Question Time last night – as is customary the Labour Party representative took a trashing from... Well... everybody really.
Last night’s Aunt Sally was Peter Hain and yes, he took it, on everything from the Iraq War to Fred Goodwin’s pension. Whenever someone was laying into him and the camera flashed to his face there seemed to be a look of bafflement in his eyes: “I’m sure when I was an anti-apartheid activist I was one of the good guys...”.
To be honest this is always going to happen to the party in power, Hain has done some pretty shitty things (he once told me in a Q&A at a conference in the run up to Iraq that we would be “naive to think Saddam Hussein didn’t have weapons of mass destruction”) and yes - the Labour Party deserves it for various things (Iraq, stealth privatisation, not giving a toss about trade unions). But let’s not pretend it would be better under the Tories.
The most irritating thing was everyone else at the table using “Fred the Shred’s” ridiculous pension for political point scoring off Hain. Whilst they kept asking him why, if the government had bailed out RBS, was this charlatan benefiting from taxpayers money he kept saying he was “baffled” by the whole thing, giving the impression of a batty old aunt suffering from Alzheimer’s who hadn’t heard the question properly.
It’s very easy to throw rotten fruit at the people who have to take out the trash. As an audience member said, what Goodwin is doing is morally abhorrent but not illegal and thus Hain, or anybody else, has very little power to stop it at this point. People don’t seem to understand that the international capitalist system, particularly the finance sector, has for at least the last decade been stronger than any democratically elected government. The realpolitik of the situation is that those fucking bankers had everything sewn up. That may have changed recently. The important thing is to make sure it never happens again.
Unfortunately it NOT happening again won’t grab any headlines or win any votes. Because no one will notice something not happening. If you know what I mean.
Oh, bugger it... NEXT!
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Don't try and change the nature of a dog
In a funny story from earlier today the Prime Minister said he was “very angry” about the prospect of bankers taking bonuses and wants them to “consider waiving their right to them”.
It brings to mind Gordon Brown's often parodied Presbyterian heritage; the stern moralist wagging a finger over the bank executives saying “You could have this but do you really think you deserve it? What does your moral compass tell you?”
This unfortunately will not work because these are not normal human beings with any sense of moral responsibility. These people are shameless, greedy and seem to live their lives by the twin 1980s mantras of Margaret Thatcher (“There is no such thing as society” – therefore it doesn’t matter what happens to those losing jobs and homes as long as I get more money) and Gordon Gecko (“Greed, for lack of a better word, is good” – therefore it doesn’t matter if I take tax payers money to boost my already ridiculously high basic salary).
You might as well dangle a string of sausages in front of a dog. The dog doesn’t have to be hungry. It will still snatch it from your hand without a moment’s hesitation. It’s what they do.
It brings to mind Gordon Brown's often parodied Presbyterian heritage; the stern moralist wagging a finger over the bank executives saying “You could have this but do you really think you deserve it? What does your moral compass tell you?”
This unfortunately will not work because these are not normal human beings with any sense of moral responsibility. These people are shameless, greedy and seem to live their lives by the twin 1980s mantras of Margaret Thatcher (“There is no such thing as society” – therefore it doesn’t matter what happens to those losing jobs and homes as long as I get more money) and Gordon Gecko (“Greed, for lack of a better word, is good” – therefore it doesn’t matter if I take tax payers money to boost my already ridiculously high basic salary).
You might as well dangle a string of sausages in front of a dog. The dog doesn’t have to be hungry. It will still snatch it from your hand without a moment’s hesitation. It’s what they do.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Golli-gate
Who would have thought that the winner of I’m a Celebrity... 2005 and, um, journalist, Carol Thatcher would become the centre of a racism scandal? What next? Racism on Celebrity Big Brother?
Political correctness gone mad
But with all the media hoo-ha where do you go for an objective, balanced well argued appraisal of the situation. Why, that progressive organ of truth, The Daily Telegraph of course.
Columnist and former Telegraph editor Charles Moore writes an impassioned defence of Thatcher’s comments which can neatly be summarised thus:
1) That the term “golliwog” is not racially offensive when Thatcher uses it because they were a popular cultural image when she was growing up.
2) The BBC is engaged in a culture war against white, middle-(to upper)-class English people, the principal weapons in which are a Big Brother-type thought policing of its presenters and Jonathan Ross.
That would be a neat summary... but it’s so much funnier if we look at some of the comments in detail...
