Notepad on Life

September 16, 2017

Trying to untangle racism, we tie ourselves in knots

Filed under: politics,TV — - @ 11:46 am
Tags: , ,

For reasons I’ll save for another day, I have little time for Diane Abbott MP, but had she been looking for shoulders on which to cry this week, I would have gladly suspended hostilities and offered her mine.

For if this white man despairs of our fumbling approach to race, what must a black person like Ms Abbott make of it all?

The Shadow Home Secretary was on breakfast TV, describing the caveman-level abuse with which she has had to deal in her time in the public spotlight. In doing so, she happened – surprise, surprise – to say the word “nigger”.

And Britain listened, took to heart another object lesson in why vigilance against racism must be unceasing, and inwardly re-affirmed its efforts to be part of that vigil.

Ha! If only. No, what Britain actually did, because obsession with trimmings over substance is symptomatic of our national shallowness these days, was to ooh and aah over the use of the word “nigger” on television. Oblivious to such details as context and the skin-colour of the person uttering the word.

It’s hard to know who exasperates you more, such witless sheep or the shepherds who lead them…

Diane Abbott reveals online abuse — and shocks viewers with N-word – Metro

Diana [sic] Abbott says N-word during morning TV interview to highlight Twitter abuse – International Business Times

Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott uses n-word on live breakfast television – Evening Times

‘Kids are watching’: Diane Abbott says ‘n***** b****’ live on GMB…but offends breakfast TV viewers and gets a dressing down from Susanna Reid – Daily Mail (the ‘dressing-down’ bit, incidentally, is hogwash)

Note some of the Tweets cited in the Mail report, accusing Abbott of “swearing” while “kids watching”. While genuine swearing involves words that illuminate nothing, however, the MP’s words illustrated all too clearly how far the fight for racial equality still has to go, and half-decent parents, I suspect, would seize upon their children listening to a grown-up simply telling it like it is as a prime learning opportunity for those parents to manage.

So much pointless obsession with syntax. So easily distracted from the bigger picture behind it. In a land that has bought into the childish ‘N-word’ convention wholesale, though, perhaps we should expect no better.

Has anyone ever stopped to think the ‘N-word’ protocol through, or did they simply not care about the hugely condescending assumption that underpins it – that black people are so stupid, they cannot tell the difference between “nigger” being employed as a verbal weapon and being employed simply because it is pertinent to a constructive debate between responsible adults about race and the language thereof?

How ironic that an attempt to make nice with minorities ends up patronising the hell out of them.

And yet the malaise spreads. Even supposedly more enlightened newspapers insisted on tying the real issue in didactic knots. The Independent began well – Yes Diane Abbott said the N-word on TV this morning. If you’re complaining, you’ve got your priorities wrong, but after the scrupulous employment of beeps and asterisks (is sugar-coated reality really the province of a national newspaper?) it went from bad to worse.

Having asserted that, “it seems to be emerging that non-black people wish to gain control over who can and can’t use this word, the contexts where it is acceptable and what impact it has”, the article itself then endeavours to do precisely that:

“Non-black people…have become so used to their privilege that they cannot begin to comprehend that there is a word that they have no right to use, whilst black people can use it – or not – as they choose.”

Apart from objecting to the proposition that anyone ‘owns’ language, I think the author has the wrong word under the microscope. Forget the red herring of ‘ownership’; ‘context’ is the crux. Is the word, any racial epithet for that matter, being employed in a missile-hurling contest, or merely as ancillary verbiage by people trying to establish where we are and where we need to be when it comes to race? If it’s the latter, then leave them be, because your way of doing things, ‘N-word’ zealots and nitpickers generally, is getting us nowhere.

You put me in mind of people trying to bring an unruly hedge under control, armed solely with nail-clippers. How frantically you snip away at the periphery, all the while telling yourself that you’re ‘helping’ and yet all your audience sees is the same old messy privet.

Lose the clippers, find yourself an axe, and hack away at the roots instead. Then we can talk.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Reference to racial slurs in serious, civilised debate is one thing. If you are going to employ them in satire, though, you need to be damn sure you have all your ducks in a row. I don’t think Sarah Silverman makes her case in this clip but I add it because, in light of what I’ve written above, I do think it’s a sample of what healthy debate on this topic looks like.

Give it another decade, alas, and conversation like this will probably lead to prosecutions, by a Society still convinced that you can lance a boil with cotton wool.

