Showing posts with label Tories. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tories. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Tales of Iron Ladies


The smug, self-satisfied voice of Andrew Neil continues to drone from the radio, thanks to the BBC, so it's time to string a few thoughts together on an amazing woman who's been a constant in my life for as far back as I can remember.

Aunt O is my mum's eldest sister and also my godmother. Having no children of her own she's been exceptionally conscientious in carrying out her assigned role. Last Friday evening she collapsed in her kitchen and spent a very cold night on her kitchen floor. She was found there, propped up against a cupboard, by a neighbour who called in around mid-morning the next day to drop off the one newspaper she still bothered to read - on account of it carrying the details of the following week's television.

Incredibly,she was still breathing, in spite of being almost blue with hypothermia. Later, at the hospital, it was confirmed she'd broken her left femur, just below the ball joint at the hip. It was around midnight that the orthopaedic surgeon explained to me that an operation to replace the top part of that bone was necessary, even though, at the age of 97, there was a slight risk that she wouldn't come through it.

Aunt O had been on a kind of bed in A & E for the whole of the afternoon and the evening. Thankfully my cousin J was able to be with her throughout the afternoon, and had stayed until around 10.30 when it was confirmed that a bed would 'soon' be available. I'd arrived there myself around 8.00, and found the entire waiting room in front of the reception desk overflowing with relatives and friends of the sick and the injured who'd been brought in that day.

There must have been some very sick and injured people in there, and there must have been a minimum of staff, because my aunt needed to wait eight hours before she could have an x-ray and a proper assessment. During that time her temperature had gradually risen and her blood pressure had come down. It's just as well that she's an iron lady. [An agency nurse confided that she'd never go back to work there after her latest shift because of the extremely poor organisation and management of the place, which calls itself a university teaching hospital. This was exactly my attitude after experiencing neglectful and pathetic management within certain high profile engineering businesses back in the day.]

Born right at the end of the Victorian/Edwardian era, the first few years of my aunt's life had been lived during the first World War. By the time the second World War broke out she was twenty five, married, and living still in Longford, on the outskirts of Coventry. She still recalls vividly the time of the Blitz, and taking shelter under kitchen tables as shrapnel intended for the local gas works, railway lines, factories and coal pits whizzed through her house.

She was a factory worker for the whole of her life. She was one of Coventry's army of skilled factory workers whose dexterous and tireless hands and fingers shaped and assembled metal and plastic, electronic and mechanical components, and built things of value. All gone now, of course. Even Jaguar moved away, just a few years ago - the final insult to a city that had once been at the heart of Britain's industry and commerce, and as a consequence had been bombed and battered, but not broken, during Hitler's onslaught.

Clearly Coventrians have some issues with fascists and mad politicians who have grand designs and not much concern for the lives of 'ordinary' working people. How ironic, then, that Coventry's industries were finally demolished and destroyed not by Hitler but by the Thatcher gang and their successors - who clearly had and still have no regard for those 'hard working people' who are clearly not 'one of us'. What's more, we, the people, are proud not to be one of them.

We're proud of the fact that we continue to believe that there IS such a thing as society, and that education and health care should be free, paid for from taxes, and of high quality. We continue to believe in social justice, progressive taxation, decent housing for all, and in the elimination of poverty. We continue to believe in greater equality across society, rather than a society of haves and have nots. We continue to loathe the Thatcher woman, and her legacy, and all of those who think like her - greedy, nasty, selfish, arrogant, petty bourgeois individuals with their divide and rule mentality, their elitist and snobbish attitudes, their self-regard and their assumption of intellectual and cultural superiority. As for the upper classes, working class Tories and Ukippers - let's not even go there.

It's just as well Thatcher is going to be consumed by the fires of a crematorium and that she won't have a grave we can spit on.

As for my aunt, she's doing fine. Twenty four hours after her operation she was sitting in a chair, eating a meal. She's as tough as they come. Her little house is her Ritz, and in a couple of weeks or so she'll be back here, with a higher level of support and care, regardless of what it costs. She won't feel she wants or needs that, of course, but this time she'll allow us to take better care of her, however long she may live. That's the least she deserves. Truly it was people like her who built this nation, who fought for it, and who have maintained it, in spite of the neglect, the deprivation and the denigration they continue to experience from the billionaires, the bankers, the plutocrats, the neo-fascist newspaper owners . . . and the heirs of the Iron Lady.

