Toryphobia

I'm afraid that after the Extremist Tory massacre by Anders Behring Breivik, there will be a wave of rampant Toryphobia across Europe. After all, when a terrorist is muslim, all muslims are terrorists, and the result is Islamophobia. So why shouldn't it be any different with the Crucifixionists?

Anders Breivik highlights the bankruptcy of what is laughably called 'Right-Wing Philosophy', which is at best a mere apology for the status quo, and at worst a crazed homicidal stampede to a mythical Golden Age. And at its most moronic, makes British prime ministers, and the reactionary media, align themselves with fascists. 
The fact is that Oslo was another example of how a crazy, paranoid culture drives people crazy, just as it did to Osama Bin Laden and Raol Moat. An illustration of the extent and banality of mental illness. If Tories want to dignify Breivik's disease as  a political ideology, fine. But doing so will drag them down to his level. And if they accept that this as pathological rather than political, then so are the actions of Al Qaida. 
Anyone who did what Breivik did is crazy, nothing else. Mentally ill. All murderers are and should be committed to an asylum for life - which would also be an honest way around Norway's 21 year maximum sentence. 
But if he is insane, then all terrorists are insane, and also all mass murderers. Either all terrorists are sick or none are. The real question is why are so many people that sick? But it doesn't suit the purposes of our politicians, priests and millionaires to acknowledge the true extent of the damage done by the society they champion and benefit most from. 
The truth is that our Ratrace depends on a healthy amount of mental illness. And that most of us are only one or two traumas, humiliations or failures away from violence or worse. Casualties like Raol Moat are only the tiny tip of the iceberg. 
Our concept of mental illness is radically unsound, and in denial about our universal level of socialised, institutional neurosis. Every humiliating eradication of our individuality and every step into alienation from our fellow human beings drives us nearer to declaring war on the world, and destroying it in the only way we can. By going insane.

Charity Deficit Housing. The Poor Law Amendment Act Of 2010

Social Housing is now effectively a Charity Hostel service. To be allocated on the basis of a Means Test. The 're-assessment' will involve an unprecedented level of intrusion into personal finances, and will create the greatest poverty trap since the Victorian era which inspired it. To use the dialect, it is a 'positive disincentive' with nobs on. Why take that part-time, underpaid menial job when all it will do is dump you at the bottom of the greasy property pole with all your family and trappings. And don't dilly-dally on the way.
The greater damage to British society is almost unmeasurable but will make the government into an even bigger enemy than it already is, and will therefore increase crime and anti-social behaviour in general. Should it remain un-repealed, it will decimate already fragile communities, and nip any budding neighbourliness in the bud. Even if your Charity Tenancy overlaps with that of your neighbour, what is the point of forming a relationship with someone who will be gone in less than 2 years? In today's busy working schedule, it can often take almost a year to establish any sort of relationship, based on the kind of casual interaction which normally happens in crowded council flats with no community centre or well-planned garden space. So any sense of community will be a thing of the past, and any fantasies of a Cameronian Big Society will recede even further into the fog.

The great lie is that social housing is a rescue service for the poor. A necessary evil which, in the capitalist utopia to come, will wither away, like the rest of the welfare state, and even the state itself. The reality is that it is a vital part of the social infrastructure of any advanced, industrial state.  As necessary as the road network or the national grid, providing the bedrock of local identity via stability and affordability of tenure. And requiring the same degree of investment and maintenance, not the open-season sabotage of the last twenty years.

As much as anything, it once offered genuine 'Choice' (remember that one?) of housing lifestyle. Those more interested in living their lives than chasing a mortgage, and who saw the buildings they lived in as homes, not machines for investment, were able to form strong links within their neighbourhoods, and the longer they stayed, the deeper the store of local knowledge and experience became. When responsibly managed the result is a strong community with all the benefits, all of which result in lower costs for other social services.