“All through Carol Thatcher’s childhood – indeed, until into her thirties – golliwogs were popular toys. Robertson’s jam marketed itself with a golliwog, which appeared on every jar. You could collect golliwog stickers and send them off, and then you got a smart metal golliwog badge.
Carol Thatcher liked the jam and she liked the golliwog.”
Have you spoken to Carol about this, Charles? Do you know she liked the jam? Do you know she liked the golliwog? Do you have any indication that Robertson’s was, in fact, the favoured jam in the Thatcher household? If you haven’t verified this then its pure conjecture Charles, and frankly, sloppy...
“When she said that the mixed-race Jo-Wilfried Tsonga resembled a golly, she was making a friendly joke, rather as someone of the same generation might say, “Ooh, he looks just like Rupert Bear” (or Captain Pugwash, or Noggin the Nog).”
Not really. Rupert the Bear isn’t based on a racially offensive stereotype of bears. And under what possible circumstances, Charles, would you compare someone to any of those figures? Perhaps if they looked like them? What exactly does a gollywog look like? Other than that it’s black? Could it actually be that the only parallel Thatcher was drawing between Tsonga and a golliwog was that they are both coloured?
Which brings us to another point, Rupert, Pugwash and Noggin are distinct personalities; by calling Tsonga a “golly” she consigns him to being an unidentifiable, unindividual, generic “thing”. Or to put it another way “they all look the same to me”.
“Why not antagonise Disgusted of Brixton, as well as Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells?”
I think you’ll find that it’s hard to rile people in Brixton, Charles. They’re usually fairly chilled.
“Even when Ross rang up Andrew Sachs, a 78-year-old Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, and left obscene (broadcast) messages about how Russell Brand had slept with his granddaughter, his punishment was a mere three months’ suspension.”
It sounds like he’s implying that Ross and Brand targeted Sachs because he was a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany. I think there could be an exposé there – are the two of them actually out to get Sachs because they’re neo-fascist agents of darkness trying to finish what Hitler started?
“As bombing campaigns go, the BBC’s culture war is unique in history, because it makes the victims pay for its attacks. Pay £139.50, and Ross is dropped on you from a great height.”
That’s right Charles; only white people pay the licence fee.
It all ends rather brilliantly with Moore suggesting that Thatcher start an ironic “Golliwog Club” as an echo of the “vermin club” started by young Conservatives in the 1940s. Moore says that if she does “I think we should all join”.
I would love it if a bunch of ageing, reactionary, conservatives started calling themselves the “Golliwog Club”. Then you’ll see political correctness go mad...
Meanwhile in Sandringham
The BBC reports that, in response to the whole Golli-gate affair Golliwog toys have now been removed from the gift shop on the Queen’s Sandringham estate.
How the hell did staff there think it was still acceptable to sell them until they were alerted by this happening? Are they so isolated? So completely out of touch with modern culture? Surely not?
Slightly more disturbing is the fact that the article says they had been sold there “for more than a year”. Now, OK, if this means they had been sold there for fifty years. But it does seem to imply that someone thought it was sensible to introduce golliwog toys circa 2007/08.
The mind boggles.
Political correctness gone mad
But with all the media hoo-ha where do you go for an objective, balanced well argued appraisal of the situation. Why, that progressive organ of truth, The Daily Telegraph of course.
Columnist and former Telegraph editor Charles Moore writes an impassioned defence of Thatcher’s comments which can neatly be summarised thus:
1) That the term “golliwog” is not racially offensive when Thatcher uses it because they were a popular cultural image when she was growing up.
2) The BBC is engaged in a culture war against white, middle-(to upper)-class English people, the principal weapons in which are a Big Brother-type thought policing of its presenters and Jonathan Ross.
That would be a neat summary... but it’s so much funnier if we look at some of the comments in detail...
“All through Carol Thatcher’s childhood – indeed, until into her thirties – golliwogs were popular toys. Robertson’s jam marketed itself with a golliwog, which appeared on every jar. You could collect golliwog stickers and send them off, and then you got a smart metal golliwog badge.
Carol Thatcher liked the jam and she liked the golliwog.”
Have you spoken to Carol about this, Charles? Do you know she liked the jam? Do you know she liked the golliwog? Do you have any indication that Robertson’s was, in fact, the favoured jam in the Thatcher household? If you haven’t verified this then its pure conjecture Charles, and frankly, sloppy...
