviet Union. All the other communist countires now in the EU, have some semblence of Democracy.

Return from absence.

2010-05-02T18:35:00.013+01:00

Ok, I will be short, many things happening, not much time....

The British elections.
What seemed to perhaps be a tidal wave if change is turning into the same, gthe powers that be have mobilised against the one party that could actually make Britain a functioning Democracy. It seems that the chances of the Liberal Democrats being elected are small. This means that our country will continue with the two parties (Labour and Conservative) swapping roles with one another, with no change of ideology since 1979. This is very bad for the country, for the people that live here, and for me. The Conservatives, funded from abroad by non doms like Lord Ashcroft, they intend to put big business and industry first, to the detriment of individual workers rights and continue Britain's Europhobic and unquestionably pro American worldview. Labour of courser, led us into the folly of Iraq and sold our independence as a nation in the name of the 'special relationship' (hint, America demands, we request)

1-Opinion polls are very flawed.
The pollsters only speak to a small number of people, yet carry enourmous weight. Or the people conducting them and their ownership. The malign influence of the Murdochite media is evident. The British human rights activist and former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, has exposed this on his blog,

YouGov and Murdoch Boost Cameron Again
Last night's YouGov poll gave Cameron a full five percentage points more than the average of the four other respected polling organisations who effectively asked the same question at the same time.
The YouGove polls are simply a part of the Murdoch/Mail propaganda blitz to push Cameron into No 10.
In my last thread I posted the email I sent last night to Stephan Shakespeare, CEO of YouGove, asking whether yet again YouGove had fixed their poll by opening their online polling for a very brief window immediately after Cameron had finished summing up and before the others had summed up.
Shakespeare has replied that he does not know and he has nothing to do with the polling operation (which he recently defended in an article on Conservative Home).
Personally I find it rather difficult to believe that former Conservative parliamentary candidate and Jefrrey Archer campaign manager Stephan Shakespeare was not paying the closest attention as last night's debate figures were produced by YouGov for Murdoch, his firm's biggest paymaster.

The smoking gun.
Whats more, YouGov's libel lawyers tried to shut the website down.
Well done Mr Murray. The evidence, here, here , here and here.

This has led me to conclude that Britain and I suppose America too, in the electoral process are really hardly any more Democratic than Russia, or even the Soviet Union. Obviously, naked force is not used as much in Britiain, but the rules are more subtle. It is this subtley that deceives us. Everyone in the Soveit Union exceot the die hard communits (only 4% of the population were communist party memebrs) knew they were living in an autocratic, non democratic and heirarchial state. Yet, here in Britain, people actually think we are living in an open and accoutnable democratic state.

The ruling elites employ mass psychological deception of the populace. For example, from Craig Murray's excellent investigation above, they poll 1000 people, deliberately make it favour the Tories. This is released, along with many pro Tory editorials and headlines, which creates a false atmospehere, a 'prevailing wind' so to speak, thet they are going to win, it builds up anticipation. This has a psychological effect on voters, they feel the Tores will win anyway, they might as well back a winning horse, they want to feel good about it, they wan to 'share' the victory. This basically makes a self fulfilling prophecy, and so we continue ambling along. This is an outrage, quite simply, all the intellectuals will simply leave Britain. Unlike the USSR, we have freedom of movement, and we shall use it.

-In the scheme of the Huxleyan dystopia, which I am trying to draw people's attention to, this fits in well. Many people care about there petty hedonistic self gratification, rahter than a sense of community and society. Or the consequences of their apathy, a Tory win which is against their interests. Politics is reduced to management,so we are free from making decisions. Politics is as important as the topping we choose on our take away pizza.

I don't ask for much of the political process, but living in a functioning democracy rather than an Anglo Saxon Banana Republic is something I would like. Of course not forgetting the other Anglo Saxon Banana Republic on the other side of the Atlantic. Mark Ames and the boys at ExiledOnline are showing America for what it really is.

Miscellanious section.-----------------------------------------

Other than that I am adapting okay to my new environment. The east end of Glasgow has been solidly labour labour/socialist for decades yet there is still grinding povert. The welfare trap, perhaps? I will look into this soon. Also I consider myself to have conservative views, but I am utterly opposed to the Tories (as anyone can see above). I am more of a European style social conservtive, willing for high tax to fund social projects, but conservative in matters relating to indiviudual and civic responsibility. I walk down a local street, with myriad bars and pubs, tanning salons and off licences,or see people eating badly, smoking badly etc. These people need to live more fulfilling lives, not encouraged not to do anything. I am opposed to naked unregulated capitalsim though, that is why I detest the Tories. I have already written blog posts about this, namely what I feel is the 'shameless society'.

-I also reject multiculturalism, not from a Tory viewpoint, but from a humanistic and liberal viewpoint. Some of the most vile and bigoted people im Britain are amongs certain immigrant communities. Within immigrant communities, many bad things happen becauae they don't integrate, and hold onto only their views without challening them. For exmple, many (most?) black Christians are homophobes for example, just recently, we have had just had the story of the black Christian marriage counsellor who refused to give advice to homosexuals. Cue the umpteenth wasteful court case which is a foregone conclusion, but the 'victims' are quite happy to waste court time and taxpayer's money on their crusades

-Also, blogging into the situation in the labour market for young Brits, usually with low skilled low paying jobs. This looks where I am heading. Interested in the conditions, our choices, aspirations and lack of choice for advamncement. Having a job will also mean I can devote less time to blogging and my studies, which is the shame. But I have to live the neoliberal dream! Also, means that I may have to delay blogging under my own name, sadly. So, yeah, looking forward to scaling the dizzy heights of £5.80 an hour.

Finally, I intend to write more on Vasili Grossman on Chekhov, the former saying of the latter 'Chekhov is the bearer of the greatest banner that has ever been raised in the thousand years of Russian history'. Amen to that. Despite my anger at the lack of Democracy in Britain, at least I have my consciene and cultural knowledge to preserve my sanity. Perhaps if our politcal masters read more Chekhov, we would live in a more open, democratic and humane society.....

Best wishes everyone. Feedback welcome

absence

2010-04-19T20:47:00.002+01:00

I shall be away for a period of time, a week or two at minumum, as I relocate to Glasgow, Scotland.

Best wishes,

Challenging Logcal fallacies,-- 'NHS would collapse without foreign labour'.

2010-04-18T13:26:00.010+01:00

Deviating somewhat from my oeuvre, I am writing about something that has always interested me, the fallacy that Britain's NHS 'would collapse without migrant labour'.
The verdict is already foregone,-- yes it would collapse tomorrow if all non British workers didn't turn up. However, the point is that the NHS never used to rely on foreign labour to such an extent. And of course, there is nothing wrong with the exchange of specialists at forefront of their field, which has been more of a constant, but usage of low and medium skilled workers, that is a new thing.

The NHS has existed since 1948. We coped in the 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s without waves of immigration propping it up, although of course there were of course some, from the west Indies for example, who could of course speak English.

I have identified five factors that cause us to depend on cheap foreign labour.
1)The requirements for nursing to be a degree subject.
2)Lack of job satisfaction, pay and poor conditions.
3)Privatisation, contractors, and subcontractors.
4)Non NHS factors, namely Britain's absurdly high property markets.
5)The emigration of British NHS workers, usually for reasons related to no 4.

1.

What does she think of the government's announcement, this week, that as of 2013 all nurses will be required to attain degree-level education? "To be honest I think all you need as a nurse is common sense, and I think sometimes people with a degree can be a bit lacking in common sense. The basic requirement is that you need to be a caring person, and to have a bit of empathy. I do think the vetting system could be better, at interview level. To try and establish what kind of person they actually are in the first place. [As for theory] you can learn as you go along.

These are the words of a dedicated nurse, Margaret Haywood in an interview with the Guardian. She was a whistleblower who told about poor conditions in hospital wards and was callously sacked by the Nursing council. However she has won a 'patient's choice award'. Yet the degree-saition of nursing continues apace. This obviously puts people off nursing, they are now charging £3000 a year in England and Wales (but not Scotland) to so something that was previously free, and earned money as you trained.

2.The target obsessed culture, lack of job security and no wages increase in real terms mean that young people would rightly steer clear of an NHS job. Many students would willingly work as cleaners or domestic assistants during holidays, but because the conditions of the worker have gone downhill, many would prefer not to. And that is perfectly understandable. Into this void steps migrant labour, willing to take it because they are desperate. This is all a consequence of Thatcherite and then New laobourite economic and social policies.

3.Privatisation and contractors and subcontractors. Catering and cleaning are often subcontracted out of the NHS. This means the employees don't feel part of a team. They are not NHS workers. The focus is on efficiency, not money. This is bad for the patients, but bad for the worker as well. No sense of camaraderie, being hurried to be efficient and productive units of labour, not a human being. Contractors and private companies are less regulated anyway. They are also a huge drain on the NHS, agency nurses do the same job as normal nurses but are paid much more, the taxpayers money is siphoned off to private companies. This also creates animosity between the different types of workers, and makes them less good at working as a team.

4. External factors. The original article said that over a quarter of nurses in London are foreign. This is obviously because the property market means a house in London for nurses is unacceptable, and unattractive for British workers. There has been a process of 'white flight'. Foreign workers are more happy to sleep 4 to a bedroom as they are grateful to be earning lots of money. They can send the money home and their relatives will be very wealthy. Many may to return one day and will live like kings.Also, if nurses could get on the property ladder near where they live they would be happier to work in the NHS, instead of having a long commute from a sink estate.

5. The emigration of British workers. Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the USA especially have siphoned off many of our native nurses. The reasons include factors like I mentioned above. Frankly I do not blame them. They cannot afford a house here.

If all of the above are rectified, then the NHS could very easily rely on native labour.
(excepting of course the senior professionals, who have every right to live and work here- although we are not talking low level doctors from Ghana, more like the top specialists from North America, Japan and Europe)

The consequences.
...... An excellent post, by Rothsteen, on the thread.
A friend of mine is doing a post grad course in mental health practice at a london university. He said 3/4 of the students are from developing countries. The issue of sexuality and mental health arose and all of the foreign students suggested that being gay was either a curable disease given as a punishment from god or did not exist. After the lecturer informed them this was incorrect they remained adament they were correct.

Being Liberal is often synonymous with open immigration policies. Being Liberal is also synonymous with accepting rights of minorities, either ethnic, sexual and cultural. This is the problem we face. Do we dare admit that many immigrants hold bigoted views? Ethical concerns are also raised. Robbing third world countries of their doctors. Of course, they have free movement anyway.

Quite simply, this is not an issue of left and right. Left wingers consider themselves pro immigration, but anti racism and homophobia. Generally right wingers are more opposed to immigration, but it was Margaret Thatchers debasement of labour in pursuit of free market ideology (and continuation under the post 1997 Labour party) from the 80s onwards that led directly to the need for waves of immigrants to fill cheap jobs. Obviously there is a contradiction there. I would say I am a classical Liberal, with some conservative elements, (but never Tory)

In the words of GK Chesterton...
"And Right and Left," said Syme with a simple eagerness, "I hope you will abolish them too. They are much more troublesome to me.

I agree.

'TGA' and 'second Katyn'. Miscellany again.

2010-04-13T01:30:00.000+01:00

Timothy Garton Ash wrote an article in the Graun, comparing the tragic Polish air crash at Katyn, with the 1940 massacre. The only similarities are that people in leadership positions and intellectuals died, the nature and the numbers are completely different. And of course, the Russians showed due respect and understanding, hopefully part of a process of normalising international relations.

RIP the 97 victims, and peace to their families.
And sadly some people are even resorting to conspiracy theories. This is absurd, they tried to land a plane in dense fog on a closed runway.

Watched the Wikileaks video, from the cockpit of an American helicopter, complete with the pilots talking. If ever there was any doubt about aressting Bush and Blair, let this lay them to rest. Also, the question is raised of individual responsibility. To what extent is 'just following orders' justified?
And of course, I maintain that there will be no criminal prosecutions because the British and American media were so complicit in pushing the case for war it is only fair that some senior journalists, editors and newspaper proprietors should be in the dock themselves.

Fellow blogger and ciffer, PhillipaB, has written an interesting article on people reading intelligent literature as a challenge, and only for the glory of it and the bragging rights. This was carried on from what I said, I maintain that people rush to read books like War and Peace simply to prove they are intelligent, and not out of any love of literature. I see that War and Peace is becoming a benchmark of intelligence, when it is not. One can be an intellectual and not read War and Peace or Don Quixote or such like. I do like Tolstoy's epic, but I am interested in Russian literature and culture in general. To force it on people who do not have such tastes is wrong.

I may be inactive for a while, as I am going through a moving process, to Glasgow, the largest city in Scotland. Hopefully write some of my observations up here. A change of perspective

Still bogged down with studying. Still interested in the Balkans, a place where there has always been competition between the great powers. Extraordinary history, if somehwat bloody, often the small nations there were subject to the machinations of the 'great powers' of the day.

The leftwing case for conscription.

2010-04-08T22:43:00.000+01:00

Is national service a good idea?

Conscription... nasty, borderline fascists, is the response of most people in Britain who consider themselves liberal minded.

What about countries like Switzerland and Finland, where it is compulsory. And it can be opted out for civil service if the individual wants to. These countries are hardly at George W Bush levels of military aggressiveness. The advantages I see are....

-The politicians of the future will also have served. This means they will actually have experience of soldier life and so will be much more reluctant to commit forces to war.

-These countries are also more egalitarian and less class bound than Britain, a tight knit community. Normally people from the different social groups rarely meet in a social setting. This would break down barriers and social stratification.

-It is a good rite of passage/transitionary period in a young person's life. When I was 18 I was not really in a position to make the jump into the complexities and intricacies of adult life. Something like this would give young people time to think things over and still be in a formal structure.

As a counterargument, it could be said that the tight knit community is what makes conscription work in these countries. They are also mono-ethnic and mono-cultural, even Switzerland with it's multiple languages has a strong sense of being Swiss. These countries also do not have a Monarchy, and generally less centuries old traditions and hierarchies, which makes them more egalitarian anyway. If these countries are already egalitarian, then that enables military conscription to be tolerated. Britain is of course the other way around.
Also that many of the western countries still with conscription have strict conditions of neutrality and so nobody actually expects to do any fighting.

So, maybe not, but feasibly it is possible that it would cut down on social problems in Britain

miscellany 2. (sorry)

2010-04-03T00:26:00.000+01:00

- The degree-isation of society and the careers market. From a Guardian article, although it is actually about the fact that more females study at university than men*. I talked slightly differently, about the massive emphasis on higher education in Brtiain, believe this is creating a dangerous situation, where achieving an academic degree in any subject, trumps experience in the careers market. Also, that many people go to University simple as a social 'rite of passage'. There is a general expectation that the children of those who went to university must go to university. This is not creating equality, rather the opposite, a graduate aristocracy. There are many non graduates who are very intelligent and skilled, and many graduates who are not. Yet the degree is king. Many courses are very simple, not challenging and would not be degrees a decade or two ago. Retail management BSChons, fashion studies, golf course management?

*may I shoe in parts of the most recommended comments for that thread.....

"The REAL problems are going to be dealing with the massive problems caused by a society full of maladjusted and badly educated males with all the social problems that causes."

