Agenda 21 – Oligarchic Collectivism In America

America was being nudged towards National Socialism from the 1960s and now the Obama Administration is racing to implement Agenda 21, the New World Order plan that prohibits anybody but the elite from owning property or having the right of free speech.

It looks more and more likely that American individualism and the basic human instinc for self-preservation will lead to civil unrest (if the mainstream media would report the truth this has probably already happened as the police have lost control of inner suburbs in most cities. The use of force will become increasingly necessary to get most people to willingly go along with this encroaching tyranny.

So writes Dave Hodges of Activist Post in his article The New Social Class Structure Of The United States

Orwell's Conceptualisation Of Social StructureOrwell’s Conceptualisation Of Social Structure

The Illiberal Left’s War On Western Culture

During the Cold War era, the Russians told a familiar joke: “Under Capitalism, man exploits man while under Communism, it’s the other way round.

Western culture is in trouble, I don’t think many reasonable people would disagree with that (if you think a totalitarian global government is kool you’re not reasonable, GTF out of here.) The Daily Stirrer has posted many items on the war on our traditions and values and so have other people, one such article is embedded here. Don’t assume those who defend our values are right wing, Hitler’s Nazis and Stalin’s Soviets tried to change culture by force, the true left, Britain’s Labour and Liberal parties in their great days and northern Europes’s Social Democrats and Christian Democrats have always defended it.

Don’t confuse either system with freedom (The Flight From Freedom)

Read more
Culture War

RELATED POSTS:
Labour, the (very rich, elitist) People’s party plans to ban your beer and pies

The Dementia time bomb

Litle Nicky may have a young outlook but let’s be honest I’m no chicken. This issue is of some interest to me them.

The Daily Stirrer has warned many times of the various time bombs that are ticking in the basement of our bloated society. Forget climate change, it was a diversion, a phishing expedition by scientists and bureaucrats to see how much money they could persuade gullible and fear driven politicians to pump into expensive vanity projects the aim of which was not to save the planet but to win Nobel Prizes and other prestigious awards and “secure a place in history.”

Climate change is a problem but it is not our biggest nor our most urgent.

The biggest problem is overpopulation, solve that and the climate will take care of itself.

Next on the list is ageing. Medical science expects to be thanked for curing or controlling many potentially fatal conditions enabling us to live longer. Unfortunately they have not cracked the problem of age induced infirmity. The burden of caring for the elderly infirm is straining the social infrastructure of developed societies.

from The Daily Telegraph
The £388 billion cost includes that of social care, unpaid care by relatives and the medical bills for treating dementia.

The figure is expected to rise rapidly in the coming years but governments are woefully unprepared to meet the challenge, said the World Alzheimer Report 2010.

Experts at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden and King’s College London examined the cost of dementia care and found that, if it was a country, it would be the world’s 18th biggest economy.

And if it was a company, it would be the world’s biggest by annual revenue, way above Wal-Mart (£265.6 billion) and Exxon Mobil (£200 billion).

Campaigners already warned that the costs of caring for people with dementia are on the rise, mostly due to people living longer.

The number of people with dementia will … read more
A HREF=”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8015078/Global-cost-of-dementia-almost-400bn.html”>Dementia Costs Equal 1% Of World Economy
In the UK at the moment according to figures quoted in a BBC documentary, The Young Ones, last week one in five of people over seventy needs either full time or part time care. In the 1980s and 90s the elderly infirm, those not able to live independently, were moved to municipal care homes. These were impersonal and bureaucratic so eventually the emphasis was shifted to one on once care in the home. While better for individuals this was enormously expensive for the taxpayers and also distorted the state of the employment situation by vastly expanding the proportion of people employed by the state as against those working in true revenue generating industries.

The nineteenth century social reformer William Cobbett referred in his writing to tax eaters. It is an appelation we would do well to reclaim. Reducing unemployment by appointing vast numbers of tax eaters. To do that is to merely massage the statistics. We are left then with a conundrum for the science lovers to choke on. How do we now stop people living so long they become a burden on society? Or more to the point what is being done to ensure that as people live longer they do not become a burden on society? If half the population are over a million years old and the other half are busy caring for them who is going to grow food, build houses, make machines etc.

Euthanasia is not going to play well with the voters so the only alternative is rather that governments continuing to promote a dependency culture to return to a social system in which people are not given unrealistic expectations.

As humanist philosopher David Hume said: It is better to die at sixty – five while in command of one’s faculties that have a few more years of increasing infirmity.

more on David Hume’s life and philosophy

Listen carefully to the climate change alarmists, pay the same kind of forensic attention to the virus alarmists, the terror alarmists and all the rest. Their scaremongering is always full of might and possibly and could and maybe. Their predictions are based on mathematical models not reality.

