What a tragedy to hit Norway with its history of tolerance and freedom. The actions of Anders Behring Breivik are not in my view the actions of a madman. I am increasingly concerned about the danger of religious ideologies replacing political ideologies. Extreme interpretations of all ideologies are profoundly dangerous. The 20th century was characterised by political ideologies – earlier centuries by religious ones. It looks as though we are reverting to religious ones.
I watched Rageh Omaar’s two part BBC programme on the Life of Muhammad and was struck by the way Muhammad initially argued that people must be allowed to reach Islam in their own way and in their own time. Christ argued the same. Both ended up with the movement they started splitting into groups who saw it necessary to kill people who didn’t hold to what they saw as the true faith. Much the same has happened with political ideologies.
This desire to make everyone conform to one idea and one image of humanity is dangerous and leads to murder – you don’t have to be mad to do it.
This is the most dreadful event possible. My feeling for the parents are beyond measure. And it is something police cannot be held responsible for, as many are trying to suggest. He may look and sound sane, but, clearly he is not. Just as the rest of those who mass murder in this way are not right in the head. Norway is a country that understands this more than most.
However, what should be addressed is, what drove this man to such insanity? All those who are trying to side step the issue and tell us he must not speak out want to detract from any possible ‘blame’ for their own hand in this most awful mess.
Keeping him quiet, which is the head line, will not bring those poor souls back, but, searching the back drop to it may save it happening again.
@Lord Soley:
The political ideologies are the most dangerous of all.
Look at Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya for a start.
Look at what they encouraged in the men who took up the cudgel for their political movement in torture, abuse and massacre.
Could this man’s actions be a mimic of what he has seen those in power do? And under the guise of, ‘it was right. I did what I believe is right.’ How many times have we listened to that chant over the last years. All against the wishes of the majority in the democracies.
maude… remember its not a crime if you can get away with it due to your power/status within a government:
“Indeed, Obama’s inaction places the United States in violation of its international legal obligations. The U.N. Convention Against Torture, ratified by the United States and 146 other countries, as well as the Geneva Conventions, do more than prohibit torture at all times, even in war. They also require that torture be investigated and prosecuted. The duty to prosecute is no more optional than the duty not to torture. Yet Obama is picking and choosing among these legal mandates.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-books-arent-closed-on-bushs-torture-policy/2011/07/11/gIQA3v0e9H_story.html
Governments commit crimes against Humanity at least as bad, if not worse, than what happened in Oslo. Indeed it could be argued that in trying to muster support for illegal wars, certain countries have encouraged the narrative that has led to the rise of these anti-Muslim right wing views..
As I said in my comment below, extremism is ignorance.. and that ignorance exists on all sides. Until we confront it rationally and with compassion through education, the devastating and disgusting events that unfolded in Oslo will continue to happen, by lone actors, groups and governments..
@jake:
Your point is definitely on the button when you write of those who have the power to ‘get away with it.’ And they do just that, get away with it. Blair and Co, somewhat more than Obama, as they, along with Bush, were the instigators of war on a lie.
However, what I heard on the news this morning was, in many ways, as disturbing. The Norwegians have refused to discuss their immigration policies at all. Free speech on this issue is virtually denied in Norway. To bring it up at all is considered ‘evil.’ Even when they spoke to British journalists this morning. They want to pretend this has not happened.
In such an atmosphere of unaired and disallowed topics, people who seethe are left to dwell on the unthinkable. Sometimes ending in horrendous explosions of mind and might.
Politicians who fear their policies are unacceptable to the majority, have, over some time now, been deliberately stultifying debate on what they know is controversial. They have not only refused debate but removed the right to vote on these disallowed matters by erasing it from their manifestos or political discussions. For they know much would not pass a majority vote. People, in the main, want their country to remain the society and culture they grew up with and love. Massive, ill conceived change brings fear and insecurity. And naive, inexperienced government doesn’t know what it’s doing when it believes it has no need for consent to govern.
Here lies the crux of rule by undemocratic means.
maude, be careful of what you read/see in the media (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/24/charlie-brooker-norway-mass-killings I am aware of the irony of that statement then linking to ‘the media’). However, could you link to what you have seen on their immigration policy, as from a brief search it seems relatively lax?
