No Blacks No Irish No Dogs

I don't really have a problem with immigration - legal or otherwise - it's one world. It doesn't matter where someone has come from or how they have got here - it's what they do here that matters.

There are plenty of asshats in the UK that have had family here for generations. Sure there are bad seeds on every boat but I have respect for those who have given up their homes, their family and their lives to try and make a new life elsewhere. That's quite a price to pay - immigration isn't cheap.

The real issue with immigration is how it is managed and how we interact with the new arrivals. Many agencies are not sufficiently circumspect about their abilities or qualifications for particular roles. That gains cheap headlines and undermines better work.

One important effect of immigration is that it keeps wages low and they do the jobs that the "indigenous" population don't want to do, and are often grateful for the work.

If you actually study urban geography over the years you can see where the successive waves of population stablish themselves, and then gradually move into more affluent areas as time goes on.

I did this for a research thesis on the inner city areas of Glasgow, in particular at the Irish immigrant population of the late nineteenth century. Their story at the time was not dissimilar to New York. They came over en masse, established in certain areas, had conflict with the local population but eventually became part of the fabric of the city and its culture. That's how my great-grand father did it anyway.

Modern classes?

Marx defined the classes in terms of their relationship to the mode of production. The haute bourgeoisie own and control it, the petit bourgeoisie we can identify with the middle classes - they may own a small business or assist on the running of a larger one. The proletariat are those whose worth is seen as their labour in exchange for wages. The very bottom rung are the lumpenproletariat, those who have nothing and offer nothing to society - beggars, thieves and the like.
I don't think these classes themselves have changed, rather the environments have shifted and indeed the modes of production have become more diverse, which can make them more difficult to spot. Really the petit bourgeoise has expanded, and increased perceived mobility within that group seems to create new classes but their relationship to the mode of production does not change.
In the United Kingdom, finance has become the primary mode of production. The new bourgoisie have been the bankers and financiers. The proletariat their "customers".
This is an intrinsically short term model which seeks to extract capital for the benefit of the bourgoisie as close to the point of investment as possible.
The financial proletariat get no benefit from this model - in fact the poorer you are, the more you are exploited through penal interest rates, and riskier personal financial models.

Homeless

I hate to sound harsh but the reason most long term homeless people are on the streets is not the lack of available accomodation or poverty, it's because they can't function in what we who have shelter recognise as a home, and cannot form sufficent relationships to provide a safety net. That may be for a variety of reasons - mental illness, drug addiction. The latter is probably the biggest cause here and any money given generally goes on drugs. It doesnt take much begging to get the food you need for the day.

Love thy neighbour

Teengaegirls who stole from an 89-year-old man are being hunted by police investigating a spate of distraction burglaries.

"Whatever happened to the values of our society. Why should someone who fought for the freedoms, which people like these so quickly abuse today, be subjected to this sort of treatment? There is no effective discipline left in schools. We are the victims of a pathetic 'politically-correct' society which often favours the offender, at the expense of the victim. You see, none of the main political parties really offers a solution." says a blogger

Why blame schools and politicians? We all live in a society and it is very easy to blame the authorities when things go wrong. What happened to looking out for your neighbours and the mutual respect that people have for each other. It is us, you, me that is to blame. Not the government, not the teachers. It starts at home and the sooner people start to take responsibility for their own actions and the well-being of the area around them that it will start to change. Veritas Vincit.

Veritas Vincit

Veritas Vincit is a Latin phrase used by the Hussites of medieval Bohemia. It means "Truth conquers".

Veritas was my school motto and Vincent is my middle name so it fits :-D

The Death of Michael

Someone died today. It was a surprise but then again he was very unfit - a fat grey man. I only met him once and he wasn't a very popular member of the family. As far as I can tell no one grieves for him. He left no children.

It is a shame - this is a type I come across when I am doing family history - a dead end with nothing to leave the world to say he was there. No achievements, no happy memories passed down through the family, just a name on a certificate for someone to find in future years.

His brother has had a difficult year and concerns are largely with him. He is a good man and will leave a legacy though. A good person and he has helped create a life and family, despite the adversity that he and his brother faced growing up.

Two people given the same shot at life, two very different stories. No one grieves for him but maybe he provides a cursory lesson in how not to live and how not to die. Maybe that's his legacy after all.

The List

This week in the UK, the mmbership details of a far right (legitimate ) political party the British National Party (BNP) were published on the internet. This has obviously stimulated a lot of debate about them concerning their policies, their legitimacy and the rights of crtain organisations such as the police to prohibit their members from joining.