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Layer 297 . . . Self Belief, Up All Night, Zzzzzzzzs, Michael Gove, Bananas and Proportional Representation

.
The guy doing Thought for Today this morning told us that 'self belief' is the most important quality for political leaders. Which is why it's also very important - I'm sure we'll agree - that our next leaders are Old Etonians who carry an ironclad self belief with them at all times - thanks to having been to the nation's elite school and therefore equipped with, and armoured by, an elite education. Not.

It seems, according to the radio, that Cameron was up all last night - campaigning, not shagging - popping up hither and yon to annoy groups of nightshift workers up and down the country.

We also heard on Today that sleep deprivation usually gives those who are deprived of their zzzzzzzs very strong feelings of great optimism, and delusions of grandeur. Since Cameron already had those feelings and delusions, thanks to being a smarmy toff and an Old Etonian, the effect on him must be amazing. Today we can expect him to announce that he, and not Raj Patel, is the Messiah. By Friday he could be claiming he's the Prime Minister. Fucking hell!

Thank goodness for Michael Gove, who I seem to be noticing more and more frequently. I'm fascinated by him - especially the way, uniquely it seems in this election, he sniffs after making a comment, or whilst listening to a question. Is it OK to sniff whilst live on air? Is it necessary? Is this a sign of someone who has so much self-belief he doesn't even monitor his own snot-controlling behaviour? But why doesn't someone tell him?

It seems to me that Gove has been used by the Tories during this election as their front man and spinner-in-chief for interviews on radio and TV - presumably because he seems, or seemed, to be capable of maintaining an even keel, smoothly navigating semi-tough questioning and maintaining a kind of insouciance and cheerful reasonableness, which must stem from quite a strong self-belief.

This morning, however, thanks to the blessed John Humphries on the Today programme, he finally blew it - and we had a proper glimpse of what Gove under pressure, losing his rag, might look like. Very nasty indeed.

This is brilliant. Humph pressed him on his objections to proportional representation, and Gove blurted out,

"Show me a disinterested academic who supports PR and I'll show you someone who's been a member of the Labour party or the Liberal Democrats for the past 20 years!"

So Humph quoted him two who weren't, and aren't. Boom!

"This is blind date politics! Clegg's voice is seductive! You don't know who you're going to end up in bed with! Ed Balls! Harriet Harman! David Miliband! If that's democracy - then I'm a banana!"

"Thank you for that offering", said Humph, smoothly.

Gove then went on to dig even deeper, and blathered, "It's the people who decide! - Not politicians in smokeless rooms!" - by way of confirming that he'd properly lost his cool. The correct expression is "Smoke-filled", you twat! Such a quaint and inappropriate expression, anyway.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8661000/8661467.stm

PS Millionnaire property-flipper Gove, MP for Surrey Heath, had the nerve to accuse the current government of 13 years of failure, social division and increasing inequality. Clearly he thinks the Tories' 17 years of the same stuff was a much greater achievement.

PPS Since the vast majority of nations and people around the world seem to agree that proportional representation IS proper democracy, then clearly Michael Gove IS a banana. You can't fault his logic.


.

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Layer 292 . . . Depressing Memories, Future Dread, Faith Schools, Car Crash Politics, The Liberal Moment, Four Lions and Cameron

.
This morning I found myself thinking about what it felt like the day after Thatcher was elected to Downing Street - the day that joy and hope was banished from the thoughts and feelings of anyone with any kind of progressive political mindset. The staggering sense of frustration and outrage, the anger, the disbelief, and ultimately the depression . . . the state of utter joylessness and disillusion.

How could this weird little twat of a woman, this ignorant, silly little shrill person, be the leader of a country like Britain? The simple answer was, and is, that Britain, and especially England, is a silly little benighted, materialistic, unspiritual, ignorant basket case of a monarchy and a country whose people allow themselves to be brainwashed by a notoriously biased and vicious right-wing press which is run by a group of vicious and nasty right-wing press barons. It was then, and it is now.

This is not to say that the people of England, and specifically the people who vote Tory in the shire counties and the southern part of England, are bad people. Most of them are decent, reasonable, thoughtful and kind. On a good day. But what kind of people tolerate bigots, vote for Tories, Ukips and BNPs, and buy so-called newspapers such as the Sun, the Star, the Mail, the Express, the News of the Screws and the Telegraph? Let's face it - not what anyone with half a brain would call enlightened.