Advertisements

August 26, 2017

Two things that damn Britain, conveniently eclipsed this week

Filed under: business,Consumer,politics,Religion — - @ 7:57 pm
Tags: , , , ,
8237261706_3e7cf4ac53_z
Pic courtesy of Claudio Sepúlveda Geoffroy

Maybe this is why we fixate on the mundane interaction of planets.

Because no-one’s re-creating 1930s Germany up there.

No-one’s making a mockery of ‘rest in peace’ up there, just so that businessmen can get to their destination 15 minutes faster than previously.

And while no-one’s saying that eclipse specs are stylish, they’re still a better look than holding your nose.

January 19, 2017

Bag it, PM – voter empathy trumps matching outfits

Filed under: Appearance,politics — - @ 1:56 pm

Sometime, the small things are the big giveaway.

Ostensibly, Prime Minister Theresa May has impressed me so far. Her wish to be a government for all and not just some, struck the right note. Her pursuit of Brexit, after campaigning for Remain, has been so dogged, I occasionally wonder what the catch will be.

Others, of course, wonder if she has a plan at all, never mind a catch. Time will tell if my belief that politicians and businessmen would rather do a deal than leave money on the table, is vindicated.

This, however, is the first chip in her veneer. When the economy is uncertain, the National Health Service shaky and the future unclear, I just think a truly savvy leader would recognise that the £995 handbag is best kept for off-duty moments.

January 6, 2017

Shut the door on your way out, John Kerry

Filed under: foreign,politics — - @ 9:23 am
Tags: ,

 

January 2, 2017

The Honours List – always a dark side

Filed under: politics — - @ 11:55 am
Tags: ,
954583889_55f6548cf8_z

Pic courtesy of Brad Slavin

It’s the part the media didn’t shout about at the back end of December, so busy were they rightfully hailing the achievements of Murray, Farah and Ennis-Hill.

It’s the flipside that seems to accompany every Honours List: the category of recipients that, for the sake of politeness, I’ll call the ‘You’ve Done What, Exactly…?’ category. Rarely is there any fanfare for this section of the List. On this occasion, there is merely the solitary anguished voice of a heartbroken parent.

I don’t know the full ins and outs of the tragic tale of Elliott Johnson, a promising young Conservative who, if his family are to be believed, was driven to suicide by in-house party bullying. If this is so, then they are understandably aggrieved at having fresh scars rubbed raw by the award of an MBE to someone whom they regard as one of the culprits.

I do know, however, that there probably isn’t a political party around that doesn’t have some kind of form when it comes to general use and abuse of human beings. The bereaved father’s anger at cover-ups and “no sense of shame” sounds wearyingly familiar.

Is Alexandra Broadrick MBE a blameless and worthy recipient of the honour? For all I know, yes, but given the murky business of politics, I am damned if I was going to let the publication of this particular Honours List pass without doing what I could to further circulate this important footnote to a dreadful story.

When you’ve finished being dazzled by Sir Mo and Dame Jessica, you might like to ponder the less glittering corners of British society. And make your own mind up.

December 2, 2016

Sarah Olney – equally damned by word and silence

Filed under: politics,Uncategorized — - @ 6:47 pm
Tags: , ,

I’m sure the new MP for Richmond Park will be among those who claim the Government lacks clarity on the terms of Brexit. Unfortunately, it would appear that she is not much better herself.

Even before Sarah Olney fell at the first hurdle of her political career, monstered into fleeing  an interview on Talk Radio (struggling MPs used to at least be capable of waffling for England when interrogated into a corner but nowadays even that seems beyond them) her comments in this piece by the Mirror pile one contradiction upon another.

My thoughts in bold…

Westminster’s newest MP has said she will vote to “override the referendum”

So no Brexit at all, then?

Lib Dem Sarah Olney said she would “absolutely” resist Brexit in its current form.

Ah, so it could still be on?

She made clear her opposition to ‘Hard Brexit’ in on the campaign trail, confirming she would vote against triggering Article 50

Er…vote against regardless, or vote against until the terms of departure are right?

She insisted she did not want a re-run of the referendum itself…

Right. So you respect the will of the majority?

According to the Press Association, Ms Olney told Sky News overnight: “It does look now as if we can have a vote in Parliament that might override the referendum.”