“When she said that the mixed-race Jo-Wilfried Tsonga resembled a golly, she was making a friendly joke, rather as someone of the same generation might say, “Ooh, he looks just like Rupert Bear” (or Captain Pugwash, or Noggin the Nog).”
Not really. Rupert the Bear isn’t based on a racially offensive stereotype of bears. And under what possible circumstances, Charles, would you compare someone to any of those figures? Perhaps if they looked like them? What exactly does a gollywog look like? Other than that it’s black? Could it actually be that the only parallel Thatcher was drawing between Tsonga and a golliwog was that they are both coloured?
Which brings us to another point, Rupert, Pugwash and Noggin are distinct personalities; by calling Tsonga a “golly” she consigns him to being an unidentifiable, unindividual, generic “thing”. Or to put it another way “they all look the same to me”.
“Why not antagonise Disgusted of Brixton, as well as Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells?”
I think you’ll find that it’s hard to rile people in Brixton, Charles. They’re usually fairly chilled.
“Even when Ross rang up Andrew Sachs, a 78-year-old Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany, and left obscene (broadcast) messages about how Russell Brand had slept with his granddaughter, his punishment was a mere three months’ suspension.”
It sounds like he’s implying that Ross and Brand targeted Sachs because he was a Jewish refugee from Nazi Germany. I think there could be an exposé there – are the two of them actually out to get Sachs because they’re neo-fascist agents of darkness trying to finish what Hitler started?
“As bombing campaigns go, the BBC’s culture war is unique in history, because it makes the victims pay for its attacks. Pay £139.50, and Ross is dropped on you from a great height.”
That’s right Charles; only white people pay the licence fee.
It all ends rather brilliantly with Moore suggesting that Thatcher start an ironic “Golliwog Club” as an echo of the “vermin club” started by young Conservatives in the 1940s. Moore says that if she does “I think we should all join”.
I would love it if a bunch of ageing, reactionary, conservatives started calling themselves the “Golliwog Club”. Then you’ll see political correctness go mad...
Meanwhile in Sandringham
The BBC reports that, in response to the whole Golli-gate affair Golliwog toys have now been removed from the gift shop on the Queen’s Sandringham estate.
How the hell did staff there think it was still acceptable to sell them until they were alerted by this happening? Are they so isolated? So completely out of touch with modern culture? Surely not?
Slightly more disturbing is the fact that the article says they had been sold there “for more than a year”. Now, OK, if this means they had been sold there for fifty years. But it does seem to imply that someone thought it was sensible to introduce golliwog toys circa 2007/08.
The mind boggles.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
“There’s no business like snow business...”
... but this is all getting bloody boring and I rarely leave my flat anyway. So, other than that it's ramping up the heating bill, I don’t really have an opinion. Yes, alright, it’s pretty.
Let’s talk about the Catholic Church instead, shall we?
Pope’s conciliatory moves to Holocaust denier
Pope Benedict XVI, aka Joseph Ratzinger, aka God’s rottweiller, has come under fire yet again for his crazy right-wing antics. This time it’s allowing four excommunicated Catholic bishops back into the church. One of whom, British-born Richard Williamson (not to be confused with Rowan Williams) denies there were any gas chambers in the Nazi concentration camps.
The four men are apparently disciples of the right wing Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre who consecrated them without
Not only does this sound like something from a Dan Brown thriller but it does beg the question, if they weren’t appointed with
Reinstating a Holocaust denier seems a strange move for the Pope. Despite being staunchly right-wing Ratzinger has tried to distance himself from the Nazi Party since becoming a member of the Hitler Youth in 1941. To be fair to him, it was compulsory in those days so he had little choice.
Perhaps the Fuhrer still exerts some influence on his taste though. He recently caused controversy by appointing another right wing cleric as a bishop (one who claims Hurricane Katrina was punishment for
Smith: “DON’T PANIC!”
The BBC website reports that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is holding a “burglary summit”. No, it’s not the launch of some modern apprenticeship scheme for would-be house robbers but a move to tackle the growing number of burglaries caused by the economic crisis. Not that Smith wants us to worry about it.
The BBC reports that “Ms Smith said while historically burglaries rose during recession, there was nothing "inevitable" about it.”
It also reports that “figures show burglaries increased by 4% between July and September, compared with the similar period in 2007. [...] the first rise in seven years.”
That sounds a bit more than inevitable, Jacqui; that sounds like its already happening.
Smith is also reported as saying "I think it's important that we act before there's a problem”.
Isn’t that what the Government did with the Iraq war? Look how that turned out...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)