cherokoffdotcom

Watching the international news reports this weekend, I was reminded of a short period in the 1970’s, student activism to the fore, and an occupation of a strategic educational block in a college on the south coast.

The circumstances are not relevant for this blog, but the means of passing the time is. A group of us spent three or four days more or less continuously playing ‘Risk’. The game of world domination.

Unfortunately, some countries decided it was more fun to play with real continents, and real lives. Actually, they have been doing that for centuries, but the analogy still applies.

A variety of European countries were the first to swap their cross-border battles for a global carve-up, and a damned fine job they did of it too. Just about everywhere that an asset could be sequestered or stripped, a race could be subjugated and exploited, that is where they went, and established the economic divide that still pervades today.

And, more importantly, provides arenas that they can carry on the quarrels of yesteryear with the lives of others. On the odd occasion when the scrap came close to home they saw how destructive it was and exported it again. And where they have caused destruction, division, and an establishment of exploitation and alienation, they leave behind an after-math of extremism and further misery.

Balances shift over time, and size now holds more sway. But the result is still the same. Rather than scrap it out with each other directly – thankfully, the results today would be exponentially catastrophic – or sit down and negotiate without preconditions, but with respect; they continue to vent their animosity in other countries, at other population’s cost.

So, for the moment we see the sabre rattlers circling Syria, Yemen, Iraq. And any gang will pull in acolytes when circumstances suit. So the ‘big bollocks’ are joined by smaller ball swingers, each innocent, each accusatory, none without blood on their hands.

These countries, and those in Africa, and South America, and South East Asia, have suffered for years with their own internal strife. People can be like that. Some resolved over time, some kept under control for the sake of the greater good, some forever simmering.

The one thing they all have, and had, in common that they do not need to be used as a bludgeon for other people’s aggravation.  The resolution of internal strife, now enhanced by pseudo-religious extremism, is hard enough, without outside powers playing ‘Risk’ with dysfunctional countries.

But hey, why do the hard stuff, the back off and be reasonable stuff, the fair and humanitarian stuff. After all, retaining power and influence is so much more important than the odd hundred, thousand, million lives.

And history has proved that. Hasn’t it?

I was going to stick to the principle of ‘A Rant A Day’, and to be fair there is more than enough out there to do one an hour till Christmas. And that’s another thing ……

But no. A little shining soul I know suggested I do the opposite. Take a moment to spot the little lights in the darkness, and see the plus rather than the minus. So here goes.

The first lights are the easiest to spot, and the brightest. I have a son who, each day reminds me that I must have done something right, because he is. Very right. Both in his spirit, and those he chooses to be close to. And one of the best dogs ever!

I also, as mentioned earlier, know a little shining soul. Well, little person – ish – big shining soul. And with her come three more souls, at different stages but all shining, even the one from the north.

And from links to others – varied, various and endlessly intriguing – who each have added, remotely or directly, to the pushing back of the gloom. In small ways, with slithers of lives lived, places visited, thoughts and feelings and emotions. With approaches and attitudes, and support, and sharing.

And family members who surprise, and parents who have now gone, but who leave echoes that bounce back at unexpected moments and bring a smile, or a tear for times past. And the replication of faces across the generations in old photographs.

And the comfort of a meal with friends who are like family, and the comfort of soured milk and rollmops, and the memories of childhood they stir.

And the sun, over water, with a fresh wind and clean air. And an ache in the knee from the walk, because it got you to this view.

And the feel of a newly shaved face, and the feel of a face after not bothering to shave over the weekend.

And giving advice, and being thanked. And listening and not saying anything. And being there when someone needs you for nothing but a hug, and for being there.

And a book you can disappear into, and emerge a little enriched. And the cold side of the pillow.

And there are more, many more small points of light. And when they shine together it pushes the darkness way back. And I need to remember they are there more often, because the dark is always looking to move forward.

And the light I have around me is too precious to let it be nullified by all the negatives. So shine on all you little lights. You shine on the world and make it all right.

I am not sure if I am not just being a pedantic old fart, and it is an accusation that HAS been levelled at me before, but have we lost the ability to show respect and courtesy, even to those we vehemently disagree with?

Once again, listening to the ‘Today’ programme on Radio 4, I became more and more frustrated, and therefore distracted from the content, by the inability of the interviewer/journalist (delete as appropriate – least insulting) to let a representative of The Anti-War Coalition actually finish a sentence.

It was rude, unnecessary, and disruptive to what could have been the presentation and questioning of an alternative viewpoint. If you invite someone onto a programme to respond to questions, surely it is sensible to at least listen to the whole answer before offering alternative views.

And it would have been less infuriating if the interruptions were to raise a valid point, rather than to hammer away endlessly at a minor and not particularly relevant point.

What was interesting was that, within the space of 15 minutes, an ‘establishment’ representative was interviewed, and not interrupted once. Go figure.

Now, I will always support the BBC, and will argue endlessly for their independence (too late?) and their fundamental lack of political bias BUT ….

It has become the standard that, to some extent irrespective of who it is being interviewed, no-one is allowed to finish a sentence. Whether it be ‘Today’, ‘Question  Time’, ‘Any Questions’, or any number of other magazine and ‘public service’ programmes provided by all broadcasters, the trend is the same.

I know politicians can prevaricate, or straight bullshit, and be vague beyond the depths of a pea-souper at times, but there is no excuse. Ask a question, and allow an answer. If it isn’t an answer, then say so and ask again. It makes the point more clearly than constant interruptions.

And get the balance right. Ideally don’t do it to anyone, but at least get the rudeness equalised across full range of participants (victims). There is a clear bias against those from non-governmental or establishment organisations, as if their opinion is somehow more suspect and therefore more ripe for challenge by interruption.

And to encapsulate the problem, when a woman discussing ‘locker-room’ banter is in conversation with two men, and she is the only one who has to struggle to complete a sentence, it says it all.

For the second time in as many weeks, I have been presented with the punishment for being carelessly smug about my ability to sort the truth from the tripe.

Although having nothing but sympathy for those caught by post and email scams, and nothing but contempt for those who target those who will fall for scams from innocence, ignorance, a good heart, or a need to be connected; I always wondered vaguely about how people still fell for them.

After all, there is endless publicity on TV and radio about them. And so many are so badly done. But they still work, and people still suffer. And the instant blame culture – most recently castergating Royal Mail – really doesn’t help.

But, at least I am aware, tuned in to their schemes, and incapable of being conned. Well, maybe.

Rule 1: never respond to official looking emails at 7.00am when you should be leaving for work, and when another 5 minutes thought would make it clear that it was a con. Thankfully, a 20 minute drive to work got the brain in gear, and the card details cancelled, with no harm done.

And a significant amount of embarrassment, silent and unshared, and a little less smugness. And relief that whoever was running the scam was not that quick off the mark.

And again today.  What initially appeared as an exposé of Kardashian publicity seeking, now most probably a hoax, and, without fully concentrating, I fell for the con. Not funny, not clever, decidedly tasteless, and suckered again.

And it’s only a couple of comparatively small items in the scheme of things. But it does stir the occasional concern. I spend a significant amount of time pontificating confidently on any number of issues; big and small, deadly serious and of no great relevance.

How much of what I feel I know, understand, rely on, base my attitude to circumstance on; how much is real? How true? How valid?

The joy of the internet is that all is there, the problem is validating it. If I checked every view, opinion, suggestion, for their historical and factual accuracy, I wouldn’t have time to have an opinion.

So I trust. I trust the people I know, although more so those I agree with. I distrust those who I see as antagonistic to my beliefs. I check for evidence with those sources that, in the past, have appeared reliable. And I suppose that is how the world works.

But each time I slip, and accept a hoax, or a half truth, it removes another brick from the foundations of my confident opinions. And the further away the beliefs are from my daily life, the more shaky they become.

My security – the eyes of the truth teller. Liars look away. But then, there are no eyes on the internet.

It lifted my heart yesterday when, with her concluding speech at the Tory Conference, Theresa May said:

“As a member of the government for the past 6 years, and at the heart of the decision-making process, I have to accept responsibility for the dire situation I now intend to resolve. I am sorry.”

Except, of course, she didn’t. There was no acknowledgement that she had been intimately involved for every problem, every lack of fairness, every lack of opportunity, every example of different rules for different people.

