The Daily (Maybe)

Men's Societies? Oh God, no.

2009-11-23T19:21:00.004Z

There's only one men's group I've ever heard of that I actually approve of. That was set up by a serving British soldier in Italy to discuss masculinity as a way of undercutting the culture of beastings, racism and misogyny. As I recall the army hoofed him out for his trouble.

So when I heard about the rise of Men's Societies at universities I fetched the sick bucket in preparation for an extended projectile pukathon.

There are two versions of what these Societies get up to. The first, from their detractors, says they are obsessed by "Top Gear shows, gadget fairs, beer-drinking marathons and Iron Man competitions".

The very thought makes me want to bulldoze all the universities to wipe out these enclaves and then follow up with squads of flame-thrower teams to ensure the pestilence has been eradicated. That may be an over reaction though.

The second version is from the organisers themselves. Watching Alex Linsley on News 24 just now he said "It's because men are confused about what it is to be a man, we're trying to be the best men we can be... it's a celebration."

Grrr.... it makes my blood boil! In the Guardian he's quoted as saying "There is so much conflicting information for men. There is massive confusion as to what being a man means, and how to be a good man. Should you be the sensitive all-caring, perhaps the 'feminised' man? Or should you be the hard, take no crap from anybody kind of figure?"

Here's a thought, instead of worrying about what you think you 'should' be why don't you just be yourself? If you have need of virtues work hard, be polite, honest and be more forgiving of other people's faults than I am of yours. Love your friends and try to be fair to those you can't find it in yourself to like. It's not rocket science is it?

For the first and last time in my life I agree with the editor of Loaded who said "I don't think men are remotely confused about what it takes to be a man. They just get on and do it. My generation would not sit round and build a website about being confused. It's complete navel-gazing bullshit."

Sorry Alex, but can't you just get on with being yourself and not worry about what you should or should not be? Please, no-one talk to him about his feelings, it'll just encourage him.

Quote of the day

2009-11-23T17:35:00.003Z

Charlie Brooker says;

Jesus "would have doubtless vomited up his own ribcage in disgust at the mere sight of the hollow, anaesthetising capitalist moonbase that is the Westfield Centre."

No doubt he would have. I'm not a fan of shopping centres myself.

More importantly the piece is citing another example of newspapers treating advertising as if it's news, something I was railing against just the other day.

Weekending: 22nd November

2009-11-22T16:20:00.001Z

Yo, brothers and sisters. Check these out!

Blogs;

Green supremo Jon Nott has forged an eclectica.
Then there's a daisy through concrete.
My kinda lefty: Mellow Fellow.
Fit Watch - not a weight watchers' site.
Labour lefty Peter Kenyon
Very simple site. Battle of Green Britain.

Posts and articles;

Can I just say this post from Harry Hutton is bloody marvellous.
Liam calls on Irish mercenaries to get out of Bolivia.
The FT reports of imminent sanctions against Iran.
This piece on experiments in democracy in Iceland is exciting.
Exploding immigration myths from Claude.
Bea Campbell on turning red to green in CiF.

Quote of the week (here);

"As a nation, we need to prepare for a highly sexualised, electric Swindon – a Swindon with desires and needs, a vast, androgynous, super-intelligent being, splayed over Wiltshire."

Diary dates;

Tues 24th November Westminster Skeptics Science Activism in the New Media
Sat 28th November Hands off the People of Iran AGM
Sat 28th November Reclaim power: pushing for climate justice at SOAS
Sat 5th December National Climate March.
Sat 12th December Green Party London Fed Winter Party free - donations welcome.
Sat 13th March 2010 Campaign Against Climate Change Trade Union Conference

Our video of the week is one of Madame Hodge debating fascist MEP Andrew Brons. As she's got the task of facing off the strongest BNP challenge at the election we might as well see what she's made of;

Brighton Tories gone mad!

2009-11-22T14:45:00.005Z

I'm of an age where I can remember the bile directed at anyone who thought using racist or sexist language was a bad thing. The right-wing press went on an extra-ordinary crusade throughout the eighties to defend it's "I'm not racist but..." position of "it's just a bit of fun" to be a foul, bigoted git.

Anyway, if you were there you'll also remember how left-wing councils were attacked for bizarre language games where no one could refer to black bin bags for fear of being sent to a re-education camp in Germaine Greer's back garden.

The fact that these were stories were by and large a pile of gross distortions or straight up lies will surprise no-one familiar with today's tabloid culture, although it would be a mistake to think the mild version we get today is in any way a relation to the rampaging hate that requests not to use foul, chauvinist language were subjected to back in the day.

The most famous bullshit example was the report of a council who'd changed the words of a nursery rhyme to "Baa, Baa Green Sheep" which is ironic given recent events in Brighton.