I have never read such rubbish in my life. You are celebrating that society openly discriminates against males in higher education. Add to that the fact that the statistics clearly show that discrimination starts pre-school. In GCSE examinations boys on average score 11 points lower than girls in the five GCSE categorisation.

----------
Watching the Idiot(Идиотъ)TV adaptation on Veoh, based on Dostoevsky's masterpiece, picture above of Prince Myshkin. In 10 parts of 50 minutes, watched the first 7. Very philosophical themes, tragic but beautiful. Veoh is a very good site, free but requires registering with an email adress. I also watched The Master and Margarita, another TV miniseries from a few years ago, based on Bulgakov's novel. I have read both of these books, and they are very good, worth a post on their own. Master and Margaritat is based on Goethe's Faust, which I have read in translation, and maybe one day will read in the original German.

----------
James Lovelock (of the Gaia hypothesis fame) on 'suspending Democracy'. Interesting. Reminds me of Anatoly Karlin at Sublime Oblivion and his idea of ecotechnic dictatorship. My own theory is this.-
The Voltairean/Liberal principles which have based our freedom on have been corrupted and abused by those opposed to freedom. We can live in a world with what we see as 'freedom' and the human race may do irreversible damage to the earth, or we can be more pragmatic.- What do we define as freedom? liberty, equality, Democracy etc. Surely the greatest freedom is our continued existence. We may well be okay in our full lifetime and not have to worry about climate change, but our children and grandchildren, do they not deserve the right to freedom of existence.
Also, our view of 'freedom' is exploited by those opposed to freedom.
I personally consider myself to be a meritocratic elitist- as long as the mechanisms are in place for people to rise to postions of power and influence, then it is perfectly acceptable for their to be elites.
(I dislike Libertarianism though, full of wealthy men who think they are inherently better than everyone else. It is pseudo meritocratic)

Okay, I am going on a bit. Reminds me of an excellent documentary series by British filmaker Adam Curtis- The Trap. It is on google vidoes, a very good. Also focuses on Russia a bit, specifically about the chaos in the 1990s.

-----------
Architecture and urban planning in Britain. My idea of small tightly dense urban centres connected by high speed railway. Because they are densely packed as opposed to sprawling suburbia, this allows for more space for green land, but it is shared between everybody. My take on the current situation in Britain is that Anglo Saxon individualism means we divide the land into silly little plots, because everyone wants to live in a semi detached and land to call 'their own'*. This means endless suburbia, everyone has a tiny patch of greenery, but little or no actual open land.
Obviously I have no skill or training in this are, but architecture and the built environment has always fascinated me. I suppose I am thinking of the spoke and hub model, where the hub, in this case a central city, is joined by lots of spokes, the densly packed commuter towns. In between is plenty of green open space.
This is all from a Jonathan Meades article. Jonathan Meades is an architecture critic with a massive ego, but very descriptive and evocative with his words. He came to the island where I live. (a must see)

*How much land does a man need? 6 foot by 4 foot. (An excellent Tolstoy short moral story)

---------
Happy Pascha/Easter (eastern and western, to all Christian followers)

-Reading, I have read geneticist Bryan Sykes' 'Blood of the Isles', Interesting and about genetics and DNA of Britain. Turns out that we are mostly the same, our DNA is mostly the same as it was in the neolithic period 8000 years ago. SOme foreign influence, Iberians, Mediterraneans Romans, Viking, Normans. As far away from the Mediterranean as movement over water was actually much faster than travelling over land.
Just finishing off Anne Applebaum's Gulag history. Interesting and I have already read Solzhenitsyn so it is a familiar topic to me.
Still reading Grossman, life and fate 'Гроссман, жижнь и судьба'. Very long and with everything else I am doing, not much spare time to read it. But I will persist.

-Practicing 'русский язык на SKYPE'. Using SKYPE and talking to friends helps me study Russian. 'вечная память', eternal memory, to the victims of the Moscow bomb blast. Other than that, hope to go back to Russia some time this year.

From now on I will include a weekend miscellany, even if only to update regularly. Posting during the week, hopefully I will do more.

miscellany.

2010-03-27T03:02:00.000Z

In what direction am I wishing to take this blog? Truth is I am not 100% sure.

My interests are, in no particular order....
-Geopolitcs and economics, demographics, social history and culture of Russia and Eastern Europe. Especially the false perceptions frequently peddled in the west. Also the Slavic languages, I think my (admittedly mediocre) knowledge of Russian is a good springboard for other.

-The often lying nature of the western media on general, if not the hypocritical nature and double standards. After reading Medialens excellent book, I see that even supposedly trusted organs like the BBC have serious problems. Against lobbying and astroturfing.

-Culture in general. Literature, classical music, history. Hope to include a culture/book review and discussion subset, not quite sure how to do it on blogger. In my spare time I would love to learn to play an instrument and to paint.

-Science, administration and management, planning for the future. Global situations, economic, political. Environmentalism and global warming. All this is something I do not know so much about, but keep my ear close to the happenings in this field. I believe in climate change but I am against agitprop like this, the consequence of letting brainless oxford humanities grads take the reigns. Similarly I hate the whole greener than thou parsimoniuosness.

-Britain centric topics. We have many domestic issues, the state, eroding of intellectual culture, the social stratification and re-emergence of privilege over meritocracy. Our society is a race to the bottom and crass vulgarity rules our TV screens and printed media. Too many quangos and cosy organisations getting government funding for questionable ideals. Politically I do not fit into and left/right axis as I have aspects of both. If anything I am like a European Christian democrat, willing to pay higher tax for public services and social equality, but with a firm belief in individual conscience and responsibility.

-Europe. I do not like the British anti European sentiment, often baseless and whipped up by people interested in keeping the EU weak, namely Rupert Murdoch. I vaguely consider myself a EU federalist, and believe a stronger Europe is the best for the world. How I have fitted this into my Russophile aspect I have not decided, as obviously Russia has no intention of joining the EU. However there are historical prescients, like the Germano-Russo alliance from Peter the Great onwards, in which German specialists occupied positions in Russia. This is now somewhat replicated with the present day Russian/German friendly relations.

-My own forays into self education. Despite what Simon Jenkins says, I am interested in the STEM's, Science, technology, Engineering and Mathematics. I am in the process of studying at the Open University, and although it takes a long time, the great thing is that you can pick and choose various modules. I am still interested in arts and culture of course, but that is sometihng I have always done in my spare time for pleasure. The tecnhical/vocational aspect of STEM subjects is something I lack knowledge in . (Also, I think it should be STEMS, the extra S is for statistics.)

-Related to this, computer software skills. Website design, video editing. I am currently half heartedly embarking on a youtube video project, and did the best I could with windows movie maker and a few subtitles, but I want to do better. To reach to a wider audience.

-Vocational skills in general. Just because I am interested in art, literature, history and geopolitics, that does not mean I should neglect the practical side of things like plumbing or bricklaying. This is something that I will be in doing more in real life than on here.

-Also, philosophy. The definition of ourselves, our existence etc (ok I'll think more about this later). Really, it is more about meaning we get in our lives, and also the over prevalence and increasing quackery of what is termed as 'mental illness', especially focusing the pharmaceutical industry and the ever increasing mediaclisation of thoughts and expressions. The mass consumpiton and gratification of today's consumer society is darker than any Nihilism Dostoevsky feared, I think. Political philosophy too, hopefully.

-And of course, writing blog posts. Hope to be informative and discussion provoking as possible. I would like to write for something like Cif one day. I am particularly interested in Aldous Huxley's fear that we would be a nation of idiots, of our own choosing- no one would want to ban books because no one would want to read them.

Wise men.

2010-03-15T04:56:00.000Z

The case for a 'council of wise elders' as a replacement to the Lords.

After reading a Polly Toynbee article (writing in her capacity as President of the British Humanist Association) the issue of the Bishops in the Lords comes up. This is a reasonable debate to make, and the issue of abolishing the Lords often polarizing views. Cifs 'poster of the year' thinks it is fine, declaring it to be 'harmless'. Also of interest was an editorial in the Guardian, 'Science has to speak up' about the need to increase investment and public interest in Science. So in a somewhat different angle from Toynbee I propose having a similar system to the Lords but with a somewhat more egalitarian element. That is, to have an unelected (or selectively elected) council of 'wise men' in positions of power who are able to act in the national interest but do not have the charisma to win an election.

I personally can see some advantages of the Lords, it allows some great minds to be free of the political posturing of requiring an electorate. Witness great minds like Lord Longford, an old Etonian and Oxford PPE graduate, yet was a socialist and (old) Labour member and who fought tirelessly for prison reform for amongst others Myra Hindley, his strong Catholic beliefs and influence acknowledging the human capacity for repentance.

However, the issue still remains that the House of Lords is an undemocratic and elitist organisation. Still somewhat hereditary, (although not as much following reforms of 1999), and still with the connotations of country piles and landed gentry. Or just as bad the peers filled in to so they can get roles in the government, Lord Mandelson and Lord Alan Sugar being an example.

My proposal is this- a 'council of wise elders'. This attempts to combine the best aspects of the Lords, the intellectual traditions and mouthpiece, and stability, but also combat the worst aspect, it's undemocratic nature. More meritocratic, less hereditary and it allows intellectuals a voice in politics which they would otherwise be denied.

I have realised the problem. Politics is like a preening peacock, the posturing sycophants, and skilled PR types get in, those able to make good soundbites. Real clever and intellectual people don't stand a chance because they don't appeal to what the public want. This is also a crossover from what I have been saying about the looming (if not already here) Huxleyan dystopia. I am sure many intellectually minded people are seeing the farce that politics has become, where the lowest common denominator and a soundbite and gimmick culture rule, supported by an often compliant media establishment, with their own interests to pursue.

Anyway, for my proposal, some existing Lords would already fall into the category of 'wise elders', those along the late Lord Longford's lines, but there would be no heredity element or requirement or a vast estate needed. It would be aimed at anyone with high intelligence in a professional field, molecular biologists, neurosurgeons, Oxford Dons etc. As I said before these people are going to struggle to get elected.
At first I did not elaborate on how these 'wise elders' would be chosen. If they were simply chosen by the governemnt of the day, then that would be a problem as conservative governments would tend to choose wise elders of a similar persuasion, so would a (however unlikely) left wing government. But eventually I came to a conclusion on how to elect them.
There are Royal Colleges for professional disciplines. The members of each college would simply vote for a member or two who would be elected to the council. The Royal College of Surgeons would elect say, 3 or 4 people to go to the wise council, another Royal College would elect another set. Also other institutions like universities electing academics and so forth., Engineering, science, industry, all the leading lights could be elected from within to represent their profession's interests (and the countries interests) at the wise council. This allows them to say they have been 'elected' and gives them a mandate of some sort, makes them more egalitarian.
There is also the question of how far reaching this could be. I was thinking really of only about 100 wise elders, but it could feasibly be many more. One poster seemed keen on extending it, saying there could be for example a 'king of the plumbers' meaning every trade, skill and profession would be represented at the council

I have the brevity of vision to realise that the political process (and the UK in general) has always had a tradition of anti intellectualism. I see no problem in having a small minority elected by a small minority, that is in the national interest of having the intellectuals having a heavier voice as a counter to the Nihilistic apathy and base idiocy that seems to surround the political process and our culture generally. A small minority elected by a small minority is better than a small minority elected by no-one.

The Soul and Barbed wire.

2010-03-06T18:40:00.000Z

Preamble:This article is not concerned with the exact details of Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, why Venables has been returned to prison or their lives on the outside. What I am addressing is the attitudes of the media and the 'man on the street' in this case. What I see is merely a continuation of our protestant/puritan based attitudes to society, which even though many have left religion behind, are still maintained in our culture.
---------------------------------------------
Jon Venables is back behind bars,- 'back where he belongs' cry the ranting voices. Again we witness this county's irrational anger and hatred, we saw it a month ago with the sentencing of the Edlington boys. Where does this come from?

It started with an editorial in the Guardian. I posted a lengthy response about what I think this is the best hypothetical course of action. In short----
Jon Venables and Thompson can walk down a street under their real names, and no one will bat an eyelid and demand revenge. This requires three things.
1)That the killers themselves have repented and are conscious of the crime they have committed.
2)The public and society at large can accept that people are capable of spiritual resurrection and are willing to forgive them.
3)There is no media campaign hounding them, no headlines of 'pure evil' etc.

But this is not the case. Why? Because of our Protestant and Puritanical based culture (even if the majority of people don't practice a religion). Compare and contrast that with the traditions of grace and forgiveness found in Catholic and Orthodox Christian influenced countries - and individuals, in my case, Fyodor Dostoevsky for the Orthodox and Anthony Burgess for the Catholics.

Following conversation with an Orthodox Christian blogger (Gregor) and my own readings of the great man's works, this is what I make of the Dostoevskian worldview.
How would Dostoevsky interpret this?
Look at Raskolnikov in Crime an Punishment, for example. His conscience drives him to confess his crime and seek his redemption, which can only come through suffering and accepting one's guilt. Dostoevsky's works descend into the pits of despair, sometimes lifting out, many other times not. I don't necessary share Dostoevsky's view that the abandonment of God only leads to madness and despair(--in fact, I would say an embrace of God in the evangelical protestant sense of being 'born again' does lead to madness), but I respect his understanding of the human psyche and portrayal of mental illness. Throughout his novels Dostoevsky struggles as to why people do bad things, why do people hurt children and the like. Like in the Karamazov Brothers, Ivan in the preliminary to his great philosophical essay, 'The Grand Inquisitor' talks about children who were killed by a general who set his dogs on them. This also reflects his own struggle with his beliefs. Many of these little insertions are actually based on real contemporary events that were reported in the newspapers at that time.

Dostoevsky however also rejects the socialist doctrine of 'crimes being ascribed to the influence of the environment'. In my favourite part of Crime and Punishment where Raskolnikov discusses his theory of great men, Razumihin says 'A man of forty violates a girl of 10. Was it his environment that drove him to it?' As an Orthodox christian, he would of course advocate a degree of self consciousness and a rejection of socialist doctrinal excuses of crime being a 'protest against the social conditions'. He would hope that one's own conscience is enough to stop most people. What of those with no conscience though? Surely then that would be indicative of mental illness?

Also worth noting is Alexander Solzhenitsyn (of eternal memory), who had the moral tenacity to forgive those who oppressed him, and the title of this piece comes from a chapter in the Gulag archipelago. Many millions were just caught up in the Soviet system and just by a whim happened to be a prison guard rather than a prison. He realised this and so that absolved them of their guilt Solzhenitsyn served in the red army, it is entirely possible that had he not been arrested, fought on to the end of the war, after war's end he could have been posted to run a gulag camp.

How would Anthony Burgess interpret this?
Following mostly from his novel A Clockwork Orange. When young Alex is sent to prison, among other things he talk with the catholic priest. They talk about choice. He has a choice between enforced goodness (The Ludovico technique), as opposed to coming to terms and repenting for the evil he has committed. Burgess was raised a Catholic, whether or not he practiced I don't know, but that particular sense of free will and man's capacity for redemption seems to be a constant in Catholic and Orthodox based cultures. This concept is even prevalent in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. They can easily kill Gollum, but choose to let him go. Why, because he may have a purpose. And of course, he does. And of course he is irredeemable- but if he was redeemable then the ring would not be destroyed. The ring itself is also an analogy, of what exactly, I cannot say.