And yet, all of a sudden, trickle down economics is wrong. Industrial expansion led only by the private sector is wrong. Apparently, government can also invest in infrastructure because interest rates are at an all time low. Shame no-one spotted that before, or did they?

That speech was Labour-Lite, in all but name. Government investment, the exploitation and suffering of all but the few at the top, the imbalance in corporate governance. How about some original ideas?

Oh yes, grammar schools. Demonisation of foreign workers. That’s original, and guaranteed to bring people together.

Oh, and while we are talking about the Labour Party, or the new ‘nasty’ party, riven by divisions, let’s just get a little perspective here. We have just been through a sham of a referendum, tortured by lies, half-truths and prevarication, that happened because – and only because – your previous leader was terrified of the huge divisions within the Tory Party.

And the result? 37% of the electorate say we must leave the EU, and it suits you to go along with it, for now.

There is no honesty in your proposed programme, Theresa May. There is no honour in your stance as the supporter of the working classes. There is no truth in this change of direction.

Because, if there was, then this would have been said by you for the last 6 years, not just now when the two most visible architects of the pain are now all but disappeared, and certainly very quiet.

You can try to steal the ‘middle ground’, whatever that may be, by copying the intentions of the opposition, but you will be found out.

You will be found out because your party are not it’s natural bedfellows, because the actions won’t match the words, and because there is too much blood on your hands Lady Macbeth.

Well into the Tory conference, and I am positively glowing with the prospect of them looking after me. Theresa promised. I am her target audience. The totally strapped middle.

And so far …..

With the overarching bullshit regarding Brexit, and how the wide world is champing at the bit to deal with us rather than the whole of the EU, I remain confident that I am still in their radar. After all, she promised.

Grammar schools. Well my son is done with that, so its everyone else’s children who can fall through the net of selection. Or do they intend to equip each child with a ladder? Or maybe the intention is to prove that social mobility goes both ways.

After all, if you want industry to grow, you need an endless supply of the depressed and downtrodden to re-establish those Victorian boom times. And if the odd oik squeezes through and gets better educated, they will hopefully be dutifully grateful and vote Tory.

Brexit will bring freedom from regulation. Companies can be more flexible in their employment  processes. Wages can stay low. So that will stop pulling in the migrant workers to do the jobs that we don’t want to do because the wages are too low. No, hang on, that can’t be right, because she promised.

Our military will be protected from malicious prosecution. Now this gets interesting. Military action is fraught, frightening, confusing, and not amenable to calm appraisal of actions. But there is still an expectation of human rights. And of course this will no doubt work both ways, so the military organisations will also be freed from prosecution by their members.

Apparently we need more doctors, all of a sudden. Who knew? Maybe stop driving current doctors abroad to find a reasonable work / life balance. Maybe stop turning dedicated people into activists because they feel the NHS is threatened. I am starting to feel worried about these promises.

And now, those financially sensible targets, getting the country into the black, have gone out of the window. So, no more austerity? Well, not quite. That will continue, the end date has just become a little vaguer. After all, if you keep setting targets, and keep missing them, then you start to look a little incompetent. Much more of that and you could join Labour.

And, another new idea. Spending on large infrastructure projects to get the country’s industries moving forward. If only the Labour Party hadn’t copied you by saying a week ago, it would really sound original. And somehow this will increase borrowing, but not debt. Because they promised.

So, if I understand correctly, we are no longer being screwed by a Tory Party led by an out of touch élite, but being buoyed up and coddled by a caring, sharing, Grammar School educated – so that proves it! – worker lovers.

Comforting, isn’t it? No worries now. After all she promised.

I suppose it is common enough to be less than chipper on a Monday, but today is a corker. And the anger has arrived from all sides, with a vengeance.

An 11 year old with a beautiful soul, a bright and glorious child, emotionally contorted by a singular parent hell-bent on his own destructive agenda to the child’s detriment. So, every little bump becomes a mountain of tension and worry.

A mother, shining bright in determination and love, having to watch, and wait, and patch and console, and ache.

And mothers, and fathers, hiding in rubble, striving to protect children from the callous indifference of daily bombing raids – the result of third-party arguments played out in third party conflicts.