Override is a strong word. So you don’t respect the will of the majority?

Asked if she would actively resist Brexit as an MP, she said: “Absolutely. Now I’ve been given this mandate.”

Riiight. Sorry to be picky but is that resist absolutely absolutely, or just until the terms are palatable? And how does last night’s mandate stack up against the June 23rd mandate, incidentally?

“What we really want, once it’s clear what terms we are going to leave the EU under, what it means for free trade, what it means for freedom of movement; once we’re clear about all of those terms, to put that to the people in another vote so that they get a clear choice between the actual terms of leave and remain.”

Oh lordy…And this squares with ‘override’ how, exactly?

A sidebar to the Mirror article asks Who is Sarah Olney, how did she win the Richmond Park by-election and how did Zac Goldsmith lose? Two of those questions are probably taxing quite a few of us by now.

May 26, 2016

‘Eye in the Sky’ shows why war on terror is pie in the sky

Filed under: Cinema,politics,War — - @ 8:06 am
Tags: ,

How much you enjoy Eye in the Sky – the latest film on drone warfare – depends on what you’re looking for.

The plot is fascinating, the cast excellent (good to see Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul back in the spotlight) and for those of us who’ve always had a thing for the older woman, Helen Mirren in combat fatigues is a fantasy we never dared imagine might one day be externalised.

Yet it is also irritating to the point where my wife nudged me sharply for ‘chuntering’; expressing my increasing dissatisfaction with what was unfolding before me, in periodic sighs and audible groans that could no longer be contained, public place or not.

Thankfully, she didn’t use her normal ploy in these circumstances – “It’s only make-believe…” – because sadly, I have the awful feeling that Eye in the Sky is all too true to life.

No spoilers here: let’s just say that a drone strike on a house in which there is visible evidence of a suicide bomb attack being prepared, is delayed by a turn of events that gives rise to the moral dilemna around which the movie revolves and which is played out at both the US air base from which the drone is operated and a Whitehall meeting room.

With only so much time left before the suicide bomber and his accomplices leave the house, politicians six thousand miles away perform a masterpiece of buck-passing and dithering, the life of an innocent mere proxy for their own political lives. Like a blocker in an American football game, political correctness positions itself obdurately in the way of a blindingly-obvious military imperative.

Does that sound like make-believe to you? If not, then you will understand why I chuntered. It is probably a consequence of being a nation 70 years removed from its last all-consuming conflict that there exist in its citizenry people who naively imagine that the execution of war can be neatly trammelled within the Queensberry Rules. That a politician criticises a general (the swansong role of the late Alan Rickman) for plotting the execution of an enemy from the safety of central London, having herself played the game of drawing-room warfare to the point where Winston Churchill would have spat in her face, is the film’s crowning hypocrisy.

Yet just as I have ceased laughing out loud at the sitcom Veep, because of a nagging fear that its ghastly, shallow characters are all too reflective of real life in Washington DC, so I couldn’t really enjoy Eye in the Sky, because of the dismaying suspicion that this is just how it is in reality. People doomed to lose a war because they insist on treating it like a fencing match.

And, oh, the optics of the film’s crux, where a black guy gets leant on because a bunch of feckless Caucasians can’t make their minds up. In an era where race predominates, did no-one think to put his hand up during filming and suggest that this might not look terribly edifying in the final cut?

As I say, it depends what you’re looking for when you enter the cinema. The drama never flags, the cinematography is excellent, and how gratifying it is that Alan Rickman’s last major line in cinema is not only the film’s best but maybe one of the best he has ever uttered: “Never tell a soldier that he does not know the cost of war”.

If only our politicians enjoyed such clarity.

As a counterpoint, here’s a left-wing view of Eye in the Sky, after which you may feel a measure of sympathy for scriptwriter Guy Hibbert. He produces a fine piece of work and somehow manages to raise everyone’s hackles.

May 20, 2016

Pat Glass and a transparent geography lesson

Filed under: politics — - @ 5:44 pm
Tags: , , ,

It isn’t the first part of Pat Glass’s Gordon Brown impersonation that should bother us.

Maybe Labour’s Minister for Europe was wide of the mark when she dismissed the grumblings of a Derbyshire resident about a local Polish family on welfare, as those of “a horrible racist”.

And maybe she wasn’t.

I would want to hear the conversation on which she was overheard reflecting before I formed an opinion.

