Layer 491 . . . The Churches of England, A Debate, The Media, Rowan Williams, John Sentamu, the Moral Agenda, Taxes on Bankers and Jarrow Marchers

.
I went to church last night - and I've never before seen a church so packed, with every pew taken and with extra seats needing to be brought in. A very lovely church it is too - St Peter's has been the parish church of De Beauvoir Town since 1841.

No need to worry - Oxzen hasn't had a moment of revelation and decided to follow The Lord. Indeed not. The Church of England is going through some interesting times, with its two archbishops saying some very enlightened things these past few days, but Oxzen still sees no reason to convert to a belief in God.

Last night St Peter's hosted the third "Hackney Debate":

"George Alagiah chairs a discussion on media regulation and ownership, phone hacking and journalistic ethics, and public responsibility."

The speakers were Nick Higham, James Anslow and Suzanne Moore - all of them (and George) residents of Hackney.

George Alagiah strikes me as a lovely man and someone with enormous intelligence, together with superb communication skills.

The three speakers all seemed very inclined to accept the status quo with regard to media regulation and the Press Council - i.e. no more regulation, no more control on media ownership, no statutory body to monitor the activities of the press and media. None of them seemed to speak with any great passion about the appalling British media and its collusion with governments to keep our politics, our economics and our financial system going along the same old track. There was even praise for Murdoch and the tabloids generally.

Even Suzanne Moore oozed complacency - telling us that if we don't like the tabloids and the right-wing press then we can find better news reporting and comment elsewhere on the Internet. Maybe she's right - maybe it's not even worth complaining about the power of the right-wing press to dominate the national conversation, since there's nothing we can effectively do about it.

Personally I'd have preferred to listen to platform speakers who could show similar outrage to that expressed by several members of the audience. Maybe if you have a regular column in the Mail on Sunday AND a column in The Guardian, as Suzanne does, you're a bit beyond outrage.

http://stpeterdebeauvoir.moonfruit.com/#/debate/4556340694

Respect to the Reverend Julia Porter-Pryce, who's the driving force behind making this particular church relevant to its community, and has opened up her church to be a venue for these public debates. It's a great venue, and even had wine on sale before and during the debate.

Have a look at the St Peter's website to find out more about what they're doing for the community -

"transforming its Crypt into a real community asset - a thriving centre for social interaction, creativity, cultural expression and community support. We're making the space fully accessible, flexible, practical and welcoming. It's home to the cold-weather night shelter, a thriving community cafe and many groups promoting creativity and healthy living." 

........................................................

During the first phase of the St Paul's site occupation, the head of the Church of England very wisely kept out of the debate about the camp, the occupation and LSX. He's now speaking out.

Oxzen has previously commented very favourably on Archbish Rowan Williams -


http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2011/06/layer-471-essays-rowan-williams-new.html

http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2011/06/layer-472-alfie-bowe-songs-and-singers.html


Occupy London: archbishop of Canterbury backs new tax on banking


Rowan Williams says the protest at St Paul's shows 'widespread and deep exasperation with the financial establishment'


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/nov/02/occupy-london-archbishop-canterbury-tax?


The archbishop of Canterbury has outlined a package of political and financial measures needed to take forward the "moral agenda" of Occupy London campaigners encamped outside St Paul's Cathedral.


Backing a new tax on banking, Rowan Williams said the protest against financial inequality and banking excesses had been seen "by an unexpectedly large number of people as the expression of a widespread and deep exasperation with the financial establishment that shows no sign of diminishing".


Endorsing the idea of a "Robin Hood" tax on financial transactions, he said: "There is still a powerful sense around – fair or not – of a whole society paying for the errors and irresponsibility of bankers; of impatience with a return to 'business as usual' – represented by still-soaring bonuses and little visible change in banking practices."


Williams stepped into the debate as another senior figure in the Church of England, the bishop of London, Richard Chartres, told the Guardian that the protesters' voices chimed in with "alarm bells ringing around the world about the connection between finance and ethics and human flourishing".