The age time bomb is with is now and it is ticking away under the chair on which you are sitting.

The Daily Stirrer
Doctors traing to include making patients conform to stereotypesTheosophy For Beginners

Will Change Be Unfair To Everyone?

The 2010 UK general election campaign has been more Presidential than ever. But does the focus on the three leaders, zGordon Brown for Labour, David Cameron for the Conservatives and the Liberl Democrats Nick Clegg. The emphasis on television debates has enabled the leaders to evade any difficult question requiring detailed answers but do their vague promises of change and a fairer society serve Britain’s version of democracy well?

Read the full article Change Can Be Unfair To Everyone at The Daily Stirrer

As The Housing Crisis Deepens Is This An Answer?

In this article
A home run for housing
Liberal Democrats finance spokesman Vince Cable suggests a policy aimed at reminding people houses are homes to live in not investments to be bought and sold for profit would be a positive move. The idea is that as repossessions increase in number, funds that have been locked for years are released to enable Housing Associations and other social housing organisations to buy the properties from mortgage providers, enabling people who were mis-sold mortgages they could not afford to remain in their homes as tenants.

Cable is, as far as I am aware, the first promient politician to say we must rid our society ofd this obsession with the fallacy that owning property makes us rich or “middle class,” and talk for reminding people that houses are not investments to be traded and there is no real stigma in renting one’s home.

Could this be the first positive step towards repairing the society Thatcher trashed so deliberately and disastrously and Blair pulverised.

A Society in Decay

We have commented many times on the breakdown of society and the very visible symptoms in the streets of our towns and suburbs. The astounding revelations this week as the murderers of Gary Newlove were sentenced prove another example.

For all this the Government keeps trotting out its fraudulent statistics showing that crime is actually falling and certain bossy, meddlesome middle class harridans (yes I do mean you Polly Toynbee, get over your schoolgirl crush on Tony Blair and open your eyes to reality.)

The guilt tripping middle class socialists of Nu-Labour are quick to excuse the violent minority on our streets, to blame parents, political extremists, the consumer society etc. (and I have to say it is pretty rich to read comments written by a Chelsea Tractor driving media millionaire blaming consumerism for society’s ills as if the problem is nothing to do with them,) they will blame anybody but the thugs and scumbags who perpetrate such random acts of violence as we hear of every day.
The finger pointers of the right like to blame single parent families, the failure of the justice system, the nanny state, all the usual targets of the right.
Nobody ever thinks to blame the evil little shits who are responsible.

It is not the consumer society that causes these outrages, nor is it single parent families. Many single parents bring their children up well. It is not lack of male role models: it is lack of positive male role models and the failure of society to give out a clear message that everybody is free within the law, but step out of line and there will be consequences. For most people than message hardly needs to be given, the majority know instinctively where the lines are drawn. But a few, like the thugs who murdered Gary Newlove, are quick to exploit the stupidity of the guilt-tripping middle-class socialists in engineering laws that give more “rights” to the criminal than the victim. Ask them to stop trashing your car or vandalising your garden and the mantra is, “Why should we, what are you going to do about it? we know our rights.”

We need not feel guilty abot punishing these people, they do not come from poor homes, thus being victims of society, they come from uncaring homes and thus are victims of their parents. And if the thought in their heads when they murder, maim and destroy is not, “This is wrong,” but “there will be no consequences, I’ll only get an ASBO,” then they deserve to face the wrath of society.

The sooner the better.

The Cure for Affluenza.

Philosopher Oliver James’ book on our sick, materialistic society calls the malaise afflicting so many in the English speaking world Affluenza. He claims the symptoms of affluence, mental illness at epidemic levels, the decay of social institutions, addiction, the fragmentation of society and isolation of the individual, deification of celebrity and the pressure to seek status through acquisition are a result of the selfish capitalism that has dominated politics, business and society for the past thirty years. (Affluenza – Oliver James)

So what is the cure?

Well the most important step will come as a shock to the system from many. Forget the loony suggestions of “scientists” to put anti depressants in the drinking water, we should simply nationalise the housing stock, put an end to the insane desire instilled in people to buy houses and remove the greatest cause of stress. There is more to life than buying houses. Having worked in Europe I can vouch for the fact there is no such obsession with property ownership in France, Italy, Germany or Sweden, people are happy to live in rented homes and they are much more fulfilled in their lives, not having to worry constantly about interest rates, property values and whether the council are planning to open a bail hostel just round the corner. People can just be, they are not under constant pressure to acquire.