It has been alleged that the Tories in Brighton and Hove council have banned employees from using the word green because, as we all know, Green equals Communism and Communism is off message.

The Brighton Argos reports that "Council workers claim they are being told not to use the word green over fears it is increasing support for the Green Party. Officers at Brighton and Hove City Council say they are instead being asked to replace the word with "sustainable" or "environmentally-friendly."

"A council contractor said: "There's no official policy but since the Tory administration came into power there has been increasing talk about not using the word green because of its association with the Green Party.""

Revenge!

Tories say goodbye to "green shoots of recovery", don't think electing Cameron will be OK because "the grass is always greener", don't even consider "turning green with envy" at the right's ascendancy because the "green eyed monster" will have to get tinted contacts if he wants to rear his ugly head anywhere near the south coast.

It's 'Brighton Tories gone mad' - again - but tinkering with words wont save them from the inevitable.

Floods and Fire

2009-11-22T13:12:00.004Z

My heart goes out to those who've been caught in the floods in recent days. One of the shocking things about events like this is the way it strikes without warning. Whilst there were weather reports of heavy rain few people could have prepared for the deluge that has swept Cumbria destroying bridges, creating evacuees and damaging other parts of the infrastructure.

One heroic policeman, Bill Barker, has died as he tried to protect the public by directing people off a bridge that collapsed and he was swept away in the floods. A canoeist has also died elsewhere in a storm swollen river.

When disasters like this strike the fact that we're a rich country means very little, at least until the crisis has passed and we can begin rebuilding the area. It's a warning for the future that countries like the UK are not invulnerable to catastrophic natural events.

Meanwhile, as we've just received the largest amount of rainfall in one go since records began, on the other side of the world New South Wales is in lock down preparing for its worst fire-day ever, it's premier stated "It has never been this hot, dry or windy in combination ever before".

Sadly, this kind of event is just a taste of what some people in the world have had to experience and our wealth acts as a cushion against these smaller scale disasters. There is an air unreality about disasters unless they actually happen to you. If they help us understand our place within the Earth's eco-system then some good can come out of these tragic events.

The People's Charter

2009-11-21T22:03:00.003Z

I attended the People's Charter event today at Camden Civic Centre. The Charter is a rather neat idea to collate the ABCs of left policy into six main points, like the original nineteenth century Chartist document, and then get lots of people to support it.

That means it includes loads of good stuff that happens to be part of Green Party policy already (green jobs, renationalising the railways, scrap trident, that sort of thing) and is pretty much the left-wing version of motherhood and apple-pie.

There were a whole host of interesting speakers from a variety of backgrounds and perspectives. Trade union leaders like Matt Wrack of the FBU and Bob Crow of the RMT gave the affair some solidity whilst people like Pregna Patel from Southall Black Sisters and Colin Prescod from the Institute of Race Relations provided a more social, community focus.

There was far too much said to give a full and proper report back but I do remember one speaker from the floor defending the Labour Party's record by saying "The Labour Party has had no influence over government policy for some time." Well, that's inspired me to join then!

Perhaps more accurately a PCS speaker described the three main parties as "in fact, three factions of the same party." Although I'm not sure about that, as factions implies there are real differences.

Another speaker put forward the idea that not only do we have a broken society with a broken economy, we also have a broken democracy and, he said, he'd like to see the Charter adopt some demands around democratising the country - in just the way that the original Chartists had been a movement for working class political representation.

If I have criticisms it's probably that in the effort to be uncontroversial the Charter may well be considered a little bland to some, which may explain a lower than expected turnout. The other difficulty - which is not a criticism but a problem - is that, as a set of general demands that few people have as yet heard of, you can't just wander up to people in the street and say "sign up to the People's Charter?" and even if they did what would it actually mean?

You really need to move from the specific to the general. In other words you're campaigning over the closure of a local nursery and you raise the Charter within that to deepen the politics of the campaign - this way the demands have more substance because they are connected to something directly tangible.

I'd also say the crisis of political representation was the driving force for the original Charter and, in very different circumstances, that's exactly why the left needs to popularise its demands today. It's because common sense ideas that are held by millions - like renationalising the rail - are just not represented in Parliament that the need for the Charter and other initiatives arises. The Charter by its very nature has to skirt round this issue, and that blunts it as a tool.

Anyway, I'll continue to argue for the demands of the Charter, and more, and if this document helps bring to life some of these basic socialist ideas then that's all to the good.

The BNP in words and pictures

2009-11-21T17:17:00.004Z

I've just watched the BNP TV ad from Barking presented by the chuckle brothers Nick and Dick putting on a display of unity to cover up the fact that Dicky Barnbrook has just taken one for the team and been firmly ejected as Parliamentary candidate by the beastly one.

Not an entirely convincing display of brotherly love, although I did enjoy the moment when Barnbrook said that to win the constituency "we need two simple things". I can't be the only person who thought he was going to follow that up with "and here we are!"