Not even the unfortunate echo of Gordon Brown’s private comment that wasn’t, while Prime Minister in 2010, however, trumps the second half of Glass’s faux pas, in which she revealed that her indignation was such that, “I’m never coming back to wherever this is.”

“This”, it turns out, was the village of Sawley, in south-east Derbyshire; the birthplace (unless Wikipedia is seriously losing the plot) of Halle Berry’s maternal grandmother. If its current residents lament Ms Glass’s dismissive tone, they can be assured that anyone else learning of this episode will share their exasperation, whether it’s Totnes or Tadcaster that he calls home.

For all their professed concern for us, we are just voting fodder in the eyes of our elected representatives, particularly those who have begun to set sail up the Westminster career ladder. Just numbers in a poll, segments on a chart.

If their presence on our doorstep only at election time, or Gordon Brown’s pathetic hypocrisy six years ago, hasn’t made this penny drop for you so far, the blasé Pat Glass will surely help the process along.

November 1, 2014

After a chicken**** week for the Left, a plea for grown-up politics

Filed under: politics — - @ 10:10 am
Tags: , , , ,

If this is ‘progressive’, you can keep it.

A representative of the President of the United States of America denounces another head of state as “chickenshit” in a public forum (we must admire Team Obama’s consistency, if nothing else) and now a Labour front-bencher this side of the Pond rolls up in the Houses of Parliament wearing a T-shirt that bears the legend This is what a feminist looks like, amid a ridiculous spat over whether the Prime Minister should have worn one for the benefit of the cameras.

Labour, too, has ‘form’ when it comes to dress wholly inappropriate to the occasion. When your outlook on life is of the liberal, anything-goes variety, I suppose it’s inevitable that you see the word ‘standards’ as referring simply to a pile of London newspapers.

When it comes to the tiresome collision between gesture politics and social media, on the other hand, is it too much to ask that supposed grown-ups move beyond it?

“Wear my T-shirt or me and my mates will slag you off on Twitter”. It’s rare that I praise the Prime Minister but his refusal to join in with this tosh is commendable. The man has a country to run, for goodness sake. Judge him by his policies and the execution thereof if you’re concerned about his attitude to women, not by the wearing of some silly T-shirt.

What have things come to when, whatever your hopes as to which party wins the White House or Number Ten next time around, they take second place to prayers that it will consist of adults with a firm grip on the word ‘statesmanlike’ and what it entails?

October 28, 2014

Michael Fallon commits modern politics’ greatest crime – listening to the public

Filed under: politics — - @ 1:46 pm
Tags: , ,

You always know when a politician has come dangerously close to telling it like it is. He’s backtracking like crazy within 24 hours.

In touch with the mood of his people? Then he should damn well keep it to himself…

I wouldn’t mind if there wasn’t something so predictable about those who objected to Defence Secretary Michael Fallon’s weekend comments that the UK is in danger of being swamped by immigration. The Liberal Democrats would object to anything these days, such is their desperation to show that they still have a pulse, while Labour understandably won’t brook any swipe at the people who form the lion’s share of their vote.

Throw in the usual nicey-nicey knee-jerk brigade, like the Archbishop of Canterbury, whose promising start to his tenure is fast becoming a distant memory, and Fallon’s best reaction would have been to ignore the lot of them.

But no, in any clash between the mood of the so-called elite and that of the Great Unwashed, the former must prevail and so yet again we see one of our leaders on the back foot for the dreadful faux pas of giving public opinion a voice.

Because here’s how it is: this country IS being swamped by immigration, as even those of us who believe in immigration – as long as it is planned and implemented by people with a backbone and half a brain – can see with our own eyes.

I was at church on Sunday. Part of the service was the christening of a Lithuanian baby and part of the order of service was read in both English and Lithuanian. Fifteen years ago, I would have thought it a delightful touch, just as I would the occasional sound of foreign voices in my town or a shop that specialised in eastern European food and drink. Nowadays, though, all I could think on Sunday morning was “thin end of the wedge”.

This change in outlook occurs not because some inner Nazi has simply been waiting for any old excuse to show itself, but because I see what is going on around me, as do millions of people in Britain. An immigration free-for-all that is neither thought-out nor managed and that generates its own ugliness. You put a people in fear of losing their country’s identity and social tension is inevitable.

How many times must this be spelt out? It’s not about race, it’s about numbers.

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: