Three white men

A few weeks back I went to the "Congress of the non-right" (I've disguised the name, to protect the innocent) here in sunny Manchester.

I had a really really fantastic time. Everyone kept their contributions short and to the point. No-one drivelled out-dated socialist rhetoric, and every workshop was structured around what small groups could brainstorm and then bring to a larger group, rather than what a Speaker Thought and Old White Men Thought in response...


What are you, fucking insane?

It was terrible, eye-stabbingly unbearable.
And I made a terrible spoof of a nursery rhyme to go with it.

Three blind mice	Three white men
Three blind mice, three blind mice,	Three white men, three white men
See how they run, see how they run,	See how they drone, see how they drone
They all ran after the farmer's wife,	They all ran over the given time
Who cut off their tails with a carving knife,	And cut off our verve with a lengthy whine
Did you ever see such a thing in your life,	Did you ever see such a pointless crime?
As three blind mice?	As three white men?

Who's Next?, as Tom Lehrer sang

OK, so the name should have been a give-away, but I am slightly obtuse. Gideon Rachman, one of the most worthwhile reads in the FT (which is going some) is, almost certainly, of the Hebraic persuasion, as the ol' anti-Semite code used to have it. Not that that changes anything, just explains why he writes so much (and well) about the Middle East I guess.

His recent (24 Feb) piece "Nuclear Iran? Decision time is here" deserves closer attention than I am about to give it.

Ephraim Kam, of the Jaffe Centre for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University, is fairly typical in arguing that a combination of Israeli and US nuclear deterrence would mean that "Iran will not use nuclear weapons, not against us and not against any other country."

Quite. Whatever happened to deterrence? Do we really think the Iranians are suicidal?

An Iran with nuclear weapons could destabilise the region in numerous ways. It could back radical Islamist movements such as Hizbollah and Hamas with more energy and less fear of reprisals. It could threaten and intimdate the oil states of the Gulf. It could frighten more of the educated and mobile Israeli middle class into emigrating. And it could precipitate a destabilising arms race across the region- as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Gulf States and Turkey all rushed to go nuclear.

Yes, that would be the same tactic of politicide that the Israeli's have used to such great effect in the Occupied Territories: make life so unbearable that anyone who can, leaves. That'd be the well-educated, the middle-classes who would lead social movements and other forms of viable resistance. A jail with three walls... The late Baruch Kimmerling even wrote a book about it... Sigh.

Would a military attack work- or would Iran be able to rebuild swiftly? Would Iranian retaliation lead to a broader military conflict across the Gulf region- the home of US military bases and much of the world's oil? Would Israel attack if Washington held back?

Well, that's the nub of the issue, isn't it? The Israelis have expended a lot of energy on having their very own nuclear deterrent. You can kind of see their point. Given what the UK and US have allowed to happen in the past, would you, in their shoes, with your back really really the wall, trust the Gentiles not to sell you out? Not if you were sane.
They have airborne nukes, submarine nukes, and land-based nukes. And guess what. Those nukes can reach Europe. That is enough to concentrate anyone's mind.

Let the brain take the strain?

Robert Reich wrote this book a long time ago (early 90s) called "The Work of Nations"- [the title an allusion to Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations."]

One of the most remembered ideas Reich threw out was that the future would see the rise of "symbolic analysts"

"Reich divides American jobs into three broad categories for assessing their contribution to new the global economy. These are "symbolic- analytic" services, routine production services, and "in-person" services. The first of these is carried out by what Reich calls "symbolic analysts" engineers, attorneys, scientists, professors, executives, journalists, consultants and other "mind workers" who engage in processing information and symbols for a living. These individuals, which make up roughly twenty percent of the labor force, occupy a privileged position in that they can sell their services in the global economy. They are well-educated and will occupy an even more advantageous position in society in the future."

from a review by a guy called Scott London

So, combine that with info-overload and your middle-class types (heck, everyone; why needlessly drag class warfare into all this) lives in terror of losing the plot.

And where there is a (perceived) need, can a kindly multi-national be far behind?

No, obviously not. That was a rhetorical question.

So for the last few years we've been treated to Cap'n Picard and Julie Walters and ex-Mrs Tom Cruise telling us they keep their grey matter in tip-top shape by using various 'brain trainers.'

Hmm. Which? have done a study, and gues what, there's no evidence the things work. The editor sensibly says-

"If people enjoy using these games then they should continue to do so- that's really a no-brainer. But if people are under the illusion that these devices are scientifically proven to keep their minds in shape, they should think again."

Quite.

But of course, here comes the plaintive response from a games industry neuroscientist:

"Our study showed that after training for five weeks subjects didn't just improve at the trained tasks, but they also improved on tests of memory and attention that were not part of the training."

I know who I trust to do rigorous and reliable and valid research. Which? do you trust?

Newspapers and their Meaning(s)

What does your reading of a particular newspaper say about you?

Reading ANY newspaper (and here I exclude the Commuter McNuggets of the Metro) says that you're part of a dying breed- young hip folks get what infotainment they need from tinterweb and tv. Like the 20th century dinosaurs they are, the newspapers' circulation is packing up, and they are stroking out with increasing regularity.

