If we want world peace we need to replace this ancient culture of power and greed with love and compassion. Focus less on defense and destruction, focus more on enhancing life and personal growth. If we respond to evil powers with hatred and violence, it only diminishes our own humanity and fans the flames of evil. It's such a viscous cycle but the only way to change it is by starting inside yourself. There can't be any large scale revolution without that. We can't force this change of culture using violence or oppression, it doesn't work, as we have seen over and over again and as is discussed here: http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/…/paris-you-don-t-want-to-…/ I don't know what the answer is either, I just know that violence only breeds violence, we must lead the way with compassion and tactic. "No martyr's cause has ever been stilled by his assassin's bullet."
Tuesday 17 November 2015
Tony Benn, 1992
If we want world peace we need to replace this ancient culture of power and greed with love and compassion. Focus less on defense and destruction, focus more on enhancing life and personal growth. If we respond to evil powers with hatred and violence, it only diminishes our own humanity and fans the flames of evil. It's such a viscous cycle but the only way to change it is by starting inside yourself. There can't be any large scale revolution without that. We can't force this change of culture using violence or oppression, it doesn't work, as we have seen over and over again and as is discussed here: http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/…/paris-you-don-t-want-to-…/ I don't know what the answer is either, I just know that violence only breeds violence, we must lead the way with compassion and tactic. "No martyr's cause has ever been stilled by his assassin's bullet."
Wednesday 4 November 2015
What it Takes to be a Rebel in Modern Times
More of the same stuff from my last post.. Although more recent.
Capitalism: A Love Story
This was released in 2009 but I've only now seen it as it's just been uploaded to Netflix. Well worth a watch. More disturbing than any horror movie I've seen:
I fear Britain is growing more similar to this American government/corporation combination.
Tuesday 3 November 2015
Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire
------------------------------------------------------------------
Oppression
noun
Oppression
noun
1. the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, cruel, or unjustmanner.
2. an act or instance of oppressing or subjecting to cruel or unjust impositions or restraints.
3. the state of being oppressed.
4. the feeling of being heavily burdened, mentally or physically, by troubles, adverse conditions, anxiety, etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Such a great book on the nature of oppression. It would do the world good if everyone read and absorbed this. It makes perfect sense.
A few quotes from the first chapter:
"The oppressed, having internalised the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines, are fearful of freedom. Freedom would require them to eject this image and replace it with autonomy and responsibility. Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued constantly and responsibly. Freedom is not an ideal located outside of man; nor is it an idea which becomes myth. It is rather the indispensable condition for the quest for human completion."
"The oppressed suffer from the duality which has established itself in their innermost being. They discover that without freedom they cannot exist authentically. Yet, although they desire authentic existence, they fear it. They are at one and the same time themselves and the oppressor whose consciousness they have internalised. The conflict lies in the choice between being wholly themselves or being divided; between ejecting the oppressor within or not ejecting them; between human solidarity or alienation; between following prescriptions or having choices; between being spectators or actors; between acting or having the illusion of acting through the action of the oppressors between speaking out of being silent, castrated in their power to create and re-create, in their power to transform the world. This is the tragic dilemma of the oppressed which their education must take into account."
"To deny the importance of subjectivity in the process of transforming the world and history is naive and simplistic. It is to admit the impossible: a world without people. This objectivistic position if as ingenuous as that of subjectivism, which postulates people without a world. World and human beings do not exist apart from each other, they exist in constant interaction."
"Reality which becomes oppressive results in the contradistinction of men as oppressors and oppressed. The latter, whose task it is to struggle for their liberation together with those who show true solidarity, must acquire a critical awareness of oppression through the praxis of this struggle. One of the gravest obstacles to the achievement of liberation is that oppressive reality absorbs those within it and thereby acts to submerge human beings' consciousness. Functionally, oppression is domesticating. To no longer be prey to its force, one must emerge from it and turn upon it. This can be done only by means of the praxis: reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it."
"Any situation in which "A" objectively exploits "B" or hinders his and her pursuit of self-affirmation as a responsible person is one of oppression. Such a situation in itself constitutes violence, even when sweetened by false generosity, because it interferes with the individual's ontological and historical vocation to be more fully human. With the establishment of a relationship of oppression, violence has already begun. Never in history has violence been initiated by the oppressed. How could they be the initiators, if they themselves are the results of the violence? How could they be the sponsors of something whose objective inauguration called forth their existence as oppressed? There would be no oppressed has there been no prior situation of violence to establish their subjugation.
Violence is initiated by those who oppress, who exploit, who fail to recognize others as persons-not by those who are oppressed, exploited, and unrecognised. It is not the unloved who initiate disaffection, but those who cannot love because they love only themselves. It is not the helpless, subject to terror, who initiate the terror, but the violent, who with their power create the concrete situation which begets the "rejects of life." It is not the tyrannised who initiate hatred, but those who despise. It is not those whose humanity is denied them who negate humankind, but those who denied that humanity (thus negating their own as well). Force is used not by those who have become weak under the preponderance of the strong, but by the strong who have emasculated them.
For the oppressors, however, it is always the oppressed (whom they obviously never call "the oppressed" but - depending on whether they are fellow countrymen or not - "those people" or"the blind and envious masses" or "savages" or "natives" or "subversives") who are disaffected, who are "violent," "barbaric," "wicked," or "ferocious" when they react to the violence of the oppressors."