Actually, I wouldn't recommend watching the video if you're of a nervous disposition because the line "We need to flood this constituency with activists to make up for the fact that the Labour Party is flooding us with foreigners" was almost more than even I could take.

Talking of the BNP I saw this photo of the BNP conference in Wigan where they voted to ballot their members on letting non-white join the party. It made me wonder - will they also have a ballot to allow women to join too, or is that a step too far for the master race?

Just a thought, unless they have strictly segregated meetings, I've heard they really admire Sharia law so it could be...

You gotta laugh: immigration controls

2009-11-20T22:36:00.004Z

Earlier in the week I wrote an article in the Morning Star for the end of immigration controls. Often this is called 'no borders' although I deliberately steered clear of using the jargon.

Tomorrow's edition of the Star carries a letter by Stephen Lee insisting my position is "laughable", "utopian" and that my piece is "no way to make allies". Apparently I'm not realistic.

He might be right... you decide.

Heroes and Villains

2009-11-18T23:41:00.004Z

The New Statesman has published its guide to who it thinks are the heroes and villains of the environmental movement. One of the beauties of lists like these (apart from the pantomime-like orchestrated booing and cheering) is there's always something to disagree with, and this one is no exception.

As you know I'm not keen on raising people up onto pedestals (see my controversial Brian Haw post for example) so when we single out individuals for praise or condemnation it's not always about them as an individual (although it can be) it's also about what they represent.

The villains list must have been difficult now that George Bush is out of the White House but he's there in spirit under the guise of Donald Trump but the authors have commendably kept the focus of their ire on the actions of big business (with an side serving of poking for the Labour government).

It's when they come to the heroes list I'm a little more confused. Franny Armstrong, yes, of course, good stuff, but the National Grid? Apparently they published a report saying that wind power was not variable in input. Don't get me wrong, that's not a bad thing to do but heroic? Publishing a paper stating something pretty obvious? If you say so... and the less said about James Lovelock the better. Literally.

I don't know - check it out for yourselves. I'm just glad I don't have to compile a similar list because if I singled out Switch Ninja for praise people might just look confused.

Prison officers on strike

2009-11-18T11:33:00.003Z

It looks like the prison officers are on strike again. Once again it's unofficial action because regulations forbid them taking legal strike action.

Liverpool prison officers walked out against bullying and harassment by superior officers and according to the BBC staff at three other jails have threatened to take solidarity action.

The union's deputy leader complained that the employers had simply refused to discuss workers concerns saying; "The Prison Service's intransigence on this issue is ridiculous.They would not agree to a meeting to discuss this issue. The POA are holding out the olive branch."

"We have said to the Prison Service you can end this dispute now by agreeing to a dedicated meeting to discuss the bullying and harassment by senior management at Liverpool.They are refusing to do that. Some prisons had meetings this morning to discuss this issue. I would expect other prisons to follow suit."

As I said during their last dispute "If we're to have prison officers let them be well looked after, motivated individuals who don't feel like taking their frustrations out on the prisoners. Which I suppose means I support the action. Victory to the POA!"

What's the world coming to?

2009-11-17T17:44:00.003Z

Paul Waugh reports that a prospective Labour candidate for council mentioned in passing that the Queen was vermin and suddenly everything goes off the rails.

Apparently, if you're even thinking of standing for Havering council you'd better show due deference to her Majesty at all times. Peter White's quote, in it's full glory is as follows;

"What is the point of celebrating the Diamond Jubilee of someone who is born into a position of privilege, she is a parasite and milks this country for everything she can, she has more front than margate asking for extra money from the civil list. Maybe she should sell a couple of her properties.

Maybe if she want Buckingham Palace to maintained from public funds she should open it to the public. Don't get me wrong i have no problem with a public holiday but lets have one that means something, rather than celebrating vermin."

Please remember if you are standing for council - don't compare the Saxcoburgs to rats, parasites, woodlice, headlice, fungi, weasels, those monkey's with blue bottoms or cockroaches. It just isn't nice. Also you might find yourself the subject of a message from HQ like this one;

"Peter White has been summoned to a meeting with key members of the local party and officers from the London Regional Labour Party. He will be required to explain his comments and they will consider his future."

Gulp. Can I just say how I've always admired the Queen Mother's hats. Most unvermin like.

RIP Callan

2009-11-16T13:14:00.002Z

Edward Woodward has died. Not good, not good at all.

I'll always think of him as Callan, the working class state agent always at odds with his public school educated superiors, but he was also bloody marvelous in the Wicker Man and Common As Muck.

Barking Griffin

2009-11-15T22:44:00.002Z

So Nick Griffin is to stand in Barking against Margaret Hodge. It's a fair assumption then that they think this is their best bet for a seat.