The advocates of selfish capitalism tell us the economies of the main nations of mainland Europe are in worse shape than those of the U.S.A. Britain, Australia and Canada. This is a blatant lie. The economies of these nations work differently, their finance systems and currency are not underwritten by debt. None of these nations are in great shape, there is not a single major economy in the world that is in great shape. China and India are about the best but the cost of dealing with the consequences of climate change and the rising cost of energy blights even their success.

Thanks to the looniness of selfish capitalism there are now pigeon holes in mail drop offices in the Cayman Islands that have more valuable economies than many third world countries. The great lie of the free marketeers was that if we deregulate businesses, privatise public services and free the entrepreneurs to make money, their riches will trickle down and everybody will be rich. At the beginning of the 1980s, the dawn of the era of selfish capitalism, it was the great complaint of socialists like myself that 90% of the nation’s disposable wealth was in the hands of 10% of the people. Now after twenty-five years of the poor benefiting from the trickle down effect, 90% of the disposable wealth is in the hands of 3% of the people. The rest are living under unprecedented burdens of debt.

What do we do apart from nationalise the housing stock? We bring back public ownership to essential utilities, electricity, gas and water. The privatisation of these essential services was probably criminal and at the very least wholly immoral. And the privatisation of the Trustee Savings Bank was plain and simple theft. It was not the government’s to privatise.

The latest swingeing increases in the cost of gas and electricity are not, as is claimed, the result of rising prices of gas and crude oil. They are the result of Margaret Thatcher’s botched privatisations and the criminally flawed deregulation of the stock market. Does anybody know how many German, French or American electricity companies the Chinese, Russians or French own? None. Does anybody know how many American companies whose shares are traded on the stock exchanges are owned by foreign firms. Very very few, it simply is not possible for foreigners to walk into America or most other nations and buy up companies whose business is deemed vital to the national interest. The situation is the same almost everywhere except Britain, the national economy is regulated for the protection and benefit of that nation. The British economy is deregulated for the benefit of foreign rip – off artists who want to make vast fortunes in our nation but not contribute to the nation’s tax revenues. Thus the burden of subsidising the ineptly managed “private finance initiative” ventures in the provision of public services falls on that 97% of the population who share 10% of the wealth.

Is it any wonder we are all stressed out and suffering from the afflictions of affluenza?

The author D.H. Lawrence said over seventy years ago, “Humanity must get back in touch with the rhythms of nature.” Little Nicky Machiavelli agrees, but first we must get back in touch with each other. In our local communities not via the internet.

Affluenza: Wikipedia

Infected by Affluenza

Big Idea for the New Year – Let’s Dump London.

Just before Christmas I was pontificating on what step we must take in order to set this great country of ours on the right track and seized the opportunity to remind everybody of the harm that was done to our national community by the crackpot economics and hate-based social policies of Margaret Thatcher. One comment that came in from somebody on my friends list suggested the country was a mess because Good Saint Margaret had not gone far enough and that the answer to our failing public services, culture of greed and selfishness and looming crises in the financial sector, health, education, transport and everything is to cut income tax to 16%.
A-ha I though, enjoying an Alan Partridge moment, a-ha, another whinging Londoner who can’t afford his mortgage and is looking for a thinly disguised handout from us sensible, pragmatic, stoical, hard working Northerners, Mildlanders and West Country folk.
Well up to now of course, we have never objected to subsidising the capital. Nineteenth century social commentator William Cobbett dubbed it The Great Wen (wen: a wart or benign tumour) and described the city as “the home of stock jobbers and tax eaters” or to put it another way people who grow rich without actually contributing anything to the society from which they enrich themselves. It may seem a bit unkind of him to lump all Londoners into this category but sometimes generalisation helps to make a point. And Cobbett did point out that there was plenty of room outside London to accommodate all those Londoners willing to get proper jobs and work for a living.
Cobbett’s hatred of London was extreme. Most of us have been happy to abide by the understanding that we subsidise London so long as few Londoners ever venture north of Watford or west of Reading.

About fifteen years ago I had the misfortune to work with the kind of Londoner who makes people hate Londoners. An East End boy who had moved up to a Bovis home in the suburban sprawl north of the North Circular Road, he thought his three bed dormer and his Renault Five meant he had joined the nouveau riche. Every day I endured his witless remarks about the north being like Coronation Street, about keeping coal in the bath, his repeating “Ee bah gum” as if it were something real people ever actually said and his general delusions of superiority. And of course his prattling about how marvellous Margaret Thatcher had been for the country.

One day I happened to mention I was extending my weekend in order to put some wall lights in the dining room and doing a few other domestic jobs. Being a long term house addict he jumped in;
“Oh yeah, I put wall lights in our lounge, maybe I can help. What’s your room like?”