"Acts which prevent the restoration of the oppressive regime cannot be compared with those by which a few men and women deny the majority their right to be human.
However, the moment the new regime hardens into a dominating "bureaucracy" the humanist dimension of the struggle is lost and it is no longer possible to speak of liberation. Hence our insistence that the authentic solution of the oppressor-oppressed contradiction does not lie in a mere reversal of position, in moving from one pole to the other. Nor does it lie in the replacement of the former oppressors with new ones who continue to subjugate the oppressed - all in the name of their liberation.
But even when the contradiction is resolved authentically by a new situation established by the liberated labourers, the former oppressors do not feel liberated. On the contrary, they genuinely consider themselves to be oppressed. Conditioned by the experience of oppressing others, any situation other than their former seems to them like oppression. Formerly, they could eat, dress, wear shoes, be educated, travel, and hear Beethoven; while millions did not eat, had no clothes or shoes, neither studied nor traveled, much less listened to Beethoven. Any restriction on this way of life, in the name of the rights of the community, appears to the former oppressors profound violation of their individual rights - although they had no respect for the millions who suffered and died of hunger, pain, sorrow, and despair. For the oppressors, "human beings" refers only to themselves; other people are "things." For the oppressors, there exists only one right: their right to live in peace, over against the right, not always even recognised, but simply concerned, of the oppressed to survival. And they make this concession only because the existence of the oppressed is necessary to their own existence."
Every paragraph is worth quoting on here but I'll stop there..
Go buy the book, I had to read some bits a few times to understand it properly but it really is one of those books you could pick up and read front to back over and over, and everyone should.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pedagogy-Oppressed-Penguin-Education-Freire/dp/014025403X
All photos found on Google images.
4. the feeling of being heavily burdened, mentally or physically, by troubles, adverse conditions, anxiety, etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Such a great book on the nature of oppression. It would do the world good if everyone read and absorbed this. It makes perfect sense.
A few quotes from the first chapter:
"The oppressed, having internalised the image of the oppressor and adopted his guidelines, are fearful of freedom. Freedom would require them to eject this image and replace it with autonomy and responsibility. Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued constantly and responsibly. Freedom is not an ideal located outside of man; nor is it an idea which becomes myth. It is rather the indispensable condition for the quest for human completion."
"The oppressed suffer from the duality which has established itself in their innermost being. They discover that without freedom they cannot exist authentically. Yet, although they desire authentic existence, they fear it. They are at one and the same time themselves and the oppressor whose consciousness they have internalised. The conflict lies in the choice between being wholly themselves or being divided; between ejecting the oppressor within or not ejecting them; between human solidarity or alienation; between following prescriptions or having choices; between being spectators or actors; between acting or having the illusion of acting through the action of the oppressors between speaking out of being silent, castrated in their power to create and re-create, in their power to transform the world. This is the tragic dilemma of the oppressed which their education must take into account."
"To deny the importance of subjectivity in the process of transforming the world and history is naive and simplistic. It is to admit the impossible: a world without people. This objectivistic position if as ingenuous as that of subjectivism, which postulates people without a world. World and human beings do not exist apart from each other, they exist in constant interaction."
"Reality which becomes oppressive results in the contradistinction of men as oppressors and oppressed. The latter, whose task it is to struggle for their liberation together with those who show true solidarity, must acquire a critical awareness of oppression through the praxis of this struggle. One of the gravest obstacles to the achievement of liberation is that oppressive reality absorbs those within it and thereby acts to submerge human beings' consciousness. Functionally, oppression is domesticating. To no longer be prey to its force, one must emerge from it and turn upon it. This can be done only by means of the praxis: reflection and action upon the world in order to transform it."
"Any situation in which "A" objectively exploits "B" or hinders his and her pursuit of self-affirmation as a responsible person is one of oppression. Such a situation in itself constitutes violence, even when sweetened by false generosity, because it interferes with the individual's ontological and historical vocation to be more fully human. With the establishment of a relationship of oppression, violence has already begun. Never in history has violence been initiated by the oppressed. How could they be the initiators, if they themselves are the results of the violence? How could they be the sponsors of something whose objective inauguration called forth their existence as oppressed? There would be no oppressed has there been no prior situation of violence to establish their subjugation.
Violence is initiated by those who oppress, who exploit, who fail to recognize others as persons-not by those who are oppressed, exploited, and unrecognised. It is not the unloved who initiate disaffection, but those who cannot love because they love only themselves. It is not the helpless, subject to terror, who initiate the terror, but the violent, who with their power create the concrete situation which begets the "rejects of life." It is not the tyrannised who initiate hatred, but those who despise. It is not those whose humanity is denied them who negate humankind, but those who denied that humanity (thus negating their own as well). Force is used not by those who have become weak under the preponderance of the strong, but by the strong who have emasculated them.
For the oppressors, however, it is always the oppressed (whom they obviously never call "the oppressed" but - depending on whether they are fellow countrymen or not - "those people" or"the blind and envious masses" or "savages" or "natives" or "subversives") who are disaffected, who are "violent," "barbaric," "wicked," or "ferocious" when they react to the violence of the oppressors."
"Acts which prevent the restoration of the oppressive regime cannot be compared with those by which a few men and women deny the majority their right to be human.
However, the moment the new regime hardens into a dominating "bureaucracy" the humanist dimension of the struggle is lost and it is no longer possible to speak of liberation. Hence our insistence that the authentic solution of the oppressor-oppressed contradiction does not lie in a mere reversal of position, in moving from one pole to the other. Nor does it lie in the replacement of the former oppressors with new ones who continue to subjugate the oppressed - all in the name of their liberation.
But even when the contradiction is resolved authentically by a new situation established by the liberated labourers, the former oppressors do not feel liberated. On the contrary, they genuinely consider themselves to be oppressed. Conditioned by the experience of oppressing others, any situation other than their former seems to them like oppression. Formerly, they could eat, dress, wear shoes, be educated, travel, and hear Beethoven; while millions did not eat, had no clothes or shoes, neither studied nor traveled, much less listened to Beethoven. Any restriction on this way of life, in the name of the rights of the community, appears to the former oppressors profound violation of their individual rights - although they had no respect for the millions who suffered and died of hunger, pain, sorrow, and despair. For the oppressors, "human beings" refers only to themselves; other people are "things." For the oppressors, there exists only one right: their right to live in peace, over against the right, not always even recognised, but simply concerned, of the oppressed to survival. And they make this concession only because the existence of the oppressed is necessary to their own existence."
Every paragraph is worth quoting on here but I'll stop there..
Go buy the book, I had to read some bits a few times to understand it properly but it really is one of those books you could pick up and read front to back over and over, and everyone should.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pedagogy-Oppressed-Penguin-Education-Freire/dp/014025403X
All photos found on Google images.
Tuesday 6 October 2015
Life in my hand
There's something I find interesting about photographing a subject in my hand. The idea of being connected to whatever you're photographing, while keeping it natural and modest.
magic beans (runner beans)
Crested gecko
Dahlia with raindrops
Dead bat
Dead bat, wings spread
Plums from my boss' garden
Little toad that was stuck down a drain
Monday 28 September 2015
Rubble Kings
Who knew the movie The Warriors was actually a pretty watered down truth of the reality in South Bronx in the late 60s/70s! American imperialism and capitalism igniting fury in the oppressed, violence and gang culture were strife.
Netflix have commissioned some great documentaries, this is one of them - highly recommended.
Monday 7 September 2015
The Chemical Brothers - Snow
Give it a chance. Maybe skip 30 seconds or so, but then turn it up loud, close your eyes and feel it !
Went to see American Ultra last night at the cinema, such a great movie.. Perfect casting. Unique concept including comedy, romance and action. Unpredictable. Love love loved it. This song was playing during one of the scenes and it was perfect. Go see.
Friday 28 August 2015
Thom Yorke "Harrowdown Hill"
Oldy but goody, based on the death of Dr David Kelly back in 2003. An equally disturbing story if it were suicide or murder.
Wednesday 26 August 2015
Life, what is it but a dream?
A boat beneath a sunny sky,
Lingering onward dreamily
In an evening of July --
Children three that nestle near,
Eager eye and willing ear,
Pleased a simple tale to hear --
Long has paled that sunny sky:
Echoes fade and memories die:
Autumn frosts have slain July.
Still she haunts me, phantomwise,
Alice moving under skies
Never seen by waking eyes.
Children yet, the tale to hear,
Eager eye and willing ear,
Lovingly shall nestle near.
In a Wonderland they lie,
Dreaming as the days go by,
Dreaming as the summers die:
Ever drifting down the stream --
Lingering in the golden dream --
Life, what is it but a dream?
- Lewis Carroll
Life is but a dream...
Monday 24 August 2015
Thoughts this morning
I like Sunday mornings as it's the only day of the week that Dara doesn't get up for work. We have nothing to do but chill, talk, drink tea, read. It just feels so good to wake up after a good nights sleep, with no hangover, in a comfortable place with no rush to do anything. Even better being next to someone that you love. That couple of hours is just absolute bliss. I'm a smug bitch.
This Sunday morning Dara read the news and I read some of my book. We conversed, as you do, putting the world to rights.
I mentioned that I'd seen a post on Insagram by someone I follow ('that_paleo_guy'); he posted a picture saying 'SATURDAY SOCIAL MEDIA SHUTDOWN #saturdaysocialmediashutdown' and in the caption he put "Time to detox from social media for the day. Shutting off the cell phone and tablet until the sun comes up tomorrow morning. No notifications, no distractions from the digital world, no blue lights, no nothing. Time to refresh. I'll see you all in the am. #peaceout #timeout #refresh #reset #reboot #unwind #familytime #metime #nodistractions #feelgood" - I thought that was a good initiative.
I also told him about this set of photos by photographer Izabela Urbaniak of her children enjoying technology free summers.
I have mentioned before on my blog (and in conversation with D) that I really do appreciate my morning walk with Finn as a time to be away from the madness of the world, to not absorb information, to just be with nature. However, I still feel like I spend way too much time sucked into the internet, scrolling though status updates on Facebook and new posts on Instagram. It's often the first thing I think to do when I wake up - check for notifications, refresh, refresh, refuckit. It can't be healthy. This guy explains it well:
"Generation of idiots, smart phones but not people!" Oh dear.