With “People, in the main, want their country to remain the society and culture they grew up with and love”.. I’m sorry but that is a very typical conservative world-view, and quite a scary one.. ‘we dont want change, we want to go back to the good old days where racism was ok, homosexuals could be stigmatised and teachers could strike children for misbehaving’.. now I’m not saying that those are your views, but thats where those kinds of views lead. Just look to the USA where they have voter-led initiatives.. some are good but some just promote racist/sexist/discriminatory votes.. which, supported by the “main”, lead to countries going backwards instead of forwards.. just a cycle of ignorance.
To really move forward we have to accept that change happens naturally in any society. It will never be able to be what you “grew up with”, so you have to enact legislation that is thoughtful, well-conceived (read evidence-based) and compassionate to all.. deep down we are all the same, we are all Human and we have only been brought up in different cultures – that is the only difference between us! That majority votes that you talk about are based on ignorance.. immigration, economics, social policy etc. are all based on stereotypes and stigmatisation of certain areas of society.. which are based again, in ignorance. We should not be looking to go back to ‘how things were’ but accepting our differences in order to improve for the future!
He may look and sound sane, but, clearly he is not.
What drove him to it?
A life time of being frustrated in everything he attempted to do; abject, chronic failure to achieve anything.
Politics, they say, starts with 2. It is when the third one comes along that the problems begin, or the fun.
How many did this man begin with and how?
Apparently a man with any amount of potential
for fulfillment in his life, by appearances, but not in his spirit or soul.
Extremism is ignorance. Unfortunately extremists have the loudest voices.. often overruling the rest of an apathetic society, even ‘converting’ some. Reactions to extremism are often worse than the original acts – just look at the wars we are engaged in… or the continual loss of our civil liberties in order to ‘protect us’. But in these reactions there is money and power to be had.. so maybe that is why genuinely trying to engage people in subjects that effect everyone is so often neglected, why it is easier to pander to certain parts of the media to gain election support than explain tough choices, why it is easier to go to war than to educate and support.
Human nature will always lead to some form of extremism.. however, we have the tools, in the form of education, to reduce the severity of it or mitigate it in some cases all together… if only we had the will.. or is that too optimistic?
Evil! He is possessed by a demon. Good job we have moved on isn’t it?
Ref: Profile of the Sociopath
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
@Jake:
A couple of points in respect of your two posts addressed to me.
First, I think the Guardian article, as always, is never ever so extremist in its reporting and views when the Labour leaders, you know, those fundamentally flawed, left wing lunatic brigade, who make war on millions based on a lie, instigated for the right wing maniac friends in the White House. Somehow the angst doesn’t reach such heights when they write of their down sides.
Then, the Guardian turns a blind eye, oh, so conveniently. The view suddenly becomes opaque and you hear things close to, well you have to stick with those who see you right. No pun intended.
Next, what you suggest in your point of view regarding change, is so off the wall. I would have to add, your thoughts resemble those who go to extremes. How is wanting to stay in a society that adheres to the ideas of democracy, you know that little promise made to go with a majority vote, rather than jump so far away from the mainstream you are altogether in a different political playing field, as we are today. That one, the one you declare is backward and slow thinking, akin to the fifties. That one that had the odd murder, and rare drug addict, where children were taught academic studies, etc., rather than how to put on a condom and give good head by the age of five. The one that taught social graces, and how to be articulate as well as obedient and reliable. That same ethos that said patriotism to our state and people was profound. The one you tell us was, from your point of view, horrendous.
Are you seriously saying what we have on offer now, for the billions we pay in taxes, comes anywhere close to that, in hindsight ‘nirvana,’ we threw away to make room for the world we have now? How little respect you appear to have for our heritage. How ignorant and fundamentally naive of you.
You wrote as if you are an indoctrinated robot, who has no brain to think or eyes to see. You, and people like you, are the reason this country is in the mire it is. For you cannot even realise the horror of it or the desire the democratic people of Britain so desperately want to be rid of it.
This mess could only have been brought about by those with as much disdain for this country as the raving lunatic of Norway had for his. Yet, you blindly sing its tune as if it were a mantle for good. A shining light for us all to follow.
You, and others like you, are so out of touch it is reminiscent of the take over in the Stepford Wives play.
What I would like to know is, where does this madness spring from? Who is the instigator? And how have they managed to dupe so many for so long?