--------------------------------

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams calls for new tax on bankers


The Archbishop of Canterbury has thrown his weight behind the St Paul’s Cathedral anti-capitalist protesters as he called for a new tax on banks.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8863794/Archbishop-of-Canterbury-Rowan-Williams-calls-for-new-tax-on-bankers.html


“The demands of the protesters have been vague. Many people are frustrated beyond measure at what they see as the disastrous effects of global capitalism; but it isn’t easy to say what we should do differently. It is time we tried to be more specific,” Dr Williams said.
........................................................

Archbishop Sentamu targets City greed

He suggests denying honours and the Queen's Awards for Industry to fat cat firms; and an interesting way of embarrassing tax avoiders

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-northerner/2011/nov/05/sentamu-archbishop-of-york-st-paul-s-camp-corporate-greed-city-of-london?

The Archbishop of York, Dr. John Sentamu, has spoken out about the greed which provoked the St Paul's camp. Typically, he makes two practical suggestions [which can be read here - http://www.archbishopofyork.org/articles.php/2238/archbishops-call-to-re-establish-a-fairer-society]

Changes in public attitudes can take place quite quickly.  Over the last few decades racism has lost its respectability and is seen as unacceptable.  The same applies to homophobia (the irrational fear of homosexuals) and discrimination against women.  My belief and trust is that a society which has shown itself capable of making such rapid changes to attitudes in these areas will also prove capable of recognising that our society will work best when we recognise that as human beings we are all, fundamentally of equal worth and members of one society. 

Let us do it. Let us do it now.

..................................................

Archbishop of York attacks high-paid executives


Dr John Sentamu has attacked the salaries of top executives saying that huge differences between the rich and poor "weaken community life and make societies less cohesive".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8871631/Archbishop-of-York-attacks-high-paid-executives.html


Archbishop of York John Sentamu attacks executive pay

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-15605385

......................................................

Jarrow marchers complete journey


A group of activists who have recreated the famous 1936 Jarrow March for Jobs will complete their 330-mile journey by highlighting the growing "crisis" of youth unemployment.


Dozens of people have taken part in the trek from the North East to London, where a rally on Saturday afternoon will be addressed by politicians and union leaders.


Youth Fight for Jobs, which organised the march, will hand in a petition to 10 Downing Street calling for a huge Government job scheme, apprenticeships, the reinstatement of the Education Maintenance Allowance, the reopening of axed youth services and action on tuition fees.


Spokeswoman Claire Laker Mansfield said: "Young people have shown that far from being lazy or scroungers, they want a future with decent jobs and education. The marchers have received huge support up and down the country. People have fed them, put them up and made it clear they back our demands.


"We think it is unfair that in the 21st century young people are facing long-term unemployment. There are almost a million young people out of work, and the jobs market is not getting any better."


Great-grandchildren of those who took part in the original march 75 years ago were among those taking part in the protest march, which started on October 1.


In 1936, 200 jobless men marched from Jarrow in north east England to London with a 12,000-name petition calling for government action to create jobs.

- UK Press Association

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5i0bboHKNDe1XKO4DBFEe5hD6JJTg?docId=N0466781320418717584A

.

Layer 471 . . . Essays, Rowan Williams, The New Statesman, Proper Public Argument, and the Bastard Blair

.

Thought For The Day

The things that bring meaning to life are fellowship, solidarity and community.

.......................................................

Bastard Blair on the Today programme again . . . Every single word that comes out of his mouth is pure shit. Here's an appalling psychopath with an abysmal track record  - whose great success was in winning the Labour leadership and then surfing an enormous wave of anti-Tory feeling in the country - who's STILL being given platforms to spout his neo-conservative bullshit opinions - on Syria, Egypt, Middle East policy, the state of British politics - you name it. Tone still has lots of opinions.

In a week when the current Archbishop of Canterbury is strongly criticising our Tory-led government's policies (as guest editor of the New Statesman!) and pointing out that they have NO MANDATE for their policies, all that Blair had to say is he doesn't read the New Statesman (ignorant bastard) and he supports the 'reform agenda' of the coalition - as long as they're continuing with the 'reforms' that the New Labour mob started during Blair's time as Leader. Which indeed they are.

This man is a fucking disgrace - and a shameful reminder of what the Labour party allowed itself to become. Any Labour party member who DIDN'T resign their membership to protest about Blair's policies really needs to take a good look at themselves and ask to what extent their continuing support for Blairism got us to where we are now. Or do they really think that they did something valid and useful by continuing with their membership?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/default.stm

.....................................................

Archbishop of Canterbury criticises coalition policies


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13706710


The Archbishop of Canterbury has warned that the government is committing Britain to "radical, long-term policies for which no-one voted".


Writing in the New Statesman magazine, Dr Rowan Williams raises concerns about the coalition's health, education and welfare reforms.


He said there was "indignation" due to a lack of "proper public argument".


Talking specifically about the government's key health and education policies, Dr Williams said they were being introduced at a "remarkable speed".


"At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context," he said.


"Government badly needs to hear just how much plain fear there is around such questions at present."


In a wide-ranging attack, he accuses the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition of creating "anxiety and anger" in the country by introducing reforms without sufficient debate.


Dr Williams is critical of Prime Minister David Cameron's flagship Big Society initiative, which aims to shrink the state and hand more control of services to volunteer groups, describing it as a "stale" slogan which is viewed as an "opportunistic" cover for spending cuts.


The BBC's religious affairs correspondent, Robert Pigott, says this is by no means the archbishop's first attack on government policy, but it is extraordinary for its breadth and it is the most overtly political yet.


"Dr Williams even questioned the coalition's use of its democratic mandate, claiming that no-one had voted for its radical reforms to health and education, and that they were being forced through without 'proper public argument'," he said.


.....................................................................

Rowan Williams: no one voted for coalition policies


Archbishop of Canterbury issues broadside against 'radical policies' and 'big society' project in New Statesman editorial


http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jun/09/rowan-williams-coalition-policies


by Patrick Wintour


The archbishop challenges the government's approach to welfare reform, complaining of a "quiet resurgence of the seductive language of 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor".


In comments directed at the work and pensions secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, Williams criticises "the steady pressure" to increase "punitive responses to alleged abuses of the system".


Westminster politics "feels pretty stuck" he warns, adding that his aim is to stimulate "a livelier debate" and to challenge the left to develop its own "big idea" as an alternative to the Conservative-Liberal Democrat alliance.


The coalition is facing "bafflement and indignation" over its plans to reform the health service and education, he writes. "With remarkable speed, we are being committed to radical, long-term policies for which no one voted," the archbishop says. "At the very least, there is an understandable anxiety about what democracy means in such a context."


He complains that the education secretary Michael Gove's free-school reforms passed through Parliament last summer with little debate, using a timetable previously reserved for emergency anti-terrorism laws.


Separate reforms to universities will see tuition fees treble and funding for humanities courses cut.


Williams says education "might well be regarded as a proper matter for open probing". But "the feeling that not enough has been exposed to proper public argument" has created "anxiety and anger" in the country.


Britain needs a long-term education policy "that will deliver the critical tools for democratic involvement, not simply skills that serve the economy", he says.

.................................................

This is an interesting event at the University of London - The Literary Essay in English  -   2 and 3 July 2011 - organised by the Queen Mary department of English -

And this is an interesting piece for bloggers to consider -

Since Montaigne, the essay has been, alongside fiction, poetry, and drama, one of the major genres of literature, distinguished by its appeal to personal experience rather than institutional approval for authority. It is an intimate forum in which difficult political, scientific, and philosophical issues can be introduced to the general public, and to one another. Yet the essay has been almost completely neglected in literary studies, and in contemporary culture there is little understanding of the genre's history and importance. Its distinctive forms - experimental, exploratory, polemical, introspective, or conversational - have not been charted; nor have the themes which mark the essay through its history: dissent, whimsy, experience, experiment, conversation, unconscious experience, frailty, amateurism, friendship, and intimacy. In the public arena opportunities to publish essays are now very few: the tradition which passes from Johnson's Idler, through the Edinburgh Review, the Westminster Gazette, Hound and Horn, the Dial, the Athenaeum, the Criterion, Horizon, and - finally, perhaps - Encounter - is practically at an end. Hazlitt and Lamb would have few opportunities to publish their essays nowadays. This conference seeks to remedy this neglect, bringing together academics, novelists, and essayists, creating an opportunity for ideas to be exchanged, stimulated, and disseminated.