How does our society currently interpret this?
Amanda Platell in the Daily Mail says- “Their rights to rehabilitation took precedence over James Bulger's parents' right to see his killers punished”
This is a completely fallacious argument as no one has the right to see someone else punished. Prison is not intended to punish. Prison is intended to provide justice and act as a deterrent to would be criminals. The conditions in a prison structure will be punishing, but they are not designed to punish.

'Child Killer'-is a phrase which is bandied around a lot when referring to Venables and Thompson. They were children themselves, can no one see this is a double tragedy, that innocent children have taken another innocents life, but also shattered their own innocence. Some are even claiming for them to be hanged. Do they not realise that if the state had done that just after they had been found guilty then the state too would be a 'child killer'.

Repulsive organs like the Sun seem to be just wishing that some of the hardcore 'lags' will take revenge on the accused, with salivating hints about heavy prisoners already knowing Venables identity Despite the Sun's supposed commitment to law and order it will always praise another prisoner who attacks a controversial prisoner, which shows their gutter scraping reputation. It's tough stance on crime does not extend to 'patriotic 'criminals ready to kill a rapist, murderer or paedophile for queen and country. Also the Sun is swarming all over the campaign, remember they have a bad reputation in Liverpool following the Hillsborough disaster.

The question of free will also has to be fitted into the constraints of mental illness. Dostoevsky wrote a lot about this and Nietzsche called him 'The only psychologist from whom I have something to learn'. What then if these children suffer severe mental illness. To what extent would that mitigate them. Almost all of Dostoevsky's novels and important characters feature mental illness to some extent.

Unfortunately the worst aspects of puritanical protestantism are still in place, no matter how secular we are. An editorial from the Sun would not be out of place in Oliver Cromwell's day, similarly Daily Mail tax bores shocked that 'taxpayers' money' is spent on anything remotely interesting is like Cromwell banning Christmas celebrations. Interesting also that the two 'Anglo Saxon' economies, Britain and America, both seem to be infested with the free market ideas, the solipsism, belief that greed is good, moral judgment and divisions into good and evil.

And of course, even many actual protestant denominations in this country are not into the hell and brimstone. I don't want to categories all those under the broad church of 'protestantism', rather I am emphaisisng those more 'puritanical'. The Archbishop of Cantebury for example, is a Dostoevsky fan, so much so that he has written a book about it. I am sure that he would find within his soul the redemption and resurrection of a young person is possible. Or periodically when there is a murder trial and the victims family stand outside the courthouse after sentencing and say that they forgive the perpetrator. These people are from a variety of faiths, non christian as well, and even of no faith. However the puritanical streak has carried on, no where less than in Fleet Street, where the Littlejohns, John Gaunts and Melanie Philips of the world subscribe fully to this neo puritan ideology. And of course they are a mirror onto society, they shape the social attitudes and norms, so the people are then hooked on the retribution agenda.

I don't even know why I focused so much attention on the gutter press. My main thesis is of course a Dosteovskian/ Burgess angle on free will and human nature and how they are related to the Orthodox/Catholic cultural attitude as opposed to the Protestant/Puritan cultural attitude.

Response to a Cif article on young people, voter apathy.

2010-03-04T14:31:00.000Z

(context: A response to a Guardian article 'Don't blame us for political apathy', written by Sian Anderson, 'a 19-year-old freelance journalist, PR and radio host from south east London'. In this article she talks about why she would probably never vote and comes out with generic cliches about 'da yoof', sating such things as-- 'Personally, the thought of walking into a polling station, tattooed up to my neck, piercings all over my face and wearing my comfortable-yet-dreaded-by-the-government "hoody" to be judged and looked down upon is cringeworthy.'
This article provoked a storm of responses, many negative and angry. I too was impassioned to respond.)
Here is my response.............

No, we are not all apathetic. Blame yourselves (and ourselves) for apathy, but I refuse to follow such a path.

Sian Anderson believes that young people are apathetic. Yes, that is largely correct, although that is the result of our fragmented political system, it's direct lack of accountability, but also 'our' generation's own inaction and nihilistic pursuit of pleasure..

Technology has not only set us free, it has also enslaved us. I can only conclude from reading her article, and in the wider aspect of conversing with many young people that 'our' generation is apathetic, but not universally. Previous generations rightly feared dictatorship, witnessing the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century. We, with our technological innovations, trans-border communications cannot understand the spirit of that age. We think that democracy will die with fascist jackboots marching on seats of power. Democracy dies as we watch generic celebrity programme X and don't give a toss. Who cares about the world, when petty amusements can appropriate all life?

I myself try to comprehend as much of human nature and humanity as possible. I do not live in a bubble (Ok I still live at home with my mother, but I digress.) surrounded only by those with similar interests and pursuits sharing the cultural zeitgest. I often speak with young and old people of a variety of different backgrounds from travelling around, social settings etc, what I see leaves me concerned, shocked and confused. There is the apocryphal parable about a questionnaire asking young people if people if they are 'important', done at different decades, the 60s, 80s and 00s. In the 1960s almost no young person said they are important, because frankly, they are not. Doctors, lawyers, nurses and plumbers are important, teenagers and university undergraduates are not. In the 80s and by the 2000s, many more young people falsely labelled themselves 'important'. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but because you put a few photos on a facebook page that does not makes you the centre of the universe. To me solipsism is nauseating but sadly becoming more and more prevalent in society.

There are many contemporary issues which are too important to be ignored, climate change, government accountability, domestic and foreign policies. For me the most important is electoral reform, because it is the lynchpin from which all other government policies will spring from. When the electorate can actually choose who they want in office, those in office will be more likely to serve their needs, unlike the current system. Giving up and disengaging from the political system will not get us anywhere.

Ms Anderson's article and the vast minutiae of anecdotal and personal evidence I have gathered observing and being with many of my peers has led me to one conclusion- that we are on the verge of a Huxleyan dystopia, at the most critical juncture in our recent history. In his book, 'Amusing Ourselves to Death' the author Neil Postman says “What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism.” There is an excellent cartoon of this doing the rounds on the web comparing the differences between Orwellian and Huxleyan dystopias. George Orwell was a mirror on the 20th century, Huxley was a prophet of the 21st century.

I proudly remember the first time I went out to vote, a month after my eighteenth birthday, only for a local council election, stopping by the polling booth on the way to six form college. I value education, enlightenment and an intellectual spirit. There needs to be a unity of purpose, a cultural 'consillience' to use the scientific term (invented by 19th century Oxford polymath and Anglican priest William Whewell who also was the first to use the word 'scientist') meaning jumping together, meant for the interdisciplinary of arts and sciences . We need a social and political consillience uniting those of diverse and disparate backgrounds into the fabric of engaged citizens in a Democracy.

Video project is up

2010-02-28T03:13:00.000Z

I have sort of lacklustrily embarked on this video project, hopefully to pick up progress soon. OK, it's not great, the best I can do with Windows Movie Maker.

So after a bit of dithering, brushing up my computer skills, and nearly exploding as movie maker often crashed deleting my savings, my, ahem, masterpiece is unleashed to 'teh internets'.

The idea, to challenge racist stereotypes of Russia.
There is an overreacted perception of Russia as racist in the west, and while it is often over exaggerated to beat Russia with a stick. However, there is no denying that racism is very prevalent in Russian society, and this is having a denigrating effect on Russia itself. If Russia wants to survive the 21st century, it needs to have social unity.

It will be a relatively simple affair, a piece of classical Russian music with images from all the ethicities, races, cultures and religions within the Russian landmass. There will be text subttitles which will carry the message, imploring unity and respect for each other and a rejection of extreme nationalism and racism.

After I have tackled racism, I hope to make more videos about such things as -imploring Russians to have larger families,
-rejecting alcoholism and drug addiction,
-rejecting prostitution and becoming mail order brides
-working towards educational attainment rather than vulgar western consumer nihilism including conspicuous consumption and a rejection of the oligarchic excess.

I know I will not achieve a lot, but small things like this helps. I have not yet ransated them into Russian, so the reach is limited at the moment, but when so I will pu thtem onto a Russian video site like rutube to acheive a wider target audience. My Russian translating skills are pretty poor and computer translations have many grammar problems, so if anyone wants to translate the text let me know.

The music is by Shostakovich.

'The New Cold War'-- My opinion

2010-02-23T16:49:00.000Z

I finally got around to reading Edward Lucas's thesis, which is very in depth, and of course charts various human rights abuse, psychiatric abuses and questions of Putin's ascendancy- re the 1999 apartment bombing and the possible conspiracy. And the laws, court system, attitudes to history etc. Lucas is a writer for The Economist, as such the economical/industrial angle is covered in depth as well. Namely Gas, and of course all the disputes associated with it, and Europe's dependency, with some 100% dependent on Russian gas, and many more with Russia the majority supplier. And new pipelines are being built like the NORD Stream, and elsewhere Gazprom and Gazprom subsidiaries are buying up infrastructure networks and foreign gas companies.

I agree with many things that are indisputable facts, the domestic situation, human rights abuses, lack of openness, journalists in danger, lack of trickle down of the wealth, but on the indisputable facts, but on his central thesis of a resurgent cold war, I disagree. Similarly, he often talks of 'them' and 'us', this is to create a sense of alarm. His chapter on the Ossetian war continues the proven false theory that Russia attacked first, that tanks were going through the Roki tunnel and Georgia acted in defence. Yes, there was low intensity conflicts leading up to the outbreak of hostilities, sniper exchanges etc, but it was Georgia who instigated the conflict by resorting to BM21 Grad missiles. That was a serious ratcheting up of hostilities. His explanation for this 'ill judged'. The book is littered with weasel words like this. Saakashvili is of course only 'hot headed'

Another thing I disagree with is his 'orientalism'(false and romanticised) viewpoint, that Putin is the new Tsar. This is trying to show the unbroken lineage with dictators of the past, 'same old, same new'. He even says Putinism is 'red, brown and white' Red for communism, brown for fascism and white for Tsarism, therby trying to associate the three most oppressive regimes on the Eurasian landmass in the 20th century with today's Russia. And where would he be without trying to pose a warning thretat

I also disagree with his sanctified view of Anglo/American liberal Democracy. In Brtiain, with our undemocratic electoral system and creeping authoritarianism, where we have two (or three) parites who are almost exactly the same.. In America, with its nominaly free elecotral system, yet is severly hampered by the demands of big business, the corporate media and many lobby groups.
It is true however that we have free speech (at least most of the time), which while Russia nominally has, publishing it can be sometimes difficult. Yet, I talk to Russian people online, they can talk about anything (although of course web users are not representative of the general population).

Also, that Europe needs to rely on America, that they do so, yet still hate Americans. But Europe may well be to express itself in the future. The European union is here to stay, already there are joint EU military exercises and weapons coperation like the Eurofigher or the civilian airbus A380. The division of course of old and new Europe is there, but he exaggerates the threat countries like Poland and the Baltics have from Russia. What made me laugh out loud was his theoretical ideas that Kazakstan should become a 'euro-altlantic country' - meaning in NATO and the European union. HE just seems to be incensed that countries like Germany are taking their own policy. Or the false analogy with Nazis again, that actions of the bigger European countries are putting the little ones in danger of Russia. Lucas is after all a Brit, I guess traditionally Euroskeptic, pro Atlantic. But Europe is mature enough to make her own policies,

Also, heaping praise on people like Garry Kasparov, yet he is someone who associates himself with people like Eduard Limonov of the National Bolshevik party. The 'dissidents' who are western funded, by questionable organisations with questionable intentions. People like Kasparov who supported the chaos of the 90s, or those like Berezovskiy who enjoyed profiteering and kingmaking during that time. And the funding of 'orange' movements. The book was obviously written before the recent Ukrainian elections, but at the time he wrote it, Yushkenko had hardly any support anyway.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1206632220540390824#
Here he speaks to an American institute. Interesting to watch. Although he resorts to Godwin's law.-- 'Imagine if the Nazis survived the war' then their replacing history in analogous to the USSR (Hitler died naturally in 1953 to be replaced by a Nazi type of Khrushchev). Seriously. Also, in the book he makes Nazi analogies. The present Germany-Russia cooperation (which in my view is the best option for Russia, Germany and Europe in general) is described as an 'energy version of the Molotov Ribbentrop pact'. This is really telling of his opinions.

So, overall 5 out of 10. 5 for factualism, in depth research and covering a wide base, but no more as I reject his thesis and the overuse of weasel words, supposedly neo Tsarist nature of Russia, and Nazi analogies. This creates a drip drip effect, which clearly shows the authors opinions

Media spin in the Afghanistan surge.--Operation Moshtarak.

2010-02-16T20:37:00.001Z

In recent days, the news has been full of a 'big offensive' in Afghanistan, this operation Moshtarak, (meaning 'together' in Arabic). It even has a Wikipedia page which, as it is an ongoing battle, is being constantly updated.

This is the 'long awaited surge' and news reporting is going over the top in a way I have not seen in the Afghanistan conflict. It was obvious that this action was planned months in advance, and journalists are clearly embedded and receiving intelligence briefings from the military establishment.

Medialens, is an excellent website that monitors the British media. Already someone has written an email to the BBC complaining about their coverage of the operation:

Introducing a segment on the current US-led 'surge' in Helmand province on The World Tonight last night you stated "Operation Moshtarak in southern Afghanistan has two aims. The first is to drive out the Taliban, the second is to bring good governance to the region." (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qtl3).

Shouldn't you have said "Operation Moshtarak in southern Afghanistan has two STATED aims" or "NATO SAY Operation Moshtarak in southern Afghanistan has two aims"?

I ask because I am aware the Soviet Union's publicly stated strategy for their invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s was "to prevent the establishment of... a terrorist regime and to protect the Afghan people from genocide", and also to provide "aid in stabilising the situation and the repulsion of possible external aggression"
(http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/071120_invasion_a_comparison.php).

I presume you wouldn't have taken the Soviet Union's publicly stated reasons for invading and occupying Afghanistan at face value, so why have you done so with the US Government?

I look forward to your reply.
Kind regards
Ian Sinclair

Good on him for pointing that out. (The link he also gives is good and is worth a blog post in itself-INVASION - A COMPARISON OF SOVIET AND WESTERN MEDIA PERFORMANCE) This could have all been avoided if the media had used that one word, stated. This then gives a sense of detachment from the statement maker. The analogy with the Soviets was true, their stated goal was to support the Afghan regime, what their actual goal was is still debated.

Also, the Guardian has finally got round to questioning it, after giving blanket coverage of the operation. It's a pretty good article for a change, although the 'UK's leading Liberal voice' was a bit slow off the mark, for days it gave blanket coverage to what were almost certainly NATO/MOD press releases.

This is very much a media war, that aspect was also planned in advance. I refer back to the Wikipedia page. I have just seen that it was actually created on the 4th February, and the offensive did not begin till the 13th.(here is the page history) This is from a New York Times article of 3rd February. Considering the New York Times has quite a reputation for questionable journalism (see the Ossetia war), it is still worth reading...

The deliberate publicizing of the offensive — with news conferences, press releases and public pronouncements — is relatively unusual for the military.
...
The imminent offensive was first announced in a press release from the Pentagon on Monday, and, unusually, the name of the campaign was disclosed: Operation Moshtarak, which means Joint Operation in Dari.