Two things spring immediately to mind. First, the rather uninspired dullard that is Richard Barnbrook seems to be out in the cold having assumed he was going to have a shot. I hope there are no tensions there boys.

Second, Nick seems to have deserted the North West already. It's almost as if he doesn't give a fuck about the people who just a few months ago elected him to represent them. At least pretend to care Nick.

In theory this is a safe seat for Labour, but then they are always the most dangerous ones because all too often these constituencies have been taken for granted. The previous results were as follows;

	Candidate	Votes	%	±%
Labour	Margaret Hodge	13,826	47.8	-13.1
Conservative	Keith Prince	4,943	17.1	-5.9
BNP	Richard Barnbrook	4,916	16.9	+10.6
Liberal Democrat	Toby Wickenden	3,211	11.1	+1.3
UKIP	Terry Jones	803	2.8	+2.8
Green	Laurie Cleeland	618	2.1	+2.1
Independent	Demetrious Panton	530	1.8	+1.8
Workers' Revolutionary	Mick Saxby	59	0.2	+0.2

The BNP will have to double their vote and more to win this seat by the looks of things, it's a long shot which Ladbrookes is giving 9/2. Of course, that's not factoring in the sterling work that Mick Saxby will have put into the constituency in the meantime building the revolution.

One question that I've been pondering and now seems like a good time to ask it... should the Greens stand here? It's extremely unlikely that we'd make the difference between Hodge and the Uber Grupen Fuhrer's rise to power, but it would be an added discomfort if the BNP won by 1% and we'd collected 2% of the vote.

Weekending

2009-11-15T15:37:00.000Z

Welcome to the weekending. What did we spot this week?

Blogs;

Apparently Old Punks never die.
Son of Schism-Schasm.

Posts and articles;

Carnival of Socialism is up at Harpy Marx.
Aiden Baker looks at alternatives to Amazon.
Peter Tatchell in the News Statesmen looks at democratic reform.
Daniel Hoffman-Gill has a great post on Poland and immigration.
The FT reports that Obama has ruled out a Copenhagen treaty.
Peter Cranie notes the latest poll.
Jon Rogers looks at what's happening in UNISON.
We're in Afghanistan to get rid of the Taliban. Or failing that put them in government.
Respect had their conference yesterday Ger Francis (via Derek Wall) and Liam react.
The Ecologist looks at how we get community investment in green projects.
Nick Griffin to contest Barking seat.
Congratulations Alan Gorman, new Green town councillor in Totnes.

Diary dates;

Sat 21st November People's Charter National Conference, in Camden.
Tues 24th November Westminster Skeptics Science Activism in the New Media
Sat 28th November Hands off the People of Iran AGM
Sat 5th December National Climate March.

What happens when you cross the irresistible beats of Ska with Christian rockers? Watch this video to find out. Fans of either discipline may require a stiff drink on hand;

Afghan corruption is life and death

2009-11-14T11:10:00.004Z

I've only just seen this but The Sunday Times had an in depth story by the exceptionally fine journalist Christina Lamb on Afghanistan. It includes revelations about the recent shooting of five British soldiers that made my blood run cold;

The 25-year-old, an unmarried man called Gulbuddin, was part of a 15-strong team that manned a police station in the Nad Ali district, in the heart of Helmand’s poppy-farming lands.
Embedded with the Afghan police were two trainers from the Royal Military Police and a protection force of 14 soldiers from Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, the Grenadier Guards.

The Taliban subsequently claimed Gulbuddin as one of theirs. Senior sources say local intelligence shows the claim is false, however. In addition, witnesses contacted by The Sunday Times say other factors lay behind the massacre.

According to two Afghans who knew him, Gulbuddin had complained of being brutally beaten, sodomised and sexually abused by a senior Afghan officer. A policeman named Ajmal, a friend of the gunman, said Gulbuddin had been constantly tortured. “He was being used for sexual purposes,” said Ajmal.
Another policeman, Kharullah, who was injured in the shooting, said: “Gulbuddin was beaten many times and that’s why he got angry. One day when he was patrolling with British soldiers, he swore he was going to kill him.”

When Gulbuddin opened fire with a machinegun, his target was his alleged abuser. According to the Afghan sources, the five British soldiers were killed simply because they were present and considered to be the man’s protectors.

The allied task to prop up this corrupt regime is not simply one where we are making the best out of a bad situation but one where we are actively protecting rapists, ballot-riggers and reactionaries.

Far from being killed by the Taliban it appears that these British servicemen were in fact killed by a police officer that we'd severely let down in the most horrendous way. I've no doubt that they did not deserve to be killed, just as Gulbuddin did not deserve to be raped and beaten by a superior officer protected by a ring of British bayonets.

Speaking on Question Time last week Sir Ian Blair had said the problem was that the police officers were being recruited "off the streets" (i.e. they come from Afghanistan) when in fact the main problem is that the regime the police serve is itself corrupt to the very top.