Far right and far left viewpoints have a place in a valid democracy so attempting to legislate against them purely to stifle them is wrong and achieves nothing. Conversely, it would probably do more to encourage the less-palatable aspects associated with them.

I've only seen one name on the list that recognise, but I knew of his affiliations anyway. I may not agree with his views but I hope, given where he lives, that this does not compromise his lifestyle or personal safety.

However, certain organisations have a mission and purpose that has to represent and support the society we have now. They must have a right and indeed a requirement not to employ people who are members of other organisations which seek to challenge that purpose. How can you work constructively in a community that you privately seek to undermine? It won't work for anyone involved, least of all the member in question. Good career move eh?

I think a key issue with migrants is their rights and access to public services. The normal argument being that they have not contributed via the tax system and therefore should not benefit. I think this misses however, a crucial point in that we live in a global society and have done for many years. The technology we have is not British, the actual finance behind it is neither. The cost to the individual is also confusing. It takes a lot more to give up your homeland, friends and family to make a new life than it does to live in the Midlands all your life and pay a few hundred pounds tax every month.

But we are an island and people generally like what they know and the pursuit of an inclusive agenda has alienated many traditional communities, like the Erewash valley near here. Need it? I don't think so, the culture is still predominantly of that traditional British ilk, and the second and third generations of immigrant families are increasingly becoming part off that.

What concerns me more than the multi nature of culture is rather its quality - the culture that these younger generations are absorbing is the XFactor culture, rather than the culture that we as living historians seek to promote. :?

The Far Right is not the answer

Communities Secretary Hazel Blears has called for a new drive against the party as a list of names and addresses of their members was posted on the internet.

The leak has cast new light on the make-up of supporters of the BNP, which has in recent years made electoral gains disturbing to politicians across the spectrum.

Writing in a national newspaper, Ms Blears said: "We must recognise that where the BNP wins votes, it is often a result of local political failure.

"Estates that have been ignored for decades; voters taken for granted; local services that have failed; white working-class voters who feel politicians live on a different planet.

"In such a political vacuum, the BNP steps in with offers of grass-cutting, a listening ear and easy answers to complex problems."

Ms Blears accused the party of playing on people's "apprehensions" and peddling "pernicious but plausible lies".

The release of the membership list, which included telephone numbers, has led to fears that BNP supporters will be targets of abuse and even violence.

Police in West Yorkshire have been investigating the torching of a car near to the home of one of the names on the list.

There are also concerns that teachers, police officers and army personnel feature on the list, although it is not entirely up to date and some of the names appearing on it are not BNP members.

Ms Blears urged a concerted fightback against the BNP where concentrations of support are strongest.

She said: "We must continue to campaign vigorously against the BNP: demonstrate, picket, leaflet and argue."

Future God?

"God" to me is a political creation to provide legitimacy to regimes. gods on the other hand are means of explaining and rationalising what we see around us. The two are not mutually exclusive and overlap quite extensively (and I wish I could believe by the way)

Religion I see as a shared set of beliefs and assumptions that guides behaviour, stronger than a mere culture. It doesnt necessarily need a god figure.

Science is such an example I think but what happens when everything is explainable - when we work out the universal equation of everything for example? Will it lose its purpose, drive and potency and just become wallpaper? What then do we believe in?

The Phoenix

Baha'is believe that the world goes through cycles where everything collapses, forcing us to rebuild and start again, like a phoenix.

That's true - the natural tendency of any system is towards chaos, so any order achieved is temporary and doomed to fail. Personally I think western society works in approximately 300-year cycles and we are at the start of the third cycle since 1400. The 1700-2000 cycle was based on scientific reasoning and the pursuit of perfection as deemed by man rather than a god or gods. I think it will move now to an acceptance of imperfection and differences. We have to deal with who we really are rather than as it is prescribed to us.

The New World Order

I'm not that convinced by the NWO theory - I do agree that there are non-democratic associations that grease the wheels of government ranging from university clubs to the Freemasons. It's a part of everyday life so no reason why it won't happen at the upper echelons. However, I don't think that man as a species is that clever for it to go beyond that. The natural tendency of any system is towards chaos, so any order achieved is temporary and doomed to fail.
I know what people mean about the similarity between the two sides of the Presidential coin, but I think that also proves my point on order. The effective "one-party state" was achieved here in the 1980s with the right-wing hegemony of the Thatcher government that left subsequent governments unable to manoeuver outwith the culture they had created. That however, was predicated on economic growth. To sustain this, the economic model became riskier and thus increasingly unstable - a house price bubble underpinned by cheap finance.

On Ron Paul

I'm not a big fan of the Austrian School - conversely it isn't based on the basic principles of modern discourse i.e. empiricism and scientifc reasoning. It is the flaws in human character that precipitated the crashes of 29 and 08 i.e. good old fashioned greed. Obama is fortunate in so much as FDR gave him and his advisors the basics of a road map out of tis mess. FWIW I think the biggest challenges are the dependency on oversees energy and unemployment. John Maynard Keynes is the economist Obama needs to refer too once again. Invest state money in a renewal energy infrastructure and that will begin to stimulate the economy. I think creation of such a renewable energy industry, rather than the quick-hit of oil could be a viable economic alternative to the military as the driver of industry.I do though agree that devolution of power to the States is a viable political path. It was one of the first things that the Labour government did here in 97. Transferring control of issues to the people whom they most directly affect, while at the same time removing these issues from the central in-tray.With regard to suprantional organisations, such as NATO and the UN, the opinion out here is that they are in the pocket of the States anyway. To what extent that will change if the global economic map is re-drawn is a moot point.

The Result

Senator McCain couldn't conduct his campaign with the elegant grace that was evident in his speech after Obama’s victory. That was part of his problem - awkward and temperamental under pressure and with a tendency to make negative jibes. Obama on the other displayed effortless cool, appearing calm and measured. In a media-dominated age that counts for a lot.

The colour of his skin furthermore is an issue whether people like it or not, and while many people DID vote for and against on that basis, I do find it hard to believe that it gave him the edge over John McCain.

Obama has been elected despite the fact that he is black, not because of it. Little more than 40 years ago Barack Obama would have found it hard to be served lunch in a restaurant, let alone be US president. That is the mark of his success – it is for the moment however and his true impact and earned place in history will be measured in the years to come.

I've said several times in my own journal that the biggest issue the world faces is a failure of the free market, and that requires an interventionist solution. A John McCain administration could not deliver that solution - it is not in their bloodstream. Indeed, the big theme of Republican economics - cut income tax - no longer cuts it politically when 29 million Americans pay no income tax.

I get the impression that many people have gone outside of their comfort zone on this one which puts further pressure on a President faced with the most difficult challenges.
We have now economic conditions that form part of a larger cycle and that is not normally planned for, in so much as it only happens once every other generation at least. Laissez-faire cannot help this situation – you need someone to take control and for the State to provide a reinforcing infrastructure.

In this election America was not looking simply for a candidate able to command its forces as it enjoyed undisputed hegemony. It was more anxious than that. It was looking for a leader, like Mr Obama, who could command and might deserve the respect of the world.

If Obama succeeds he will be as great as the hype now says he is. If not, then the electorate will remove him in 4 years time. That’s democracy.

Today

Everyone who is able to vote should.Democracy is one of the banners that our troops and your troops are waving in their operations around the world.Many many people have died because they believe in that principle and not voting due to apathy is something I cannot stand.I've followed this race closely and am in the Obama camp. He isn't a direct fit with my political beliefs - I don't think any mainstream American politician could be but I detest the other side for all sorts of reasons lolIt's exciting - shame I can't vote. We are of course increasingly subject to American influence - and have been for most of the 20th century. I look forward to the day when we have a global democracy to match our global economy and we can all take part in the process.

What a surprise

Financial workers at Wall Street's top banks are to receive pay deals worth more than $70bn (£40bn), a substantial proportion of which is expected to be paid in discretionary bonuses, for their work so far this year - despite plunging the global financial system into its worst crisis since the 1929 stock market crash, the Guardian has learned.
Staff at six banks including Goldman Sachs and Citigroup are in line to pick up the payouts despite being the beneficiaries of a $700bn bail-out from the US government that has already prompted criticism. The government's cash has been poured in on the condition that excessive executive pay would be curbed.
Pay plans for bankers have been disclosed in recent corporate statements. Pressure on the US firms to review preparations for annual bonuses increased yesterday when Germany's Deutsche Bank said many of its leading traders would join Josef Ackermann, its chief executive, in waiving millions of euros in annual payouts.
The sums that continue to be spent by Wall Street firms on payroll, payoffs and, most controversially, bonuses appear to bear no relation to the losses incurred by investors in the banks. Shares in Citigroup and Goldman Sachs have declined by more than 45% since the start of the year. Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley have fallen by more than 60%. JP MorganChase fell 6.4% and Lehman Brothers has collapsed.
At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/17/executivesalaries-banking

PC

I've just been reading an article elsewhere about how the word "gay" is used perjorativeley in certain situations.
I get the point completely but language changes through time and it's the attitudes behind it that are the problem rather than the words themselves.We use all sorts of words in situations that have no connection whatsoever to other uses of the phrase in question.In the UK - the epitome of the boorish, homophobic asshole can often be found at soccer games. Ironically, my local team play at "Pride Park" - that one hasn't been turned round.
Conversely, the gay community for example have taken "queer" and made that a positive statement. Poltical correctness has been shown to be counter productive - it defines such behaviour as an easy way to rebel so people, especially the young, are given meanings that they often aren't aware of and use them more. It publicises "bad language" and gives it a wider audience.

The Return of Marx

In the United Kingdom we have let finance become the primary mode of production. The new bourgoisie have been the bankers and financiers. The proletariat their "customers".
We have entred into contracts with these instititions in the form of mortgages, loans etc which they have then sold on as "assets". They do not extract the full benefit of the asset but it has become the accepted wisdom that money now is better than money later. They have also transferred the risk, which also helps to justify the reduced premium earned on their initial investment.
This is an intrinsically short term model which seeks to extract capital for the benefit of the bourgoisie as close to the point of investment as possible.
The financial proletariat get no benefit from this model - in fact the poorer you are, the more you are exploited through penal interest rates, and riskier personal financial models.
The mythology of consumption has led people to believe that money and investment in "things" (themselves transient or highly depreciating assets) is a way to achive status.
Furthermore, the idols of the proletariat, those who are considered "special" are not those who can help develop lives but those who merely exemplify this self-destructive lifstyle and achieve sufficient media coverage to attain celebrity.

It's war

Gordon Brown last night branded Iceland's failure to guarantee British savings in its failed banks as "totally unacceptable and illegal", amid warnings that more than 100 local councils, police authorities and fire services have up to £1bn lost in its bankrupted system.Charities, including children's hospices, warned they were at risk of losing £25m. In unusually aggressive terms, the prime minister said he was willing to use anti-terrorism legislation to freeze the assets of other Icelandic companies operating in Britain in an effort to recoup the lost money. The extent of the potential difficulties for councils and other bodies began to emerge yesterday as more and more said they had invested money in Iceland's high-yielding savers' accounts. By yesterday evening, the Local Government Association (LGA) had accumulated reports showing that 108 councils in England, Scotland and Wales had deposited £798.95m in Icelandic banks.egTransport for London £40mNottingham city council £42mMetropolitan police £30mThe government wants councils to deal with the consequences, although there are signs that it is ready to offer essential help. Private savers took risks too, yet ministers have protected them. A situation where bankers get billions, but keep their jobs, while councils take the hit, cannot be justified.

From the Guardian 9 October 2008

The Hidden Hand of History

“Wave after wave of selling again moved down prices on the Stock Exchange today and billions of dollars were clipped from values. “Traders surged about brokerage offices watching their holdings wiped out.... It was one of the worst breaks in history.... “For a time, in the morning, the market was showing signs of rallying power.... Then new waves of selling out of poorly margined accounts started another reaction...”

Minneapolis Star account of “Black Tuesday” (October 29, 1929)

Am I safe?

Our industry has been in recession since the beginning of 2007 at least. I think as the biggest player we are far better placed than the myriad of smaller dealers out there, for all sorts of reasons financially and structurally.Like I was saying the car market is ahead of the general market in that respect - the market has been contracting on big-ticket items since late 2006. It just didn¡¦t become noticeable on the general market until the credit crunch hit mid-2007. If you will recall we were suffering round about then because the manufacturers were continuing to produce, despite slackening demand, which was pushing down the profit that we could make on car sales. I think however now that it is a general recession - production is falling back, demand for service and parts will rise and that area of the business will grow. It is higher margin traditionally than sales so I think we can do well - this business is to a certain extent self-diversifying in these conditions. I'm fortunate that people still need trucks and cars and the people that provide those services need accountants!