The teenager minister for housing Grant Schapps is claiming with some pride that the rolling bi-ennial wave of evictions, combined with a punitive increase in rents will pay to build more new social housing, which he says he believes is necessary. This is the biggest lie of all. If the New Poor law Amendment Act delivers any revenue at all, which is doubtful, it will immediately find its way into the pockets of grateful cowboy speculators, who will bang up their usual tacky boxes, and vanish overnight. The only real benefit to the government will be as another bulwark against local action and organisation. It is another shackle to genuine progress.

The Whig Poor Law Amendment Act Of 1834 decreed that external relief for the poor was to be stopped within two years, leaving them with the choice of the workhouse or starvation. No able-bodied person was to receive money or any other help from the poor law authorities except in a workhouse. The legislation was designed to root out the "undeserving poor". 

Some things never change. The act, passed by a combination of the predecessors of the Liberal Party and the Tories of the day, had exactly the same contempt for those who had no property, and was just as fearful of them.
The other effect of the 1834 act was to create a huge interventionist state machine to imprison or evict the 'undeserving poor' and safeguard its political dogma. The same thing will happen this time. As Cameron should have grasped from his holiday reading ('The Spirit Level', Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett) enforcing inequality always creates a bigger state. 
The default slogan of the Condems now appears to be 'You've Never Had it So Good', whether sanctioned by Number 10 or not. Which in a government is always a sure sign of being divorced form reality. It was predictable in the latter days of the Eden/Macmillan tory reign, and even excusable. But barely six months into a new administration must be some kind of record.
On our decrepit little South London estate in the late 70's there used to be 2 accountants, a doctor, 2 architects and even an executive from a city pensions fund. Along with various graduates in a range of scientific and clerical jobs, including one very well-paid person at the Home Office. As well as a range of plumbers, electricians, chippies and other tradesmen.
In general, people were quite happy not owning their homes. It was so much less worry. And people had more time to spend getting to know their neighbours and working with them to make all their lives better. 
That community is now a wasteland of strangers thanks to the wonder of the property ladder. Furthermore, our collective efforts in renovating and managing the block have made it so desirable to the property market that our reward will be excessive market-led rent increases, and the danger to or tenancies from the new housing benefit limit of £400. So the message is obviously 'Only Suckers Make An Effort'.

It's so UNFAIR!!

The Condem coalition is trying to cover up its idiotic sabotage of the recovery by floating fluffy concepts nobody knows the meaning of, in this case, 'fairness. We are invited to decide how much fairness we can afford, thanks to Gordon Brown's socialism (the same socialism adopted by George Bush). And urged to inform on any Scrounger-Bugs we know of. And that is meant to somehow make us feel involved and empowered. The 'Big Society' as the Nark's Paradise.
And so various classic scholars and agony aunts and enthusiasts for ancient slavery are wheeled out to decide what fairness is, and discuss eternal verities and the judeo-christian tradition until its time for the next retail opportunity when we'll be back with the question: 'If you caught your boyfriend wearing your pants, would you dump him?'
Fairness is not an abstract absolute, it is in fact the direct result of the invention of unfairness. Something we didn't know we needed until it was abused. The 1st -generation agricultural settled civilisations would have probably seen the first crystallisation of the idea of fairness in response to the first systematic exploitation.. Ever since then in the resulting hierarchies, one group or other has felt oppressed and exploited by the groups above, and threatened by the groups below because of their exploitation of them.
Before competitive, hierarchical society, 'fairness' would have been the status quo from necessity. Now it is a genuine threat to the structure of the society we live in, which is why it is resolutely opposed by those with most to lose. They see the real danger of justice in an unjust world..
But since almost everyone has almost everything to lose, and often to those nearest in the hierarchy, unfairness is systemic and objectively divisive, instilling mistrust and suspicion as default emotions, with disastrous consequences for the quality of life and the health of society.
Primitive hunter-gatherer groups, like many isolated tribal groups today, would have had no need for unfairness, and not much need for territorial conflict. With such a family structure to the tribe, and such a lot of land and resources to share among nomadic tribes, by far the best strategy would have been to move on - except in time of crisis, such as severe drought.
The point is that while there was enough to go around, there was no conflict, and no 'unfairness'. This is not the great fall from grace it is sometines depicted as. The proverbial Martian observing the course of human history would merely note that we had chosen one means of building cities and kick-starting technological development. Without enough unfairness, we might not have invented the steam engine. But since we did, it would be obvious to the Martian that we needed less and less competition to progress further, and that unfairness had been made obsolete. That Empathy has been the logical, humane strategy for almost a 100 hundred years. That we have had the technology which made competition obsolete for almost that long.
The same Martian would also be placing bets that our ever-expanding consumerism will devastate our eco-system. So while empathy might not be allowed to take its course now, due to the usual rearguard actions, there is no alternative. Our attitudes to property will have to change, and our dependence on conflict will wither away. The usual suspects will scream that this is unfair. That they have a right to more than everyone else, but not for long. Eventually, even they will realise that there really is more to life than winning.