Prosperity without growth

2009-11-13T11:41:00.005Z

Last night I went to the packed book launch of Tim Jackson's Prosperity without Growth: Economics for a Finite Planet (published by Earthscan). Jonathon Porritt, who introduced the author, declared we were there to celebrate the absence of a question mark. We've gone from questioning whether the growth model works to asserting that it doesn't.

I've not read the book yet but it looks extremely interesting. The idea of economic growth is a given in most circles. I don't remember the last time a mainstream politician questioned the fundamental place growth has as an indicator of economic health.

However, growth comes at a real cost and what benefits growth does deliver it delivers unequally. The gap between the richest and poorest nations is greater now than it was thirty years ago not just because the wealthy are advancing more quickly but because the rich are rich on the backs of the of the poorest. As Prashant Vaze points out in his The Economical Environmentalist the flights alone of the wealthiest ten percent of the UK population contribute more carbon to the atmosphere than the entire emissions of the poorest UK citizens.

When we look at Gordon Brown's call for increased consumer spending and freeing up the ability of banks to lend again as a solution to the current financial predicament there seems to be a real disconnect between these short termist attempts to get back to business as usual and the long term problem that we are a debt ridden society where we are live beyond our means. If anything his solutions are about deepening the fundamental problem, not addressing it.

Add to this the fact that unremitting growth is not ecologically sustainable and may lead to catastrophic consequences for millions of people around the world, we have a ticking time bomb whose main victims are the poor. It seems to me that a different kind of economics is required.

The catch all term growth does not differentiate between useful production, anti-social financial gambling or meaningless digging and filling in holes. As Chris Harman pointed out in last month's Socialist Review "much, if not all, of the growth of the British economy over the past decade and a half has been non-growth... a minimum of scientific scrutiny shows that GNP does not measure people's wellbeing."

That's Jackson's argument. Prosperity "transcends material concerns. It resides in the health and happiness of our families. It is present in the strength of our relationships and our trust in the community. It is evidenced by our satisfaction at work and our sense of shared meaning and purpose. It hangs on our potential to participate fully in the life of society.

"Prosperity consists in our ability to flourish as human beings – within the ecological limits of a finite planet. The challenge for our society is to create the conditions under which this is possible. It is the most urgent task of our times."

While we feel bound to measure our success as a society by the amount we consume regardless of whether that consumption leads to a greater quality of life (sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't) or whether we're consuming tomorrow's resources today we'll be trapped in a vicious cycle that's neither ecologically nor economically sustainable. It's time to reassess what it is that we value outside the narrow confines of conventional economics.

Labour retain Glasgow North East

2009-11-13T10:11:00.004Z

No big surprises at the top with Labour retaining the seat and the SNP still firmly in second place, although the Lib Dems cannot be best pleased with their pitiful result coming in sixth behind the BNP and Solidarity.

It's a pity that the Tory just managed to scrape her deposit back, but we can't win them all. The lack of headlines really reflects the fact that most parties didn't stand here last time so there's not much direct electoral history to compare to.

The Solidarity and SSP vote combined is much the same as last time (a little down) but the bizarrely high 2005 SLP vote has completely collapsed, possibly indicating that people had previously seen the word Labour and voted for Scargill's team accidentally last time.

The BNP vote has seen a boost after their successes elsewhere and blanket media coverage of the main stream media's bugbear of choice - but the boost was not significant enough to see them retain their deposit, let alone threaten the big players.

Full results, lifted direct from wikipedia, God bless it.

	Candidate	Votes	%	±%
Labour	Willie Bain	12,231	59.4	N/A
SNP	David Kerr	4,120	20.0	+2.3
Conservative	Ruth Davidson	1,075	5.2	N/A
BNP	Charlie Baillie	1,013	4.9	+1.7
Solidarity	Tommy Sheridan	794	3.9	N/A
Liberal Democrat	Eileen Baxendale	474	2.3	N/A
Scottish Green	David Doherty	332	1.6	N/A
Jury Team	John Smeaton	258	1.2	N/A
Scottish Socialist	Kevin McVey	152	0.7	-4.2
No Label	Mikey Hughes	54	0.3	N/A
Socialist Labour	Louise McDaid	47	0.2	-14.0
Independent	Mev Brown	32	0.2	N/A
The Individuals Labour and Tory (TILT)	Colin Campbell	13	0.1	N/A

Passenger protest rescues refugees from deportation

2009-11-12T13:41:00.003Z

The NCADC reports that refugee Rose-Jane Wanjohi and her UK-born daughter Natale were saved from deportation after passengers on the plane they were due to be flown out of the country in refused to allow the plane to take off.