I drew a quick sketch and said the lights were going on the chimney breast to cast a soft light over the table.

“Yeah, but its not that simple,” he said, “where’s your television?”

I told him that was irrelevant.

“Nah, nah, it’s very important. If you’re not careful you will just see your lights reflected in the television screen.”

I asked, “But how can that happen when the television is not even in that room?”

“Oh, its a dining kitchen.”

“No, its a dining room, the kitchen is a separate room. And the tele isn’t in the dining room.”

Where is it?”

“In the lounge?”

The cockiness faded a little, “Jesus, they must be small rooms.” he said hopefully.

“Well the lounge is fourteen feet by twelve, the dining room seventeen by fifteen and the kitchen about fifteen by nine. So how is the position of the tele relevant to my wall lights?”

By now he was totally gobsmacked – and I had not told him about the cellar, the attic and what used to be the scullery cum wash-house.

After the weekend I took to work a photograph of the view acrosse the valley of the Lancashire Calder to Pendle Hill, taken from my front door.

“Where’s that,” my aspirational colleague asked, “Scotland.”
“No, my front garden,” I told him. Well it was not a total lie, the first twenty-five feet was.

“You got a view like that in Lancashire.”

“Lancashire is beautiful and Coronation Street is a fairy story.

“How much is your mortgage for that place?” he asked.

“About a hundred a month.” I thought he was going to be sick. Londoners just don’t get the North.

That assumption of superiority is something I have often encountered in London, usually from people who have taken on a mortgage they cannot afford and delude themselves they have moved up in the world. They are invariably fans of Margaret Thatcher.

Unfortunately Thatcherite politics depends on engineering artificial economic booms by lowering interest rates to a level at which it becomes viable to borrow to invest. And Thatcherite philosophy tells is followers (quite wrongly) that the best investment is property because property values always increase. What goes up must come down of course and every housing boom bursts just as soon as reality rears its ugly head. Unfortunately the breed of Londoners who are responsible for that city’s ills are immune to reality. Thus as well as convincing themselves the only reason for the collapse of the property market is that people outside London are not prepared to take on mortgages of twenty five times their annual salary, they are prepared to believe the Olympic White Elephant is a wonderful money making opportunity, that tax cuts for the rich can result in more money flooding into the economy so everyone gets richer (in reality more money flows out of the economy through offshore investment vehicles and everyone, excepting the very very rich, gets poorer.
So while contemplating the meaning of life on New Year’s Day I was suddenly overwhelmed by the an idea that will save us hard-working, level headed etc. non-Londoners from having to subsidise the great Wen with our taxes while our sensitive ears are constantly assailed with their whining about needing more favours, more subsidies and more everything.
Let’s dump London out of the UK. Its an idea that should make everybody happy, Londoners for as long as it takes to learn they need us more than we need them, the rest of us forever. I would not exclude all Londoners from the UK, like Cobbett I would be willing to accommodate those willing to work at proper jobs that do not involve property developing, trading financial derivatives or flogging dodgy T-shirts to tourists.

But allowing some people* to stay, country lovers like Mike St. Mark, sweeties like eggbod and entertaining folk such as Jack Frost out would make room for us to exile to independent London all the people outside London who work in financial services, anybody who thinks Thatcher was a good leader, anyone who has owned more than two houses in the last five years or anyone who drives a black can and can tell you where St. Mary at Hill is.

I would even let a top quality Londoner like Ros Thompson bring Arsenal along with her, after all there are a few big cities in dire need of a decent football team. Among those that spring to mind are Bristol, Sheffield and … dare I say it?….yes I dare – NEWCASTLE.

*If your name is not among those of Londoners to be saved, don’t worry, the full list is too long to reproduce here.

Blake’s Heaven (another message from beyond the grave)