I thought to myself on Sunday morning "I am going to spend less time online and more time in life, organic, natural life." I enjoy using social media as a platform to connect and share photos, humour, interesting articles, perspective on things, it's a great thing but it shouldn't be as pertinent on my mind.
When I do eventually nestle down and start a family, I'm going to encourage alternative methods of enjoyment and stimulation. I don't wish to deprive my future sprogs of technology as we do live in a technological world, I want them to fit in but I don't want them to be consumed by it. I'm sure not many people admittedly want their kids to be obsessed with technology but undeniably, TV or a game on your iPhone are useful solutions to curing a child's boredom while you're occupied with something else. I will strive to avoid this - summer's without technology sound dreamy and unimaginable in this day and age, yet it wasn't that long ago that these technologies were invented. Let's take a leaf out of Dollyandfife and Izabela Urbaniak's book.
Let's go outside, let's get sucked into the natural world more often.
Reflecting on my current state of mind...
We all change and evolve as we go through life, we have different information sources around us, different influences. Thinking about my own mindset - At this current time the things that are most influencing my outlook are; videos I watch on Youtube (The Young Turks, The Trews, Secular Talk, The Labour Leadership campaign, mostly Jeremy Corbyn ), the book I'm reading (currently: The Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire), the conversations I have (mainly with fellow dog walkers and Dara), the things I see on Instagram (I follow a wide variety of people but my favourites besides my friends are - dollyandfife, moistbuddha, michelgaubert, mydaywithleo, beigecardigan, fuckjerry, thefatjewish), work and my goals for the future. (It's ironic because most of what influences my outlook on life I have accessed via the internet, the thing I want to spend less time on is the thing that's educating me. Handy but addictive.)
At other times in my life I may have had or may have more conversations with different people to those I converse with at the moment. I may watch or have watched more TV rather than Youtube videos and on completely different subjects, the books I have read or will read cover completely different topics, so the influences on my mind and my perspective are variable but at the moment, the things that most influence my outlook:
- Youtube- Learning about politics, philosophy, spirituality, injustice, flaws in society, humanity...
- Books- Same as above and in addition, oppression
- Conversations- Talking about these things in conversations, and I've also been talking about history and how much society has changed and is changing (I'm thinking of a recent conversation I had with Tom and Frank who I met walking the dog, they were telling me what life was like when they were young back in the 60s and 70s)
- Instagram- The people I mentioned that I like best on Instagram crack me up and remind me that although things are shit and the world often lacks humanity, society is broken in ways but we sometimes just have to laugh. We mustn't take eveything too seriously as it will ruin us. We have to continue to find humour in the world. Other people I follow are inspirational in other ways.
- Work- My workplace pleases me and my boss inspires me as he is so successful and intellectual. I am grateful to be in this position.
- Goals- I'm mentally planning our wedding, I'm thinking about finance and how long it will take for us to buy our own house. Naturally the thought of 'nesting' leads me to thinking about starting a family, popping some sprogs out...
Within that I watched Russel Brand's last ever episode of the Trews, watch here:
"I think that we've gone as far as we can with the Trews for now. And the thing that's been interesting over the course of the year is the reaction to some of the stories that we've reported on and the reaction in the press and on TV, to me.
... So it's been like an extraordinary time for all of us, there's a presidential election in America that's thrown up ludicrous characters like Donald Trump but also the potentially optimistic participation of Bernie Sanders. Is there a possibility through conventional political means to return the will of ordinary people to the seat of power it's a really big question. When I talked about revolution at the beginning of this mad journey on Jeremy Paxman, I was kind of gung-ho and stuff but I think what revolution means, well what revolution literally does mean is a change of power not using the conventional means of power. We're gonna have to come together in a different way to create the change. Now I believe that more than ever. I really believe in change, I feel really optimistic about the inevitability of change...
... I believe in the possibility of ordinary people to change their circumstances if they come together, and I believe in me and the Trews and what we've been doing. I'm gonna be learning, 'cause I know change is coming and I want to be part of that.
... I can't do it the service it requires until I go away and learn some stuff so that when we come back it will be more truthful, more inclusive than ever, 'cause the worlds going mental and more than ever ordinary people need to come together.
... I'm going away to think and to learn, because its worth it, because this is an important time because there is a possibility of change.
... So really the obligation to tell the truth as always lies with you as much as it does with me. The only real weapon we have is to be truthful with ourselves, truthful with one another and to formulate new organisations, new ways of pursuing change."
So all of that combined going through my mind is probably why I've been having the weirdest dreams. The capacity of the mind and it's ability to process information is unreal. It would be a shame to waste it on gossip and game shows. Russel Brand talks about Truth being the only weapon we have, I think the real weapon is our mind. Being truthful is something we should all live by for sure but it is our mind that we must harness and evolve. The mind is the tool which we use to channel our energy, our mind is what we use to set our goals and obtain them, our mind controls our emotions, our perceptions, our behaviour. Our mind gives us the ability to make a difference in the world through our consciousness, our minds are what makes us unique.
We should strive to share ourselves through interconnectivity, be equal and one with everyone and everything. We don't need to be rich, popular or highly educated to acquire that. We should be open minded not ignorant, continuing to learn. While it naturally scares us, change is inevitable, so let's embrace it and influence it positively.
As we learn, reflection is so important. Allowing time to process information that we take in and to consider alternative perspectives, that in itself exercises the mind and develops intelligence.
Friday 21 August 2015
WORD! Eve Ensler
Q: There are a lot of causes out there that are being talked about, you know, poverty, sickness and so on. You spend eight years on this one. Why this One?
A: I think that, if you think about women, women are the primary resource of the planet. They give birth, we come from them, they are mothers, they are visionary they are the future. If you think that the U.N. now says that one out of three women on the planet will be raped or beaten in their lifetime, we're talking about the desecration of the primary resource of the planet. We're talking about the place where we come from, we're talking about parenting. Imagine that you've been raped and you're bringing up a boy child. How does it impact your ability to work, or envision a future, or thrive, as opposed to just survive? What I believe is if we could figure out how to make women safe and honor women, it would be parallel or equal to honoring life itself.
Eve Ensler
Ships? Sure I'll sail them...
Ships?
Sure I'll sail them
Show me the boat,
If it'll float,
I'll sail it.
Men?
Yes, I'll love them.
If they have the style,
to make me smile,
I'll love them.
Life?
'Course I'll live it.
Just give me breath,
Up to my death,
And I'll live it.
Failure?
I'm not ashamed to tell it,
I've never learned to spell it,
Not failure.
Maya Angelou
Maya Angelou Live and Unplugged
A true and beautiful soul. Feed your soul through Maya Angelou, listen here:
Wednesday 19 August 2015
Mos Def: "We are in Critical Times"
Thought's on upheaval. In light of the happenings in Ferguson and other parts of America.
Racism, inequality, imbalance of power, Yasiin Bey responds.
"Free the people. Free the land.
My country is Earth."
Katie Hopkins - Russell Brand Trews
"Isn't it a bit mad, to see human litter strewn about. This is the kind of images that Katie Hopkins doesn't care about... She's just the puss emerging from the pimple that is our policy."
"Until there's a shift in the lens of the way we see the world, of like "oh right we're meant to be here helping each other", until you make that shift, that you can only make really as an individual and hope that it emanates on a familial, social, communal, national, international level, unless we start making those individual transitions, that's why again what Katie Hopkins says is important, because we can't afford to allow that to be our prevailing mentality in our conversations in our chats in bars, cafes and workplaces, far less allow it to become policy. For us to live under the politics of cruelty, a kind of incremental holocaust. If compassion is not a component, then there's no humanity left to save. Once we kill the compassion within ourselves then we are all then cockroaches, waiting for the apocalypse, and it can't come quick enough."
"I suppose what you can do, is find your own humanity, look for the humanity and connection that you feel to other people and be kind. "
Thursday 13 August 2015
Speak only
"Be still when you have nothing to say; when genuine passion moves you, say what you've got to say, and say it hot."
D. H. Lawrence
Gary Cooper with his wife Rocky, 1930s.
Wednesday 12 August 2015
Neil Gaiman - What a guy!
"So be wise, because the world needs more wisdom... and if you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise and then just behave like they would... and now go, and make interesting mistakes. Make amazing mistakes, make glorious and fantastic mistakes. Break rules. Make the world more interesting for your being here. Make. Good. Art."
David Icke - Mind Control & The New World Order
Interesting and disturbing:
"People said - in very large numbers in the early 1990's - that I was crazy, insane, having a midlife crisis, I'm sure some people still feel the same, but I tell you what - If I'm seen as sane by a world this crazy, I'm disappointed."
“Fictions are necessary for the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The Truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.” Albert Pike
Tuesday 11 August 2015
Monday 3 August 2015
Immigration revisited
With all the media attention on the Calais hold up crisis currently happening, the discussion/debate/argument about immigration is wide open again. An interesting article a friend of mine just shared via Huffington Post, well worth a read. It's good to get some actual facts about immigration because a lot of what we're led to believe by the media is completely exaggerated and tailored to create a more shocking news story. It is completely reasonable for people to be concerned by migration if they or their family are being effected by seemingly exhausted public services, or unable to find good quality work that pays a living wage. People feel at threat by what they see as a severe immigration crisis in their home country, well truthfully there is a severe migration crisis, but it's not just here in the UK - it's global, and it isn't a straightforward situation, there is a large background to why this is even happening.
I don't know what the answer is, all I know is that as a nation we have to take some responsibility for what is happening in these countries and the cause for why people are so desperate to leave. We should not get angry, we should widen our knowledge on the situation and focus our efforts on influencing global change to restore war torn and impoverished countries. As a starting point, we're better to learn the facts at least and as always, not regard what we read in the newspaper as gospel.
I enjoyed Robin Lustig's final note on his Huffington Post article:
"Do I have the answer to the global migration crisis? No, but here are some suggestions that might help: set up proper, EU-run processing centres at the main entry points: southern Italy, Greece, Hungary. Genuine refugees should be offered asylum according to an agreed quota calculated according to population and GDP. Those deemed non-eligible for asylum would be offered a choice: wait in a camp until your number comes up, and then go where you're sent -- or go home.
The tragedy is that so many people are so desperate that they're prepared to die in an attempt to find a safe place to live. And our response is so blinkered that all we can think of is building higher fences."