There's that old saw- hang on, let me Google it-

Jim Hacker: "Don't tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers:
- The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country;
- The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country;
- The Times is read by people who actually do run the country;
- The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country;
- The Financial Times is read by people who own the country;
- The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country;
- And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is."

Sir Humphrey: "Prime Minister, what about the people who read the Sun?"

Bernard Woolley: "Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits."

Well, I used to read the Indie, but in between 18 and 25 either it changed or I did or we both did, so I then spent a wasted decade reading the Grauniad. For too long.
Then I spent years forcing myself to read the Financial Times till I got the knack.
Now I know what they mean by "No FT, no comment."

Reasons to love the FT
- quality of the writing (Matthew Engel, Gideon Rachman, Lucy Kellaway, Gillian Tait, Joshua Chaffin, Tony Barber etc etc)
- more facts per square inch, especially ones the other papers don't/won't print.
- virtually free of celebrity shite. There's no filtering that needs doing as you turn the pages.
- unashamedly capitalist; there's none of the tedious hand-wringing of the liberal press.
- actually takes anarchist and communist artists, film-makers seriously, without the patronising undertone (or overtone) of the Farringdon fuckwits.

And, if I'm honest, buying the FT is a a way of thinking myself (and trying to display to others) that I am Serious. And Diligent.

And I love buying the Morning Star alongside the FT, and doing a compare and contrast.

Hegel apparently said that reading a paper was one of the rituals of Modern Man. Not for much longer, but I for one will be sad to see the end of the FT, if and when that day comes.

Fourth World Reviewed (issue 149)

Latest "Fourth World Review" slaps onto the doormat. (Last issue reviewed here)

Highlights include;

a provocative list of actions for re-imagining society by Will Sutherland,

"It is such a shame we cannot use the brains that evolution has given us. We may not be fiddling while Rome burns but rather frantically shopping until the planet is destroyed. 'Me now and feck thefuture' is the scream of a culture that is barely out of nappies. It is ugly and pathetic and will be viciously removed by nature- a rather unpleasant prospect for our children."

"How Green became a Screen" by Keith Farnish

"Greenpeace, WWF, the Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth and every other mainstream environmental organisation believe that you can "fix" the problems inherent inthe system, to make this planet a better place; that you can appeal to the goodness of politicians and industrialists to make them curb their destructive behaviour; that you can bring about a sustainable society by urging people to change their light bulbs, shower instead of bath, travel a bit less, offset their emissions and recycle."

True, but doesn't address the institutional reasons for this, making it not just an issue of ideology, but practicalities (maintaining the flow of direct debits, relations with ministers, the need for regular victories etc etc). And the Thatcherite call- "what's the alternative?" is, to me, unanswered, here at least.

Transition Today- Peter North sort of responds to critiques made by Trapese, except he sort of doesn't.

"Planning a New World Order" by Donald Henry is- for me- the highlight of the issue, showing the conflicts of interest involved in planning consultancies when they work for councils and retailers, and the toothlessness of the regulatory bodies.

John Papworth closes out, as he does in every 4NW I've read so far, with some pungent observations.

"The motive power of the global economic system seems to have collapsed, and the prints, both tablids and broadsheets, appear to share a common ground of utter incomprehension, manifest contradiction and a capacity for limitless self-delusion."

All in all, worth a read, worth subscribing, which you can by sending a cheque payable to Fourth World Transition

FWR, 96 Gayton House, Knapp Road, London E3 4BY

Open and Shut up case...

After the Convention of Modern Liberty debacle, I stomped off to my "local Wetherspoon's" (I'm aware of the contradiction, but the only 'greasy spoon' cafe nearby is awful) for a veggie breakfast.

Bumped into a guy I know tangentially, and although the conversation started off amicably enough, it soon spiralled out of control. I bear at least 50% of the blame for that, and really should grow up. Sigh. I think the button that was pushed (and again, I bear the blame here- I should be in better control of my buttons) was the resigned assumption that numbers attending a campaigning group's meetings must necessarily shrink with time.

WTF? Since when was it acceptable to accept that campaigns will go up like a rocket and down like a stick? Why aren't we moving heaven and earth to figure out how to do things better? Why aren't we doing sensible soul-searching about the reasons newbies don't stick around, why other people never quite set foot through the door, why the 'core group' is core, and stays core? Why aren't we highlighting the dangers of burnout and cliquyness in core groups?
Are we doing all this activism tosh this for social reasons, or are we doing it because we genuinely want to achieve our goals?? Huh??

So it all came down to a tedious semantic battle on the meaning of "open". Open has many meeetings, but here it was put, bizarrely as a "contradiction" with 'fun'.

Sigh.

http://www.agileopen.net/on-open-space is a good place to start.

Or here, here, here or here. Or here. Or here dammit.

Campaign Against Enduring Counter-productive and Useless Meetings is obviously going to have to be re-vivified...

Weight of the World 7: Oh gooder griefer

Absolutely static. 127.7kiloes

Exercising lots.

Obviously eating too much good food.

Obviously the wife's fault for being such a good cook.

