Randomly Selected Article or Link
at 09:09
Via my good friend John Medaille , an article from CounterPunch on Ron Paul the Jeffersonian:
If we stipulate that a candidate
polling at least 5% in national polls is a "major candidate,"
there is simply no other major candidate in 2008 who is more
Jeffersonian, more committed to peace, justice, and democracy,
than Ron Paul. He puts pretenders like Edwards and Obama to shame.
I like a lot of what John Edwards is saying on the campaign trail
today, but I don't think he means a word of it. He's a limousine
liberal phony when it comes to the rich/poor issue. He supported
the Iraq War until it became widely unpopular. He voted for the
Patriot Act. He claims to be against outsourcing of American
jobs but he voted for permanent normalized trade relations (MFN)
for China.
...
While the stray neo-Confederate
may like Ron Paul, he is also the recipient of more African American
support than any other Republican. Paul is backed by both realistic
veterans and idealistic pacifists, Christians and atheists, John
Birchers and NORML members. It's a kaleidoscope campaign--not
of pandering or double-talking but of an honest commitment to
an array of deeply held American values. Liberty and peace are
popular. It's not a cult of personality like Obama.
Trackback URL for this post:
at 09:17
I just noticed Nick on BBC being interviewed for his opinion on the latest data losses, saying something to the effect that it's part of a systematic incompetence of this government. Tribal type "they're bad" politics.
I'd much prefer him to say that this is evidence of a more general problem with government as an institution, that no political party would be able to control this particular beast and that we would be looking at ways not simply of being more secure about data but at ways of dismantling some of the bureaucracy that wants to keep such data in the first place. That "government has no business holding much of this data let alone carrying it around in laptops or posting it on disks".
at 01:45
Having succumbed to this fad for petitioning Tony Blair over anything from the size of underpants available in Marks & Spencer to whether we renew our nuclear strike capability, I got the news that my petition had been accepted - so please - read it, at the address below, and if you like it, sign it. Let's see how far it can get. It's not as sexy as not banning fox hunting obviously, but many times as important though I do say so myself.
Your petition has been approved by the Number 10 web team, and is now available on the Number 10 website at the following address:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/AbolishDCLG/
Your petition reads:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Abolish the
Department of Communities and Local Government and allow local
people to decide in consultation with the local representatives
they elect to do the job how best to run their localities
Local government has been subject to far too much tinkering,
target setting and control by central government for decades.
If government is by the consent of the governed then surely
that consent, for local affairs, is given in elections to local
councillors. Instead of handing down a menu from on high of
how local government will be permitted to operate, allow real
innovation and local consultation to decide how to run and fund
their local communities.
Thanks for submitting your petition.
-- the ePetitions team
Trackback URL for this post:
at 02:07
I've got to be nice to Jon Snow - he's my university Chancellor for a start and I always enjoy his annual lectures here. He often speaks about what one might call opinions below the political radar. On Monday night he presented a heavily trailed documentary about "What Muslims Want" - drawing on recent research and opinion polls amongst British Muslims about their attitudes to British society and their world view.
I was left not quite clear about whether it was intended to show how different some Muslims' attitudes are, or how similar, to the "rest of us". But it felt as if it was tending towards highlighting supposed differences, and left me feeling slightly uncomfortable as a result knowing that I felt the same on many issues. As if those differences were somehow sinister.
I am a Christian (most would probably say not a very good one but that's not for them to judge in my creed anyway). I've been on a faith journey that has taken me to what one might call "separatism" - from childhood Scottish style non-conformism to Roman Catholicism and I nearly became a monk about twelve years ago in my mid-late twenties. Just about the time when the young Muslims Jon Snow's research was looking at were at their most radical or separate. But I don't think I am particularly extraordinary - it was a part of me forming my opinions and locating myself in the world.
Nowadays, if anything, I have at least as much sympathy with what I understand of Islam as I do of Christianity. Indeed I do feel a lot of the time that Christianity has "lost it", particularly in the area of social and economic justice. The very fact that it has over centuries become a faith of empire builders and rulers is a problem for me - that it has conspired to entrench some hierarchies and inequalities rather than level them as it promised.
But you know, I didn't see much that was "extreme". Taxi drivers, just like me as a hall warden of a Friday or Saturday night, have every right to feel that British society is losing its way, that women are treated appallingly by some young men, young men who should know better, educated young men, often with plenty of money. We see it week in, week out. But I've also heard girls lolling around drunk demanding to be screwed over the bonnet of some stranger's car in a university car park by the multiple drunk lads they staggered out with.
Nor am I alone. It was Tony Blair that blamed everything on the sixties not so long ago (in which I think he was wrong), and there are many, many more in sympathy with the view that there is a malaise of some kind afflicting in particular the generation of an age with the Muslims who scored most highly on the "extremist scale". Tony's answer is ASBOs and the "Respect Agenda", they see theirs as an international agenda of divine laws that will not only put decency back into society but also equity for the Umma around the world.