Maude:
– my view of change is off the wall?! Where did I present anything that said I didn’t want to adhere to democracy? I was saying that there is a disconnect between certain public perceptions and what actually works. This is often reinforced by propaganda.. how many people would have voted ‘yes’ for Murdoch’s BSkyB bid a month ago compared to now if there was a public vote? I’m glad you brought up the drugs issue too – how many addicts were there in the 50’s compared to now? What’s the difference? Our war on drugs, which has been shown numerous times to be a failed/flawed policy that achieves none of its aims whilst wreaking havoc among the most vulnerable of our society. Yet, put it to public vote and the fear/ignorance that abounds the issue would result in a vote for tougher laws (which don’t work http://www.icsdp.org/docs/ICSDP-1%20-%20FINAL.pdf ). Put evidence into policy, as with Portugal’s decriminalisation and suddenly there is near-unanimous support. That is why in my post above I suggested that policies should be EVIDENCE-BASED, not fear and ignorance based. Preventing biased and ignorant votes actually IMPROVES democracy. Democracy also has room for improvements, such as AV which I bet you voted against without understanding the underlying mathematics of it… It has been proven that our current voting system is the least fair, is it anti-democracy to support a fairer system?!
– I am not suggesting that what we have on offer now is ‘nirvana’, far from it in fact. But in many aspects the standard of living is far better than the 50’s. People always look back on history with rose tinted-glasses but would you want to live in 1900 Britain where you couldn’t vote or work to the same level as a man should you choose to do so? In 50 years’ time conservatives such as yourself will look back at 2011 with the same rose tinted glasses. The real ignorance here is the failure to recognise the mistakes and problems of the past. In fact it is you who is unpatriotic as you don’t want to progress the society, you just want to take it back to the good old days – how in any way is looking to improve what we have now with evidence-based policies ignorant? Is it unpatriotic to oppose illegal wars that not only cost our society financially but also in civil liberties after terrorists predictably attack us for our involvement in said wars?
– I am part of the younger generation, and assume from these posts and very conservative viewpoint that you are part of the older generation? So maybe those who are building the future are not the ones who are out of touch? You are lumping yourself in with racists and sexists…
– this ‘madness’ springs from the fact that I see policies and publications that are so extreme or just plainly flawed that I have to speak out! If you read my original post I was saying that ignorance and fear are the progenitor of the type of violence witnessed in Oslo and you come out and say that I’m mad for suggesting that we view everyone as equal and not segregate based on race/gender/religion etc. to remove the causes of extreme views and you call me ignorant and unpatriotic!!
All I know is that although the UK is nowhere near perfect right now, I sure as hell would not have wanted to grow up in the 50’s. I have proposed tolerance and evidence-based policies and you call me ignorant, unpatriotic and anti-democratic without realising the inherent ignorance in that, so therefore, I would like to know your proposal… as right now it sounds like you want to kick all the ‘immigrants’ out and revert to oppressive 1950’s Britain, which is exactly the problem that needs weeding out and one I illustrated in my original post!
@Jake:
A bit excited aren’t you? Now why is that?
Where is this evidence based information you have that today is so much better than yesterday?
You are sadly naive and have no real understanding of your country and it’s heritage. If you can honestly feel that the standard of living and expectations for today’s people in the UK is better than previously, then you must be a glutton for punishment.
It’s highly amusing you feel I am a Conservative. That really takes the cake.
The life and education of the British state schools of the 50’s can only be bought today if you can find £30,000 per annum. Which is why Labour wants to do away with Independent schools, because that way there will be nothing to compare the dreadful dross we have now.
Actually, reading you spout such nonsense is really sad. It means you have nothing, not even research, to enlighten you to the history of this islands life and once fully rounded opportunities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA88FT3e0mg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwMvtVD-nfs
And the glories of British schools today. We start with teachers. Those wonderful bastions of the education system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJoYhGQwIdc
Note the age of these kids coming next, they don’t know the difference between good and bad food, at around fifteen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhYorQMpWdY
Really great curriculum to assist in finding a job. That will really help them get healthy and certainly will teach them how to communicate with the world. So much better than in previous decades where they were ill treated and leaned on so badly, they ended up unable to speak, just like this guy below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPvHwA9mFvA
Articulate, man. Really doing good, yeah.
And next, the good old political correctness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjHbqInq-aM
And here we have the wonderful American way. Lets make them ‘safe’ in the classroom.
You are a truly sad individual if this is what you believe is ‘Happy Days’.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZc5_4H_W38
Now for the standard of living. Do you honestly believe that the living standard is better than it was decades ago? Think again, you are being duped.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gjhzyyiHc_s
@Maude, yes you are a social conservative, not in the ‘Tory’ way conservative but in the true meaning of a conservative (from wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism):
“that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were.”