Spot the strange assertion there? "Few opportunities to publish their essays nowadays". This is a bit like a music lover saying, "Thanks to the Internet there are very few record shops still operating in High Streets nowadays."

So which is best - having a dozen or so magazines with limited circulations that publish a small circle of recognised essayists, or an Internet that gives anyone and everyone the opportunity to publish worldwide (for free) every single essay, review, article, etc they would ever want to write?

So is the issue really about getting paid for (or making a living from) writing essays? Or is it about having access to the guaranteed readership of an established magazine?

.

Layer 276 . . . Going Forward, Easter Weekend, Spiritual Intelligence, Christian Brothers, a Zen Son, and Vincent Van Gogh

.
Going Forward

I hate people using the expression "going forward" when they mean "in future". Where did this bollocks come from? NO regular person says "going forward". It's management-speak, think-tank speak, government speak, and I fucking hate it.

Some jerk on the radio just now said, "We need to have all of this in our policy going forward" - which is a sentence that needs neither "going forward" nor "in future" - unless someone means it's something that we should NOT have in our policy right now, but WILL need it to be policy at some future date. In either case, nothing and nobody is "going forward".

...............................................

Easter

Easter came and went quite pleasantly, with some decent sunshine and warmer weather towards the end. The first of the flowering cherries out in the street is in full blossom - well ahead of the others. The neighbours' magnolia is just starting to open out. The forsythias are still at their peak of yellowness.

Feeling motivated by the sunshine yesterday I managed to re-pot a number of houseplants, and sowed several packets of seeds in various trays and containers. Hopefully this will be a good year for sunflowers. Hopefully it'll be a good year for sun.

Good Friday

There was an item on the Today programme that began with the question, "Will you be going to a church this Easter weekend?" No. Obviously.

It led into a discussion about the "wider place of spirituality in society . . . a sense of the divine . . . the place of particular institutions in society . . . a general loss of faith in the old imperial God . . . belief in a 'higher power'".

There was a consideration of "something else going on . . . belief in 'a god' without membership of a particular institution . . . a sense of the divine that's more subtle than the church version".

Some geezer from the "Institute of Social Change" (David Voas?) reckons that two thirds of us believe in a higher power of some kind, but don't belong to a religious institution. There are only one million regular church attenders in Britain, and only one sixth of us have a firm belief in God. However, most people think there's "something out there" - "something powerful that can't be ignored". The new 'post-Christian' spirituality movement includes non-godbotherers such as Buddhists and paganists.

Many people have a new kind of "faith", but reject a "simplistic, authoritarian teaching that no longer appeals". Something new may be emerging - something that sees connections between different faith traditions.

All of which I find quite encouraging - if EVEN the people of Britain are starting to sense the existence of a spiritual intelligence that connects all people all of the time.

http://www.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/socialchange/

..........................................

I forgot to mention in the last blog that Emma Thompson spoke very movingly about the loss of her father, in terms of missing his warmth, his generosity, his wit, his calming influence . . . "

Clearly he was an extremely spiritually intelligent individual. A giver and not a taker.

......................................

The teaching unions have their annual conferences at this time of the year, and they've been talking about boycotting SATs again. Why? I thought they'd agreed last year that they shouldn't have anything more to do with the damnable things.

On the Today programme Alan Smithers and also someone from the Sutton Trust (Lee Elliott-Major? Lee Elliott (major)?) talked about the need to sort out our Early Years education and "exam overload". Smithers talked about the government running schools centrally as "franchise factories".

Sutton Trust man concluded that we need to "radically re-think education".

Clearly, however, neither of these guys has any idea about what to DO. Knowing the way Smithers leans politically - he of the private "University of Buckingham" - you have to assume that when he talks about radical changes in the Early Years he's probably wanting 'formal' learning (phonics, etc) to begin even earlier, in order to try to boost attainment.