Yesterday I looked at the thoughts of American writer John Steinbeck on the subject of individualism and human creativity. Yesterday was also the 250th anniversary of another visionary who still speaks to us relevantly and eloquently from beyond the grave.
William Blake, poet, artist, was probably the most extraordinary visionary Britain has produced since Shakespeare. Though not in the same league as a writer Blake, writing in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, foresaw many of the problems that would face society two hundred years later.
Most people know this writer for the hymn Jerusalem and so think of him as a religious poet. It is true there are many references to God and Jesus in the poems and essays but an unholy row has been simmering in he Anglican church for many years as to whether Jerusalem is actually a Christian hymn or poem. The answer to that (its a pagan poem actually) does not matter, what is interesting and is a theme running through Blake’s work is that his religious views represent heresy to standard Christian beliefs. Blake sees God as a symbol of the oppressive authoritarianism of state and church and Jesus as the unifying spirit of humanity. An authoritarian God and a liberal, humanist Jesus.
All our lives we are required to choose between God; conformity, unquestioning obedience, commitment to work and money and unthinking acceptance of the status quo, and Jesus; freedom of thought and speech, questioning of injustice and a love of art and expression all of which Blake believed would lead to the overthrow of tyranny and the creation of a Utopian world, Jerusalem:
I will not cease from mental strife
nor will my sword rest in my hand
‘til we have built Jerusalem
in England’s green and pleasant land.
So no promises that it will be easy then, but plenty of references to The Da Vinci code, well, to the enduring myth that Jesus actually visited Britain a few years after his alleged crucifixion. A full book would be needed to explore the possible truths of that so we will skip nit for now.
Most people have probably been told the lines in the poem Jerusalem that go:
And was Jerusalem builded here
among these dark, satanic mills?
are actually using the “dark, satanic mills” as a metaphor for the protestant churches that were preaching a very hardline version of Christianity. This is true but not entirely true, Blake is using a double meaning. Remember he was writing at a time when the Industrial Revolution was at its height in Britain and also there was a second wave of the protestant reformation going on. The mills and factories of the manufacturers were certainly dark, satanic places, the workers endured long hours in vile, dehumanising conditions, working for a pittance; they could be laid off or sacked without notice, punishments were regularly handed out for misdemeanours as trivial as talking to the person at the next machine, wages could be reduced on a whim and, under the law of the day, nobody could leave to obtain better employment without the permission of their master. Yes master, not employer. The relationship was of master and servant, and despite all the pious words of abolitionists who campaigned to stop the slave trade, the condition of workers in the industrial cities of Britain were no better than a kind of slavery. The workers could submit to the will of their bosses or they were free to starve.
The protestant chapels were just as dark and Satanic in a different way. It was in such places and through their warped teachings the idea of the “undeserving poor” took root, the notion that poverty was a judgement imposed by God and those who did not endure it with stoicism and grace were deserving of further punishment at the hands of pious human tormentors who considered themselves to have been granted wealth because God recognised they were better people.
What did it take to be part of the “undeserving poor”? Well, complaining about injustices, poor wages, squalid living conditions and the exorbitant prices charged in the “truck” shops. Oh yes, truck shops, nearly forgot those. So concerned were the pious and godly rich people for the souls of their workers, they did not pay wages in legal coin but in tokens only redeemable in shops owned by the employer. This was ostensibly to prevent the “undeserving poor” from spending their earnings on sinful frivolities such as drinking, singing and dancing in the alehouse. Obviously such practices did not sit well alongside Blake’s notion that all human beings must be free to make their own choices.
It was not only religion and the cause of the workers that aroused the poet’s passion. He was quite prepared to embrace radical political causes and supported both the American and French revolutions, writing in support of Washington and Lafayette and denouncing the Kings of England and France.
By profession Blake was an engraver and illustrator and his fine draughtsmanship brought him to the attention of radical publisher Joseph Johnson who championed the work of writers such as Thomas Paine, sometimes known as “the firebrand of the American Revolution” and Mary Wollstonecraft, proto-feminist and mother of Frankenstein author Mary Shelley. Through Johnson, Blake also met people such as scientific pioneer and religious rebel Joseph Priestly, Radical theologian Gilbert Wakefield who popularised the Unitarian faith in Britain and poet William Cowper, a stylistic influence.
As Blake developed as a writer, ideas formed from contact with these influential thinkers were given shape by his own individual vision. The form of Christianity expressed in his poems, though heretic in the view of the Biblical fundamentalism of the day, was in reality derived from the much older tradition of Celtic Christianity and owing a lot to the fashionable revival of interest in paganism, mysticism and naturalism. In the Everlasting Gospel, his last and unfortunately unfinished poem he goes right out on a limb and proposes that the true God could only possibly be a female, while in The Song of Los his implication is that the endless cycle of nature, of death and renewal, is the reality while the idea of “resurrection into a better life” common the Abrahamic religions is a fanciful notion that appeals to the weak minded. To the mainstrean Christian all virtue comes from God, to Blake all virtue is human and all evil from over-zealous and hypocritical love of the patriarchal and materialistic God of the Abrahamic religions.
In summary then, Blake was as much a political as a religious poet, and as such he now speaks to us from beyond the grave, showing us how we must fight to retain our rights and freedoms including the freedom to believe or not believe in some sort of God.
He also shows us in the words to Jerusalem that we must slow the insane rush for technology, not turning back the clock to a medieval lifestyle as Blake’s critics claimed he was suggesting and as my critics, the immature and irrational boy – scientists (who think they are really really original) will try to claim I am suggesting. There is no need to turn back the clock, only to make sure we control technology rather than letting it, and those who profit from it, control us.
Blake’s Heaven then was not a dream world where everybody sprouted wings and a distinct lack of wedding tackle and went around playing little harps, it was a world in which all could live with dignity and have the opportunity to fulfil their potential. That is a dream that technology should have put within our reach. Unfortunately, because we have been misled by those who worship money and power it seems to be slipping further away from us all the time.