Tony Blair in his speech last week on a "war of values" said, for example, that Islamic extremism is not about poverty. Let's look at that. There can be no doubt that Islam is a religion of the overwhelmingly poor and dispossessed. In the second half of the twentieth century in particular while individual families and oligarchies have become fantastically wealthy supplying the western world with the fuel for the engines of its vast economic advances - oil - well over a billion more Muslims around the world have not benefitted from that in any significant way.
Out of so many excluded and oppressed, given a faith that tells them, rightly, that they have as much right as any to share in the wealth God has bestowed on us through nature, is it a surprise that a few, a tiny few, are taken in by the most extreme interpretations. Just as some people in the UK find solace for their anger over apparent injustice and exclusion in extremist nationalist groups. And globalisation, particularly of travel and information has made those inequities more visible to more people (remember for many in relatively well developed South Africa and India, 1985's Live Aid beamed into football stadia was the first time they had seen people the other side of the world partying live for their plight). And they have, sometimes, a right to be angry about it.
Islam is a faith of economic and social justice if nothing else. One of the main roles of the Caliphate as I understand it is to ensure the equitable division of God's gifts in nature throughout mankind (even if it would be romantic nonsense to say there's some golden age in the past when any Caliphate ever achieved that). The faith retains, albeit on occasion only through lip service, the ancient Abrahamic controls on usury for example which both Judaism and Christianity have long since all but abandoned. Did you know that "Hallelujah!" was the cry of the slaves, freed from their debts at the fifty year Jubilee when all debts were cancelled and all lands returned to the common wealth for redistribution? But in that it also shares elements of the radical liberalism of centuries, of Locke, Cobden, Hobhouse and many others. Christianity too remember looks to a day when the nations of the world will be one, that power will not be wielded by men over men, but the birthright of us all adminstered for all our benefit.
So where do I differ from the "separatists" or "extremists"? Well, I've moved on slightly from my own "radical extremist" days. I've found in the fusion of my faith with liberalism the ability to strive to be a better person, to carry out the little Jihad if you like, and encourage others to do likewise in their own ways, but not to impose on them unless they are materially or objectively harming someone else. I did disagree, for example, with the condemnation of the Danish cartoons and the circumscribing of free speech. Those of us with a faith have to be more robust in our own defense but not allow ourselves the luxury of special protection from people who may not agree with us.
My faith teaches too that people have the free will to decide for ourselves - the essential element that makes us human. To make mistakes and learn from them. But that's my faith and people are free to share it or not, to make their own way so long as they don't hurt others in the process. But the way we live does hurt others, from destroying the planet to raping whole continents of their resources to make our lives comfortable. And it does have roots in our apparently growing devil may care decadent lifestyles. The simple fact is that most people mature and learn from their more wild escapades and do become better functioning members of society as a result. So I don't see that we need someone imposing their idea of the divine will on us all. Encouraging and challenging us to think about our behaviour, yes, but imposing and punishing - not as a rule.
If we can relight that radical liberal flame, I do believe there is the makings of a fusion that can bring the essential elements of social and economic justice from all the world's major faiths, including the ones, like some forms of Christianity which have slightly lost that focus, and others, like Islam which are growing as a reaction to the inequity in the world, and still allow us to live our lives largely as we choose, have more respect for others, and take more responsibility for ourselves. But like many Muslims and not a few Christians, I am not entirely sure that that radical liberalism is evident in today's more cynical "politics of power". Reclaim it and there's a chance we can enjoin many of these to our cause, the greater cause of humanity as a whole. Go on as we are, and we can expect more polarisation, more resentment, and yes, more desperately hopeless individuals for whom it may be tempting to think that they can make their point through violence.
Technorati Tags: religious wars, islam, humanity
Trackback URL for this post:
at 23:30
Anyone not already outraged by the treatment meted out by the military, both British and American on our citizens from Tipton should have been watching:
The Road To Guantanamo: - Channel 4's new drama from multi award-winning film director Michael Winterbottom – The Road to Guantanamo – created huge international impact and won the prestigious Silver Bear for Direction for Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross in competition at The 56th Berlin International Film Festival.
...tonight.
You can say all you want about the necessity to do certain pretty nasty things in time of war, about rules of evidence not functioning properly in a foreign country you are trying to subdue, and who knows whether the lads from Tipton are telling the God's honest truth (though personally I am more inclined to believe them than all the FUD that comes out of the security services), but it seems to me that heads should roll for their treatment and that of others still in GTMO and other members of the gulag archipelago.
Impeaching Blair is too good for him. I hope he's watching and can still say what he said to Parky last week about conscience and being judged by history and his God.
Trackback URL for this post:






