Why does a flagship programme like Today insist of wheeling on such know-nothing pundits who clearly have no recent or relevant experience of children, teachers or schools, let alone any coherent ideas about the kind of revolution in education we really need, for the sake of all our children.

http://www.suttontrust.com/

.......................................

Easter Monday

Start The Week - Radio 4

Three cheers for the Archbishop Rowan Williams - for blurting out that the Catholic church (in Ireland?) is now an institution that has "suddenly lost all credibility".

["Suddenly"? Well done all of us atheists and non-believers who realised this a long time ago!

How typical of Blair to convert to RC just as all this shit hit the fan.

But how come nobody's talking about the church's Christian Brothers sect and their decades-long involvement in child abuse of all sorts, including beatings, humiliation and sexual assaults? I first heard about these people about 30 years ago from someone who'd had personal experience of what the priests and nuns got up to in their schools. 30 years down the line I've recently realised that by no means everybody has even heard of the so-called Christian Brothers.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congregation_of_Christian_Brothers   -   see section on 'Scandals'.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/thousands-raped-in-irelands-christian-brothers-schools-14308329.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article6350520.ece

Williams talked on the programme about honesty and truthfulness as being necessary if Christianity is going to survive. So even the Archbish has his doubts about the survival of Christianity!

Phillip Pullman, the well-known author and atheist, was also on the programme, talking about his new book which praises "Jesus - the man", but condemns "Christ - the church - the institutionalisation of a 'spiritual vision' ". Large bureaucratic structures do it no justice, especially when they betray the real teachings of Jesus.

Professor Mona Siddiqui pointed out that Sunni Islam doesn't have any bureaucracy.

Williams mentioned that the Quakers don't either. But he was concerned about "ensuring consistency down the centuries", and therefore the need for a bureaucracy. Sounds like some kind of C of E inspectorate - Offgod.

He also said the life of Jesus created an 'explosion of ideas', and therefore there was a need for an organised Christian bureaucracy to package and market what it saw as the key ideas.

Mona Siddiqui spoke about the Davos meetings of the World Economic Forum in which many of the most powerful business leaders have said their businesses don't have an "ethical framework". Apparently they would like one!

However, the majority of those businessmen, whilst they're apparently keen to give money to "good works" after they're made their fortune, don't really want to switch to an ethical business framework which might inhibit their ability to accumulate scandalous levels of profits and salaries.

Philip Pullman pointed out that the profit motive will continue to dominate above all other considerations, besides which, the directors of companies are legally constrained NOT to 'do good' - and only to maximise profits for shareholders.

Pullman also reminded listeners that values, morality and ethics have NO direct link with religion, as such.

David Baddiel, also an atheist, was also on the programme, chipping in some thoughts about relativity, truth and sources of empathy.

The Archbish had the last word, claiming that the universe comes from God. So there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Economic_Forum

........................................................................

A Third Way?

Why can't these Christians and Muslims (and atheists) understand the concept of spiritual intelligence, the importance of pursuing enlightenment through direct experience and meditation, seeking inner truth, and developing lovingkindness?

Which would they rather have - a planet without any religion but with all the people holding peace and lovingkindness in their hearts and souls, just as Jesus and Muhammad urged - or a planet full of people who believe in 'God' but who go around killing and abusing one another?

The idea of a God and a Supreme Being is completely useless. So are popes and archbishops who claim to speak with and on behalf of 'God'.

Why was there no Buddhist on the programme? Is it just a numbers game - like, we have very few Buddhists in this country and therefore the Buddhist viewpoint can be completely ignored, no matter how useful, logical and sane it may be?

No - let's just focus on the useless, the illogical and the plain insane, and we'll call it "faith". We're all quite familiar, comfortable and secure with that.

...................................................

How many parents in this quaint little country can say they're blessed with a child who quotes them the sayings of the Zen masters? Like mine said to me yesterday - "One often meets his destiny on a path he takes to avoid it."

He also told me I shouldn't make a habit of thinking about worst-case scenarios when considering options and actions. Dat's ma boy!

.................................................

Vincent

There was a fabulous programme on BBC1 yesterday  - Vincent Van Gogh: Painted With Words. Every word spoken by the characters or the voice over was written either by Vincent himself, or his brother Theo, or another contemporary.

Many years ago I bought and read a book of the correspondence between Vincent and his brother, but having it brought to life so vividly on the screen, accompanied by close-ups of the paintings and drawings, was mesmerising. Catch it on iPlayer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00rzj61/Van_Gogh_Painted_with_Words/

I hadn't realised that in his determination to "make himself useful to those he saw suffering around him" he'd tried to become both a teacher's assistant and a church minister. Having failed at both, by the age of 30, he poured his spiritual intelligence and energy into his art, which he realised was truly his vocation. A man of the people, he identified strongly with peasants, working people and outcasts. The works of Dickens, and his descriptions of the squalor and poverty of the working classes, made a huge impression on him. He also read Zola - "The supreme chronicler of the oppressed and tormented working classes".

He wrote to Theo, "In art one must give one's heart and soul"

He had a passion for Japanese prints, which was also shared by Gauguin and Monet. He loved their colour and their compositions.

In February 1888 he moved to Arles, and reveled in the vivid colours and the quality of light.

"I revel in the heat - like a cicada! I don't need Japanese prints here!"

Soon, however, it became clear he was suffering from bipolar disorder.

"So many days pass without me saying a word to anyone. It worries me to spend so much time on my own."

He fantasised about starting an artists' colony in the south. He painted pictures of sunflowers to decorate his rooms and his studio, anticipating the arrival of Gauguin.

He said, "Let me quietly continue my work. If it's that of a madman, then too bad."

However, he discovered that working and "screwing" were incompatible!

In October 1888 he took off a slice of his ear, which he presented to a prostitute.

"I wouldn't exactly have chosen madness, had there been a choice."

By May 1889 he'd more or less come to terms with his 'madness', and was alternating periods of 'extreme excitability' and 'amazing creativity' with being completely unable to work.

He did several paintings of The Reaper working in a cornfield, having visions of Death cutting down humanity.

Eventually he went to live in an asylum - the St Remy sanatorium - where he became calm and lucid, and passionately devoted to his painting. Most of the time.

In July 1890 he went to Paris to see his brother, who had a new child. He suddenly felt like a liability. "Living at your expense, I feel the pointlessness of my life."

His final works were of black crows, flying above cornfields. They were possibly an attempt to express sadness, and extreme loneliness. He then walked out into the fields and shot himself in the chest. He was 37.

Theo wrote, "There was nothing anyone could do. Life weighed so heavily upon him."

Barely 6 months later Theo died of syphilis, at the age of 33. Could it be that Vincent knew that his brother was terminally ill?

.............................................

Questions

Given that Vincent was simply a brilliant artist, and had no idea how to go about selling his work, how much effort had his brother really made to sell the paintings on Vincent's behalf?

What's it mean to say that life "weighs heavily" upon someone?

Maybe great artists are those who truly apprehend the human condition, in all its brilliance, and all its joy, and also in all its misery and pain. Such sensitivity, such capacity to feel incredible amounts of loneliness and isolation, for example, in oneself and also in other people, as Vincent certainly did, must surely be unbearable from time to time.

Vincent's real tragedy, I reckon, was needing to rely on his brother for funds, and the feeling of being a burden that came with that. He surely lacked - bizarrely - self-respect and self-esteem. He didn't see himself as "successful". He didn't have close friends or a partner who could care for him through his periods of depression, who could tell him how wonderful his art was. Lacking friendship, close family, intimacy, laughter, and ordinary day to day joys in life, no wonder he came to feel that life was pointless.

............................................

I think what we now know about depression and bipolar disorder is that there's no way to properly address the inability to feel any joie de vivre if one's brain isn't regulating its production of serotonin properly. Perhaps bipolar disease simply means that production of serotonin swings wildly between under- and over-production, whereas straightforward chronic clinical depression is simply due to a long-term failure to produce sufficient serotonin.

It seems pretty obvious that such conditions - such chemical imbalances - are exacerbated if for any reason we also fail to produce any of the pleasure chemical endorphin.

These things are becoming maybe less of a mystery, but are none the less problems that are difficult to address for a whole lot of people.
.