So what's kept them in such an unenlightened state? It's the culture wot done it. It's the whole set of assumptions and prejudices which are dressed up as 'common sense' and 'the way we do things in this country'. It's the values propagated in newspapers and the rest of the media, and also in schools. It's the inability to think critically and the lack of understanding about alternative value systems and ideologies. It's the acceptance of a State in thrall to a monarchy and other reactionary vested interests. It's the weakness of alternative forces, and the inability of those forces to connect with those whose schooling and whose access to more enlightened modes of understanding has let them down.

Doomed. We're all doomed. I thought Marina Hyde's regular Saturday column yesterday was pretty bleak and doom-laden, but she has good cause to be filled with fear and dread about what'll happen if the Tories do well and get themselves into power this Thursday/Friday, which looks quite possible, barring a miracle and the anti-Tory vote actually turning out in droves.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/30/cameron-election-no-real-change

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

Faith Schools

I turned on the radio this morning - which isn't something I normally do early on a Sunday morning - and listened to spokesmen from all three of the major parties saying they'd be quite happy to open more and more faith schools 'if that's what people want'. Doomed.

These fuckers were talking about 'parents rights' to have their children educated in a faith school. Nobody gives a fuck about children's rights to be educated in schools that allow them to grow up in an atmosphere that's not dominated by mumbo jumbo about 'God' and 'faith' and deference to 'those who know better'.

Fucking unbelievable.

Vernon Coker is a fucking disgrace to a once-proud and once-progressive party. He's a real gem in the crown of a disgusting shambles of a knuckle-dragging crew calling themselves New Labour.

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

Car Crash Politics
And talking of New Labour, the print version of yesterday's Guardian featured across pages 12 and 13 a brilliant photo of Brown and his inner circle from the Cabinet lined up in front of some ridiculous mobile posters mounted on trucks. All that was missing was the actual firing squad.

[Strange, though, that the Milibands were missing.]

So who was there, alongside Gordie in his pink tie and grey shirt?

Mandelson, Alexander, Darling and Balls - all looking like they'd just arrived from a board meeting of some merchant bank - all dark suits and sober ties.

Alan Johnson in a light grey suit, standing in the pose of a slightly bemused insurance salesman.

Yvette Cooper in a buttoned up  blue coat from Debenhams, whose hem ended a few inches above a dark skirt which itself was a few inches too long.

Harriet Harman in her usual appalling baggy trousers and sensible flat shoes, and her usual naff necklace and tailored tight jacket.

Tessa Jowell looking like fuck knows what in a kind of shortie lumber jacket, too-tight light-grey tailored trousers, vile little flat shoes and a grey rouched top! Not to mention grey roots badly in need of re-doing.

The entire photo-op was ruined for Brown, but saved for the rest of us, by some dork crashing into a nearby bus shelter and wrecking the front of his car! It seems Brown's trusty aide-de-camp, a certain Sue Nye, was one of those who actually went to help the hapless twat who'd crashed. Obviously our actual government did nothing at all to assist.

This Sue Nye, incidentally, who has performed in this role for several previous Labour leaders, is married to a certain Gavyn Davies, another New Labour supporter, who also happens to be a very rich bastard thanks to being a top merchant banker - with Goldman Sachs, since you ask. Or at least he used to be with G-S. It seems he now 'runs private equity funds'. And so it goes. New Labour are not just in bed with the fat cats and the bankers - they ARE the fucking fat cats and bankers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/30/car-crash-labour

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/30/election-brown-sue-nye-profile

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

The Editorial

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/30/the-liberal-moment-has-come

Having referred in Layer 291 to yesterday's Guardian editorial supporting the Lib Dems, I've now re-read it a couple of times, and I think it's an extremely well-written piece which sums up really well the failings of New Labour and the reasons why the Lib Dems should be strongly supported in this election by those who call themselves liberals, social democrats, socialists amd progressives. Well done Guardian. A hung parliament, and the possibility of proportional representation, is crucial.

This isn't to say that the LibDem approach to economics or their ideology is perfect. In fact they're very reactionary on wanting to inappropriately & prematurely deflate the economy, thereby damaging public services in the process. They don't even have a coherent ideology. They DO, however, demand proper proportional representation - and so should we.

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

Four Lions

I heard on the radio this morning someone urging us to go and see the new film by Chris Morris - 'Four Lions'.

Have a look at this promo:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ew-SrlQ9tlI&feature=channel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuNybnoxqVE&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Uglk7QyxKs&NR=1

Lots more clips and trailers on YouTube.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/may/01/chris-morris-four-lions-interview

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

Cameron

On Andrew Marr's programme this morning Cameron gave a pretty convincing impression of someone who speaks passionately about his genuine beliefs, and with a certain amount of intelligence and perception.