I never said today is ‘happy days’, I said “no where near perfect”. I recognise and understand the failings of today (and highlight them often) but strive to improve the future – I believe the only way to improve is to highlight and recognise failings so we can move forward. I disagree with many things that go on today and will actively speak out against them where I see fit (vested interests in politics/media, drug policy and foreign policy to name but a few). You however, put on your rose-tinted glasses and cherry pick the best bits of the 50’s and worst bits of today (and in one of my first posts you agreed with me about problems we face today). You fail absolutely to recognise any problems with your viewpoint whatsoever, which from my standpoint, is ignorant.. and just the kind of ignorance that leads to political extremism…
@Jake:
Lets start first off with your claim to having ‘evidence’ based information. Where is it? Do you have a link where the rest of us can then be so persuaded? Show the evidence you have of the progress you claim we should be aware of and salute. That would be a good start. But don’t conceal from it those studies dealing with the rise in violence, abuse and rape of women and children, the dramatic rise in prison population, even with the blind eye being turned to so many more, termed lessor crimes, not worth pursuing. Let us have it all so we can compare the past with the present fully and with the total all consuming picture.
Don’t forget to show the full story of the standard of living that you can so blithely dismiss as not of ‘Happy Days’ but of these well rounded good days we should appreciate rather than having to ‘endure’ today. And I say ‘we’ and in true meaning for both the middle and lower classes. For, the extraordinarily wealthy we now have in our midst feel nothing, see nothing and are oblivious to the reality they are imposing on others. The rich, as they call them, have never had it so good as they do now. The economical pie has been distorted in favour of those who do not need it, whilst those in the bottom segment are losing out at a rate not seen since the Victorians. And you, with your empty comments call me a Conservative and extremist.
In very small part, what you wrote could be considered ‘almost’ in tune with some of my thinking and persuasion. I emphasize ‘almost,’ when you write I ask for balance, a new look at what we have been lumbered with for some decades now and the likes of an unelected peer who can state, with ideological constipation, that he agrees with you and your obvious indoctrination of what used to be so bad for the nation, for you certainly cannot claim experience as he tells us he can.
What are you suggesting is better? Surely not the state of our hospitals and care of the elderly? That has deteriorated over the years at a pace that would knock your block off. Or, could it be a school system and education that has climbed such a mountain? That too has deteriorated to he point where an alarming amount of young people are unable to either read, write or speak with any kind of passing vocabulary when they leave those institutions at sixteen with the hope they will be employable. But you, in your naivety, feel this is more than acceptable, it is the way forward. I can’t wait until kids you have in the future come out unable to converse with you on any meaningful level and then hear you say your tax money has been well spent.
Take the crime level and the need so many of the population find to drug themselves into oblivion because they have no sense of purpose or self in this great left wing euphoria you find so easy to suck up on. And the smugness and immaturity you display when you think you are being fanned by the agreement of the knowing.
Now let’s move on to your idea of how we should go forward to make it a better place, presumably in the same vein, as you are pleased with the movement and outcome so far. What do you see as the next step? Tell us your deeply held vision and how we are to accomplish it?
Lets also look at your assumptions on my feelings of happiness and with a desire to return to those eras of a past where Britain shone in the world. Why throw out baby with the bath water? Evolution and enlightenment in society does not require abandonment of the exemplary, it is the reverse of that. To grow means to grow through and let go of the worst, to then be able to immerse ourselves, renewed, into a knowledge of advanced edification.
@Maude: Ok, a quick search turned up this document http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/rp99/rp99-111.pdf Some points showing improvements since the 50’s (this doc was published in 1999 though):
– III; Life expectancy since birth has gone up and infant mortality has gone down
– IV; number of people with degrees has gone up, also the number of women as a percentage of that number has increased.
– VI; police strength has gone up
– VIII; annual fatalities per thousand motor vehicles has gone down
– X; women MP’s at the general election has gone up
To name but a few. Now, before you accuse me of cherry picking, I recognise that there are also problems; III-rates of cancer has gone up, VI-offences have gone up along with the prison population and some prices have gone up XI (although today many things are relatively cheaper than in the 50’s, groceries especially) and there are still problems with literacy. Also, remember that some rises can be down to better data collection – A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, said: “The method for recording crime has changed a great deal and if a person perceives a crime has been committed against him or her, then that crime is recorded. It just wasn’t done that way in the 1950s.” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article545031.ece .http://www.statistics.gov.uk/resources/graph2_tcm119-28051.jpg also highlights the effect in how crimes are recorded (go to ‘overview’ then ‘trends in recorded crime). Also, since drug use, possession, supply and manufacture were criminalised, crime has moved in to fill that demand – so a sensible policy of regulation could save this country money, reduce crime, frees police to deal with more serious crimes (such as the ones you suggested) and help addicts http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/Reportand http://www.viennadeclaration.com/ (but I know already that you disagree with this evidence-based approach).
