Buyer beware

Subject: Buyer beware.

 Imagine an advert for fast food (junk food), where the people shown in the advert, were overweight and looked downtrodden.  Imagine instead a fast food shop filled with slim, well heeled people (not the fat stressful people), who are shown rushing in to gobble the food quickly before running back to work.

Virtually all advertising is predicated on glamour, not only the ads targeted at women to improve their looks but the car ads to lure men to lure the women who have been lured to dress up in a world which clearly revolves around women.
The artificiality of life's needs are all around us. The impact of subliminal messages is immense and the psychology of engaging with people, 24/7 is well honed in this society. Our society, based on consumerism, has this important feature, a massive artificial stimulant, the need to buy and continue buying, ad nauseam.  

I suppose the Soviets propagating their need for industrial might produced reams of visual propaganda to stimulate people to work harder and make the nation great but somehow this propaganda that we should impale ourselves on the cross of consuming things for no other reason than we can. That we should be encouraged for instance to eat food that is clearly bad for us purely to enhance the stock market price of say McDonalds or drink liquids saturated in sugar when too much sugar is known to be bad for us, so we sustain the bottom line of Coco Cola. The ethics of big business always trumps the ethics of the health industry and we, the simple pawn in the middle, are played and forfeited at will.

There is little or no protection at government level where it is only at this level does the persuasive language of leverage come into play. Business of course would say it has no business evaluating the rights and wrongs of the products it sells, its loyalty is to the shareholder and the companies bottom line. The gun industry in America deny's it is complicit in the slaughter of children on a campus saying it's not the gun which kills but the man or woman behind who pulls the trigger. The gaming industry deny their complicity in gambling addiction and, at this moment are crying about the massive job losses which will ensue because government have cracked down on the slot machines reducing the £100 bet to a maximum of a £2 bet in the hope that the debts racked up will be minimised. The manufactures of motor cars in which they embedded devices to mislead the authorities about dangerous exhaust emissions. The banks who twist and twirl their products to manipulate the market and the real estate industry encouraging people to enter into a contract for which they have not a chance in hell of fulfilling. 

The list goes on and on. The capitalistic mantra, "there's a sucker born each minute" or as Lloyd Blankfein the boss of Goldman Sacks put it more prosaically when responding to the accusation that the derivative market was the sale of deliberately disguised rubbish for which the purchaser was being hoodwinked, his answer was that the trade was between adults who had a duty to protect themselves, 'buyer beware' and therefore there was no onus, in a free market for the seller to consider any ethical standard.
So 'buyer beware' but it's an unfair playing field when the seller spends millions of dollars or pounds each night pumping out adverts every 10 minutes on the TV just when our defences are down as we relax in the lounge with our children perhaps participating in some wildlife program and next second the screen is alight with adverts from an industry which wouldn't know the difference between truth and falsehood  if it bit them on the bum. Every 10 minuets the same adverts, the same manipulation of the facts, the same blatant untruths and all we can say is 'buyer beware'

Another nail in the coffin

Subject: Another nail in the coffin 

I'm always underwhelmed when members of the "great and good" are established on committees to investigate things which go wrong. When I heard a 'Dame of the Realm'  had been appointed to look into the building industry and its procedures I thought a glimpse at her background would be useful.

Dame Judith Hackitt has an ocean of engineering degrees to her name as well as being the ex chair of the Health and Safety body which is supposed to be one of the watchdogs to established good practice within the very industry she is being asked to adjudicate.  It seemed to me that whilst you needed an expert who understands the issues, her chairmanship of one of the bodies which clearly had failed to monitor the industry regarding its concern for overall safety she was a little too close to the flame.

We have a High Court Judge looking at the accountability of contractors involved in the procurement and fitting of what turned out to be a highly inflammable cladding which was installed at Glenfell and on buildings across the land, cladding which the specification illustrated was not fit for purpose.
The Judge's progress is leisurely as befits his status, 9 months have passed and he seems only to have got his ducks in a row but theses sort of things can't be hurried since we are in thrall of the Establishment and their figures of magisterial importance. Anyway the more he can string it out, time wise the more he can charge and his political masters are usually keen to kick problems into the long grass and if the past is anything to go by, these investigations often take years.
Dame Hewitt his morning was paraded before the Medea to divulge her own findings. She had found the obvious and rejected the obvious in consecutive sentences.
She illustrated the establishment penchant for observing the blinding obvious, by stating that the regulations were not being followed and that the organisations given the role of overseeing the regs were falling far short of their duty. The obvious corollary to this would have been to ban the cladding in which the flammable material is a constituent part but no, that's far too simple and what to us is obvious is less obvious to a member of the Establishment who task it is to clarify and provide leadership.
One has to ask why. Is it because she was too cozy with the industry and her task was being to act as a conductor and to present us with articulate waffle. Obviously we will never know but it has put another nail in the coffin of trust which the survivors of Glenfell have demanded.

The focus of the psychiatric's chair

Subject: The focus of the psychiatric's chair.

How do we square the circle. More and more people are claiming help from the government coffers whilst the economy is in tatters.
No one wants to acknowledge the fact that we can't afford to balance the books
properly without a fresh look at how we tax people to share the financial load, across the classes, rich and poor, a reaffirmation of the concept of paying, when you can to pay, for those genuinely unable to afford to live. Of accepting our own responsibility for our financial commitments and if necessary moderating those commitments to what we can afford.
When I was young and growing up, it was a far less affluent time, the country was economically broke, having fought a World War and had to repay the money it borrowed from the Americans to do it.  We witnessed in 1945 a different type of political bravery from the one experienced during the war from Mr Winston Churchill, this time by the unexpected new post war Prime Minister, Clement Attlee.

He propelled a new magisterial social revolution in the post war social contract which included,  amongst other things, the formulation of the NHS. and a massive home building program of social housing for ordinary people. 

It reflected a political philosophy which was inclusive and not exclusive. It was about different priorities and a new understanding that "ordinary people count".
In those days the ordinary man and woman in the street hadn't heard of "rights" but they had an intimate knowledge of belonging to a community. They recognised the implicit commonality between human beings and hadn't, at that stage been  encouraged to forget their social contract in favour of the self centred, striving, individualistic life style propagated by Mrs Thatcher.
The old was thrown out virtually wholesale and in its place a hybrid of the American philosophy of winners and losers. The spectra of a society in which people cared for each other was replaced by one where people who didn't ask who lived next door.
The inter social responsibility of caring as much as we could for the people around us was replaced by the competition to express our financial success in the way we consumed and it's most visible influence was and still is the car on our doorstep. It became a contest to outdo our neighbour not to care for them, to exclude them from our calculations and become mired in self-interest. The individual "rights" was the result of allowing ourselves to become isolated and having to ask a rapidly disappearing government to take the place of things which previously society had handled.  The Government have continued to distance themselves from their people and the malaise of ill health, often brought on by stress, especially mental health, has produced a plethora of notifiable mental disturbances each the brain child of the psychiatric industry .The sufferers now on first name terms with their affliction, often mentally defined,  which mother's of children who they find hard to control can now be categorised.  Mothers of limited education can reel off, chapter and verse on this esoteric subject, mental health. It's as if they seek some sort of  fame to go along with their categorisation along with their ability to pronounce long, virtually unpronounceable Latin terms as if having having a child with so and so, brought them closer to some sort reconciliation with their day to day toil.
Whilst it does not disguise the personal trauma but it's often a trauma which would have been handled so much better by being included within a caring society rather than the individuality and focus of the psychiatric chair.

A foreigner in my own country

A foreigner in my own country

One could accuse Garath Southgate of being tokenistic by including a couple of white players in his England team to play in the World Cup this year. It's a defining moment when the make up of the national team begins to reflect the changing make up of our society.
Of course there will be many saying that the colour of ones skin has no relevance in today's colour blind society but one is drawn to question how embedded are the people who's parents came to this country 50 years ago who themselves still feel in part their deep  ties lie to the country their parents emigrated from.

The argument that the children growing up in the UK are unlikely to feel these ties, or that their ethnicity has nothing to do with say the West Indies, Pakistan, India, Syria, Lebanon, Nigeria, The Cameroon and so on is unproven.  It's certainly true of an Aussie or a South African that the ties are maintained. It's seen in specifically the cricket test matches in this country when Pakistan or India come to play, two thirds of the spectators support the visiting non UK side.

It's not a phenomenon which one wouldn't expect, our personal history is only part of who we are and since our parents and the aunts and uncles who make up the extended family, our kith and kin, are deeply embedded in who we think we are it's natural to feel that part of our root culture is 'over there'.
Meanwhile the society here has undergone a massive transformation, a sort of colonisation in reverse. Unfortunately we fear to offer any sort of opinion because of the backlash of being called racist.  Unlike the pillorying of our role in the colonisation of other countries across the globe, Political Correctness has shut down debate about the reverse colonisation of this country and the potential to upset the inherent equilibrium of a county inhabited by people who are recognisably the same.
Fostering all manner of foreign culture, religious and social on our unsuspecting society we have been made incoherent by the clamour  to say nothing, even to think nothing, it's all a bit 1984 for my liking.
These cultures religious and social are for our good we are told, they enrich us with new ways to look and experience new things, as if looking at different new ways of living was the precursor to "the good life". Our old ways are just that"old ways" and we must move on and integrate ourselves with the new. We of course have no say in the matter since others have a better understanding of "our" needs. But perhaps reminding ourselves that originally it was the economic determinant which encouraged people to come here in the first place perhaps the baggage they brought with them is the part we least understand and most resent.
Now I know I will be accused of being a racial bigot by some people but those who know me know this is far from the case rather it is placing on record the legitimate fears and in some cases resentment for being hoodwinked about the unforeseen outcome of mass immigration and the growth of different values from 'within' which resulted from that immigration. At no stage were we consulted, at no stage we're the ramifications of being changed from a monoculture to a multi culture explained. Today the insistence for further change to assimilate and change even further was evidenced on a popular BBC morning news and current affairs program, four different people of colour were extremely unhappy with their lot here and demanding swinging changes. It appears they can demand openly for change whilst we are shackled by PC to remain stum.
When I walk down Newham High Street later today I will not be angry about the row upon row of Indian shops selling silks and saris or the food outlets selling chapatis, I won't be upset to be one of the few white people on the street, I will accept wholeheartedly the women going around their daily business shrouded head to toe in a patriarchally ordained  costume which is designed to exclude me but I will ask myself, how did all this come about and has it in any way made me a foreigner in my own country. 

Within not without

Subject: Within not without.

Today the debate was about the intriguing concept of believing in the "essence" of god without "believing in God". 

The complexity of the biblical story and it's time line, set in a period so remote from our own current thinking, makes the telling of this unlikely and complex story, which includes concepts  such as the "virgin birth" the "resurrection" even the concept of "heaven", difficult if not unfathomable. 

There are of course many religions. Some of them thrive on sticking firmly to the text and believing every word,  others try to manage their belief in "something" with a nagging doubt about the bibles specific veracity.

The Quakers, who were members of the audience are currently undergoing a re-evaluation of their teachings with a pragmatic sense of trying to put greater  emphasis on the 'human experience' on earth than with the god described in the Testament. 

Their personal striving for understanding through human love and human reconciliation, is reflected in their congregation being called "the society of friends" and that there is something of god in everyone, each human being unique and therefore their belief in god is tempered by their belief in their fellow man. 

This emphasis on humanities role in the practicality of founding a better place on Earth rather than the carrot of life beyond death is more atheistic than faith bound, although perhaps the Quaker would balk at the comparison. They belong to a pantheon of faiths which strive to understand the basis of humanity without mixing the image of God with their own, other than the belief that God lies within us.

Meghan Markle

Subject: Meghan Markle. 

Why do we feel the urge to undermine other people. In a typically unedifying scene, four British showbiz women harrying Samantha the half sister of Meghan Markle, who is marring Prince Harry this weekend.

I'm not in any way a royalist but I am a humanist and to see these four British soap stars the sort of mini celebrities who parade our tv screen appearing on a talk shows such as "Loose Women", a show designed to celebrate gossip.
Samantha Grant has multiple sclerosis and is confined to a wheel chair. She has been interviewed before by the media defending her family, as any daughter would. The family, not born in the bubble of aristocracy, are normal with a history of at least one black sheep in the guise of a brother who has been off the rails with drugs and violence.  
The press and media have had a field day exploiting the Meghan's family history for any dirt they can find. It's a pity they don't spend half as much effort in exposing the skeletons in the aristocratic cupboards, including Harry's family as well as the proprietors of the newspapers and media outlets who publish salacious title-tattle, but of course who are strictly protected.
As a nation we seem to have a penchant for the salacious, we burry our noses into the dirt and the pornography of our time and then seem surprised to find it exists in ordinary families right next door. The moms and dads, sons and daughters who have misbehaved  and strayed off the beaten path, a path which few would actually recognise but which is held up as the gold standard if you wish to marry a Royal. It's so disingenuous since 'The Royalty' are mired in a grimy family history, hushed up inconvenient episodes which would be embarrassing if they got out. In an age of smartphone reporting where a party episode is snapped and the papers have it all over the front page the next morning often blown out of context there is I'm sure, plenty of inconvenient footage if needs be.
The news hawks have railed at Meghan's Dad for being a bit of a recluse living in Mexico having been declared bankrupt and probably escaping from family and friends because of his shame. He had supported Meghan as she tried to break into the world of acting and it is suggested by Samantha that a little bit of "payback" from the wealth garnered by Meghan wouldn't have gone amiss.
My disenchantment yesterday is aimed at the shrill accusatory tone taken by these harridans of our small screen, these righteous women who's own lives might not bear too much scrutiny going into full pit bull mode demanding to know the why and wherefore.
I thought Samantha handled them with grace and patience. She was calmly informative and seemed to have a perspective on her family which was supportive even under the prying, disdainful, accusatory line of questioning she had to undergo.
Robert Burns comes to mind more as more as we watch the attempted demolishment of people growing up and living this hectic, often narcissistic life in the 21st century where probing for morals and virtu, which disappeared at the turn of the century is a lost truly cause.

Self worship

 Fw: Self worship

 

The concept of a pure unadulterated mind, a mind which becomes clouded by thoughts and actions which are alien to it and which can be rationalised  and therefore to a large extent eliminated through the discipline that meditation brings is a useful employment of ones time if it is true that the mind has a kind of duality, the pastoral and the reactive.
Neuroscience would have it that there is no Garden of Eden no underlying purity of mind  and only the conflict of environmental experience to tutor it.
The distraction of facts from experimental knowledge gained through years of immersion is a dangerous area since the action can often out weigh the theoretical, especially when we are dealing with the essence of who we are. The mind is the mind and the brain is the step-parent to the mind, the outcome of all those electrical synapses and chemical formulations which in themselves are pinprick moments in time but which collectively form the essence of who we are.
Do we need to police these random stimulants to make something more benign, more social, more constrained by philosophical codes of social structure.
It has been the work of religion to codify what is good and bad within us as it pertains to the common good. There has always been an impress of authority on the common man to conform, to fit a social structure not of his own making and one which seems to be coming apart at the seams with the globalised mechanics of economic efficiency.
The search for inner peace and the realisation that we are in many ways alone even as we seek the close affection of someone else leads us to institute an audit of our place in the universe and here on earth. This tiny blob of matter so insignificant in terms of the universe we seek, like the Catholic Church to make ourselves the centre of everything meaningful, a last 'hurrah' before we obliterate our species in a final bout of narcissistic self worship.