He even supported the idea of 'fairness', cutting the salaries of cabinet ministers and bureaucrats, and giving a 'living wage' to those at the bottom of the pile, which is something that Thatcher would never have done.

However, he'll never support proportional representation, and above all else he's a slick salesman. Marr completely failed to challenge him on education & schools, and his intentions to privatise even more public services.

Thatcher soon morphed from a prattish lightweight into a ghastly nightmare of a crazed authoritarian dictator, driven by extreme right-wing economic, political and social ideologies. Cameron could easily do the same, especially when he starts slashing and burning and throwing even more millions out of work. If the roof caves in we can be sure he'll be on the side of Big Finance, the City, vested interests and fat cats.
.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Layer 201 Part 1 . . . Nailing Cameron's Lies, the Cause of the Crash, Education, Tutors, Inequality, and The Role of Government

.
Reasons to be Cheerful, Part 1

Just when I think I'm getting too jaded to read serious newspapers I find this week's Observer is full of very good stuff, and thank goodness that we still have writers and thinkers of the calibre of Will Hutton and co.

Andrew Rawnsley's column focused on the clear blue water that's reappearing between Labour and the Tories, since last week's Tory conference so clearly moved their party back to the Thatcherite right, having flirted briefly with the middle ground in the past couple of years.
Labour loves the state; the Tories loathe it. So far, so simple.
Last autumn, the world's banks came within days of a cascading collapse so apocalyptic that money would literally have disappeared overnight. The banks had not become so reckless because of too much regulation, but because of too little state intervention. And when the banks went bust, and the markets could not save themselves from meltdown, only government was big enough to step in and avert catastrophe. History will likely credit the crucial decisions to rescue the banks as the greatest positive of Gordon Brown's premiership.
The Tory leader betrayed extraordinary blind spots. Incredibly, he managed to talk about the financial crisis without once mentioning the market failures that would have had even more catastrophic consequences without government intervention. His account was riddled with confusion and contradiction which suggests his theory of the state is at best half-formed.

Cameron made the audacious claim that the Tories would do a better job than Labour of helping the poor. In neither case did he explain how reducing inequality and protecting vulnerable families are going to be possible without forms of government intervention.

The state is going to be slimmer, but it will remain large. A crude clash between Big Government and Small State misses the more sophisticated and important challenge. That is how to make government smarter. Labour is likely to have time in opposition to rue that it did not do more with power to modernise public services. The Tories will probably find themselves in office when they try to work out how to fashion an intelligent state. They will not find the answer in the sound and fury of empty conference slogans.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/11/andrew-rawnsley-conservative-conference-election

This final point is really key. Governments and civil service bureaucracies are fucking dumb. They're full of intellectually able individuals who are retarded by their lack of emotional intelligence and social intelligence, lack of a decent values system, lack of an intelligent ideology, and most of all lack of spiritual intelligence.

They're full of careerists, hyper-competitive power-crazed hustlers, complacent elitists and people who know fuck-all about the realities of life in the communities they're meant to be serving but which they imagine they're leading, and directing.

 These people were summed up brilliantly in the wonderful writing of The Thick of It. According to Wikipedia a new series is to be broadcast on BBC Two, in late October, 2009.

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

The Observer's editorial says this:
Mr Cameron should have been intellectually prepared for the extraordinary events of the last two years. The credit crunch had many causes, but chief among them was market failure. The aggregate power of individual greed was not adequately balanced by government regulation or social restraint.
But in his keynote address, the Tory leader offered a different explanation. The causes of Britain's economic problems, he said, are "Gordon Brown, who designed the system of financial regulation" and "government, [which] got too big, did too much and undermined responsibility". So the problem was too little political interference in a market-driven society, and also too much.
There was not a single social, economic or cultural problem in Britain that did not, according to Mr Cameron, have its roots in "Big Government". And every solution, it seems, should begin with a cull of those fabled profligate bureaucrats.
That is a big intellectual retreat from the position he held not so long ago.
No one expects a Conservative leader to reject the market and nor should they. Britain is hardly lusting after central planning and price controls. But for Mr Cameron, in a speech designed to flesh out a mature political philosophy, not to mention market forces was an extraordinary omission.
More peculiar still, Mr Cameron has witnessed a global crisis produced by inherent flaws in a system governed by laissez-faire economics and yet somehow he has emerged with an anti-government creed that sounds closer to the conservatism of Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s than to his own conservatism of three years ago.
Perhaps Mr Cameron has simply missed the point of the credit crunch. Or perhaps he is calculating that brash anti-government rhetoric is a way to turn public disenchantment with politics in general into Tory votes.
Whichever it is, if his speech reflects the final destination of Mr Cameron's intellectual journey in opposition, the whole exercise, in retrospect, looks immensely naive or hugely cynical or both.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/11/david-cameron-conservative-party-editorial