You seem to think that because I disagree that in many aspects today is better than the 50’s that I automatically disagree that there are any problems today, or I am tacitly excepting them. This is not the case. The rich/poor divide is of huge concern to me, the frivolous and often illegal wars, the loss of civil liberties in the name of ‘protection’. These are all very serious problems that I take seriously. Where we differ is that I see the good aspects of today and want to build on that whilst you seem unable to recognise any progress at all. The good old days you remember weren’t good for everyone. So.. my vision for the future – a more balanced economy between services and manufacturing, better regulation of companies so there is actual accountability for the havoc they cause – and the same for government. Better distribution of wealth – is it fair that someone earning hundreds of millions of pounds a year pays the same rate as someone who earns £150,000? Higher tax for the most wealthy, the difference between £400m and £600m isn’t going to effect that persons quality of life. I want evidence in policies not just ruthless and blind ideology followed when it has been proven to fail in the past. Real efforts to have an accurate and less-biased media (lest you think Murdoch’s right wing control has been a good thing?!) and lastly, equality, human rights and compassion for our fellow man/woman regardless of their race, gender or religion. So yes, to let go of the worst, as I have been saying, but please please recognise that there have been improvements since the 50’s unless you too have evidence to suggest otherwise (youtube videos and daily mail articles don’t count). What is your vision Maude?
@Jake:
First of all, you sound like a trumped up little Whitehall stooge, relying on government statistics suggests you are living in cloud cuckoo land. They buy a massaged version of what they want the population to swallow. You should know that from the statistics on inflation. And this practice has been known for a very long time. Your posts read like an out of touch with reality twit.
Next you obviously don’t read this blog often, or, what I write when you do, as to declare yourself the saviour of the poor on taxation, etc., is way off track with my sentiments. You have done what all little boys do and that is assume, because I have a leaning one way, I must follow along with the entire gamut on that side of the red/blue line. Wrong.
However, I will challenge some of the claims you make as not to do so would seem I agree with your leaning.
Literacy: Huge segments of the UK have a literacy level akin to the third world. Not so in the 1950’s.
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:aXSGiubw_J4J:www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0000/3816/FINAL_Literacy_State_of_the_Nation_-_30_March_2010.pdf+literacy+levels+in+the+uk&hl=en&gl=uk&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESg7AwNJTARHSSkiNdfW_Ov_eZTgRTVFXWOSqj-6Kl6PK3MMHGAHbEDrVuy2nxRnHLdXtucmiFP5cD2Or0uNmvKP5CR4j3VCe0UpUItBd_kfD_BxKZs-d-mAadmu_1LLfkQ_o1_2&sig=AHIEtbRbqJFhgd8R5bfwnu5sAfsUHSp-ng
Police and their strength: Police do not want to deal with serious crime because government requirements regarding politically correct policies thwart their efforts.
Is this what you are telling us is police strength? Better than in the 50’s is it? Most of these guys are women of 4’6″. you can certainly rely on them to look after you.
http://www.time4thetruth.info/2011/06/private-police-force-uk-given-just-1.html
Give me a break. Only a nerd would feel this is an improvement.
Women MP’s: What does that mean? Can you explain why you feel that is such a great improvement to Britain in real terms? That is game playing with silly left wing statistics. The general public regard this as child’s play. What the voters of Britain want are MP’s who can give them the kind of government they require. The sex of the individual is irrelevant to us. Lists of women put up for office because of their gender is lunacy and does not make for strong government. MP’s who are barely able to understand the time of day, of any gender, but, have been selected because of a quota system should be illegal. It is a betrayal of the nation as a whole to choose candidates on such a flimsy notion because of a fad. Put up a link that shows the world what, in particular, women MP’s, as individuals, have done to enhance their constituents life, that could not have been done by a man. Ability and quality is the only criteria for a job well done. Nothing else matters to the voter. The nation is not interested in the left wing feminist hysteria as the majority of ordinary women do not feel their lives have been enhanced by what is seen as feminist agenda. Some feel it has made their lives almost impossible.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3702369.stm
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/article6188063.ece
And here we are told feminism is a fraud.