There seems to be no easy, humane solution whereby all parties are satisfied. Let's see what our leaders come up with.
Wednesday 29 July 2015
Why I don't believe in either Conservatives or Labour
My attempt at blogging about politics - this could make no sense, forgive me - I'm new at this stuff.
Ever since the run up to the recent election, I've been trying to improve my knowledge on politics, mainly UK politics, I felt embarrassed that I couldn't hold a proper conversation about something that I've learned is so important to each and every one of us, and the future of absolutely everyone and everything.
I have always been interested in philosophy, I was never religious but I wanted to understand 'the meaning of life' or whatever, I wanted to stop myself from being scared of death, to get the most out of life. I remember when I was young sitting at the dinner table chatting to my family and suddenly realising that I was actually dying at that point, saying something like "so we're all getting closer to death every second" and being so stunned and scared by this prospect. I discovered that's why a lot of people follow religion, they need faith in something to have a purpose, to feel safe and secure and to have a reason to be good, and to have hope when things go wrong. Often people go off the rails if they don't see any point or meaning. I couldn't grasp the concept of God, or as I was taught it at least - the Creator. I was always more drawn to the Big Bang theory, evolution, science - although at school I was useless at science. I read the book, 'The Curious Incident of a Dog in the Night-Time', I actually posted about it on my blog back in 2010. I was comfortable with the idea of dying and my energy being absorbed into the universe, as the boy in the book puts it:
"What actually happens when you die is that your brain stops working and your body rots, like Rabbit did when he died and we buried him in the earth at the bottom of the garden. And all his molecules were broken down into other molecules and they went into the earth and were eaten by worms and went into the plants and if we go and dig in the same place in 10 years there will be nothing except his skeleton left. And in 1,000 years even his skeleton will be gone. But that is all right because he is a part of the flowers and the apple tree and the hawthorn bush now..."
I listened to some of Alan Watts' lectures, and read some Hunter S. Thompson, Jack Kerouac, D.H. Lawrence... I suppose they would be bohemian types - some of their work influenced my perspective on life, all before I learned much about politics. So I had a base if you like, I began to feel like we are all part of something much bigger than our human society, yet that rules us all. We are alive in our consciousness for a short while, it's a great blessing in itself, yet so many people go through so much pain, it's so depressing. I believe that ideally those of us who are privileged really ought to share our good fortune with less fortunate beings, and encourage them to be more engaged, we should all be able to enjoy the ride.
Previously I had never voted. I'd never really been interested in politics, I felt completely disconnected and uninterested. My early realisations were:
1. I didn't fully agree with any of the parties' manifestos; I was under the assumption that no matter which party were in charge of running the country, there would always be groups of people in society who felt mistreated, there is no way everyone could agree and be happy.
2. There are so many aspects to it; we hear about it so often - the party currently in power having to fix the damage from previous years. We very rarely know the truth of who's to blame, and our opinions can often be distorted by those we should be able to trust, giving biased accounts of happenings.
3. The only possible saving grace would be to have a diverse government who collectively understand and have compassion for the lives and needs of all people, the planet, and everything else. Educated leaders who each had a unique perspective, coming from differing backgrounds. Then I thought, but that is why there is such mayhem in government, because many of these MP's have different views yet don't have the capacity to try to understand things from an alternative perspective or the ability to compromise fairly. It takes them so long to come to any agreement on important issues, it seems to take years to change broken systems.
4. A statement I heard quite often that I wanted to learn more about before jumping on the bandwagon: "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer"
Dara and I would chat about these things, both being liberals and not really knowing which party we should support.
Other than conversing with people, Youtube has been my main source of educating myself, firstly watching people such as Akala, the Artist Taxi Driver, Russel Brand, Frankie Boyle, Stewart Lee. All seemingly angry with the government, certainly opposing the Convervative manifesto. Listening to their views, I felt drawn to the left. I couldn't quite get my head around the injustice and lack of compassion for people lower down in society, under the current system. Particularly the unbalance of government spending - how can these people on one end be getting paid way more than they could possibly need to live comfortably even when in most cases they have been born into money, sure they may have worked hard but more often than not it was because their parents could afford the best education, therefore giving them that platform. While on the opposite end, less privileged people who may not have been given many opportunities, have had many battles to face throughout their lives, even those with disabilities, are all seemingly being categorised as scroungers and unable to access even the bare minimum financial support from their government, leading them into lives of destitute rather than prosperity. It seems as though if you are born into a middle to upper class family you are likely to live a life of prosperity, wealth and success, whereas if you're born into a lower working class or poor family, you are highly unlikely to escape that category. It doesn't seem right that your life can be planned in that way before you're even born.
David Cameron is always saying "we stand for working people" in other words "we don't stand for scroungers", but they are not tackling the issue of 'benefit scrounging' in the right way. So many people are being forced into that category and not given any support. It seems to be so categorical, there isn't enough focus on rehabilitation. People need to be more engaged, encouraged and given better resources to lead a more positive and productive lifestyle. It seems to be so much about money, we need more compassion and education to spend the money in the right way. You can't just tell people that they need to change their lifestyle and turn their worlds upside down in the aim that they will one day find a balance and not need government help. People need real support, access to opportunities to give something back and be engaged with society.
Rehabilitation is a word that I find myself using quite often. I believe that we are all born pure, sure we may have certain traits built into us, but we can all grow into something good, given that we can access to the right opportunities and resources. Likewise we are all capable of being bad, if we are drawn down those paths. We come to many crossroads in our lives where we can go off track, things can go terribly wrong, we can be lead into unhealthy, soul destroying situations. But I firmly believe that with the right resources, compassion, time and love - we can all overcome these troubles and be rehabilitated to our original form but with wisdom gained by learning from our experiences. Often we hear people saying 'find God', I believe this translates into finding peace and love within ourselves, reconfiguring our lives.
I recently went to Budapest, I learned more about Communism while I was there. More recently I watched a Socialism debate at Oxford University, called 'Does Socialism work'. My two favourite speakers were Jeremy Corbyn on the 'yes' side and Daniel Hannan on the 'no' side. It was a very interesting debate. Daniel argues that fascism emerges from socialism, which leads to communism, referring to the failing communist regimes we've seen in the past, similar to what I had learned about in Hungary. Jeremy talks about the principles of a communal health service and those socialist concepts, the evils of free market capitalism, access to decent housing and decent education for everyone. Daniel talks about the desire for material improvement being fundamental in human nature. Jeremy talks about eliminating poverty and injustice while Daniel believes that the 6 billion people in this world who can't afford the cars and dishwashers, WILL be raised to a higher standard of living in the future when free exchange, specialisation and comparative advantage run their course. It's difficult to take either side because you can see where they are both coming from. Two very passionate and intelligent speakers. We need to keep both sides in mind and try to meet somewhere in the middle, compromise reflects democracy. Perhaps Daniel is right that more and more people will be raised to a higher standard of living in the future, but Jeremy is right in that action needs to be taken NOW to help these people in poverty and suffering injustice.
Is this really how it is?
Is this the morbid alternative?
Ultimately there will never be complete fairness and equality in our species, as Daniel Hannan says: "Socialism and capitalism are matrices, they are economic systems within which people can be generous or greedy, they can be selfish or altruistic."
Capitalism is really run by cartels and corporations but ultimately that's always going to be the case. In history we've seen that communism was run by criminals and greed ridden businesses too and civilians ended up much worse. We need to find a way to distribute money more fairly without exploiting anybody. We need to find a way to reduce greed and the desire for fast and destructive development. We need to show Capitalist leaders how people are being failed by their system, and work hard to introduce innovative ways of engaging these failed people with society, encouraging an egalitarian system where everyone is given the compassion and financial support that they need, no more and no less.
I felt a lot more against, or rather - unable to understand the Conservatives before listening to Daniel Hannan. Many people I know voted Conservative, a large portion of the population voted them in, they must have had their reasons to do so, it's unproductive to simply ignore that fact. My first thoughts still apply, except I know have a better understanding of the statement "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer". I still don't feel as though I would support either the Conservatives or Labour, however I now feel that no matter who's in power, we will still have battles to face, these need to be fought within communities, we need to focus our energy on making small changes. Creating a different world by these many small operations. We will always have to work hard as individuals and within our communities to create a positive impact on the world in whatever way possible depending on the resources available to us.
We have a voice now more than ever; with the powers of social media, the widespread media attention on petitions that normal people set-up to make changes in the world via platforms such as change.org, easier access to alternative news sources such as Private Eye, Huffington Post, Youtube, bloggers. More and more young people are becoming engaged with politics. If we continue to educate ourselves and others, avoiding stirring up anger by only displaying our biased views, keeping conversations open by looking at things from different perspectives, developing our knowledge and sparking interest in other people, rather than constantly battling against the system, we can actually create a positive impact on society. We can shape the future. Let's not settle on just complaining about what we think is wrong with the world, lets also seek possible solutions and promote them.
On a less serious note:
“No matter how corrupt, greedy, and heartless our government, our corporations, our media, and our religious charitable institutions may become, the music will still be wonderful.”
Can Socialism work?
I stumbled upon this debate that took place a couple of years ago. The topic really interested me as I've always known a little about Communism and Capitalism, and I wanted to know how Communism, which on paper sounds quite ideal, could end in such disaster as I'd recently learned about in the Tower of Terror, Budapest.
I mostly enjoyed listening to Jeremy Corbyn on the 'yes' side and Daniel Hannan on the 'no' side. I'm definitely a socialist but I do understand what Hannan is saying. Unfortunately we do not live in my ideal sort of world.
Click on their names to watch the full speech, or see my highlights below:
Jeremy Corbyn:
"The party that is heavily represented by the other side here are presiding over an explotion of free market private rented flats which now make up a 3rd of my constituency and the people are being socially cleansed by high rents and insufficient benefits and the refusal of government to bring in any form of rent control.
Again, better quality housing leads to better education which leads to better health."
To John Redwood, " You promoted greed at the expense of an egalitarian society."
"The moral case about socialism - those people opposite that spoke will have you believe that there is something normal and natural about living in a society where dog eats dog, the poorest go to hell and the richest do well. Do you want to live in a society where there is no public provision of any kind of service. There is only private provision and the only thing to worship is money and getting rich at the expense of others, or do you want to live in a society where there is universal health care, where there is a protection against total destitution and poverty, and every child gets to go to school. I want to live in a society that has that kind of collective principle about it.