Where it's at

This business is at the luxury end (to a certain extent), and as we are the biggest in our market by some size I would say we are a bellwether for the economy as a whole. As a shareholder I follow the stock market but I do not have the confience at the moment to invest further. Why not? Well the one thing an investor needs is confidence - even if the direction of the market is downwards. Then we can direct our funds in a particular direction and gain the desired return.Not all investors are looking to get rich quick and to this extent I look at the long-term trends as well as the short term rises and falls in the market of the past few weeks, which really tell me little of any interest.The Dow Jones and the FTSE map each other closely over the long term - that is the market trend. In fact the FTSE before the credit crunch rose higher but has since fallen faster than it's New York counterpart which indicates over-inflation in the UK stock market.My company's stock and that of our closest rival map each other almost exactly over the medium term - that is the industry trend.My industry has in fact shown a downturn since January 2007 - that predates the start of the downturn in the market trend which dates to mid-2007 (the onset of the credit crunch).The concern for me is that our industry does not yet show sign of development, of beating the overarching market conditions. With this in mind I think market diminution will continue until the second half of 2009 at least. That is the situation viewed from here conservatively, realistically I'm sorry to say I think it will roll on until well into 2010, probably 2011. That is when a recession (an expected contraction in the market equivalent to the "bust" of "boom and bust") becomes a depression - a sustained slump.What will be the effects of this, beyond the obvious economic hardship? Well Britain will see a reduced status on the international stage - the City was our big player and that has been humbled, as has our position on the coat-tails of the United States. Britain will become a bit-player, I would say like Austria - a diminished and peripheral nation. This will create its own social tensions. While I see a structural move to the left to counteract the liberal and permissive policies which precipitated this situation, there will become an obvious tension with those who cling to a desire to maintain the Great Britain that they have been used to. With this is in mind I can see a place, rightly or wrongly, for the Far Right as an increased voice of disenfranchised Britain.

Over the edge

Debt is seen as one of the causes of the Great Depression, particularly in the United States. American consumers and businesses relied on cheap credit, the former to purchase consumer goods such as cars and furniture, and the latter for capital investment. This fuelled strong short-term growth but created consumer and commercial debt. People and businesses who were deeply in debt when price deflation occurred or demand for their product decreased often risked default. Many drastically cut current spending to keep up payments, thus lowering demand for new products. Businesses began to fail as construction work and factory orders plunged.
Massive layoffs occurred, resulting in US unemployment rates of over 25% by 1933. Banks which had financed this debt began to fail as debtors defaulted on debt and depositors attempted to withdraw their deposits en mass, triggering multiple bank runs. Government guarantees and Federal Reserve banking regulations to prevent such panics were ineffective or not used.
Bank failures snowballed as desperate bankers called in loans which the borrowers did not have time or money to repay. With future profits looking poor, capital investment and construction slowed or completely ceased. In the face of bad loans and worsening future prospects, the surviving banks became even more conservative in their lending.Banks built up their capital reserves and made fewer loans, which intensified deflationary pressures. A vicious cycle developed and the downward spiral accelerated. This kind of self-aggravating process may have turned a 1930 recession into a 1933 great depression. Nicked from Wikipedia.

Production and Reproduction

The main threat so we are led to believe of the current market turmoil is that we will enter a "recession" or worse a "depression" - the implication being that the economy will stagnate or contract and not just for a short period of time.So what? I think part of the issue here is that the capitalist model has failed, because one of its central assumptions is simply wrong. That is, we should expect and indeed demand that economies "grow". Why do they need to grow, beyond organic growth attached to the population size?The people of the world do not exist to grow economies - they exist to re-produce and in doing so, we make the best of what we have. If you have less you make more of it.Reliance on economic "growth" is in fact a flawed and degenerative existential strategy. You become intoxicated with false wealth which prevents you from seeing the real issues.It also allows us to support unsustainable models that are allowed to develop within the gentler framework that general capital growth facilitates. These shouldn't be a "lifestyle" choice.

The Economy

People were talking about this being like the 1970s but again that was being blase - that was due to inevitable inflationary pressures of Keynesian demand policies and an over-inflated public sector (which up to a point had been necessary in the post-war reconstruction period) It's not that complicated -the conditions that precipitated the Great Depression have been in place for several years now. It is just that governments have been too weak/neutered/blase to do anything about it Banks over-lending on the back of a property bubble, lack of compartmentalisation in the financial markets...and off it goes This is a crisis of liberal rather than interventionist policies and will need the return of the latter to repair it, just as it needed Roosevelt in the 1930s. And yes it will need tax-payers money (and that is a misnomer anyway) Noting the rise of the Far Right in Austria, I pray it doesnt need any more war to resolve it fully