Oh Brave New World…

Since I started to write about the boy-scientists (a phrase I will explain properly soon) in connection with the frequent reports and studies that are thrown at us every day, the misinformation and disinformation that comes out of certain branches of the scientific community and their unshakeable belief that us ordinary punters “cannot understand because we are not scientists,” it has occurred to me several times as I wrote of plans to put anti–depressants in water, to withhold medical treatment from those who self harm by having a cheese sandwich and a beer and to fiddle about with the genome to produce a perfect race, that I ought to do an article on Brave New World, Aldous Huxley’s 1930s novel of a technological utopia.
In common with Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four, forever imprinted on the minds of my generation because of the cover image of a military boot grinding on a human face, Brave New World was a novel that changed the way we viewed the world we lived in. In many ways it inspired aspects of the social revolution of the 1960s as people shrugged off the social controls that had imposed such restrictive conventions on western society.
Now of course the bright young things of the sixties are just boring old farts and people are tricked into conformity by promises of ever improving material benefits if they will only sustain constant economic growth. Consumerism has replaced patriotism in binding us into slavery.

Unfortunately I procrastinated too long. No less a literary luminary than Margaret Atwood has beaten me to the punch and written an excellent article about Huxley’s Brave New World with its compulsory drug doses, genetic engineering to produce social classes from A to E (Epsilon semi-moron aka chav) so reminiscent of toady’s ABC1 social classifications that have replaced the old aristocracy, upper and lower middle class and the much les stratified working classes. How like the modern world Atwood makes it all sound with a level of sexual liberation that deems it bad manners to refuse to have sex with anybody who offers, it’s genetically engineered “pneumatic” women, psychological manipulation, constant pressure to consume and deep suspicion of any sign of individualism.
The portrayal of the dystopic utopia is accurate though. We do seem to be blundering towards a version of that society. Messing about with nature is never a good idea.
You don’t have to take my word for it of course. Read Margaret Atwood’s article here.
Or better still, read Huxley’s novel of benign totalitarianism, Brave New World for yourself.
Even more chilling, Nineteen Eighty Four deals with the darker side of tyranny. With its Thought Police, Big Brother, Ministry of Love (where people who rebel againts the totalitarian regime are “re-educated” by the Though Police until they learn to love Big Brother again, its permanent war against a vague and nebulous enemy and the sinister Room 101 in the Ministry of Love, the novel presents an image of where we might be led if we reject the doubtful blessings of Brave New World.

“Oh brave new world that has such people in it” is a line from Shakespeare’s The Tempest. Often interpreted as a play in which Shakespeare abandom his gift for writing as he senses his talents will wane, it has also been interpreted as a metaphor for the supersession of the old, easy going, humanisticic society of rural England by the philosophies and values of the protestant reformation.Either interpretation could be correct and probably both are because Shakespeare was nothing if not multi-layered

Because some people feel recent blogs have painted a very negative picture of the sciences, I have promised to set the record straight by writing a post showing that I am quite a fan actually (as you would expect from someone whose career was in computers) It is the arseholes who approach science like a zealot approaches religion that get up my nose.

Should We Stop Them From Breeding?

The mindless murder of young Rhys Jones in Liverpool this week has given us a very disturbing insight into gang culture among the young. The stories told by members of The Noggzy’eds and the Crocky’eds, their nihilistic view of life and their perverted loyalties. Evidence presented in so many news reports suggesting this behaviour is not confined to one city but spread over the whole country.

It makes the assurances of middle class bleeding hearts that “there have always been gangs and things are no worse than they ever were except in the eyes of the hysterical media,” seem rather hollow. Things seem to have run completely out of control in the past few weeks, perhaps it is because the school holidays have freed more young people to roam free, looking for “laffs.” That could explain the recent violence. But the problems are not confined to violence. Irresponsibility is at the root of problems relating to drugs, drinking and sexual behaviour.