Rose-Jane and Natale were taken from detention and "escorted" onto a British Airways flight by four security guards this morning. Meanwhile, supporters were leafleting passengers about to board British Airways Flight BA65 to Nairobi.

The leaflets explained that a fellow-passenger and baby were being taken against their will into extreme danger. As Rose-Jane sat on the plane, several passengers refused to fasten their seat belts. The pilot would not take off until it was resolved, and so Rose-Jane and Natale were taken from the plane.

Speaking from the van taking her back to the detention centre, Rose-Jane told NCADC: "I don't know what to say. I am so happy. I would like to thank my friends, and thank the people on the plane, for saving my life and my daughter. Thank you so much. God bless you."

Rose-Jane and Natale are not out of danger yet but are now back in the relative safety of Yarls Wood.

It's so good to hear happy news sometimes and this points to how even in the most desperate circumstances we can win sometimes. With the dedicated work of NCADC campaigners and the support of "ordinary" members of the public it really is possible to stop the state in its tracks.

Things in the news

2009-11-11T10:51:00.003Z

No time to post properly but here are three striking articles in the news that made me sit up, which takes a lot as I'm a habitual sloucher.

Fire arms police officer suspended. What for though?

Brighton bin strike called off. Chances of a proper settlement look good, shows what one article in the Morning Star can do.

After the horrific murders in Fort Hood by a US Army Major it is revealed that "Ft. Hood has had 76 soldier suicides since 2003". That's around one a month.

Guest Post: A citizen's income for all

2009-11-10T12:46:00.002Z

Continuing my short series of pieces on economic issues, Natalie Bennett discusses the 'basic income', a mechanism to ensure that every citizen should be free from poverty as a right.

When you think about it, most European societies, de facto, very nearly have a basic income that supports their most vulnerable members. With very few exceptions, most societies will not deliberately force a person within them onto the streets, or leave them to starve. (That some people fail to navigate the obstacles to get to that point, and end up “on the streets” most people, even right wing politicians, will usually accept is regrettable.)

The expectation is, at the end of the day, that every member of the society is entitled to a basic level of subsistence, of survival, simply by being part of that society. But to get to that point, every society currently forces members relying on such support to jump through a variety of hoops to “prove” they deserve the support – “readying for work” interviews for disability benefit, prying “who owns those shoes in your wardrobe?” questions for sole parent benefit. It’s a variation of the “deserving poor” formula that was developed in Protestant Tudor England to replace traditional Catholic general largesse.

Over recent decades, however, increasing numbers of scholars and politicians have had a revolutionary thought. What if, instead of setting up all those obstacles, employing all of those bureaucrats to ask prying, indelicate questions, you simply accepted a simple right: if you are a member of this society you have a right to a basic decent level of subsistence? A basic, or citizens’, income, which everyone is paid, as a right – no means test, no prying questions, no need for shame at being a “welfare recipient”.

Instantly you’d save a fortune in administration costs, you’d avoid all those barriers of literacy, of ability to fill in forms, of preparedness to accept “welfare” (which robs millions of British pensioners of basic comforts – while the banks have been very happy to accept their welfare payments without a murmur). You’d also be ending at a stroke the poverty traps that leave many unemployed/disabled/unpaid carers worse off if they return to work when and how they can. And you’d have made a huge definitive statement of principle.

How would it work?

So how would you do it? You’d decide on a level of payment – the current level of unemployment benefit is often chosen as a logical starting point for thinking about this – and pay everyone that sum of money in regular payments spread over the year. You’d pay more to pensioners, to cover the fact they can have higher living expenses and no real way of earning significant income, and possibly less to children, the levels rising with their age. And that would be it.

People could choose, if they wished, to live on that sum, and devote themselves to that novel they always wanted to write, or to developing that community vegetable garden at the end of the road, or to caring for a sick relative. Or some – yes – would probably sit on the sofa.

Most people wouldn’t do that. People work because they want more than basic subsistence, and they work because many jobs offer satisfaction, company, the chance to get out of the house.
Some jobs, the least satisfying, most frustrating ones, probably would be harder to fill – but then if banks and utility companies had to stop using soulless mechanical call centres and go back to local offices staffed by local people you could actually talk to as individuals, then we’d all be better off. And if garbage and sewage workers’ pay had to go up, and the salaries of social workers doing the enormously difficult job of child protection, then that would surely be no bad thing. There might be some jobs worth doing for little pay – maybe the users of the community garden could kick in what they could into the pot for a garden manager.

Taxation would kick in at some point probably not far above the basic income, but there would be no poverty trap, no loss of income. If a recipient worked five hours a week, they’d get the pay for that, and they wouldn’t lose the free bus pass that today could make that financially crippling. If they got some work this week, but not next, they wouldn’t find their benefits cut and no money to put food on the table.

How much would it cost?

So what would it cost? Broadly, about half the cost of the basic income would come from existing benefits and reduced administration costs. The rest would have to be found – taxation, mostly from the rich, but you could also expect a society in which more people had some work, and paid some tax. It’s tough to do the maths of this: it tends to leave quantitative economists tearing their hair out because it is so hard to model – there are no examples of which to base assumptions of how a society would react.

But broadly, it is possible to find a coherent model to make it work financially. And beyond that, it is an illustration, perhaps a perfect illustration, of the fact that lots of changes, really important, fundamental changes, can’t really be modelled, planned; they just have to be done, because they are the right thing to do.

Recently I’ve been increasingly coming to the view that we’ve been looking at economics, and economic models, the wrong way around. Traditionally, we start with where things are now, change one thing, then try to make the rest of the sums add up. And those models really haven’t worked out very well recently…

What if we started differently? We could start with what we regard as the basic essentials that a society should provide – basic income and essential public services – say “this is what we need and must have”, then work out how to fund it. Lots of things might have to go – consultants fees, aircraft carriers, new roads, infrastructure for globalization. Some new and faintly shocking things might have to come in – higher taxes on the rich, tougher controls on banks. But then you’d have done what has to be done to deliver a society that truly met the base needs of all its citizens.

Footnote

There’s no space here to fully explore the full beauties of a basic income. There’s further reading suggestions below. And this article has focused on developed societies, but the introduction of a basic income could be even more revolutionary in developing societies. If people already live on $US2, a payment of that sum could totally change their lives. On a small scale this has already been done, in Namibia , and the results have been stunning.

Further reading

A Citizens' Income, Clive Lord.
Redesigning Distribution: Basic Income and Stakeholder Grants as Cornerstones for an Egalitarian Capitalism, Ackerman, Alstott and van Parijs.
Basic Income on the Agenda, Loek Groot
A Basic Income Grant for South Africa, Guy Standing
The Right to Exploit: Parasitism, Scarcity, and Basic Income, Gijs Van Donselaar
Or see the Basic Income Network.

Lewisham links

2009-11-09T20:43:00.002Z

As you may know I'm cutting down the amount of linking I'm doing in the right hand column to make it all a bit more user friendly. Anyway, in order that I don't throw the baby out with the bath water I've decided to set up a Lewisham links post which I can link back to in order to make sure there's a way of supporting the local community.

If you have a site you'd like to promote please let me know in the comments box. Thanks.

Green		Bloggers
Cllr Dean Walton Green Ladywell Lewisham Green Drinks Lewisham Green Party Lewisham Greens' Twitter		853 Bob from Brockley Brockley Central Dizzy Thinks Transpontine
Resources		Community
Lewisham Council Lewisham Local History Society News shopper Wikipedia entry		Brockley Cross Action Group Brockley Jack Theatre Brockley Max Festival Brockley Society Croftton Park Community Link Crofton Park FC Jam Circus Rivoli Ballroom Telegraph Hill Society Voluntary Action Lewisham

Weekending: 8th Novemeber

2009-11-08T20:51:00.001Z

It's weekending time again;

Blogs;

New Green blog Eco-DIY
And another Pat Cleary's blog
And another Greening Kirklees
And yet another! Green Bill
Good lefty People's Republic of Hove

Posts and articles;

Peter Tatchell defends himself against the smears
Matt Selwood on how London gets its food.
Jenny Jones argues we should give Londoners a say in policing.
The New Scientist on Sea Monsters.
Criminalise bankers not prostitutes (Jess Hurd)
Kucinich explains why he voted against health care reform.
An ethical tourism company drops carbon offsetting.
I enjoyed Chris Harman's article reassessing GDP in Socialist Review. Although I'd put this in this week's crop before I heard the news of his death I've decided against taking it out.
Good piece on why belief in climate is not the same as religious faith.
I was in the morning Star twice this week (one article held over from the week before). Once on feminism and the other on drugs. Letters in response here and here.

Diary dates;

Weds 11th November CEDAW a convention on international women's rights.
Sat 21st November People's Charter National Conference, in Camden.
Sat 28th November Hands off the People of Iran AGM
Sat 5th December National Climate March.
Have I missed off your event? Let me know.

Youtube of the week, Beatrix Campbell launches her Parliamentary campaign as a Green Party candidate;

P.S. I filmed this. It was both the first time I've put a video on Youtube (with all the little gizmo's) and the first time I'd been introduced to Ms Campbell. I don't know what I was expecting, but she was really, really lovely.

RIP Chris Harman

2009-11-07T21:17:00.006Z

I was saddened to see that Chris Harman, long term leading light of the SWP, has died. It's been a while since I've spoken to him but it's still a shock to hear this news as he was always someone who seemed so flea fit and full of intellectual life.