http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/
Annual fatalities: Some of the frauds you cling to make me fall off my seat laughing. If government seriously wanted to end road fatalities they would simply lower the speed limit. Fifty on the motorway and twenty in towns and villages. Overnight we would see the reduction to virtually no deaths from road accidents. So, please, leave out the pretense.
http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/press_releases.htm
Spread of disease: Cancer is not the only disease that is spreading at a rate of knots. Aids and tuberculosis, as a result of mass uncontrolled immigration, are way, way up. Particularly from Africa. Tropical diseases because of unprotected holiday makers taking ludicrous risks of no vaccinations against known diseases.
http://www.avert.org/uk-statistics.htm
Infant mortality in this country is a disgrace. Where are you living?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1486760/More-babies-are-dying-soon-after-birth.html
Criminality: The rise in crime is beyond measure as accurate statistics are deliberately massaged for politically correct motives.
Get real and stop the game playing.
Maude. If you want Western democracies to die you are going the right way about it. The issue I wrote about was a man (probably not mad but that is unknown at this stage) who kills for explicit political religious reasons. You turn the argument agains us! Do you have no pride in what this country has achieved and how we have protected the rule of law and democracy for so long? Stop attacking and start asking how we can confront organisations (religious or political) who encourage extreme violence.
It is a real cop out to blame ourselves – like blaming Britian for the rise of Hitler because of post World War 1 policies.
Jake. I wish we could say this is ignorance and education will solve it. The twin towers killers were well educated and I suspect this man was too. In the 1970’s when I was a probation officer I dealt with many very violent people. They were often well educated.
Try this web site: http://www.quilliamfoundation.org/component/content/article/61-press-releases/841-before-a-after-the-norway-massacre-symbiosis-between-anti-muslim-extremists-and-islamist-extremists.html
As an afterthought. I did not enjoy life as a child in London in the 1940’s and 50’s. I much prefer Britian today. I went to a failing school where violence was common including attacks on teachers. Much wrong was committed behind lace curtains. Maude if you think things are so bad you really ought to put yourself forward for election and do something about it. Otherwise you will be seen as someone who moans but takes no action to put things right. Get elected girl!!!
Lord Soley, I’m glad that you can validate my claims of 50’s living standard compared to now. I really did not think that I was being ‘mad’ suggesting the things I was!
Regarding ignorance and education… I think I need to define what I was saying in a bit more detail. To me education is not just academic, we have to consider all forms of education, such as opinions from parents or religious leaders.. or from the media. I’m not suggesting this in any totalitarian nature, more like parents are ‘taught’ to teach their children that smoking is bad for them. But well-educated people who support polarised views are not stupid but are ignorant.. so what perpetuates this ignorance that leads to extremism? Unfortunately it is views such as Maude’s, where proposing anything other than the ‘party line’ means you are mad or a left-wing-loony. This has left us with a culture, generally, of fear. Fear that the ‘Muslims are taking over’, fear that we have ‘lost our way’ etc. These views are just too easy for people to play on, be it parents or grandparents talking about the good old days or the media running negative narratives against sects of society to sell more advertising space.
So, the real education is that of teaching tolerance and fiercely and publically opposing certain racist/ignorant world views. Unfortunately I believe this means some form of better regulation on the media (whilst still allowing them their freedom).. I would suggest an overhaul of the “toothless poodle” that is the PCC, plus government presenting clear and evidence-based arguments opposing forms of ignorance.. even if politicians don’t like evidence as it often gets in the way of their ‘beliefs’. The third step is to actually consider the effects of policy.. the recent anti-Muslim sentiment was borne from 9/11.. but 9/11 itself wasn’t borne out of thin air, it was decades of repressive (and sometimes illegal) policies across the world that alienated people and pushed them to extremism. Until people stop setting the wheels in motion and then blaming those they alienate, extremism and ignorance can only continue.
Either way, I doubt we will be able to get rid of the types of ignorance that I am highlighting within my lifetime, but I do think there is room for huge improvement and therefore an improvement to society/the world overall.
@Lord Soley:
I return to the post where you accuse me of being unpatriotic and ‘blaming’ government here for Norway’s ills.
How you can find that thought process in what I wrote is more than extraordinary. I have been accused of much but being unpatriotic is not one of them.