Not long ago on a daytime TV show I saw two young men, both in their teens, swaggering around bragging about their sexual prowess. Both were still in their teens, one had fathered eight children, the other claimed nine. Neither had kept in touch with the mothers, probably the kindest thing they had done for those girls. Worse though, neither young man saw any reason to change their behaviour, both said they would refuse to use condoms as it was “unmanly” and both felt that fathering a lot of unwanted children “proved they were men.” The attitudes are primitive.

It does not matter how many A-levels pupils can be coached to pass, if the system is not teaching young people how to behave it has failed abysmally. Real education does not begin until after we leave school. Schools should give us the basics, literacy and numeracy and it should at best teach people to think rationally and instil curiosity and hunger for knowledge.

What is going on may seem like The End Of Civilisation As We Know It but we can get things back on track quite easily. Firstly, the world has TOO MANY ARSEHOLES. These people, mostly members of the nationwide ubergang, The Needaspikethroughtheir’eads must be controlled.

Most important, we need to stop them breeding. In the 1960s or 70s Indira Gandhi’s government in India offered men transistor radios in return for having a vasectomy. Only they did not explain what a vasectomy was. We could try something like that to stop the arseholes from breeding. Offer them an X-box or a few rocks of meth perhaps? The cost benefit to society is enormous when we consider the cost of providing care for a few dozen abandoned children for eighteen years.

Second, young people who have never been subjected to proper discipline but only punished for disturbing parents who were sleeping off a booze or drugs binge should be taught that actions have consequences. Kill somebody and you spend the rest of your life doing hard labour in unpleasant conditions. Terrorise someone and we send you to work as a street cleaner in Baghdad or somewhere. It does not take much imagination to make the punishment fit the crime.

Thirdly, and more controversially, there has to be a concerted effort to rebuild communities. Reverse every law Margaret Thatcher’s government ever passed. Build social housing, invest in railways and bus systems, deprivatise everything that was stolen from public ownership and sold for pennies to Thatcher’s and Blair’s cronies.

In Britain our biggest problem has always been the division of society on lines of class. No human being is of less worth than another because of where they were born or how they speak, or what educational qualifications they have. Personal wealth does not make somebody more worthy of respect or bestow privilege on them.

If we attack the problem at both ends, show people who wish to be anti – social that society can be nastier on a bigger scale that individuals ever can and start to repair the damaged caused by the warped political thinking of people whose ambitions outweighed their abilities, we can change course.

We have to become a society again.

And I’m not the only liberal intellectual that thinks so

God’s Shock Jock?

Those of you who read my articles might be surprised to learn that earlier today I was guesting on a Chistian Radio show for London’s Premier Radio station.

Even more strage, the producer Justin Brierley contacted me after following comment threads on some of my jousts with fundies at U.S. site Gather.

Well Justin’s show “Unbelieveable” is a British production with a more moderate tone than U.S. evangelical Christianity, so after some discussion I decided the programme would be fun to do and managed to get my friend Jenni Hutchinson (vieira) invited as my opponent, the Christian speaker. Did you know BTW that satan is the Aramaic (ancient assyrian language) word for opponent or adversary. Ha! Jenni is a little devil – she will love that.

Anyway we put together a really good programme, covering topics such as how the church may fulfil a role in modern society, the nature of faith, building bridges (we bridged the religious divide, the generation gap – Jenni is 24 I’m…not. OK, I’m yibblety-yibble. We bridged the geographical divide between north and south and the soccer supporters gap, Jenni follows Arsenal, my loyalties are to lowly Accrington Stanley (the team that came back from the dead – reluctantly apparently.)

All in all we proved there can be dialogue between Christians and non believers.

It will be difficult to get the show on the air in some areas but there is an internet feed. ?Here are the details:

The programme airs at 2pm this Saturday here are the ways to listen “Live”

1305, 1332, 1413 MW (Greater London)| Sky Digital 0123 | Virgin Media 968 | Freeview 725 | London DAB or online at http://www.premier.org.uk

From (Usually) Monday you can listen to the archive edition of the programme online http://www.premier.org.uk/engine.cfm?i=680

Not of great spiritual interest to many of my friends here maybe, as most share my attitude to organised religion, but a worthwhile demonstration of constructive dialogue between faith and non-faith, with some good points made on both sides.

OK, that’s just a cynical ploy to bost the show in search engine listings of course. But you will excuse me one shameless self promotion item I’m sure. I promise to get back to more humour and controversy next time.

The Tyranny of Bricks and Mortar.