Outside of his friends and family Chris will mainly remembered as an intellectual and theoretician who was able to make socialist and Marxist ideas accessible. This side to his work is best exemplified by Economics of the Madhouse, How Marxism Works and A People's History of the World.

The last of these extremely readable books is a very impressive tome covering the entire sweep of history and ever since I read it almost ten years ago I've always kept a copy around for reference and I'll continue to do so for some time I'm sure.

I've not read his latest work Zombie Capitalism yet but I've heard it's very good and one thing about Chris was that his powers never seemed to dim across the decades of his political activity. My condolences go out to his friends and family.

Other thoughts at Lenin's Tomb, Socialist Resistance, Dave's Part, Left Outside, Third Estate.

Engel vs Sexist Tory Fool

2009-11-07T10:10:00.006Z

We're told that Cameron is man of modern sensibilities. The Tory media machine tells us he understands that racism, sexism and homophobia are more than just a bit of harmless fun. It's hard not to believe it's true when you see his lovely soft haircut and elegant frowns of concern at all the right moments.

However, it looks like the Tories still have a little way to go in purging sexism from their ranks. It seems that while queuing at the Parliamentary canteen Sir Nicholas Winterton slapped Natascha Engel MP's bottom.

When later questioned about the incident Winterton replied that "I have a friendly relationship with most members of the House, male and female. Can I remember this incident? No. Can I categorically deny it? The answer is no. I'm quite a normal person."

Oddly, I believe him. Not the last bit about being normal obviously, but I suspect he doesn't remember whether or not he slapped the Labour MP's bum because it's so common place for him to do that sort of thing that it doesn't stick in his memory. Of course, Sir Nicholas said he DID remember queuing to buy soup and a doughnut, but then who doesn't remember each and every doughnut they've eaten. I certainly do.

He told the Telegraph that he might have slapped Engel but that any such gesture would have been out of "affection and regard". Hmmmm. Like for an old horse you're sending to the knackers yard, or a serving girl who's been in the family for decades.

What does Engel say of the matter? "I would rather not be slapped on the backside" by a "silly old man". This seems understandable.

While this is a small incident in many ways I do wonder how many women Tory MP's bums he'd slapped before turning to the Labour ranks. No wonder they have so few female MPs if this is an example 0f the way they treat their female political representatives let alone their less exalted activists. Further reading

Countering racism as well as the racists

2009-11-05T12:40:00.003Z

I went to an extremely interesting Socialist Resistance meeting last night on the rise of the far right (write up). One of the reasons I like this bunch is that the standard of political discussion is extremely high and they have the knack of being able to openly disagree with each other without turning every issue into a crossing of the Rubicon.

There are a number of crucial debates taking place at the moment over how we deal with the far right. For example, tactical discussions on the utility of no platform, the need to mobilise counter demonstrations against the English Defence League (EDL) and how we deal with the fact that more than a million people voted for the BNP in the European elections.

Now, I think that if fascists are organising an 'anti-mosque' march in your area the number one short term priority is to make sure anti-racists turn up in larger numbers and directly confront the bone heads. I'm also completely opposed to inviting the BNP, or other far right ideologues, onto political platforms to debate their ideas. These people are building a movement to send me to a gas chamber and I'm opposed to giving them a leg up.

That said I'm concerned that the debate can sometimes get boiled down to these counter measures, because they are part of the left's 'comfort zone', when they are only a small part of the fight against the far right.

You can't defeat the BNP through counter marches because they rarely march, that's not how they've accumulated their record support. Likewise, no platform was the mainstream consensus when the BNP won their first MEPs, we should maintain it in my view, but those Euro-seats were won without the assistance of Question Time and the show is not make or break in terms of the fact that the BNP have managed to achieve mass support for the first time in history.

All the evidence points to the British National Party being a disorganised bunch of inarticulate muppets who have an anatomy problem - they don't know their arse from their elbow. They do not garner votes through the force of their arguments or the genius of their street mobilisations but because they are the focus of pre-existing bigotries and anger.

The tactical questions of countering the EDL physically or shoring up the confidence of those who can deny the BNP electoral platforms must not be allowed to obscure the fact that the BNP have grown out of a sewer, and it is no use spending time combating specific racist organisations without also recognising that racism, homophobia, and all the rest of it are social problems that exist independently of far right organisations.

UAF, Hope not Hate and independent local groupings do tremendous work which we should all support where we can, but we shouldn't confine ourselves to their sensibly limited menus. We have to do what we can to undermine racist ideas, Islamophobia, climate change denial. It's not enough for people like Jack Straw to take up a posture of hatred for the BNP while parroting their anti-immigration agenda in the hope that it will undermine their vote.

We've seen recently that homophobia is still alive and well, it wasn't created by BNP goons and our work to tackle it is just as important. It would be very easy to get distracted by mobilising against right wing football hooligans and for the focus to drift away from the bigger picture. These set piece battles are not enough.