Nothing to do with a total lack of impulse control or moral fibre on my part. Couldn't be.

Anarchy in the FT!

Ok ok, the title is a little disingenuous.

But on the stepper at t'gym, I encountered in the space of 10 minutes (or 200 calories), two snippets of interest to armchair beardies (ABs) like me.

In the FT Magazine for Feb 14/15 Anna Brooke does an interview with a Parisian sewer cleaner called Jose Lahaye. He talks about the vicissitudes of the job, and closes out with “Being a sewer man may be dangerous and dirty, but you receive a lot of praise and respect from both the public and the government, and that makes it all worthwhile.”

Which is what the ABs have argued in response to the puerile “well, if there was anarchy, nobody would do the unpleasant jobs” line. As if people who do unpleasant jobs are only motivated by money, or the threat of a bullet.

Later on in the same issue, the brilliant Matthew Engel (his piece on banking in Liechtenstein was fab) visits Summerhill, the (in)famous school Where the Kids Make the Rules..

“It is an illusion that Summerhill has no rules: Neill made a firm distinction between allowing children their own freedom and allowing them to interfere with anyone else's There probably isn't a school in the country with a thicker rule book.... It'sa also an illusion that kids dislike rules. They actually love applying them. They just resent the imposition of them by adults.”

Engel is not starry-eyed of course.

“It would be nice to believe that the absence of pressure to achieve perversely instils a thirst for knowledge and learning, but I saw no evidence of that.... Neil said: 'I would rather Summerhill produced a happy street sweeper than a neurotic prime minister.' But doesn't happiness come from fulfilment? Wouldn't a street sweeper who might have been PM be really neurotic.”

I've long noted that the Life and Arts section of the weekend FT takes artists/writers/film-makers etc who are anarchists and communists seriously, and manages to mention their political beliefs and actions without the standard sneer/smear/patronising chuckle of the Guardian etc. It's (yet another) reason to read the FT, as if all the others weren't enough.

Viz 183

One of my not-so-guilty pleasures forced its way through my letter box yesterday; viz, the latest issue of Viz (this link apparently takes you to a "less shit viz website")

I read most of it on the stepper at the gym, polishing off Roger Mellie at home.

Not a classic, but still has its laugh-out loud moments.
"The Bee Man of Big Ben" is a sort of surreal piss-take of the Dam Busters, exquisitely drawn. Huge talent spent on something, well, childish, but revelling rightly in that childishness. That's Viz all over...

No hilarious letters for once- usually a strong point.

A fun "Photo Romance" about rich people not enjoying the credit crunch.

More Godot-esqe bleakness with the Drunken Bakers (for some reason one of them self-medicating flour for facial cuts caused by landing in broken glass had me almost falling off the stepper. Also beautifully drawn).

A standardly fun Profanisaurus.
Cleverest is probably "Excalibird: A magnificient piece that a chap manages to pull successfully, against all the odds."

And the highlight? Well, I suppose the Critics, who go from writing about how the recession is(n't) causing great Art to be produced to stacking shelves at Sainsco themselves... And then...

Weight of the World 6: Oh good grief

Good thing I am actually changing shape, or I'd be extremely fed up.

Am continuing to shift lard from belly etc, to the point where folks are commenting. Am I shifting it off the scales? Am I heck. 127.7, as of Friday 13th.

It's enough to make a man comfort eat...

Ashes to Ashes: Two bald men fighting over a comb

Four years ago, Australia had just beaten India (in India) and came to England to wallop the Poms again. A little complacent, a little arrogant (what, Australians? never). They neglected to note that said Poms had just beaten South Africa, and were on a bit of a roll.
My mate Dave was going to be content with a few sessions going the Poms way, but we all know what happened-
A wolf-pack of Steve Harmison, Andrew Flintoff, Matthew Hoggard and the 'tasty' (wife's words) Simon Jones used reverse swing and a bit of thought to hamstring the Aussies. Gilchrist neutered, Martyn and Hayden and Langer not up for it. If it hadn't been for Warnie and Brett Lee, our batting totals would have been even worse.
It was a great series, and the better team won.
[The next series, in Australia, 2006-7 was less fun to watch, because the English preparations were non-existent, and as a captain, Flintoff is a great bowler (this too was predicted by Dave).]

And now, with the next Ashes four months away, the Aussies have lost their Old Guard and are in the inevitable shaky transition. Beaten by the South Africans, beaten by New Zealand. They have a lot to prove.
And the Poms? To lose by an innings when you were only 70 behind takes real talent. It reminds Dave of the pre-Hussain days "when England lost everything. Always."

Will the cricket be any good? Dunno. Will it be a spectacle? You bet.

Weight of the World 5: Ups and downs

Spent last week on the stepper and then undoing it the following morning with a cooked breakfast.

Anyhow, got on the Scales of Justice on Monday and had gone all the way back up to 129.7. i.e had managed to lose 0.7 of a kilo in a month. Except, except... people were commenting on shape change and beer gut loss, and I too felt better.

So today, same scales, four days later, 127.4. Go figure.

Off to gym for two hour stepper stint, and another tomorrow.

Blind persistence is one of my talents, sometimes.