Diligent as ever in his quest to expose ways in which ordinary punters are being stitched up, Little Nicky has turned his attention to the housing market and the way it is manipulated. What brought this to my attention is a report that house prices here in Britain are set to rise 50% in the next few years.
Now house prices have risen 120% in the nine years since New Labour came to power while earnings have only risen 24%. These figures just do not add up, surely it is time for a levelling off of prices?
With the appalling state of social housing, the only way people can afford a decent home in a pleasant environment is by getting on the property ladder. In fact those who do not own their own home are increasingly finding they are treated as second class citizens.
If the projected price rises happen only people in the most highly paid professions or those who can obtain help from their parents or are lucky enough to have a legacy from Grandparents or other sources will be able to afford a home and with loans running at around nine times average income the housebuyers will struggle to service the interest on such huge amounts and fend off starvation. They will not even be able to think of holidays, smart cars etc. Is it any wonder more young people are choosing to stay in the parental home.
It is only two generations since most Europeans escaped from the shackles of wage slavery and not much more than that since many turned their backs on the old world to find a new freedom in America, Canada and Australia. And yet those countries too, without even the excuse that population growth has outstripped the available building space, are suffering from exploding property values and stagnant incomes.
The situation has not occurred by accident of course, few things occur by accident in this world.
In the decades after the second world war, industrialised societies went through a social upheaval. The immorality of Christian morality was questioned and failed to stand up to examination. The old ruse of “do not question the will of God” was exposed as meaning nothing more that “do not question the will of the ruling elite.” The working and lower middle classes could no longer be bought off with the promise of rewards in heaven for a lifetime of suffering. State funded education had equipped the majority to relate to the existential view summed up as “you live, you die, end of story: so while we are in between we may as well enjoy ourselves.” People realised that their first duty was not to country or employer but to themselves and their families. They were encouraged by socialist politicians whose polices promoted the tearing down of vast tracts of slums to be replaced with municipal housing, the provision of public service healthcare, state controlled education for all and collective bargaining by trade unions to ensure the workers received a fair share of the profits. Unemployment benefits and other allowances provided a cushion against the vindictiveness of unscrupulous employers. The workers could no longer be starved into submission.
By the nineteen sixties the social revolution was in full swing. Timothy Leary invited the world to “turn on, tune in and drop out,” while in Britain music and fashion challenged the smug complacency of the middle class hegemony. Things were looking sticky for the ruling elite, the masses, proles, the great unwashed were saying “NO! we will not be told what to think and do, we will do what suits us best, thank you very much.

This should have been great news for the human race, but a population of individuals that have the power to think and act for themselves is never welcome news for any government, even those that wave their democratic credentials in the face of any criticism.
And so just as the medieval peasants who were virtually owned by the Lord of their village were superseded by the wage slaves of the Industrial Revolution whose life depended very much on the whim of a factory or mine owner, future generations will find their lives constrained by the need to service the interest on a crippling mortgage.
The bond will not end at death of course, already we feel social pressure to help our offspring spring onto the mortgage ladder, we are made to feel we have let them down if a substantial bung towards a deposit is not forthcoming.
“Oh but how will the poor little dears ever own their homes if you don’t help them” our peers say. Well maybe the best way to help them and to follow the advice of Jeremy Bentham and think about the greatest good of the greatest number is to make our sons and daughters face the reality our parents generation faced, “life owes you nothing,” and then they might get off their backsides and vote for the Green Party, the only political movement committed to ensuring our grandchildren have grand children of their own.
Will it happen? Its touch and go, you see the most sinister thing about this move towards mortgage slavery is it has taken on an almost religious element. And just as religions gained control over civilisations by promising rewards after death so the great god PROPERTY promises that if you work hard all your life, improve, trade up and work, work, work without ever rewarding yourself, you too can be rich when you are dead.
What they don’t tell you is that the more likely scenario goes, you work hard neglecting recreation, in retirement you become asset rich, cash poor thus inadequate diet and high stress levels will drive you into senile dementia. You will not be able to look after yourself and will be forced to go into care. Your home will be sold to pay the fees of the retirement home, you will end up having to move to a home for the bewildered because your funds will run out. You will die poor and forgotten. But don’t worry because by then you will have forgotten who you are anyway.
Is there an alternative?
There are many, we could rise up against the Tyrannies of Bricks and Mortar, Financial Planning, Mass Media and self serving politics. A mass movement can bring about social change. A widespread campaign of passive resistance such as Gandhi led to win India’s independence could disrupt the global economy. And we could all say “screw your overpriced, characterless little boxes,” and live in Yurts.
They can’t put us all in prison

Fighting Crime

Your are probably wondering where Little Nicky has been hiding.

Well ever eager to champion the cause of common sense he is daily taking the fight to the mass media.

Today’s target is a typical pice og hypocritical cant in the Guardian Blog. Read the full item and Nicky’s response by clicking here