You see, with what you appear to support, I see you as the machiavellian you claim me to be. For you have been in government, and now in the Lords, where you, not I, are party to our deterioration as a nation. Yet, you ignore that fact and accuse me. Interesting.
What I wrote, I wrote with the view of an outsider. Culpability, if you see it as aimed at you, can only be of your choosing. Now why is that? The facts are as they are, I did not conjure them. And as far as the Norway massacre is concerned, I think it is now clear the man is considered mad.
And on the matter of life in London in the 40’s and 50’s being far worse than today. I spoke in depth to my relatives on this matter after reading your post, as I found you breathtaking in your condemnation. The answer I got was, yes, materially, in some ways, today is easier. Having an inside toilet and a bath you don’t have to fill in front of the fire, as well as an automatic dishwasher, washing machine and vacuum cleaner has made life easier to keep up with dust and dirt in the house. Especially when women now are required, by social abuse, to not only take care of a house, children, food, cooking and nurturing of a family, but, do a full time form of employment to feel they are keeping up their end of the bargain. Which means, of course, most households are deprived in the extreme as the machinery devised to assist an already hard job cannot cover those most important aspects of household management. They also don’t cover the fact a mortgage today is unsustainable not only by those on lower incomes but much of the middle classes. That is the serious factor they bitch about, no roof over their heads being at all conceivable for the future. A three bedroom London Chiswick semi being implausible at over million pounds to purchase on todays salary. Consumerism another big bug bare to all.
The older relatives though, tell me they would rather be dead than have to face what they see today as school life, or, lack of it. Lack of freedom to play, (constant threats of dirty old men around the corner) or, to simply explore their neighbourhood, this, they see, as an attack on their very being as human beings. The infringement on their ‘right’ to childhood, and the feeling of innocence expected of them, as well as the loss of protection and concern of adults, in general, toward their welfare. This they would find especially hard to live with. Abandonment of children by society being the biggest betrayal of all. Some said they feel that if they were parents today they would have to seriously contemplate going to jail rather than succumb to what is in store for their children and grandchildren. Oppression is what they call it.
The loss in trust of their government and the madness of policies is another no go area. So, all in all, they tell me, I must hang in there and try as hard as I can to make a difference for the future of their families, as they see no hope otherwise. Which of course made me more than smile, as I tried to tell them, quite dramatically, it is them, not I, that can make a difference.
And one of the ways to make that difference would be to rid ourselves of unelected peers who have no idea what the people are having to put up with. And as a result, cannot connect with their nations ‘oppression.’
Maude, the lie was a very valuable strategic lie. Does Iran NOT have WMD?
I think the Snorkelling Lord Soley (by now in this weather)is mistaken in attributing any thing more than total derangement from the mass murderer in question.
Broadmoor is full of people like that, who don’t manage to exterminate quite so many, in their rampage.
Quite why they did not kill him off straight away, is hard to say. Hungerford and Dublane
are said to have done “themselves” in, at the scene, and nobody is going to argue with that.
Maude, the lie was a very valuable strategic lie. Does Iran NOT have WMD?
I think the Snorkelling Lord Soley (by now in this weather)is mistaken in attributing any thing more than total derangement from the mass murderer in question.
Broadmoor is full of people like that, who don’t manage to exterminate quite so many, in their rampage.
Quite why they did not kill him off straight away, is hard to say. Hungerford and Dublane
are said to have done “themselves” in, at the scene, and nobody is going to argue with that.
Duplicate comment detected; it looks as though you’ve already said that, but I have not!
If you compare society in four different “ages” of man,
1)Hunter gatherer
2) Nomadic
3) Early agricultural
4) Industrial
His behavior and the pressures on him have changed drastically. In hunter gatherer
societies they had to hold together. Their dream time had to match, or the group disintegrated and died out.
The Nomad knew he had to move, when pressures on pasture and forage were to great for the survival of the society in that place. Their dream time may not have had quite the same cohesive force but was much the same.
In agricultural societies there was still no great pressure on the society to hold together and those who could not conform were excluded from it, as though they were dead, or themselves hunted.
In the age of the machine,things are rather different. There are huge OUTWARD pressures
rather than those of the holding IN, of the hunter gatherer. The huge importance of global human rights, but the constant erosion of local civil liberties, as individuals try to assert themselves at all, is one of the most difficult problems facing all civilized man.
The possession of industrial machine made and even,automatic, killing weapons, allows a man to imagine that he is a hunter gatherer, whereas in fact he is a mass murderer.
His dream time is quite at odds with the society about him, but they are entirely unaware of it.