Layer 134 Education, Brown and Harman: Back to the Grindstone.

.
“Since the recession began, applications to train for teaching have shot up.”
BBC News Radio 4.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7933690.stm

So this is now a clear case of potential teacher supply outstripping demand. And what does a stupid government do in this situation? Well, a truly stupid government, as represented by Jim Knight, creates an incentive for supply to go up even higher by saying it’s going to compress PGCE training courses from an already ludicrous 12 months to - wait for it - 6 months. That’s SIX months to learn about and become skilled in the arts and sciences of being a teacher.

What the government should be doing, of course, is fast-tracking redundant bankers with their fat kiss-offs into work experience as Teaching Assistants, to give them a substantial first-hand insight into why the majority of them SHOULD NOT, and CANNOT, become teachers.

That would serve two purposes. First, to disabuse them of what it’s actually like to be a teacher, and save them the time and expense of training to be a teacher. Secondly, to rid them of the idea that they have the intellectual, emotional and spiritual resources to be a teacher.

The very few who survived this sort of apprenticeship to a practicing classroom teacher for at least 6 months, before even embarking on training, would then

* be absolutely certain that they have the qualities of sensitivity, empathy, intuition, intellect, instinct, humility, emotional intelligence and resilience that you need to be a good teacher.
* be clear that they can function effectively in a professional setting as a member of a team of professionals, which of course you don’t necessarily need to do as a self-serving banker.
* be clear about the sort of self-discipline and self-sacrifice it takes to be a good teacher.

Having had such a workplace experience, any sensible applicant for teacher training would then demand that basic training should be effective and thorough, and conducted by highly skilled and experienced practitioners in both the college and their placement schools for a minimum of two years.

-------------------------------------

There’s talk about the government introducing a Masters degree in Teaching & Learning. The incredible thing is that we apparently don’t already have them. How can that be?

Could it be anything to do with the idiotic world of academia where subject specialisation is all, and “Teaching & Learning” is a bit . . . . . generalist? A bit like Primary teachers - regarded as the poor relations, generalists, etc. When what they are in terms of their professionalism is actually a specialist in child development and pedagogy.

No-one can actually teach a young child who has limited language and literacy without understanding what makes a child tick and how to motivate them to want to learn. Or at least that’s what Primary teachers used to be able to do before NuLabour got its hands on education and turned teachers into operatives in results factories, “delivering national strategies” and teaching to tests.

In Finland, the world’s best educational system has not only an all-graduate profession, it has an all-post graduate profession, with every teacher being trained to Masters level in pedagogy within 5 years of starting teaching.

As a teachers’ Union spokesman said on the radio - it’s completely mad to let semi-trained people loose on teaching children when they haven’t even begun to properly understand the basics of child development and pedagogy, let alone know how to organise up to 30 children within a small space so that each and every one of them has his and her specific educational and personal needs met, all day every day.

Let alone be able to offer them a daily experience of school that fosters a love of learning for its own sake, and allows every child to develop high levels of intellectual, social, emotional and spiritual intelligence.

Even experienced teachers find it difficult to do that - principally because these days they’re no longer trained in such skills. They’re fast-tracked into “delivering” literacy and numeracy strategies and “the curriculum”. In other words, preparing the children for tests and exams.

But of course this is what people like Jim Knight imagine teachers should be doing. Any old banker can surely be trained to stand in front of a class and fill children with imperial gallons of facts. Within six months. Can’t they?

That’s right, Jim lad. Hammer them with grammar, “wow words”, “connectives”(?), number facts, bits of science, history and the rest, plus some training on test techniques, and Gordon’s your uncle.

------------------------------------------------------

Here’s an excellent article, published on the Guardian website yesterday.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/mar/09/anthony-seldon-examinations

I can’t imagine Anthony Seldon wanting any semi-trained ex-bankers working in his school. Can’t imagine the fee-paying parents wanting them either. Maybe they’ll be fine for the inner-city schools. Eh, Jim?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2009/mar/09/anthony-seldon-primary-tests

---------------------------------------------------

Returning to Oxzen’s recent comments on Brown and Harriet Harman, I notice Jackie Ashley wrote some very important comments in yesterday’s paper, under the strapline,

Harman and Darling are the PM's most constant allies. He should let them speak out, rather than slap them down.