So, essentially this operation seems to be one giant media exercise, which the media have bitten hook line and sinker. Which raises questions about the independance of our media, and their complicity in upholding establishment attitudes, or one organisations stated goals and passing them off as universal truth, ie NATO's stated goals are to spread freedom and Democracy, and their actual goals include opther factors, such as having a foothold in central Asia, oil issues, a military presence near Iran etc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would also like to take this opportunity to shamelessly plug Medialens' excellent book, 'Newspeak in the 21st century'. It is an excellent book, and though it really only focuses on the British media, and even then on the supposedly 'Liberal media'like the BBC, channel 4, the Guardian and the independent it is very in depth and raises serious questions about journalistic integrity. There is a lot of censorship in the Western media that we do not realise. The book is similar to a Chomskyite and John Pilgerite worldview, as these two have recommended for it on the cover, but it is still good reading, whatever one's political persuasions.

Interesting fact, also. The area they are fighting in, Helmand province, there can be seen many irrigation ditches etc where 'our boys' are fighting. These were actually built in the 1950s by an American company for Afghanistan. It was an idea for economic recovery, similar to the American Tennessee Valley authority. The excellent documentary maker Adam Curtis has written in detail about this. It is a cracking read complete with photos and videos from the time. That same Helmand province where now British and American soldiers are fighting, in the 1950s, there were being built American style suburbs and housing schemes.

Privatisation and Russia's mortality rate.

2010-02-14T20:15:00.000Z

After reading the Latynina article in the Moscow Times, I stumbled across this, an article in the Moscow times, entitled 'Privatization didn't kill'.

The article seems to be a refute of a publication in The Lancet of an article by Oxford sociologist David Stuckler. The focus, on the deaths caused by mass privatization and gangster capitalism in Russia during the 90s.

The Moscow times article is drawing emphasis on a rebuttal to Stuckler's claim, which shows their roots as nothing more than a business organ catering for a very narrow view on Russia. It is writtten by someone called Konstantin Sonin, who is a 'a visiting professor at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University, is a professor at the New Economic School in Moscow and a columnist for Vedomosti.' His article ends..

It is interesting to ask: Which of those publications will cover the rebuttal to those findings published this January in The Lancet? Scott Gehlbach, professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin, and John S. Earle, a senior economist at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Michigan and one of the world’s leading specialists in analyzing data from businesses in transitional economies, tried to duplicate Stuckler’s findings, this time using more accurate statistical methods and more “individualized” data. Their piece, which underwent even stricter review prior to publication than the original article by Stuckler, states that privatization did not exert any significant influence on the increase of mortality in Russian men.

Obviously I do not have these works, but the fact that one is a proffessor of political science, one is a senior economist and they are claiming that privatisation did not have any effect on the mortality rate is absurd. Millions of unnecessary deaths were caused.

I decided to explore this topic further. Among other things, I found out a certain Kim Zigfeld is on hand to offer a rebuttal. Kim Zigfeld is the person that runs the notorious Russia hating site La Russophobe (typical headline 'Russian barbarians slaughter their women'). Also worth noting is Zigfeld's link with Pajamas media, an American right wing website home to the usual ranters, conspiracy nuts etc. You can judge pajamas media by the fact that they sent 'Joe the Plumber' as a 'war correspondant' to report on the atrocity in Gaza in 2008-2009, and he came out a clear supporter of Israel.
She says,

During the Putin years, according to the Kremlin’s own data, Russia has suffered a net loss of 7 million children. Last year, according to the Kremlin’s own data, 200,000 more people died than were born. Russia’s rate of tuberculosis infection is ten times higher than that of the U.S. and its fatality rate from the disease is one hundred times higher. Vast swaths of the country teeter on the brink of total demographic collapse.

Where are the conclusions from “scientists” like Mr. Stuckler that rapid transition to KGB rule under Putin is killing Russia’s citizens? Where are the cries from their ranks that we must turn back the clock on de-democratization under Putin and his KGB cronies?

So, she admits the Putin years were bad (to beat present day Russia with). But the Yelstin years were infinitely worse. So if all those people died during the Putin era, how many during the Yeltsin era? Also featured in her article is our aforementioned friend Sonin.

I also found the New York Times article, which reports the paper's findings, saying amongst other things...

From 1991 to 1994, life expectancy in Russia was reduced by five years. But life expectancy in Croatia and Poland improved in the same period. By last year, the life expectancy of Russian men was less than 60 years, compared with 67 years in 1985.

The male life expectancy has fallen by over 10 years, the 5 is for men and women. The article was more focused towards the men. So we are looking here at at millions, who knows how many. The fact that even such a conservative article is subject to such scrutiny shoes how hard it is to persuade the free marketers and 'reformers' that they have the blood of millions. And organs like the Moscow Times will continue to give oxygen to people like Sonin because it suits their business agenda.

The Lancet is a respected medical journal that publishes many articles a year. Responses and replies usually come from the medical and demographic community. But why has this report provoked a much larger response? Because of ideology. The free marketers and 'reformists' cannot bear any opposition to their worldview. Because of ideology people with no academic background need to defend their 'project', not through evidence, but through the heartstrings. Frankly I would trust the Lancet more than any political commentator or economist.

In memorial to all those who died as part of a political/economic and social experiment (first communism then gangster capitalism). How many millions, we will never know. Peace.

The original article by Stuckler is here, but it costs $31.50 to download it.

Pre-mod on cif

2010-02-13T14:56:00.000Z

(EDIT- I appear to have been taken out of pre mod.-- After 2 hours. But the post stays up)

Why?
Pointing out my opinions

In reiteration of my deleted comment yesterday at 4.16pm.

If the statement made by Jenny Tong is true, then that would qualify as a case of antisemitism.

However, I find you personally repulsive. You were the editor in chief of the Israeli Airforce magazine, and consequentially you do not deserve a platform on this site. Blowing up Gazan civilians with F16s will reduce them to a bloody pulp, and therefore unsuitable for organ harvesting, but your air force have still blown them to a pulp. That is as much a war crime than stealing organs (whether Israel did or didn't)

This may well be defined as 'personal abuse', or 'ad homionem' attacks. So be it. And just to know I am an equal opportunities 'personal abuser' I have also raised questions about the personal nature of George Galloway or Islamists like Moazzam Begg on cif.

On comment is free, one of the grounds for deletion is 'personal abuse'. Resorting to ad hominem attacks, name calling, swearing etc, should be expected to be deleted.

However, there is a second category of 'personal abuse'. That is making a comment about the nature of the commentator.
There are several people, who if they are writing on absolutely any subject, the message is less important than the messenger. People like....

George Galloway (never sits in Parliament and never addresses his constituents. Hamas/Hezbollah links)
Moazzam Begg Islamic fundamentalist who exploits his victim status (he was sent to Guantanmo which was bad, but that does not absolve him of his questionable personal nature)
Uri Dromer-- Ties with the Israel Air Force means he is unable to provide an unbiased article whenever he writes

Also, worth mentioning is Alan Dershowitz. He worte an article this week, full of deletions. Talking about British libel laws. I don't deny that his attitude to Gaza has nothing to do with libel laws, but I remembered his article 'The criminal cynicism of Hamas'. So I said that for some articles, the nature of the messenger is just as important as the message.

Why Comment is free continuyes in the employment of these people I do not know. However I also think it is fair game to talk about their personal lives. And I cannot be accused of anti semitism because two of the above are Islamic Fundamentalist sympathisers, the other two staunch defenders of indefendable aspects of Israel.

Yulia Latynina, Luke Harding, Timothy Garton Ash, the NBP and La Russophobe

2010-02-11T14:19:00.000Z

Letting Poor People Vote Is Dangerous

So sayeth Russia's greatest 'liberal' opposition journalist. How dare those febrile masses choose someone of their own volition.

As wikipedia says, 'On December 8, 2008 she was awarded the Freedom Defenders Award by the United States Department of State'
(the power of Wikipedia is such that someone has edited her Wikipedia page to say 'In a February 2010 article, Latiynina advocated that only rich people should be allowed to vote as poor people made bad choices when they voted'. This is 100% true. Whether this remains on the site remains to be seen)

Anyway, her article on the 10th of February, the aforementioned 'letting poor people vote' is dangerous' is a load of utter bollocks, and shows that underneath the Russian 'liberals' there is this authoritarian bent, or a desire to return to the chaos of the 90s.

I quote liberally from her article:

Viktor Yanukovych’s victory in Sunday’s presidential election — not unlike the victories of former Chilean President Salvador Allende, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Adolf Hitler — once again raises doubt about the basic premise of democracy: that the people are capable of choosing their own leader. Unfortunately, only wealthy people are truly capable of electing their leaders in a responsible manner. Poor people elect politicians like Yanukovych or Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Stop right there. Comparing the election of Yanukovich to Hitler, and even comparing Salvador Allende to Hitler. Pinochet was better, eh Yuliochka? Note also the emphasis on 'poor people'. Oh those poor people. They have not received 'freedom defenders awards' by the United States State Department, an oxymoron considering her article is opposed to the 'masses' having freedom. They know nothing. No of course they can't be trusted with the vote.

When the Orange Revolution hit Ukraine five years ago, the people arose in a united wave and did not allow themselves to be deceived by the corrupt elite.

No they didn't. There are certainly questions arising about the corruptness of the pre Yushenko government, but the 'Orangeists' did not enjoy complete support. And much support was simply mobilised by young 'activists' with funding from American NGOs, Soros funds, and groups like the ironically named National Endowment for Democracy . Says wikipedia-- "According to the critics, during the 1990s, NED invested millions of dollars in Eastern Europe to support free trade and the shock therapy program". Yep, shock therapy, the economic 'reforms' that have killed millions of people, blighted lives, forced people to alcoholism, drug addiction, unemployment, homelessness and prostitution.

That elite had reached an agreement with the criminals and oligarchs of Donetsk to make a minor criminal, who could not string two sentences together, the successor to former Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma.

I do not deny that Yanukovich is pretty unsavoury, and their was certainly collusion between oligarchs and security services, but the same could be said of Yushenko. Only Yushenko's criminals, oligarchs and security service members were based in the USA. At least Yanukovich's gangs were based in the Donetsk area and were thus Ukranian, rather than say CIA agents acting in the interest of superpower on the other side of the world .

In between we do have some crtitiscism of Yushenko, but compared with how she opens and finished her rant, it does not seem to matter. How she can go from sanctifying Yushenko for his actions in 2004 to hating him is her decision. She also uses it as an opputunity to portray Tymoshenko as the fairy doll princess battling the evil corrupt Yushenko, when she herself is mired in corruption scandals. Eventually she says...

Ukraine’s recent election witnessed the convergence of democracy’s two greatest weaknesses — the tendency to fear strong individuals (Tymoshenko) and the tendency to vote for simple-minded people (Yanukovych).

Hold on, the 'Democrat' and 'opposition activist' in the eyes of the west talking about the weaknesses of Democracy. If Vladimir Putin said this the western media would be all over him.

She finishes:

Poor people are capable of feats of bravery and revolution. They can storm the Bastille, overthrow the tsar or stage an Orange Revolution. But impoverished people are incapable of making sober decisions and voting responsibly in a popular election

So, a stage managed revolution like the Orange revolution is comparable to .
It is as artificial as Che Guevara T shirts worn by young western students. Which brings me to another concept, the manufacturing of rebellion. The Rebel Sell is a book that deals with this counterculture being manufactured into the mainstream. I have not read the book, but I get the general hypothesis, as I see it everyday around me. People think they are being edgy and rebellious by being 'individuals' fighting against the 'mainstream', but they just end up like the rest. I have always realised that 'individualism' is essentially a capitalist construction, even if the devotees think they are rebelling against 'the system'. But anyway, I digress.

Where does this link in with western 'liberals' like Timothy Garton Ash or idiotic journalists like Luke Harding? Their tacit support of anyone 'anti' the current Russian govenrment, no matter what their background or circumstance.

Luke Harding, we all know, is a palgiarist.
His articles are of such low quality that he even uses the death of Leo Tolstoy 100 years ago to attack the present Russian government. I don't need to say anymore of him because he just writes a load of bollocks. He does some quirky 'interest' stories sometimes, which might just qualify him for a job as a writer for a travel guide like Lonely Planet, but as a serious journalist, this man is a disgrace. How the Guardian employed him, I don't know. Perhaps he has good Oxbridge links.

'TGA' has just written an article in the Guardian.... TGA is a western 'liberal democracy' evangelist, of the old kind who once justified the British empire as being on a 'civilising mission', a tactic that has been adopted by the American empire, who have 'taken up the white man's burden', as Kipling predicted. With his style of beard, it seems he is trying to emulate the great 19th century intellectuals and politicians, but falls far short.

Which brings us on to his article today in the Guardian.

Before I look at anything, look at the title ,'The sight of Ukraine's lumpen victor should stir the EU's own into action'. Does it not occur to him that any politician democratically elected anywhere is a 'lumpen victor'. This just shows his bias, and undertones of his disapproving of their democratic choice. Even in Britain some prime ministers have not even been elected on a majority. Due to our out of date election system, where seats in parliaments matter more than votes, there have been several times in the 20th century where one party got a higher total number of votes, but not the keys to number 10.

The whole article is littered with weasel words. The very first line calls it 'a gobsmacking reversal', which betrays TGA's claim to objectivity.

If anything, it confirms that Ukraine is becoming a serious democracy, rather than the Russian-type virtual democracy it was before the orange revolution. Unlike many so-called elections in authoritarian regimes, we did not know the result of this one in advance. Experienced international election monitors found it to be free and fair. Defeated princess Yulia Tymoshenko should not be disputing the result; she should be starting her campaign to win in 2015.

Again uses to attack Russia, real or virtual Democracy, it doesn't matter. Russia had a 'real Democracy' in the 90s, millions died. Again the analogy of Yulia Tymoshenko as a princess. And showing his evidnet bias and influence in wishing corrupt 'gas princess' Yulia gets another chance.
'We did not know the result of this one in advance'. Yes we did, the Ukrainian, Russian and western media were reporing for months that Yanukovich would win.

He essentially sees the EU as bringing as vast civilising mission, and adds the analogy of a race against time to fight Russian influence, ending with the phrase "This is boring, slow, unspectacular stuff, but then, that's what the EU is good at. A tortoise should do what a tortoise can. I'm told it sometimes even beats a Russian hare."

The comments themselves though generally stood up to TGA. My own comments were that I found the article bad, but that didn't mean that I necessarily like Yanukovich (a logical fallacy)
The first and most recommended comment says--

Poor old TGA
All his pet projects are being trashed.
All that money spent on puppets was wasted,eh?

which pretty much sums it up.
My own personal opinion is that the different political bitching and grant strategy, pawns on the chessboard is irrelevant. What needs to happen first is to improve the living conditions of the Ukrainian people: (as with the other post soviet nations)

Both of these 2 opposing types have nothing to offer the Ukrainian people. The most immediate problems to the Ukraine (and many to Russia as well) include HIV, corrupt officials, low birth rate prostitution, sex trafficking and drug addiction. Also provision of health, social care,pensions etc which are less even than Soviet levels of 20 years ago. Just returning to that point and then building them up again to western standards will require massive investment.

Ukriane does not need ideologies 'Orange' or old style Soviet. It needs action.
Nothing may come of this Yanukovich government, just like the Yushkenko who was only good at giving speeches to American NGOs and lobby groups.
Either way, the Ukrainian people suffer.