How Will the Ash Cloud of Death Effect the Election?

How will the Ash Cloud of Death Effect the Election? Because it will.
What could the killer volcano question be on Thursday night's debate?
'Can you name the volcano?' That would be a start for Foreign Affairs Nite.
The first to competently pronounce Eyjafjallajökull will gain enormous respect. I suppose they're all practising in front of mirrors now, otherwise the massed Simon Cowells beyond the cameras will shake their heads in tired old-pro resignation, and call:
'Next!'
It might be tempting for the deflated Spudface Cameron to appeal to the Old Duffer vote, who have been ranting online in the last few days about how the country has no guts, and how it's all a sinister conspiracy by the Elf'n'Safety Brigade of the Nanny State.
In the good old days when men were men they'd have just fixed a pair of stout military tights (W.A.A.Fs for the use of) over the engine intakes and barrelled that kite over the White Cliffs of Dover like a partridge in season.
Dammit, all of civilisation runs on someone's blood. Without 1,000s of road deaths a year, there would be no supermarkets, and riots in the streets. And the Nanny State worries about a few hundred possible deaths in the air. This isn't the spirit which beat the Frogs at Waterloo or the krauts on the beaches of Normandy.
etc etc etc.
The professional hacks have moved in on the game, spewing out doublethink by the yard, all amounting to the samne thing. It's the Millenium Bug all over again!
A load of namby-pamby stuff and nonsense. In their day they would have donned their goggles and white scarves and ploughed intrepidly through the bit of dust, while others quivered like white mice in their shadow. Mercenary Onanism of the highest order.
Rightist Nutter extraordinaire Alain de Botton has naturally joined in:

"In a future world without aeroplanes, children would gather at the feet of old men and hear tales of strange flying machines..."

and hear tales of Noggin the Nog, and his heroic deeds in the land of the far north.
Gimme a break please. Romancifiers like Botton never miss a chance to stuff their version of the past down the throat of the present.
If he were to seriously apply his imagination more to a future without Consumerist Free Market Worship, then he would be doing his job as a philosopher. But as a devotee of the free market, this would make his head explode. Just as it did to those who always condemned powered flight as blasphemous. Botton would have been one of the loudest crying: 'If God had meant us to fly he would have given us wings.'
Ultimately, what he might as well say is 'imagine a world without the vote, where sage old men who had proved themselves in battle, took all the major decisions on behalf of everyone, who were then 'liberated' to enjoy their lives.' Ultimately, like Rabid Littlejohn yesterday, he can go Eyjafjallajökull himself.
Brown, of course, just has to play a straight hand, and he's almost home to a famous draw. 
Meanwhile, the conspiracies run to fantasy. The eruption is Iceland's Revenge for losing the credit war. The Icelandic PM on Newsnight was like having a visit from The Boys.

"Now about our little arrangement over the banks. You have a very nice civil flight industry. Shame if it were to get all clogged up and grounded. Clogged up with - oo
Now can you think of anywhere that might cause that kind of trouble?... If you can, let us know and we'll do our best to see that any problems go away. If you're reasonable about our credit arrangement...." I dunno - some kind of ASH. Maybe even VOLCANIC ash, blown thousands of feet into the air by some huge natural force.