This is another sad indictment on Brown, who’s still failing to realise it’s time to admit what the rest of us already know about NuLabour’s complicity with the City and ‘globalisation’ this past decade, and understand that he’s now operating in a totally new epoch that requires totally different approaches to politics and economics.

(Harriet Harman) seems to be fighting her cause in cabinet, taking a more anti-City line than some other ministers, and refusing to have her equalities legislation nudged aside by Mandelson . . . Under great personal attack, she's got her head down and is plugging on regardless. You don't have to regard her as some kind of political titan to think this is cause for mild praise rather than contempt.

Personally I think it’s cause for enormous praise - both what Harriet said about the bankers not being allowed to keep their booty, and the fact that she’s still fighting for her equalities legislation, especially if Mandelson is against it - which he would be, wouldn’t he?

Unless people feel politicians, like the rest of the world, have been shocked into rethinking their assumptions, how can they feel confidence in future decisions? This is not about weakness. You can't base a new politics on denial.

The Tories, with all their hedge-fund chums and banking backers, are still far too smug in their finger pointing, but even their language is now altering. Labour, take note.

If (Brown) was able to admit that he had been too credulous about the banks but had learned some painful lessons, he would actually now be in a stronger position, far better able to get a hearing.

If he was able to see Harman and Darling as loyal people with minds of their own, rather than as potential renegades who need to be slapped down, then he would also be in a better place, and his administration would seem more coherent. Why pick fights with friends?

The mood of the country has changed, anyway. People want something different in truly dangerous, recessionary times. They want politicians to be less tribal, franker and more open about what went wrong. It's a time for rallying round, not for finding new divisions.

It's not quite true that everyone failed to see the expanding golden bubble for what it was. A few did. But millions were mesmerised and the consequences are going to be horrible. At this hard moment, there is no place for false pride. We are in it together. The prime minister must be less proud. He has, frankly, less to be proud about.

There were a couple of good comments on CIF after this:

From guardianreeda (on Mandelson, and someone‘s suggestion that he could take over as PM if Brown resigned)

For a completely unelected, completely unelectable multiply disgraced multi-million pound trousering liar to end up running the country courtesy of Labour is indeed a fitting way to draw this desperately disappointing period in our history to a close.

From ardennespate (on someone’s comment that Brown’s successor should fire Mandelson immediately)

... from a large cannon, off the highest turret of the Tower of London, in the general direction of Elephant and Castle. Without a crash helmet.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/09/gordon-brown-harman-darling

------------------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, is getting involved. Quite right too. This whole economic and financial crisis is, in the end, about spiritual intelligence, ethics and morality, equality and purpose.

Archbishop delivers attack on impact of globalisation.
Time for everyone to look at own lifestyles, he says.

Blaming the greed of individual bankers for the financial crisis was too easy and people should instead be asking profound questions about how poorly regulated economies obsessed with ever-growing consumer choice have skewed the judgments of entire countries, the Archbishop of Canterbury has said.

Focusing on the greed of bankers had made people lose sight of the fact that "governments committed to deregulation and to the encouragement of speculation and high personal borrowing were elected repeatedly in Britain and the United States for a crucial couple of decades", he said. "Add to that the fact of warnings of some of the risks of poor (or no) regulation, and we are left with the question of what it was that skewed the judgment of a whole society as well as of financial professionals."

The archbishop . . . attacked "opportunistic" offshoring and outsourcing by large international companies. "The present situation favours economic agreements that give little or no leverage to workers and that have minimal reference to social, environmental or even local legal concerns.

"Learning how to use governmental antitrust legislation to break up the virtually monopolistic powers of large multinationals that have become cuckoos in the nest of a national economy would also be an essential part of a strategy designed to stop the slide from opportunistic outsourcing towards protectionism and monitoring or policing the chaotic flow of capital across boundaries," he said.

Plenty of good sense and things to chew on there. Excellent.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/09/deregulation-spending-banking

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/09/rowan-williams-lecture-full-text
.