Now, regarding Latynina, Harding and TGA, and the western media and NGOS who often associated themselves with unsavoury elements.

There has always been the Russophobic element who have backed nutters. For example, Garry Kasparov is held up in the west on a shining pedestal, yet he has allied himself with the most repulsive political movement in Russia, the National Bolshevik Party. The national Bolshevik party led by Eduard Limonov, the 'dissident' who can be seen on youtube firing a sniper rifle into Sarajevo. These are the allies western liberals make as convenient allies, even though he is standing next to Radovan Karadzic, a war criminal awaiting trial in the Hague. The NBP are a binch of rabble rousers who have nothing to offer Russia, they are parasites and scum. It is well known that they deliberately provoke and attack the police in order for them to respond, then capture the images on camera and claim to be the victims of a one sided attack.

An example of this is the New Year's day 'crackdown'. On new years eve in Moscow there was a demonstration by an 83 year old human rights activist, who was active during the Soviet era, Lyudmila Alekseyeva. Fair enough, you would think. However at that demonstration, there was also the fascist National Bolshevik Party of Limonov.
As I said the NBP are well known to deliberately provoke the militsiya, then when they respond, they whip out the cameras to record the violence. Next day reports in the western media appear about crackdowns in Russia. Also worth noting is the symbolism of the fact that it happened on New Years day. If their were to be reports of a crackdown on such a day when their is little news except the celebrations, it would portray Russia as being oppressive all year round. And the practicalities. I am sure that the OMON were pretty pissed off having their New year's eve celebration destroyed for a bunch of attention seekers.

Lyudmila Alekseyeva is not a bad person, but by associating herself with types like Limonov she is provoking a predictable response. Repulsive organs like La Russophobe, have also used this to beat Russia with a stick, but they are hardly known for objectivity with headlines like 'Russian barbarians slaughter their women'. Lyudmila Alekseyaeva is a Russian, she is being used by a website that expresses glee that Russians are dying off with HIV or that many young Russian women are sex slaves.

This is my rant for the day!!

Window on the past

2010-02-08T00:08:00.000Z

Here is the oldest book I have in the house. 'Companion to geography' dated 1871. 'Pictures of travel in far off lands', Can't even remeber where I got it, maybe for free at a charity shop even.

Here is a page from it. Expect tales of savage natives (it was 1871 after all). Well, maybe not
I cannot upload for some reason, so I will paraphrase

Interestingly also is the desire of the author's to spread Christianity in whatever way, through conquest etc. Although they consider 'Popery' to be no better than the traditional religions. This was south America after all.

This particularly protestant worldview also extends to their attitudes to nature. As we see with modern America's largely Protestant based worldview on the world, with massive over consumption and pollution, is this-- the world is an abundant gift from God for mankind to do as he please. This is still prevalent now, in places like America, just as it was in times of the Birtish empire. This book was published in 1871, at her height of the empire(although quite weak in South America where this book is set). The 'dark mysticism of the Romish faith got here first, with their temples full of heathen titles' not an exact quote, but a paraphrasal of a frequent them of the book. Sounding like Ian Paisley...

Anyway the attitude to nature. 'Drive to extinction all the native species which are unproductive, dangerous and poisonous'. And 'God has granted us dominion of this land,. 'let us clear all the trees down and turn it into productive farmland' Again these are paraphrased but they are similar to what is said frequently. So, this is the famed protestant work ethic. Britain has almost entirely moved on from this prudent ideology, but of course it is still active in America. And so, it kind of explains America's attutude to the environment.

Also I forgot to mention, there are a few tales of 'noble savages' who help their white masters obediently in grave situation or save their lives. Consequentially they are treated as 'good dogs', loyal and brave, willing to serve etc. Of course the rest of the natives are all savages in their eyes.

So, there we go.
interesting window on the past. And relevant for today? Perhaps so, considering the tactics of the militant evangelists and their proselytizing. And that technology has changed, global communications etc, as has the balance of material wealth, making it much easier to convert 3rd worlders by building a shiny new church/facility centre in a peasant village.

bomb throwing season

2010-01-30T02:47:00.000Z

The Man Who Was Thursday, by GK Chesterton
The Secret Agent, by Joseph Conrad.

I'm in the mood for some nihilistic anarchism, or maybe some anarchistic nihilism. either way, two good books. They were only releases a year apart. Thursday in 1907 and Secret Agent in 1908.

The context. London was brimming full of Russian and eastern european revolutionaries, including the Bolsheviks we all know about, but also many smaller, splinter groups (splintering of course happened very often)

I have read TMWWT and found it a rollicking laugh, so hilarious. Also, it it ties in with my previous post about exploiting fear, this does that to an ulimate level. A policeman infiltrates a gang of revolutionaries, only to find that everyone else except one is an undercover agent. The Secret Agent I have not finished yet, but it seems to be more serious

GK Chesterton was also a strong Catholic and that comes out in his work. As also in the works ofTolkien, Graham Greene and Anthony Burgess. (Must be all that catholic emphasis on free will and conscience)

Fear...

2010-01-30T00:49:00.000Z

After a late night heavy internet browsing session, with copious amounts of tea, rndom links find me to discover 'Osama bin Laden's cave complex' like the evil villians lair in a James Bond film.

Just thought it was appropriate condidering Mr Anthony Blair stood in the 'dock' at the Iraq war enquiry. Fear, fear fear. So, did Al Qaeda have massive cave comlpex under the Tora Bora mountains, with it's own hydroelectric dam and hospital? No.
Who peddled this fear. The Times of London, owned of course by patriotic American citizen Rupert Mudroch.
Just as Al Qaeda didn't have a James Bond style lair, neither did Saddam Hussein have WMDs

Failures of the welfare state.

2010-01-24T11:01:00.001Z

The coverage of the Edlington boys has raised questions in the media, from the left/liberal and the 'hang em and flog em' Daily Mail angle. However no angle seems to focus on the transfer of our country from a Christian based country to a more secular based country, which may well be the cause. Speaking objectively and favouring no angle, a massive societal shift is obviously the root cause of many of today's problems.

The welfare state was instituted in Britain largely because of Christian social values. The phrase 'Methodism not Marxism comes to mind'. This is evidentially true.
When Lenin, Trotsky and their ilk were young revolutionaries living it up in London they were shocked to find the social/labour movement heavily influenced by Christianity. Oh the barbarity of it all!

However we have now largely moved away from Christianity and it's associated cultural baggage (whether one is religious or not it cannot be denied that 1500 years of Christianity in this country including reformations, restructurings and revivals have shaped the attitudes and values of the people.

One has to consider the very founding origin of our welfare state at the time, the late 1940s. No one would consider 'playing the system' because it would be frowned upon, there were moral codes, I don't know exactly.. It just wasn't done. But because society has changed, then there is now a whole subset of people doing just that. The 'Shameless' society. But perhaps it was the loss of tradition, of religious structures, of the advent of the 'permissive' society.

Some may say it was the welfare state itself that engendered the societal change, over consecutive generation. No need to rely on God and friendly church members, the DSS would take care of everything. Perhaps. Another argument could say the Thatcherite ideology caused the break up of communities and morality. Margaret Thatcher was as atheistic and 'revolutionary' as Karl Marx. There was after all, a 'postwar consensus where both parties agreed to help all sectors and groups of the country, for the benefit of all. Until Thatcher. Although blaming Thatcher for everything isn't getting anywhere, the psychological abuse carried out by the parents to the boys was not preordained by the iron lady. They did it of their own free will.

So, we have a choice. Go back to the welfare state of our religious roots or draw a new standard for the secular age, bearing in mind that 'everything is permitted'. Which would nessesitate a harsher welfare state as many people have no moral code.

Considering that we have secualrised and also become more multiethinc and multicultural, I doubt the chances of the first one. Consider that there may well be more practicing Muslims than Christians in coming decades.

Retrograde ideology.

2010-01-21T22:51:00.000Z

How dare those dastardly Russians copy an Australian aboriginal dance for ice skating. How dare they wear make up and clothing that makes them look like aborigines.

Jumping into the fray is the 'UK's leading liberal voice' ready to condemn such action. How dare white people think they can copy indiginous people's traditions. Oh, those Russians are a barbaric nation, the light of the politcal correctness multi cult has not spread there. We have a civilsing mission to bring light to those dark Russian savages.

Oksana Domnina and Maxim Shabalin, who performed the dance today at the European skating championships in Estonia – have been accused of "ripping off" Aboriginal culture and "co-opting" Aboriginal symbols. In their "Aboriginal dance", the skaters take to the ice in brown costumes adorned with white geometric motifs and green leaves. The music includes whooping, rhythmic chanting and shouting, and a didgeridoo.

Aboriginal leader..... describing the dance as insensitive and poorly judged.

How dare they. The only way for them to stop that is to join NATO and learn our way of civilisation!

"From an Aboriginal perspective, this performance is offensive. It was clearly not meant to mock Aboriginal culture, but that does not make it acceptable to Aboriginal people," she wrote. "There are a number of problems … not least of all the fact both skaters are wearing brown body suits on their skins to make them look darker. That alone puts them on a very slippery slope."

The current obsession with pigmentation in the west has to be applied everywhere else as well.

Manton said ceremony and image were sacred to indigenous Australians. "How do you think Australians would react if some Russians ice dancers dressed as Anzacs and acted out the doomed landing of Gallipoli?" she asked.

How do Russians like it when the Western media is constantly saying they are a neo nazi and a neo soviet state, when NATO supplied weapons are falling, when they are attacked by a NATO ally but are la belled as aggressors for defending civilians. Or when a WW2 film focuses on D Day again ignores the sacrifices of the eastern front.

As the article later admits..

Russia's ice skating federation expressed bafflement, and pointed out that all figure skaters had to perform a "world" dance as part of their two-routine competition programme. Examples included Argentinean tangos and Austrian waltzes.

Who could be responsoible for such hack work? The neocon's best friend Luke Harding.

In other news, the Vienna orchestra has lodged an official protest with China after it emerged that Chinese musicians were despoiling traditionally Viennese instruments and music tones. Said the chairman Herr Bumpfelstein 'the thought of yellow people playing traditional Viennese instruments is an affront to our culture and is inherently racist....

Chekhov's Yalta Dacha and Geopolitics, linguistic politcs and thee media agenda

2010-01-21T10:59:00.000Z

The BBC has made a radio documentary about Chekhov's dacha in the Crimean part of Ukraine.

A campaign group has been set up to protect the dacha where Chekhov wrote. Here he wrote plays, the Cherry Orchard and many short stories. Yes, the symbolism, I know. It's got the support of many British thesps as well

Chekhov's Dacha is located in the Crimea in Ukraine, officially part of Ukraine but with a Russian speaking population and a Russian naval prescence. The Crimea was added to the Ukranian SSR by Stalin just before his died.

At the moment the Ukrainian government will only give funding to things related to Ukrainian language related. And the Russian cultural ministry's remit only extends to Russian soil. The present ideology is to deny that Ukraine has a significant Russian influence (although there are elections, the first round has already been won by pro Russian Yanukovich)

The BBC, unfortunately, seems to have the typical western attitude to Russia, disparaging and criticising. This is a cultural/arts radio programme but they can't let that get in the fact of having a cheap shot at Russia.
The BBC even go as far to suggest that there might be a war or a conflict 'sometime within the next 10 years' over the Crimean issue.

While I said that is possible myself, the way the BBC reporter said it, he paused slowly and dramatically, heavy word emphasis,like an ominous evil force was gathering. Remember this is the same BBC who behaved appalingly in the South Ossetian war. If theoretically Russia decided to annexe the Crimea and east Ukraine, then the Russian troops would be greeted with bread and salt rather than bayonets. But of course that does not fit in to the BBC agenda to castigate Russia as being a rapacious bear. If the Russian people are so barbaric why did a Russian city named after him, Chekhov, donate £30000 for preserving the wallpaper.

But of course, there is the idea that Russia and Ukraine are somehow vastly different. From hearing the BBC report, one would assume that the 2 countries were completely different, with completely different cultures, they had no history together apart from being in the 'evil soviet empire'.

Update, I have found the Guardian report on this (lucky it was not written by Luke Harding)

Part of the problem with securing funding to renovate the dacha is that Crimea, in the south of Ukraine, is in the grip of a complex political situation. It has a large Russian population, many of whom don't consider themselves Ukrainian. "[The dacha] is in a strange position," says Bartlett. "The Russian government didn't want to fund the restoration because the house is in Ukraine, and the Ukrainian government didn't want to pay to promote a Russian author."

Whether the likely to be elected new Ukrainian government with a pro Russia stance changes the situation remains to be seen. I would think that something will be done, perhaps not instantly, but over time. Now it remains to see whether the beeb will continue it's Russophobe agenda.

Update again
I just re listened to the BBC documentary and we have. 'political casualty of the new Russia' 'strong political feeling in Russia that the Crimea ought to go back to Russia' intones a sombre voice, 'a crisis that may erupt in the next 10 years 'if Russia's politcs go as the same line as the Caucasus'
How about asking a Crimean citizen his or her view? I am sure he would not have this Disneyfied scaremongering. If anyone thinks that the Crimea/Ukraine/Russia situation is the same as the north Caucasus, then he can only have a Brzezinski/Soros induced worldview.

Jesus rifles

2010-01-20T12:37:00.000Z

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/us-military-weapons-inscribed-secret-jesus-bible-codes/story?id=9575794

Reminds me of the 1857 Indian mutiny.
A new type Ammunition was handed out to Muslim Indian troops. Because of the ammo in those days, the end had to bitten off before firing. The cartidges were smeared in a lubricant.

It was rumoured to be Pork fat. This caused a mutiny among the devote Muslims, near civil war, leaving many dead.

Now in 2010 we hear that American assault rifles (at least the scopes) have biblical inscriptions made by a contractor that supplies the US military, with it's obligatory evangelican Christian owner.

These weapons are now being used to train the Afghan army. Such a similar provocation caused an uprising in 1857. Who knows what this provocation may do. Allegories of the crusades

Killing in the name of Jesus eh, peace and love. And a great recruiting sergeant for Al Qaeda who can now justify their crusade theory.

History comes around.

Chekhovian humanism.

2010-01-17T22:37:00.000Z

So, the Guardian finally runs an editorial on something decent for a change, the divine beauties of Anton Pavlovich. Which of course gets almost no comments, showing what a bunch of Philistines many Cifers are.

Cut to the straight.
The Chekhovian worldview could be seen as typical of the Guardians, although of course Chekhov wasn't a militant atheist, he recognised the physical and spiritual beauty of religious expression.

Few have summed Chekhov up better than Vasily Grossman: "He said, let's put God – and all those grand progressive ideas – to one side. Let's begin with man. Let's be kind and attentive to the individual man – whether he's a bishop, a peasant, an industrial magnate, a convict in the Sakhalin islands or a waiter in a restaurant. Let's begin with respect, compassion and love for the individual – or we'll get nowhere."

It's up to man to make progress. But unlike the resident Guardian atheists, Chekhov had the brevity and magnanimity of vision to realise that a world of religion and science would coexist, there would not be these bitter disputes and petty solipsist screams of me me me, so prevalent in our age.