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

Early starts for the children desperate to pass their 11-plus

Private tutors are now dedicating themselves to ensuring that children win a grammar school place. The result is a widening class divide and some children studying for up to six hours a day

This is a comprehensive 2-page article by Anushka Asthana

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/oct/11/grammar-schools-tuition-private-tutor
All over the country, parents are pouring thousands of pounds into private tutoring in a desperate attempt to help their children secure a place at one of the 164 grammar schools in England and 69 in Northern Ireland.

Fiona Millar, chair of Comprehensive Futures that campaigns against selective education, said she was "amazed" by the stories she heard about the way parents behaved. "It has got out of control," she said. "What sort of kids have to be up at five in the morning to be tutored? It is tragic. I think there are issues about pupils' well-being. I have heard of tutors for children who are pre-primary. It has become a sort of panic among parents."

Millar said parents were driven by the fact they faced an "awful alternative". In areas where grammar schools took the brightest pupils, other schools suffered from deflated results. The obvious solution, according to Millar, was to ban the 11-plus. "You can't make the argument that grammar schools are ladders up for the working classes if who gets into them is determined by the amount of tuition their parents can afford," she said.

Others argued that children felt under pressure because they knew their parents had spent so much money on tutors. One primary school teacher from Kent, which has an 11-plus system and multiple grammar schools, said the stress on children was so high that in the weeks leading up to the exam and immediately afterwards, some suffered sleep problems, became weepy and aggressive, or fell ill. There was also bullying and name calling, as children felt the strain of the "dog-eat-dog attitude".

An editorial on education says this -
A free society allows parents to employ tutors for their children. Usually, that is a rational, targeted response to local weaknesses in school departments. But as a whole it contributes to a picture of Britain's education system where an under-acknowledged engine is at work: selection by wealth. That could be payment of fees to a private school or tutors. It could be paying a premium on a house in the catchment area of a desirable school. Either way, rich children get a better education than poor ones.
In recent years, policy-makers have addressed this issue by looking at school structures, their status and funding, but with only modest effect. Perhaps, then, it is time to consider the bigger picture: that the uneven distribution of educational chances is a symptom and a cause of wealth disparities. Address directly the plain fact of vast income inequality, and educational equity may follow.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/11/inequality-source-of-schools-gap

…...................................................................

Will Hutton, as ever, is excellent:

Sorry, David, if you roll back the state, you invite disaster

David Cameron is wrong to declare we need a more hands-off approach. That's what got us into this recession in the first place

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/11/will-hutton-david-cameron-conference
It wasn't the government that got us into this mess – if what you mean by mess is an ugly recession, an unbalanced economy, profound uncertainty over recovery, grossly indebted consumers, disadvantaged communities hit hard again and a budget deficit of £175bn. What got us into this mess above all was the 30-year rise of Big Finance before which governments unfurled the white flag. Bankers used their power to bend the rules at home and abroad, to lend ever more riskily and supported by less capital, until, finally, a vastly overextended banking system backed by very little capital collapsed. The result is today's economic calamity.
There were many culprits in this story, but the damage stemmed from an obsession to keep government small and markets big. Thus, mergers that created banks that were too big to fail went ahead and their daffy mathematical models went unchallenged. We need to reform our financial system from top to bottom, but neither shadow chancellor George Osborne nor shadow business secretary Ken Clarke began to address this question. Their twin attack was on the state – Osborne's because it was borrowing too much, Clarke's because it was regulating too much.
The public now knows that markets fail. Without the injections of capital, liquidity and guarantees for both sides of the banks' balance sheets worth some £1.3 trillion, Britain would now be in the middle of a depression more shocking than the 1930s. To argue that government is the problem just a year after an event like that is intellectually bewildering. The charge against Brown is not that he did too much, but that he did too little. What was he doing allowing bankers to write the Financial Services Authority's constitution so that it did not "discourage the launch of new financial products" and avoided "erecting regulatory barriers" and "damaging the UK's competitiveness"?
The truth is that, as finance has proved, markets need governments.
*