The list of mass murderers increases unabated.
The fact that the crime, very superficially, resembles the “high crimes” of the recently arrested Serbo-Croat general over whom Radavan Karadzic presided, at the mass grave side of several hundred Muslims in a genocidal act some years ago, should not delude us in to thinking that there is anything in the least bit political about the Norwegian spree murders.
It only serves to highlight the wisdom of the Hague tribunals in treating war criminals as they are treated, as criminals, in reality no different from any others. Base and evil, cowardly acts of carefully planned brutality,
which they wrongly believe to be glamorous.
The Norway spree murderer? A base and evil man, possessed by the devil, and intent on doing all his works. He should be consigned
to oblivion as soon as possible, in whatever way they do that in Norway. A number of his living victims families, and the victims themselves, will certainly be deeply distressed at one man’s inhumane behavior to a crowd of young people, with
the Global world before them.
Give us Peace!
“…but would you want to live in 1900 Britain where you couldn’t vote or work to the same level as a man should you choose to do so?”
“…if you think things are so bad you really ought to put yourself forward for election and do something about it.”
“Get elected girl!!!”
Boys, you betray yourselves.
Lord Soley, do you know the reason(s) why political parties have all-women lists?
Jake, as you say, you are young.
I betray myself by defending progress and supporting equal rights rather than favouring a return to eras of high racial, gender or religious inequality.. please explain how that works?!
Just because I am young(er) doesn’t preclude me from the debate. You only picked out one part of my comment(s) without proposing any opinion. Also, the all-women lists are a product of ignorance (men thinking women can’t do the job as well and/or preventing them from standing through means such as hostile environments), which is exactly the kind of ignorance I was opposing above! Or can a man not support equal rights for women without being labelled as a sexist in your eyes?
Jake: I have expressed an opinion; you have reacted to it. If you believe you are defending something, so be it; I happen not to agree with your ‘evidence based’ reasoning, more so when you come back with, “…the all-women lists are a product of ignorance…”. This is entirely wrong unless you also believe Lord Soley is ignorant (see his response to me), something I would never level at him.
Or can a man not support equal rights for women without being labelled as a sexist in your eyes?
He would surely not be called one with that logic.
There are UK men’s rights groups, but which don’t hold much sway. We should hear more of them, with the excessively dominating professional women, who have two careers for men’s nul career, in many cases. (Motherhood being one).
If a man does not have a career, generally he does not have a family either, depending on caste. If a woman does not have a profession she still has a career as a mother, which to my mind is the most important one.
Is that just? (laugh)
@Lord Soley:
I can only reply to your post addressed to me when the additional post I replied to Jake with is published on the blog.
It give all the points you suggest are incorrect with videos of then and now, etc., but somehow it didn’t materialize for all to see.
And, if I were put myself up for election I would not be able to voice my honest opinion, because, like most of those who have done so, they they are censured and heavily.
I shall address your points when and if my last post is admitted. And if it isn’t I would like to know why.
Freedom of expression is only available to those who, like me, have no party affiliation. And you know it. So that was cheating.
Lady Tizzy. I not only supported all women short lists but I chaired the interviewing panels that led to more women being on short lists for Councils, MP’s, MEP’s etc.
I would have used ‘get elected boy’ here for a man who I was getting frustrated with because they were full of complaints but no action.
You’re just applying sticking plaster to a deeper problem. If the top candidates are all women then it’s right to shortlist them, but if they’re being put there merely to make up an arbitrary quota then you’re failing to put the best people forward merely because they’re men and that is wrong.
If you haven’t got enough good women being put forward then you need to start much further back in the process and determine why they’re not getting there. Are they being discouraged at school? Do most women prefer to do other things so there’s a smaller pool from which to recruit? Is it simply because there’s bias in the selection process?
@Dave H & @ladytizzy; thank you Dave, that is what I meant about the ignorance in my previous post. Yes, all-women lists seem like a good idea but they are the product of a deeper problem, such as the ones you mention. Positive discrimination doesn’t work (see South Africa for evidence of that). It should be best man/woman for the job, if certain areas of society aren’t represented well enough, then look at the root causes, not just apply plasters!
Lord Soley: I will agree with you if you can agree that Mr Cameron was equally frustrated with the usual moaners when he said, “Calm down, dear”.
@Lord Soley:
Re: All female short lists. What would be good here is to know ‘why’ you voted for all female short lists? What made you feel this was the best way forward for women? And of course men?