The tragic irony is that the Chekhovian secular humanitarian outlook was largely crushed by the Bolsheviks. They instituted enforced atheism, man was reduced to statistics and units of labour, mere commodities and resources. I accept that it is a false analogy to say that all atheism equals Gulags, slavery and destruction aka the 'Stalin, Mao Pol Pot' fallacy that pops up on religious discussions. Chekhovian 'atheism' differs from Bolshevik style in that it loves and respects religious, human expressions of spiritual beauty etc.

You could also say that the cifers militant atheism is like Bolshevism compared to Chekhovian humanism. Not in practice I admit. But in theory and ideology, theirs is the only acceptable 'way'. For many, even being religious is akin to being a child abuser. Chekhov would never say such a thing.

WilliamBapthorpe-- gate

2010-01-15T02:29:00.001Z

Putting a post on the internet requires as much effort as scratching one's backside, pratically and often intellectually as well.

On CommentisFree, one poster 'WilliamBagthorpe' said if the Israeli settlers don't leave their settlements 'they must be slaughtered, every last man, woman and child'.

Very soon after it was rightly deleted.

However, a whole army of internet bloggers, lobbyists and pressure groups are now mobilised, because one person made one stupid comment that was deleted five minutes later.
Star of the attraction is of course cifwatch who have managed to get 5 or 6 articles on this one comment.

"William Bapthorpe unequivocally advocates the murder of Jews on Blincoe thread" screams cif watch.
Err, no he is not advocating the murder of Jews. He advocates the summarily execution of Israeli settlers on the West Bank. Both are disgusting comments and both would be deleted straight away under cif's rules, as they were done.

So why all this storm in a teacup. Do cif think they have found the smoking gun that cif has a vast antisemitic agenda, because one person made a silly comment. It is almost funny that they are devoting a perverse amount of effort to one thing, but then I suppose that is up to them.

Truly, the ramblings of a fool.

2010-01-10T04:29:00.000Z

Me. We come to praise video games, not to shoot 'em up

Videogames can be great. I remember games like Age of Empires really got me into history, Rome Total War as well, great empire building, and of course games like civilisation and simcity series. But I also like the occassional fragfest,

I don't play games too often. I have only just got round to completing GTA 4 (well 92% of it) and it was great. Especially the satire, as Ben2 says the satire is great but not particularly understandable for younger people.

Like any technology, there are good and bad aspects. I am, however, starting to conclude that maybe instant gratification, instant endorphins, and a way of switching out reality may be a bad thing.

I think really it is logical Huxleyanism, and we are sleeping into a Huxleyan dystopia. We have all the infinite pleasure, we can just isolate ourselves from our own conscientiousness and the world and it's interactions. Saturated media, working to agendas, expanisonist lies, double plus good, who cares?

When I look at my friends facebook or other social networking pages, there are always reams of their likes, favourite bands, films, games, often lengthy lists of them. But there are nearly never books bar the odd Steven King or Dan Brown. Most of these people I know are going through the university process, coming near to the end of it. Have they ever read any books beyond their coursework and the odd airport novel on a summer holiday.

I am 21. Me and my age group are just outside the 'digital native' generation, yet even we have been consumed. Who knows what the real digital natives will be like. I am pretty much on the fringes of society, I refuse to conform to the cult of 'indivuduality' of 'I generation'. For a start, it is not individuality. It is mindless conformity, slavery idiocracy. All those updating their twitter and facebook pages, wearing T shirts with ironic pages, uploading photos taken at jaunty angles with faux haughty expressions, these, these collective masses, are like a different kind of human to me. I do not belong in this kind of society.

I am like the Underground Man from the Dostoevsky novel, 'I am a sick man.... I am a spiteful man. I am an unattractive man. I believe my liver is diseased.' (anyone who 'gets' that literary reference without Google, good on you)
I cannot get a decent job, even though (forgive me for flattering myself) I consider myself a cultured intellectual. Yet, a piece of paper saying degree, equals instant recognition, respect, and the idea that you are a more knowledgeable person. Even though looking at their facebook pages and speaking to them personally, they are in the 'bubble' ie surrounded by people of only their same interests, thefore the only people that exist to them.

What I am trying to say, is that academic study should always be enriched by cultural blossoming, as that youthful time period is the time to blossom. It is frequently said by people on cif that universities have become box ticking degree churning institutions (don't ask me, never been). So, in previous generations, those persons studying say, Psychology, might read a few Dostoevsky novels as they have related themes, such as the Notes From the Underground I referenced above, now they may be catching up with their favourite American TV show online, playing in a fantasy online RPG, or listening to another mindless manufactured band (although even the 'indie' bands are nihilistic solipsists)

Going back to my friends and acquaintances, they will be graduating mostly this coming year. Those who have vocational skills will be entering skill specific employment. They will be able to perform their jobs as learnt, but without the warm embrace of literature or wider culture which gives perspective. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world. Although I'm not a defender of privilege, the public school educated who went to senior positions in all fields, with their knowledge of classics, had a sense of perspective, of running things, of management, of their role in society. Now, we have lost that, there is no past to draw to, no sense of history being a long thread with experience, culture and knowledge passed on. We have cut the cord to our roots

Obviously, people can always do what they want, and that is why Huxleyan dystopia is infinitely worse than an Orwellian dystopia.

(A downside of posting at 4am is you tend to go off on a philosophical ramble when you should be in bed)

Countering Russophobia.

2010-01-08T23:39:00.001Z

I have decided one of my New Year's resolutions is to counter the blatant Russophobia in western media and popular culture.

While the 'economic analysts' of the Financial Times and The Economists have their own ideology, spin, hatred and propaganda, they are in their ivory towers (albeit they are highly influential). Obviously I would like to influence them, but I am not an economist or academic rubbing shoulders with the influential.

I am also concerned with the average person in Britain and similar Western countries think about Russia. Maybe that is one place where I can spread the truth 'going to the people,

Narodnik style

style. Let's see, jokes about cheap Russsian women, drunk corrupt Russian men, crazy scientists, primitve facilites. It is truly repulsive. Obviously as well, not just Russians, but many people from the post USSR states, and anti slavism in general including the Poles and Serbs.

But the least I can do is stand up and be counted. I may not influence anyone but a voice of dissent in the tide of racist ignorance is a start.

What's more it is a very real tragedy. While jokes are good to make with the lads about cheap sluts, it is very easy to ignore the human tragedy. How many untold millions have died during the 'liberal' reforms. Rapers and robber barons carried off the assets. A different type of raper literally carried off the womenfolk. Russia has always contributed to the western European world, actively involved in politics, Europeans military affairs art science, music and literature. Yet they are castigated as barbarians by slimy organisations like La Russophobe, while others say it is a new cold war.

Maybe once it could be ok to label the untamed Eurasian landmass as 'barbarian', such as looking at it from the classical Hellenic viewpoint over 2000 years ago when it was inhabitated by wild Scythian tribes. The prbolem is that so many of the Anglo elite (and quite a few Americans as well) are educated at public schools an oxbridge/ivy league universities which are absolutely devoted to the Greco and Roman worldview. You can imagine these excited schoolboys, lsitening attentively to their history and classics teacher, pointing to the big empty landmass far from Sparta and Athens. Several decades later, their attitude is the same.

Either way Russophobia is endemic in all aspects of British (and I presume most other Western) culture. No more fucking meercats for a start and at least get rid of the false Cyrillic and communist imagery, which is often the depth into many media productions of contemporary Russia.

100th anniversary of the death of Lev Nikolayevich.

2010-01-07T20:16:00.001Z

Shamelessly lifetd form the Guardian books blog.

There's more to Tolstoy than War and Peace

(There is also more to Russian literature than Tolstoy, Dostoevsky and Chekhov, but I suppose prose will always translate more than verse like Pushkin's. These three stand at the pinnacle also because of their universlity which transcends boundaries, indeed there works could be viewed as ideologies)

I said:
You can base a philosophy/worldview on Dostoevskian, Tolstoyan and Chekhovian views on the world. Each is completely different and represents a different philosophy. They descend in order of age, eldest first, although Tolstoy outlasted Chekhov who died of TB in his 40s.

Dostoevsky believed in unyielding devotion to the Orthodox worldview. Strict and hierarchical. This is not too good as it castigates people who differ from the 'right way'. (The word orthodoxy in Russian and Greek, means the 'correct way'.)
Tolstoy believed in the opposite, an anarchical form of religion with no structures and authority. This too, could only fail, as human nature got in the way, much as I'd love people to be like the serene characters in his novels, they are not.
Chekhov was a secular humanist who liked the cultural traditions of religion, but realised that it was now up to man to work for the greater good through.
labour, technological research and progress. That was how to express spirituality, with humanism. Chekhov was a doctor as well as a writer, so he was, I suppose, a technocrat/vocationalist, not an idle aristocrat like Tolstoy, or a former army officer like Dostoevsky.

What I am trying to say is that there is a natural culmination, a progression, which theoretically the Chekovian worldview triumphing. But, oh, such a lament. Chekhovianism should have triumphed, in Russia and worldwide, but sadly it didn't. Not long after Chekhov and Tolstoy are dead, the Bolsheviks have seized power.

poster gavinscottw says....

Comparisons are odious as John Donne once said and I think the Dostoevsky/ Tolstoy/ Chekhov triumvirate division of taste issue should be subsumed beneath the glory each of them brought to the form. What I find in each author is unique to who they were and how they viewed their world. If there's a distinct difference between them in any way, it is in this to my mind: Chekhov saw humans for what they were, Doestevsky for what they suffered by and Tolstoy for what he hoped they would be. They all exposed the hypocricies and contradictions in man and left us to ponder -and perhaps understand just a little - the imperfections of our existences on earth. They were geniuses, the summit of what is attainable in life with words and we should continue to cherish their names and disseminate their works as far and as wide as we can.

I can pretty much agree with that

Je suis antisemite?

2010-01-05T17:56:00.000Z

A post of mine from Cif has been deleted, I presume for being antisemitic.

Why? Because I linked to a Wikipedia page that explianed that Ashkenzi Jews had a hiher intelligence than the general population due to factors like study of the Torah and other religous texts, those unable to do so falling out of the Jewish population leaving the intelligent behind, persecution and being forced to flee meaning they needed transferable skills like being a merchant or moneylender, and the Christian ban on moneylending giving Jews a chance to work in this skill which requires a good brain.
(The context of the article Are parents too pushy? discusses parents who are very pushy on their children trying to get them to succeed. This is the 'nurutre' debate. I was trying to say that children are not a Tabula Rasa, they are a product of their gentetic environemnt andtheir mating partner, and the best example to use was the Ashkenazi Jews, who are products of a very specific and unique series of events, which has pretty certaionly raised their IQ levels.

The Jewish people's contribution to the human spirit is undisputed. Only 2% of Americans are Jewishm yet they have won 27% of the USA's nobel prizes (the USA has by far the most Nobel laureates .

My firstpost which was basically the above but longer and more detailed was deleted, but my reply still is still up...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear The Moderators.

I have been callously deleted for saying that in general the Ashkenazi Jewish population have a higher rate of intelligence than the general population.

The reason I said that, is because this thread will seem to be an arguement between nature and nurture, and the example of the Ashkenazi Jews is unique and very compelling for the 'nature' theory as various historical events and religious traditions mean that Ashkenazis are generally of a higher than average IQ.

This is backed up by evidence, not from head banging neo nazis and anti semites, but some of the best geneticists in the world, at the forefront of research.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/03/science/03gene.html?ex=1275451200&en=efcc603583e17b54&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0718_050718_ashkenazim.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-jewish-gene-for-intelli

New York Times, National Geogrpahic and Scientific American. Are these journals similar to Stormfront, the White power league, and the Ku Klux Klan? No.

There can be no consideration that my post was anti Semitic, if anything it was philo-semitic, as I am pointing out a positive trait of the Jews. From Albert Einstein to Leonard Bernstein, we are all better off because of intelligent Jewish people contributing to human knowledge and culture.

I therefore, request that my comment is reinstated immediately.

What will happen to this I do not know.

Supermarkets and nationalisation

2010-01-05T17:36:00.000Z

George Monbiot has writtten an article called 'Will the Tories tackle supermarkets?'

Monbiot says

The supermarkets enjoy what economists call a monopsony: excessive buying power caused by market dominance. Governments have dithered and filibustered, frightened away by the force they should be curbing. Decades of regulatory failure have made the supermarkets so powerful that few politicians will stand up to them.

He goes on to explain how many of the Tories core supporters are rural landowners who often get ripped off by the supermarkets. The farmers work hard, there are massive mark ups, they sell their produce to the supermarkets at less than cost. He recommends an ombudsman, but also to break the monopolies and monosopies up. But this is really not relevant as not everything can be local, plus lots of small companies collectively have large independent distribution networks which are wasteful to the country. Which is why I propose, instead, to nationalise the supermarkets to save money on wastage, but allow samll independant traders a chance to thrive as well.

My posts...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As I have always said before George, we should nationalise all the supermarkets and have a unified sourcing, production and distribution network.

Do you realise just how much wastage there is by different supermarkets with their own distribution lines, sourcing? you yourself have written abouth tis with regard to the supermarket in your home town. And in the end the person that loses out most is the direct producer, ie the farmer, and also the small business owner. Under nationalisation a fair price could be centrally decided for dairy milk, agricultural products, meat etc, so the farmers don't get ripped off..

It would also help small businesses. Imagine a Tesco and an Asda competing in a small town. Under nationalisation there would be one state supermarket, the other one, instead of lying empty could be divided up and let out to independent butcher's, bakers and candlestick makers, basically like an indoor market common in many towns and cities. Theses small business people would pay a low rent for their premises, therfeore protected from the savages of the market economy. Everyone benefits. A customer would go the state supermarket for bananas from S America or rice form China, but if she wants a local leg of lamb she goes to the local butcher, who is secure and has competitive prices due to low overheads because he is renting his premises form the state,

I have though about this whole process long and hard and have come to the conclusion it is the best option. If any politician has the bravery to act on it, I will salute him or her
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(My second post is in replky to zazar who brings out the old cliche that it will be like the USSR's food distribution and state opression. Also is a general expansion oif my oringial premise taking into account more details)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
zazar
To compare the idea of a nationalised and unified resource distribution network in Britain to the Soviet Union's is a bit of a misnomer.
I understand your concerns, but you say..

"Think about it. Imagine, say, Ed Balls being in charge of whatever ministry you imagine will oversee this arm of the state that you are proposing. Would you trust him to run everything smoothly and fairly? Would political dissidents get an equally share of the bounty? Or minority groups who tend not to be supportive of the government? "

That is absolutely absurd. For a start anyone can enter a supermarket without giving his name. There would be no requirement to give your details, no ration books.
Secondly there may be concerns that one giant state supermarket, if they had a clubcard scheme, then that would mean by default the state having your details. Which is why getting rid of a loyalty card scheme would be neccesary.
Thirdly, there may be concerns that all the CCTV cameras in every supermarket will link to a basement underneath the MI5 headquartes. Again absurd.

Please get away from the Soviet idea. Any person would enter a state supermarket and buy what he wants without interference. Anyway imagine Ed Balls ore somebody in charge of the 'Ministry for food distribution'*. It would have no political influence, there would be no power to stop people going into supermarkets. The best person for that job would be a technocrat or logistician, preferebly a retired officer from the Royal Logistics Corps. Hardly reds under the bed.
The only 'Orwellian' aspect I can think of is, say there is a deprived area with a history of poor diet, like inner cities or poor housing estates. For that area the state supermarkets could reduce prices on fruit and veg as an incentive of changing diets. This is not Soviet style oppression, rather it is more like the 'nudge politics' currently in vogue with none other than Mr Cameron's Conservative party.