They've never got over losing (or winning) the Cod War. Either way, they want to make us pay for making them pay back what they owe your local council, and the rest of us are left praying to Woden or Odin or Wotan to not plunge us back into recession. I blame that Click Negg. Until he opened his mouth everything was fine. The gods were offended by his overturning the political applecart.
So will that be the tactics of the Browneron on thursday? Blame it on the boy. They could do worse. It won't be the worst joke we hear all campaign, it's just a matter of who gets in first.
Watch this space.

Daily Mail Denies Right to Self Defence

David Cameron has not expressed support for the following declaration.
He is therefore unfit to be an MP.

8. 'The obligation of the British Nation to regard the sending of foreign warships into British waters, claiming to control the borders and prevent the import of arms to Britain, as a declaration of war, a new occupation, sinful aggression, and a clear violation of the sovereignty of the nation. This must be rejected and fought by all means and ways.'

Gaza is a sovereign state run by an elected government. It has a right to defend itself from attacks by a ruthless neighbour with no scruples about committing war crimes.
Whatever religious nuttery is promoted by this Istanbul Declaration, the assertion of the right to self-defence is something the Daily Mail, and everyone now calling for Daud Abdullah's head on a plate, would surely support - except in the case of one of Israel's victims, apparently.
Let's not forget what the Israeli navy can get up to given a free hand. Days before the onslaught against Lebanon, they were busy shelling Beirut beach parties, in heroic defence of their homeland.

BUY FOR VICTORY! Says Darling

You too can do your bit to support our gallant boys at The Front by going out immediately and spending every penny you've got on the most useless rubbish you can possibly find, anything to put money in the accounts of businesses so that the thing that works the spring that turns the thingumebob can keep working until the next Big Push. Buy For Victory!
The message from Andrew Darling in today's apparently historic attempt to keep us out of the soup kitchens, with its 2.5% cut in VAT and its promise to fight the next election on a manifesto of tax increases, is basically Let Your Shopping Help Our Shipping, or Combined Operations Includes You. Who knows, perhaps Darling was trying to say that:

this is not the end, or even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

Since the last ten years have been the history of pointless spending, it seemed sensible in these unprecedented times to carry on exactly as before. We are being told by the telly pundits that this 'throws out the rulebook' and other flamboyances, but the solution is still to buy and sell garbage we don't need, only more so, if possible. The opposite of everything which the slogans of the 1940's urged, but then, times change. Capitalism is always making such great strides in these matters. Take The Squander Bug when You Go Shopping!
It is therefore our duty to put our shoulders to the wheel, our backs to The Front and our noses to the grindstone, and bunker down to spend all our money as fast as our entrepreneurial superiors need us to.
As we were told on July 6th 2005, our courage, cheerfulness and resolution will bring us Victory. And then, after the next election, and the one after that, we will still cheerfully and resolutely be paying the price of rescuing capitalism from itself. So that even if the Cameron and Boy Wonder win the next election, they will be saddled with such an ideologically intolerable burden of debt that they might be better off losing, and let Gordon Brown pick up the pieces. If they win, it will only be for one term.
Whatever the intentions of today's desperate Darling Day landings, or how much histrionic adrenalin pumped through George Osbourne's veins while he tried to placate his own back benches from the dispatch box, or whether either tactic are likely to succeed, Osborne is no Nye Bevan, and the tories are now faced with the prospect of offering the electorate a range of public service cuts or more public service cuts in their next manifesto. And there wasn't much else in it to begin with.
There was no mention of any measures to recover some of the money we lent to the banking system last month - by plugging tax loopholes, for instance. Nor any mention of breaking the banker's credit strike. Winston knew what to do with essential workers on strike in a crisis. Perhaps we might even see the employment of Darling Boys; keen young accountants and business studies graduates drafted in to the banks to help maintain productivity. Some might call them blacklegs, but those who live by the blackleg can die by the blackleg.
No doubt the swots at the FT will point out this omission in due course.
bank strike