What does the term "British Values" mean ?There was a time when it would have been a question that hardly needed asking. The society was fairly homogeneous in the sense that it had been inculcated with a series of unwritten but well understood norms of what was acceptable and what was unacceptable. The society was tolerant but had not made a fetish of tolerance in the way which it has developed over recent years where now virtually anything goes. It is now a human right, prescribed in law that you are encouraged to express your views and follow your ideological leaning.Society of course was a structure made up of people who would recognise each other as largely having the same ethnicity and culture. The main, perhaps the only divide was between rich and poor which gave rise to political parties who would devote their energies to protecting either the rich or the poor. After the Second World War the society began to change with the substantial influx of people from different parts of the world who naturally held different perspectives of they way to live their lives and the cultural values which they brought with them.The seeds of multiculturalism were sown without questioning the effect it would have on the people living here. "They", as always were not consulted since there was an economic imperative to bring in people to work at wages which were designed to provide an economic return on the goods we manufactured at the time. Of course as commerce became global and the workforce could be obtained at source amongst the economically poor, the country no longer had the manufacturing to mop up the labour which had been encouraged to come here and we have what we have today a low wage poorly educated workforce sustained by Welfare.Now the religious and cultural values are the only way to distinguish a segmented society and whilst the concept of insisting that underlying British Values should have pre-eminence in such a melting pot of beliefs and centuries old custom it is frankly ridiculous to expect people from the four corners of the world to have any cognisance of our frankly weirded feudal make-up. Put another way could a Muslim or a Nigerian, someone from China or Japan be expected to change their fundamentally ingrained mode of thought and practices to accommodate a nation which had loosened its own concept of what is right or wrong, good and bad for a laissez faire free for all !!
"Our streets are not paved with gold". So said the Home Secretary in a panic reaction to the migrant issue as Africans flood across the Mediterranean into Europe. It's a migration phenomenon that is picking up speed and, given the size of the population in Africa and the disadvantaged status of so many on the Continent, the notion that you simply have to "up sticks" and arrive in another country to gain membership is new but of its time.The rigmarole to get into Australia or obtain a Green Card to work in the USA is marathon. Most people when faced with the shear bureaucracy draw back knowing their inadequacy to cross all the 'T's and dot all the 'I's but of course most of us have a choice in not going, since life in our country of origin is ok.Certainly our streets are not paved with gold, if there was any, George would be out there digging it up but everything has a comparative value and there's no comparison with our life style and that of someone living in Syria or Libya. It has been a phenomena in the making as the Internet and the smart phone not only shrinks the world, it accelerates what others do. From being constrained by the village culture and the structure within the village community, young people are creating their own concept of a boarder and the barrier to their own future and they are doing what is common in Western cultures, moving to where they see their best lifestyle chances prosper. I suppose if the world of finance can cut across boarders with its Global strategy, ignoring the will of the local inhabitant and running foot loose with established norms it's no big deal that the poor who have had their countries destroyed by the same western ideology should want to kick back.
Why do we ever listen to "others". These others with their opinions settle over one like a gritty vale excluding the real world with "their" take on what they have
contrived as real.
We form most of our opinions second, third fourth hand and rarely first. This highly filtered opinionated world of events marks our prejudice and distorts the actual. We see everything through a dirty windscreen smeared and distorted.
Our take on our fellow human beings is equally manufactured. The media, the innuendo, the gossip are all at work to discourage the true picture. Especially now, the "Internet", un-alloyed with rules or bothered by guilt is a bar room place for shopping our prejudice. We are safely more than an arms length away from any sort of retaliation if we hurt or misappropriate a persons culture or tell a story which is not only untrue but hurtful. We side with the majority irrespective of how well informed that majority is. We laugh at serious dilemma, we poke fun at people who are not in a position to argue their case.
I was reflecting the other day how in so many occasions in my life I have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and yet nothing happened and I had enjoyed the simple welcome of people who would be described by "others" as dangerous.
Soweto in the 70s was not a place a white South African would go because the prejudice and fear that was created by Apartheid made Soweto seem like Hell's Kitchen.
My German friend Carl had lost one of his lead workers and we decided to attend his funeral in the heart of Soweto. Not only were we welcomed by the family and mourners but absolutely no hostility was shown by anyone. We had breached a gap in human relations by acknowledging our respect and this was reciprocated by everyone.
On Christmas Eve In a bar in Newark, just after the riots in that town I entered this African/ American environment because I was drawn to the music and being a 'Pommy abroad' I felt at ease to go in and have a beer. The only white face in the place I excited some interest but having established my credentials I was open to being just one of a crowd and not afraid to be there because I had no prejudice.
Prejudice distorts the facts and it should be the facts which we are after to form our own opinions. These opinions will only be true in so far as we make an attempt to be as honest as we can, not only with others but with ourselves.
The biggest decision I make in the morning is whether I put on my slippers. If I do it's as if I have decided that for the rest of the day I'm 'home bound' with little encouragement to venture out. This is not a bad thing, it's not as if going out is all that special, unless of course you have somewhere special to go. This need for progression, a place to go and the propriety in the things you must do to get there starts with the slippers. To shave or not to shave that is the question. All these troubling decisions and I'v only just woken up !!Much of our life is programmed by other people and so when one has to rely on oneself to give oneself an impetus to do things much can slip through the cracks. Of course there are the hard wired customs, instilled since childhood to do with hygiene and dress which keep us on track but it's difficult to conform when one is living in blissful solitude. Who cares if you don't. Convention my dear chap, convention !I remember the story of an Aussie listening to two landlady types on a bus discussing the strange habits of the Aussie "they always want to take shower or get a bath. I suppose it's the novelty"?Anyway it's the starting that's important, getting out of bed is a thought provoking exercise in its self. Last nights book is luringly within reach. Did he make it out of the jungle. Who really done it?The exercise greeks and the food freaks all opinionate on the next move and so "others" crowd in on the simplicity of ones every action no matter how innocent.The crafters cottage with its rude simplicity has its attractions. Batten down the hatch and place a do not disturb sign on the door is the best retreat but in reality,we are compelled to go out and enjoy the day but I am also reminded of the refrain "I'm so pleased the sun isn't shining today and I don't have to go out and enjoy it"!
My God they used the "n" word and even the "m" word. Talk about, "don't frighten the horses" it was as if the the world according to Milton Friedman had received a seismic shock
I'm talking of the interview with Jeremy Corbyn on the Andrew Marr show.
'Nationalisation' and 'Marx' were thrown into the mix by Marr as an antidote to the common sense Corbyn was talking since it wouldn't do to indoctrinate the populous with common sense now would it.
The electorate have been made extremely skittish, by a medias almost constant right wing tirade against anything which doesn't have the "p" word as its economic talisman. The "p" word is of course "privatisation" !
Here we had a man not afraid to mention the illicit use of the so called 'free market' by the Railways. Railways in which that part of railways, (the track, signals, stations ect) are funded by the taxpayer whilst the 'income bit', the trains, are private.
This would be described by the Conservatives and when they were in office, New Labour as running a privatised transportation system when in fact the system is quasi nationalised.
An artificial creation if ever there was one where, to attract private investment the Railway were split into two. The 'dirty bit' the infrastructure, which has the word 'expenditure' written against it became the responsibility of the taxpayer whilst the 'income bit' was reserved for the investors.
The companies that provide us with water, electricity and gas, the utility companies were also privatised even though the users were captive and therefore there was little or no incentive to compete. An antidote to socialism, "The Market", with its touch stone 'competition' is there to eliminate the sins of nationalisation. But we all know it's a sham with the private companies who run and own the utilities companies behave like the 'cartel' they are with minimal competition between them.
What happens when "Private Enterprise" are asked to come forward and quote on building another Nuclear Reactor. They simply screw the tax payer into granting a ridiculously high kW tariff so that its a win win for the French (who are now the only people who have the skills to build Nuclear Reactors which is a travesty in itself since we pioneered the engineering know how but allowed our manufacturing and design skills to erode) and we the taxpayer pick up the long term cost.
But of course the populous has been brain washed into believing that only through privatisation can we become economically viable. They have closed down any debate on National Ownership equating it with Stalinist Russia and of course the people acquiesce to what their betters tell them !!
Corbyn has reinvigorated at least a dialog and listening to him today expertly dismantling the political land-mines which were thrown in his path, not with the usual political obfuscation but with rational argument was a genuine pleasure.
I was fascinated watching the assembly in the European Parliament of the MPCs who had invited the Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras to a debate on the Greek situation.
A multitude of different views and ideologies were gathered to vent their opinions in open debate.
We must acknowledge the fact that this is a debate which wouldn't be condoned in Russia or China where in either country we never hear any dissent, other than from people behind bars or from their deathbed.
Politics is a minefield of differing opinion, opinions arising from ideologies, different cultures, even different religious assemblies. Democracy is a delicate flower since it is a concept based on valuing each individual to use his/her discretion having listened to argument freely given in an open society. The vagrancies of each person his/her willingness to be swayed by opinion, much of it in the media, provide a hotchpotch, a multi coloured tapestry in which positive direction is often unsure, where decisions are made and unmade but where at least it's yaw yaw not war war.
The MEPs cover the whole gambit of political persuasion, each fervent, each secure in their own views.
It's a strange phenomena amongst human-beings this political commitment, (like the religious commitment), a sort of mental construct regarding the way society and its organs should be organised and the values relating to its objectives.
People feel driven to proclaim ! People who are on the whole rational, become irrational in their fervour to describe the promised land.
The theatre of a debating chamber where, not only is their a wide mix of political views but an even wider cultural landscape to draw on. Impassioned they leapt to their feet, for or against whilst Tsipras sat and listened. When his turn came there were no concrete steps as to how, only platitudes as to why and we were left once again, waiting to see !!
Japan with its ageing population and a lack of physical space has a problem of where to bury it's dead.
Traditionally the population is divided up into 50% Shinto (non organised), 34% Buddhist 4% formalised Shinto and the rest a mixture, including Christians.
A combination of pragmatism and traditional practice has made the Japanese adapt there single grave/headstone cemeteries into a mixture of high tech, low tech solutions.
The high tech end has a computerised automated retrieval system where, when you arrive to pay your respects you insert your identification card and the urn, carrying your loved ones remains are extracted from a vault and automatically presented on a Plinth with a photo of the dead person projected onto the urn. No trudging through the cemetery or tidying the plot it's all very sanitised within a modern building amongst the tower blocks and offices. Being a sceptic I wondered if the urn wasn't symbolic and the retrieval somewhat imaginary but then the whole process of dying and where you go afterwards is a bit of an illusion.
At the other end of the scale was the multiple burial plot. Here about 20 to 30 healthy people of different ages bind themselves together as a family who's purpose is to be buried in the same grave as and when the time comes. These communal plots are in ares of woodland and the selling point is not only cost but that relatives and friends coming to pay their dues have a pleasant experience
I rather like the idea of a community born of life with a focus on death. Who knows what relationships may spring from such deliberations.
I still hanker after a cardboard coffin possibly with a happy picture on the outside. Suggestions on a postcard please.