The Soviet model was under highly different conditions, as it was , a) lack of a democracy, and b) a largely underdeveloped country, c) very vast, the largest in the world, and d) quite a sparse population. Britain is a democracy, highly developed, and a small country at that, and a densely populated country. There is just no comparison.

Interestingly, one supermarket chain that has created a hyper efficient distribution network is Wal Mart, but any self respecting Guardian reader knows the negative effect of that company on it's human workforce. Under nationalisation, there is much more certainty that workers would be treated more fairly, although not necessarily to the current mantra of diversity and equalities preached to us.

Another issue is would that make shelf stackers and till operator's by deafult public sector workers and entitled to pension, subsidised childcare etc. Compared with the small butcher who isn't a public sector worker struggling to get by. It would essentially double the size of the public sector in the UK. However fewer workers would be employed in all stages from the fields to the checkout. This would create a pool of labour free to work in manufacturing, skilled trades, technical specialities and scientific research. And we could always offer tax breaks for small business owners.

Another issue I have not touched is to what extent the nationalised supermarkets would distribute non food products. I think it would be better if a state supermarket stuck to foodstuffs and household goods, ie carpet cleaners and scouring pads, but not 50 inch tellies and laptops. Then private sector comapnies like Argos and Curries and the multitude of internet companies can stay afloat. These companies all have websites, no taking away choice is a non issue.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aeroplane bomb attempt and the usual British connection. Muslim profiling.

2010-01-01T20:30:00.000Z

Unsurprising that the perpetrator in he attempt to blow up an airliner was British, even more unsurprising that he is connected to British universities.

Inayat Bunglawala jumps onto the scene.
One bit I love....

Of more immediate concern is his absurd demand that student Islamic societies give "assurances that no radicalisation will be allowed" and that they should be disbanded unless they do.

I don't see the concern. The poster Sabraguy said....

Abdulmutallab is the fourth president of a London student Islamic society to face terrorist charges in three years. Even the NUS is worried.

Inayat then says.

What on earth is "radicalisation" supposed to mean in this context? The Telegraph mentions that the Islamic society at University College London – of which Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was president – organised a series of lectures in 2007 on the "War on Terror". Can you imagine that? Students organising lectures that are critical of US and UK foreign policy. Goodness, who would have thought it?

Radicalistaion means progressing to giving cosy academic lectures to trying to blow up a plane. There is nothhing wrong with opposing the excessis and short sightedness of the so called 'war on terror'. I oppose it. However I don't go bombing planes. There is nowt wrong with students organising protest, but where it may have once been a march to Grosvenor square, killing innocent people is beyond the pale.

He finishes

Rather than trying to demonise student Islamic societies for their supposed radicalism, our counter-terrorism efforts will surely bear greater fruit if they focused more on building genuine partnerships with local communities and gaining their trust.

Anyone remember, 'Behead those who insult Islam'. As poster smellthecoffee says (and as most recommended, a litmus test of the most supported opinion)

Trust is a two way process. Isn't it about time that local communities (I assume you mean muslim communities) built partnerships with the greater population and tried to gain their trust?

__
__
Over on the Ed Husein thread the talk is on profiling, with the standard platitudes being that it is wrong. Under the present system, basically everyone is profiled, with no discrimination between anyone. However in the comments section, the most recommended comments are all the one advocating selective profiling. The general premise is that grannies, little children, innocent people are being subjeect to misery based on what is essentially a politically correct sentiment to stop those of a Muslim background feeling discriminated. Most people have had enough and are pissed off to hell with airport security. The most recommended post was from someone from an Irish Catholic background who was discriminated in Britain because of IRA bombings, but accepts it is necessary.

I said:

They (9/11 bombers) also drank alcohol and went to strip clubs, astounding considering that for their 'devotion' to their religion, they were willing to sacrifice themselves.

Or, maybe it could be a psychological issue. It is well documented that people of religious persuasion who have 'sinned' feel the need to repay for their 'sins' by an act of faith towards their deity.

Anyone that wants or tries to blow themselves up on planes is clearly mentally ill. I am not saying put a psychiatrist at every boarding gate

Rather, there needs to be in the Muslim community a different approach to mental illness, and realise that if those are taking their religion to such a serious level, they are delusional.

Any person of any religion, when that belief becomes the overbearing factor in their life and is taken to extreme levels, is clearly mentally ill. I have seen this myself with a family member who fell in with evangelical Christians.

The reason I suggest mental illness is because there is no other way I can think of why somebody educated to the level of a medical doctor, therefore very intelligent (Glasgow airport) would want to blow themselves and others up. There is quite simply no other explanation than their mental faculties being unsound.

Maybe Muslims are suspicious of contemporary approaches to mental illness and psychitary because it is western based, largely secular Jewish and Christian in it's attitudes and worldview, and therefore to them, evil.

That is what I believe. It is quite clearly an issue of mental illness in the Muslim community, but also in those of any religion who are exceptionally devout.

New year

2010-01-01T02:39:00.000Z

Happy new year.

What more appropraite music than the good old radetzky march, as performed by the Vienna Phiharmoniker every year at their 'Neujahrskonzert'

Anyway, late at night. My 'analysis' or 'digestion' of the previous year can wait. At least this year I will try to engage with my blog more.

NapoleonKaramazov's Law

2009-12-27T19:42:00.000Z

How many programmes on something to do with Russia have I watched over the past few weeks featuring faux Cyrillic.

Russia with Jonathan Dimbleby BBC4 Check
The Beatles in the USSR BBC4 Check
The art of Russia BBC4 Check

Do they no realise that faux Cyrillic is patronising. Russian handwriting is graceful and elegant. I think the big blocky Cyrillic is designed to evoke themes of soviet military power, and stereotypes of Russia as the big evil bear, a cold and harsh place.

Therefore I propose a new type of Godwin's law, called after me, NapoleonKaramazov's Law. If a television programme, film, factual or fictional book about Russia features on it's title/cover faux Cyrillic letters, then you can guarantee with absolute certainty that it will contain broad sweeping stereotypes and be factually inaccurate.

Birth of Yeshua ha Notsri

2009-12-25T13:00:00.000Z

In the words of Berlioz from the opening chapter of Master and Margarita

'There is not one oriental relgion,' said Berlioz, 'in which an immaculate virgin does not bring a child into the world. And the Christians, lacking any originality, invented their Jesus in the same way. In fact he never lived at all. That's where the stress has got to lie....'

Then he goes on 'about the Egyptian god Osiris, about the Phonecian god Phammuz , about Marduk and even about the little known Vitzli-Putzli, who had been held in great veneration by the aztecs of Mexico'

Then Anna spilled the sunflower oil, Woland appeared, Pontius Pilate pronounced sentence on ha notsri, a great read.

Either way,enjoy the trappings and traditions of Christmas that have developed over 2000 years, wherever they have come from or evolved over time.

I have just watched a fabulous 10 part adaption of the Master and Margarita by Russian television. All the episodes are available on Veoh.com with English subtitles. it is necessary to sign up to Veoh first though, but it is free.

Unbelievable travesty.

2009-12-21T18:16:00.000Z

The 'plucky little' state of Georgia yesterday blew up this memorial to all those lost during the 1941-45 war, and killed a mother and her daughter doing so.

This is an absolute outrage. 300 000 Georgians died fighting against the Nazi invaders for the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union killed over 85% of German combat personnel.

http://www.rferl.org/content/Georgia_Blows_Up_Soviet_War_Memorial_Two_People_Killed/1908415.html

What is Saakashvili's approval rating, 10%? Saakashvili who shelled innocent people last year. Saakashvili who is a pawn and a puppet of NATO.

Meanwhile the world's press had focused it's entire attention on a group of petty thieves who stole the sign from Auschwitz. Bad as it may be, the crucial difference is that the Soviet war memorial was blown up on orders from the head of state. Imagine if the Polish prime minister ordered the removal of the Auschwitz sign. He wouldn't be on the politicans' rounds of conferences and dinner circuits for much longer.

What is more, it has been discovered that the Auschwitz thieves were ordinary thieves, not far right groups
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/21/auschwitz-arbeit-macht-frei-sign

Yet there was almost no sound of this catastrophe in the Western media. The BBC's headline is Two killed in Georgian demolition, as if it were a random explosion on a building site I only heard about it from being alerted by poster UndergroundMan on cif.

My anger is largely directed against the Western media for ignoring this provocation. Saakashvili and his regime are mindless war criminals and unsupported by his populace. But what is holding his grip on power is the Western media outlets and PR firms he has hired. Another irony is also that he is building a new parliament on the site, but to blow it up he went against the wishes of the majority of Georgian people.

Swiss and Minarets.

2009-11-29T21:03:00.001Z

So, have the peace loving Swiss decided to go for blatant discrimination or not?
Boo, hiss etc, cries of racist, racist.

However the fortunate Swiss have direct democracy.

One wonders if Britain had direct democracy as in Switzerland how many divisive and controversial laws would be passed.... especially if a large chunk of the electorate allow Rupert Murdoch to think for them. The death penalty, 'immigrants' booted out, out of the EU, talentless celebrity X for education secretary, blind patriotism and jingoism.

Populism does have it's ugly side unfortunately. It is just that more enlightened countries like Switzerland deal with it more effectively.

57% is not a huge majority. Also ignored is the fact that many fence sitters may have abstained. If a similar vote happened in Britan it may well have been nearer 75%

So, no, Switzerland is not a new borderline fascist state as it will be portrayed as by many media organs. This is discriminatory yes, but people have expressed their will. Is direct Democracy more important, or an enlightened minority leading?

One could argue both ways. I'm not sure, I'll watch and see.

Paedophilia is ok if you are a women......

2009-11-29T19:16:00.001Z

So says wise sage Barbara Ellen. The same Barbara Ellen who said that all nurses should have degrees, ignoring all the anecdotal evidence* from health professionals (including nurses)and patients alike.

The basic premise of the article-- 15 year old boys are "up for it,". There's nothing predatory, teenage boys fantasise (so do men) about this stuff, therefore there is nothing wrong with it. And of course, all teenage girls aged 15 have no sexual desire or lust whatsoever, lets just ignore the generally accepted evidence* that girls become sexually active earlier.
Secondly, that the perpetrator, Madeleine Martin, "is more pathetic than predatory".
That ignores the fact that any male teacher, perhaps married, who feels he needs justification and finding pleasure in naive teenage girls is by default also, 'pathetic'. Any adult who uses an adult's intellectual wits, psychological knowledge and life experience to exploit children into sex is pathetic, no matter what gender.

So strongly were the response that they closed the thread after one day, unprecedented for the Sunday Observer, in Cif land Sunday is usually the quietest time and most threads are wishy washy lifestyle articles. I did not get to voice my dissent, but almost everyone else did, good on them.

Anyway it is always good to watch the feminists destroy their own credibility. Maybe I will set up a subset blog cataloguing all the hilarious antics of the militant fems.

*But, then I guess it's ok for feminists to dismiss anecdotal or proven evidence as it gets in the way of their ideas, or maybe they think the recorders of anecdotal evidence have no right to an opinion because they didn't go to Oxbridge,

Politics and Mental illness

2009-11-18T01:55:00.000Z

Do less democratic and unequal political systems cause or exacerbate mental illness?
Market orientated economies more likely to versus socially orientated economies ?

My personal opinion is yes.

As ever,cif inspires
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/nov/18/mental-health-psychiatric-patients-rights?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

"And again, why are we even following America? Because the Anglo Saxon media could not possibly contemplate people... speaking a foreign tongue (faints).
IMHO, what deflects incidences of mental illness is a well run and democratically accountable state where there is a unity of purpose, consensus and general social contract between the state and it's citizens. This is not a political thread, but if we followed more of the Continent's enlightened social policies, most importantly electoral reform giving PR, (yep politics) and a government and state apparatus representative and accountable to it's populace, then maybe, just maybe that will reduce the incidence of Mental Illness."

Neural nihilism vs mans' consciousness, plus Dostoevsky

2009-11-16T00:17:00.000Z

The following is a long posting I made on Cif, which I will lift here as it took bloody ages.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/15/mental-health-stigma-enke?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments
The article is called, the stigma of mental illness, by Anna Motz. Somehow I got sidetracked, by a poster 'piginclover'talking about how childhood trauma affects brain developments. The first part, about how mental illness is a western centric illness, I left out, although it is a valid point. Basically, how we have reached a natural culmination regarding man's free will, thanks to the advances in neuropsychology/psychiatry and in a much more profound way than 19th/20th century Marxism/socialism. And couldn't leave out Dostoevsky either...

Secondly
Does anyone not realise we have now entered a new era of neurological nihilism. Everything is now permitted...(one could argue)

The Marxists of the 19thc and 20th century could make crime and other deviant acts permissible by blaming it on the criminal's poor social environment, or crime as a protest against the prevailing society and it's unjust economic conditions*. A new order would come with fair social conditions and crime would never happen as their would be no injustice.
The neurobiologists and neuropsychologists of the late 20th and 21st century have discovered that traumatic experiences in childhood fuck your brain up. Open the jails, release all the prisoners, they only did their crimes because they had a traumatic childhood, as said by the poster Piginclover

For millenia humans have always debated man's free will and his consciousness, now it seems we have reached the conclusion of this debate. Does no-one realise the ramifications of the new neuro- discoveries, is that all our actions, emotions, desires and personality are just a result of a few tiny brain chemicals. As such, we can't attach such subjective ideas such as law, or justice to chemical interactions. We are free to do what we wish without restraint. 'Society' may step in and lock us in a cell, but our surroundings don't matter, we are just a collection of chemicals.

Imagine a man in the 19th century, lets call him Raskolnikov, who commits a crime because of his abject social conditions, and deems it to be morally just, a Marxist oriented theoretician would say that is OK, and his crime was a logical consequence of his poor social environment, and the criminal can be absolved of any guilt.
Then imagine he is transported into our era, commits a crime and tells the judge it was down to neurobiological/psychological trauma he experienced during childhood, and as Piginclover actually said (and linked), traumatic experiences during childhood affect the brain development, then he could be absolved of his actions because his crime was a consequence of childhood trauma.

The reason I used the name Raskolnikov, as a tribute to Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky. He was a psychologist before psychology even existed. The character Raskolnikov for example, we learn about his potential childhood trauma when as a child with his father walking past a tavern, a load of drunk peasants savagely beat a donkey to death. He wants to stop but they can't do anything, the donkey's rightful owner is the one happy to see it killed.

Dostoevsy battled with human consciousness, free will and nihilism all his life, and in all of his major novels, there is clearly a theme of mental illness.
While it seems that from my above analogy I have come to accept that 'everything is permitted' I'm not quite a complete Nihilist yet. The trouble is, that the only thing that would destroy the neurological basis for Nihilism is the prescence of a supreme deity. The natural scientific continuation from Darwin to Dawkins seems to have ruled this out, so what are we left to believe in, apart that we are just physical organisms interacting in a social and psychological background that often gets screwed up in childhood? Dostoevsky found repose in the church, fine, but he didn't know the things we know.

*Crime and Punishment deals with this thing extensively. Razumihin says about a debate he had with socialists, they said that crime is a protest against the abnormality of social conditions and nothing else. Book 3, chapter 5, the one where Raskolnikov talks about his grand theory- my fave chapter

FUCK YOU CIF!!!!!