"I also think we have to have a thought about the natural environment in which we live. We live in a free market society - certainly the domination of the worlds multinational companies and banks very powerful indeed. Are they really caring about what happens to the environment, are they really caring about the level of exploitation of oil and other mineral resources, are they really caring about the damage they are doing to the environment. Only if you live in a society and a set of principles where u take from people what they can afford in order to give that to people what need it. In other words, from each according to their means to each according to their needs."
Daniel Hannan interrupts with a point:
"That principle found its fullest expression in the Eastern Europe Marxist states, which taught that nature is a resource to be exploited and that resulted in the smoke stag (?) degredation which has not ben likened anywhere in the capitalist world. The best thing to happen to the environment was the fall of the Berlin wall so that property rights began to reverse the ecological catastrophe that Marxism had created.
Jeremy's response:
"There is some interesting parts of Marx that you obviously didn't get round to reading about Marx and the environment and about the sustainability of life. I have not actually said anything in defense of the exploitation of natural resources in Eastern Europe or anywhere else, I'm making a point that if we want to survive on this planet, we cannot go on exploiting and polluting at the rate we are, we cannot ruin our environment and destroy an Eco system and expect to survive. If you live in a free market society, a free market capitalist society will grab every piece of resource it possibly can and it wont give a damn about the environmental effects of it. A collective principal, where care about everybody does give us that opportunity to protect the natural world and the natural environment.
If you want to live in a decent world then is it right that the worlds economy is dominated by a group of unaccountable multi national corporations? They are the real power in the world today not the nation state. And if u want to look at the victims of the ultimate of this free market catastrophe that the world is faced with at the moment, go to the shanty towns o the fringes of so many big cities around the world. When the world bank arrives and tells them to privatise all public services, to sell all state owned land to make inequality a paragon of virtue, that is what drives people into danger and poverty. Think about what kind of world you want to live in - Do you want the dog to eat dog or do u want us all to care for each other, support each other and eliminate poverty and injustice? A different world is possible."
Daniel Hannan:
"Contention that fascism had emerged out of socialism."
"Socialism rests on compulsion. Its defining ethic is not equality but coercion.
Socialism and capitalism are matrices, they are economic systems within which people can be generous or greedy, they can be selfish or altruistic. Human nature is something that comes whether from our genes or from our maker. It isn't something that's created by an economic system. But what's unique about socialism is the readiness of a state to deploy coercive force. Now we've evolved a great vocabulary to describe this; We talk about things like 'asking people to pay a bit more tax', see what happens if they choose not to - behind all that polite sounding 'asking them to pay their share to contribute' is the threat of prison. Now of course there are some occasions where any society will need to rely on coercive force, on incarceration, there are some taxes that are necessary in any system, but the use of coercive and ultimately lethal force by the state is its most awesome and awful power. We should tilt the balance as far as we can to liberty. That power should be used as the prayer book says of marriage reverently, discretely, advisedly, soberly."
"The idea that those of us on this side are in favour of dog eat dog, if by dog eat dog you mean the desire for material improvement, that is a fundamental in human nature under all systems, you had it under the communist regime, the feudal regime, but what is unique about capitalism is that it harnessed that ambition to a socially useful end. Under every other system devised by human intelligence, a group of people sat on top and the way to get rich was to suck up to those in power. We uniquely in this country - and we then exported it - came up with a system where you satisfied your ambition by serving the rest of your fellow citizens under the law. We channeled that desire for self improvement in a socially productive way. and that's why socialist countries are not just less wealthy, they are also less free. It's not just that socialism doesn't work in the sense that if fails to provide material advance, it doesn't work in that it takes away human dignity, and civil rights above all our freedom to make choices as antonymous individuals."
"Somehow on this side that we are said to be more materialistic, greedier, less humane that we have less by way of fellow feeling and sympathy than those of the other side. If you contrast socialist and capitalist economies, you see precious little evidence of that, but for what its worth, I'm a conservative politician, I spend a lot of my time with libertarians,conservatives and free marketers of every stripe. I can tell u hand on heart that I've never met anyone who derives more pleasure from a healthy bank balance than from listening to Beethoven or playing with his children, or going for a walk in the country. But what is it that enables us to do those things? Its economic progress. The fact that you have a dishwasher and don't have to spend all that time washing by hand means you can go for that walk in the country, the fact that you have a car and don't have to queue at the tram station means you can listen to Beethoven symphonies, the fact that you don't have to do 6 weeks of work just to feed your children means you can spend the weekend playing with them... and where did those economic advances come from? From the system that unlocked the inventiveness of a creative people, that tapped into the unlimited potential of human innovation and raised our species to a standard of living that a couple of generations ago would have been unimaginable. Now that has happened for about 1 billion people in the world, those of us who can afford the cars and the dishwashers. There are 6 billion people who can't afford cars or dishwashers, but they will, they will as free exchange, and specialisition and comparitave advantage run there course, raising people to a higher and higher standrad of living UNLESS we go down the road of Cuba or Zimbabwe or any other socialist country because ths notion doesn't work. Don't make the mistake of judging socialsm as a textbook theory but by judging capitalism buy its necessarily imperfect outcomes. Judge like with like - in the real world you find me a funcitoning socialist country that as delivered more than a free market alternative."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)