2009-11-09T17:57:00.000Z

Their new posting tweaks have screwed up.

Anyway. I thought see how long before I could post. 23 blank posts and counting before the mods deleted it.

My profile picture is a painting by Viktor Vasnetsov, a 19thc century Russian painter. Drawing on themes from Russian folklore, history and mythology. There are 3 bogatyrs, kind of like feudal knights, from the Kievan Rus era, going around erring wrongs, rescuing damsels and leading men into battle. There was a national revival of folklore in 19th century Russia, dwelling on the past as a source of pride. Some very good artworks....

Death to (cultural) imperialism

2009-10-31T00:18:00.000Z

October 31st. Halloween.

Bah.

soujorn.

2009-10-30T17:06:00.000Z

Time,
temps,
Zeit,
время,
时间,

.....passes, and we ignore things.

Unbeleivable.

2009-09-25T15:56:00.000+01:00

Guantanamo bay is a holiday camp, if you believe Judith Miller in today's Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/sep/25/guantanamo-bay-obama-civil-liberties?showallcomments=true

If you ever wanted to know what a Pravda editorial would look like if Western journalism took such a nose dive, then here it is. Let's keep Guantanamo open because the inmates can go to art classes, watch DVDs, eat so much food they become obese. Great. Just never mind they are they are there illegally, there is no sight of a trial nearby.

There are simply so many issues,
-hubrisnness. If the US military is happy to hog the Defence budget,I mean FFS they have Mcdonald's and cinemas on US military bases, then it is no surprise that they cannot afford a universal healthcare system back home.
-The idea that ignoring the bad things (the illegality) and focusing on the good things (the prisoners regime)means the bad things don't exist.
-The very structure of the article. Basically one long list of good things. No polemic or argument.
-The Orwellian nature of the article. I can only think of 'doubleplusgood' She verbally bombards us with things that are now better, not addressing the real issue like the legality of it all. The only suitable analogy I can think of is the deckchairs on the titanic. They might look good, but ultimately no-one cares.
- The American prison and health system is not very rosy, and here they are being so nice to a bunch of people who were caught largely in the wrong place or time and so the majority of detainees are innocent. Their are many accounts online to found of people talking about such incidents.
-Plus, she seems to forget that the very word Guantanamo is still a PR disaster for America. Ok, they now have 'Islamic "feast" meals' and 'more than 315 movies on DVD' but who will ever forget the orange jumpsuits and inmates being wheeled around on carts or the exposed accomodation with wire mesh walls?

There are some times when Cif is a parody of itself. This is one the times.
I remember Elizabeth Wurzel, who branded the whole continent of Europe as antisemitic, despite not going there for years, but she had a hunch anyway. And anyone who opposed Israel's actions was instantly an anti semite. Today's effort by Judith is on a par with Wurzel, making vague but bold statements with no grounding.

"Judith Miller is a contributing editor of City Journal, an adjunct fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a Fox News contributor. She is a former reporter for the New York Times."

Says it all really.

I love Jonathan Meades.

2009-09-18T23:34:00.000+01:00

-Thank God, no more tartan, tweed and shortbread.
-Family history nonsense, ancestor tourism.
-Rubbish architecture
-Religious zealots
-Scrap everywhere
-Pretentious Castle and drug money
-Wild drinking
-Sabbath
-And of course,black pudding

More later.

Anton Pavlovich Chekov.

2009-09-15T22:45:00.000+01:00

I don't know why I started with Anton Pavlovich, surely I should have started things chronologically and wrote about Tolstoy and Dostoevsky first. But anyway, I like Chekhov because his life and works are a culmination of the previous generation of Russian literature, and it's varid philosophies.

For example, in the field of Religion. Dostoevsky, strictly adhering to the Russian orthodox Church. Tolstoy, born and raised orthodox, had a spiritual crisis, then excommunicated, his own moral system while noble, was essentially unworkable in the mainstream. Chekhov was not actively religious, but recognised the beauty and variation of human expressions of belief.

Yet he believed in the artistic and cultural expression, status and institution of religion, expressions of beauty, the culture etc. He believed in a better world to come, with faith in science and hard work, to better humankind. In essence a kind of humanism, living for each other. But this very positivity and certainty was based on Christian belief in resurrection of mankind, and of man's duty to others. He also realised how central the concept of God and Orthodoxy was to the Russian people, how it's expressions of beauty transcended all boundaries. Chekhovian attitude to religion was simple, don't bother worrying whether or not God sinks and thinking yourself into madness like Tolstoy or fundamentalism like Dostoevsky, instead, accept that organised religion exists . He loved the beauty of religious devotion of church bells, icons, architecture. As a doctor, he could observe human nature at many intimate points, in essence he was an anthropologist. Anthropologists observe, they don't interfere.

Chekhov, essentially was saying that Russia was on the cusp of a bright future,as expressed by many characters in his plays, like Dr Astrov in Uncle Vanya or the student Trofimov in the Cherry Orchard. The twentieth century was going to be the century of humanism, justice and the natural order of things. As Mme Ranyevskaya's dear cherry orchard is going to be cut down, ironically to make way for dachas for the growing urban bourgeoise, this theme is continued. The feckless aristocracy is over, the new era will be of hard working people getting their just rewards, of rationale and order.

If only it had been such, the tide of Bolshevism swept forth. Alexander Solzhenitsyn is positively astounded at the petty trifles and aspirations of Chekhov's day, a completely unimaginable era to him, frequently he interrupts in 'the Gulag archipelago' saying how could a country versed in Chekhovian positivity and humanist consciousness, come to this? How could Chekhovian characters politelty sip wines on verandahs talking about the bright future, when it had come, and he had to toil 12 hours a day for a bowl of gruel.

He also excelled at portraying the banal provincialism of Russia, it's narrowness and limited social events. All of Chekhovs plays are set in the countryside, usually among low gentry, usually with petty squabbles like money problems. This was realism, everyday domesticities. He was a master of fitting a man's life into twenty pages, going into intricacies, but not being too sparse. What we see is that the environment does to the man- let's say a young newly trained Doctor out of Moscow. The narrow minded provincialism changes him over the decades. Witness something like Ward No-6 or Ionych.

And finally, while Tolstoy was of aristocratic stock, Dostoevsky of petty bourgeoise, Chekhov was of peasant stock, his father through hard work becoming a merchant (something which was seen as 'common' in Imperial Russia and therefore not respected, even though they were the movers of the economy). This is a natural culmination and also Chekhov actually had a career as a doctor, rather than being idly rich like Tolstoy.

So in short, humanist, anthropologist, tolerance of all ways of life. And rising from poor stock in a country with a very rigid social structure, Chekhov was ahead of his time. And still serves a lesson for today. Perhaps the new atheists can learn to tolerate that religion will always exist and accept the cultural beauty of different manifestations of belief systems.
I think that the Chekhovian attitude is the best as well, observing and comprehending human self expression, but working towards common goals on this rocky path of humanity which all of us walk, regardless of race, religion or creed.

New project

2009-09-12T03:20:00.000+01:00

Dostoevsky,
Tolstoy
Chekhov.

3 of the greatest writers of the 19th century, each with completely different attitudes to the world around them, how it shows in their great works.
Something I shall be doing. Starting over the next few days, hopefully.

Mushroom Hunting.

2009-09-04T11:23:00.001+01:00

Mushroom season is upon us. Sadly my lack of knowledge and over cautious nature holds me back.
My favourite time of the season.
Always reminds me of Anna Karenina.

Mushroom hunting features predominantly in Slavic culture and folklore. Across the central east European forests, after a heavy rainfall, gifts from heaven, and a great social event.

Now or never it must be said--that Sergey Ivanovitch felt too. Everything in the expression, the flushed cheeks and the downcast eyes of Varenka betrayed a painful suspense. Sergey Ivanovitch saw it and felt sorry for her. He felt even that to say nothing now would be a slight to her. Rapidly in his own mind he ran over all the arguments in support of his decision. He even said over to himself the words in which he meant to put his offer, but instead of those words, some utterly unexpected reflection that occurred to him made him ask:

"What is the difference between the 'birch' mushroom and the 'white' mushroom?"

Varenka's lips quivered with emotion as she answered: "In the top part there is scarcely any difference, it's in the stalk."

And as soon as these words were uttered, both he and she felt that it was over, that what was to have been said would not be said; and their emotion, which had up to then been continually growing more intense, began to subside.

Beautiful. Possibly the best scene in the book. Pity those poor 19thc guys and gals, that courtship revolved so much around protocol and inability to truly express oneself. Silly intricacies, condemning someone to a lifetime of unrequited love simply because they had to obey the social mores of the day.
I just wish I knew more of the intricacies of mushrooms, to enjoy them without fearing poison.

Feminism and the red blooded male.

2009-08-31T23:21:00.000+01:00

Working class males Feminists

Where would you normally expect these two disparate tribes to meet, what with the level of social disparity and stratification on Britain presently? Perhaps when one subset comes to lay bricks or fix a burst water pipe for an acolyte of the sisterhood.

One species can be found in comfy academic circles, grand ideologies to set the world to rights, discussing the Hegelian dialect and it's relation to feminism, the other species working in a skilled trade (Sun reader of course), sometimes in Ibiza.
Ideological enemies.

When do they become allies?
The sands of Afghanistan.

All I'm saying is, the hard violence of NATO forces in Afghanistan is miles away from cosy academic discussions and flouncy ideas.
And the people they are entrusting to spread feminism..... British and American soldiers, hardly known for their liberal views. As the way it is in Britain, with our apartheid like class system, many 'squaddies' come from working class backgrounds, many feministas from comfy middle class backgrounds. Normally they would never mix, seeing each other as arch enemies, but strange situations breed strange results. The continuing failure to provide a justification for the Afghan debacle (They are even saying being in peasant villages there will make the streets of Britain safer, would be funny if it wasn't frankly Orwellian) means that is is re branded as a grand crusade to liberate women from the shackles of opression.
Which is all the lie, that somehow, magically, Afghanistan is about spreading a liberal democratic utopia to such a place where it will never exist.

Strange bedfellows indeed. It reminds me of George Galloway who managed to combine Marxism and Muslims to get elected.

How long will this marriage of convenience last? (Or partnership, feminists oppose marriage) If you really wanted to spread feminism by force, then the last people on earth I would want (bar the talibs themselves) would be a soldier, particularly a British soldier. Do they know how 'hard' some of these guys are. In short, many soldiers are the ones at school who got into fights and bullied people. Speaking from personal experience (but not making too broad a generalisation)

As is said here- http://womanonfire13.wordpress.com/2009/08/15/why-is-a-leading-feminist-organization-lending-its-name-to-support-escalation-in-afghanistan/
Waging war does not lead to the liberation of women anywhere. Women always disproportionately suffer the effects of war, and to think that women’s rights can be won with bullets and bloodshed is a position dangerous in its naïveté. The Feminist Majority should know this instinctively.

And killing people for their own Democracy... that is some chutzpah. Blowing up civilains, 50% of whom will be women.
I think it is a purely American viewpoint, waging war on a intangible thing or concept, War on Drugs, War on Terror etc, must be to do with puritanism- but that is for another day.

Two Double headed Eagles- Rus, Serbs,...Vronsky, Anna Karenina, Human Nature

2009-08-30T22:00:00.000+01:00

Here is a short piece I wrote a few months ago, just out of sheer boredom. Regards the historical link between 'Rusi i Srbi', but also with some philosophical undertones, not too mention Tolstoy's own opinions...
Anyone who has read Anna Karenina should recognise it from the last part. Anna is dead, Vronsky has no purpose..... war breaks out, suddenly he now has a purpose. This is a very good observation as to the nature of conflicts and also human nature. I can't help also thinking of Kipling's poem Tommy where the British soldier is seen as a reckless and unwelcome figure to be avoided and refused service, until a war breaks out, after which he is a hero. (That itself can also be reflected by our British Tabloids continuous blind patriotism. Anyone who is in a military uniform, and a war breaks out, or continuing as in Afganistan, is instantly a hero)

Vronsky goes to the Wars.
Anna Karenina, fate and futility.

The war breaks out. Vronsky and other 'volunteers' go off to fight. Although calling them volunteers is strange really, because circumstances have tied their hand and forced them (i.e in Vronsky's case) If anything it is a reflection on human nature. These late chapters show that for any war, there will always be a pool of disillusioned young men whose lives have stalled, who will always volunteer, because they don't really have any purpose in the normal conditions of life (a phrase used by Tolstoy a lot). 'This war is a godsend' said by someone close to Vronsky (can't remember who). Katavasov, an academic and friend of Koznyshev, decides to make an anthropological observation of the 'volunteers'.

Because there are always a number of people who circumstance and fate has struck a hard blow, their will always be men who only want to sacrifice themselves, on both sides of the conflict. So there will always be war. To die nobly and be remebered rather than sink into vagueness, obscurity and routine, eventually to be forgotten, is always an attraction to people like Vronsky. Men who's lovers have died, others heavily in gambling debt, others without any purpose in life, those who have failed in their goals- these are the ones who first sign up because they want to die gloriously. These are the people Katavasov sees in his 'anthropological sketch' And also the expectations of society influence them.

At any one point in time, disillusioned people such as those mentioned above exist. In every country, allies and enemies. Usually men. When a war breaks out, jingoism erupts. Flags wave, priests praise, generals and princes speak, women throw flowers or become nurses. These men can now be heroes. The everyday monotony is suspended. War is the opposite of the everyday. Perhaps the problem is that all these disillusioned men want to die. As do the opponents. But as General Patton said, it is not about dying for one's country, but killing for one's country.

So why should we care? There will always be a certain percentage of young men who want to die because the conditions of life have not been beneficial to them. But they are stood up on pinnacles as lions. Rather than slit their wrists in a run down lodging, they can go out in glory.

The background to this ending in Anna Karenina is that in 1876 a war broke out between Ottoman Turkey and Serbia. Serbia was under Turkish occupation, but the Serbian people had revolted. Russia, was a defender of Orthodoxy and Pan-Slavism officially became involved in 1877, but volunteers were raised in 1876, the time of the ending of the book.

Tolstoy opposed the war. He saw the realities of all the mindless jingoism and patriotic spirit. War was just a way to die with honour. So much so that the publishing literary journal stopped serialising it (the great 19th century Russian classics were all serialised) and the book was released as a whole.

That was then. Today Russo-Serb friendship is as strong as ever. What with the brother Orthodox nations, fellow Slavs, linguistically related etc. From an international relations perspective, this small part of the book can be analysed and shows good advice. Russia and Serbia are both united like the double headed eagles on their coats of arms.
But what we can learn from this passage in the sphere of human nature, is that, sadly, there will always be armed conflict, as there will always be disillusioned people with no purpose. No grand ideologies like Communism or Capitalism can make human nature better, unfortunately.

First post that no-one will ever read!

2009-08-29T00:46:00.000+01:00

Moment of history.... to be ignored by everyone.

Hi, I'm NapoleonK. Not really active on the interwebs except for my CiF profile--http://www.guardian.co.uk/users/NapoleonKaramazov

Anyways, in a fit of Nihilistic emptiness, I thought I'll give this a go..............naive young cherry blossom that I am.

Ah well, let's see how this crack warms up.