And fathers and mothers sending their children away, a hundred miles, a thousand miles, to be safer than they are at home; in hope more than expectation. And the exploiters waiting down the road, and the inaction of political expediency, and the numbers grow.

And the mothers and the fathers who take their children in their arms and flee, and sometimes land in a pause, a space of quiet. And then they are a problem, and a curse, and a threat to stability. And open hearts become a problem. And humanity becomes a justification for xenophobia.

And powers play deadly games with people’s lives, but in other countries. And lie, and justify, and use and abuse the truth for devious and deviant ends.

And far too many people are happy to take a slither, a fraction, a distorted sound bite to not have to think. Just to accept, and accuse and demean and slide back towards isolation and immorality.

And lies, and half-truths, and ancient animosities, and ego and arrogance, create more hate, and mistrust, and destruction, and a grounding for future conflicts.

It all revolves, and returns, and with more efficiency and more effect. And no lesson is learnt. And children suffer because their parents can’t protect them, because those that have the power are following a different agenda.

We are human beings. That means we should be humane. We should show humanity. It is the same word.

But it is ignored, by one bad parent, by  organisations, by governments, by nations.

I am angry. And I am angry because, whilst good and selfless hearts do strive to improve, those with the real power look on and strengthen the divide.

So, I stay angry.

I was just about to contact the World Wildlife Fund to add sexism to the list of seriously endangered species, but then, thankfully, I remembered the US presidential election race, and breathed a sigh of relief.

And having watched extended sections of the first ‘debate’, I am safe in the knowledge that it is alive and well and breathing boorishness all over the North American land mass.

Why, oh why, would a hugely talented, experienced and dedicated person put themselves forward for the highest position in the US, having worked in public service all their adult life, unless they were a lying woman? Beats me.

Why would an orange serial bankrupt repeatedly interrupt, shout over, prevaricate, obfuscate, avoid, distract, ignore, deny, deviate and bluster, unless he was an honest and upright man. Beats me.

This should have been a wholly uneven contest. Preparation versus bullshit, facts versus fabrication, professionalism versus buffoonery.

The fact that it is happening at all is beyond ridiculous. The fact that both of the candidates are still standing is more worrying. Anyone with a modicum of self-respect would have backed away after the opening salvos, accepted that they were beaten, and gone home to Bill.

Come on Hillary, let’s be realistic here. Yes, you are experienced, skilled, capable, and possessing a back catalogue of achievements that would shame nearly all of us, but you – how can I put this without giving offence – haven’t got what it takes to lead. And you lost at birth.

There is only one reason that the comedy of you opponent is still there, and still attracting support, and that is because you haven’t got the balls – literally.

Okay, you were decidedly off-kilter with your emails, and didn’t handle the fallout very well. And you have been associated with an institution with a less than glowing reputation, but hey, who hasn’t?

But on the fundamental issue of trust and honesty, there really is no contest. Every time he opens his mouth a lie emerges. And it doesn’t matter how many times any number of people fact-check him, it doesn’t seem to dent the armour.

I have to accept that Trump has no moral centre, or sides. But how can so many people see him as the solution to their disillusionment? Especially when so many of the problems they are suffering from were instigated and exacerbated by the party he purports to represent.

And the only thing I keep coming back to is Hillary Clinton is a woman. And for large sectors of the US that is a step too far. Obama was a huge reach, and one they should be proud of, based on their recent history. Hillary is too much for them to take straight afterwards.

They obviously need a little rest with some reactionary leadership. Although, Michelle Obama would have been an interesting option!

If the farce of a political discourse in the US is not a good enough reason to bring about a fundamental realignment of power and responsibility, let us look a little closer to home.

Two examples in recent weeks have proved, yet again, that if you put a man in a position of authority, he will over-reach and prove his inadequacy.

A senior MP, chairman of a committee investigating, amongst other things, prostitution in its varied forms, is caught paying for rent boys. Stupid, naive and arrogant.

A football manager, presented with the top job in his profession, and career, can’t handle the £3 million salary without trying to enhance it, and boast about rule bending into the bargain. Stupid, greedy, naive and arrogant.

And the list goes on, and on. And I search my memory for the last time that a woman, in a position of power and authority, was dismissed in disgrace due to greed, stupidity or arrogance.

I would never say that all women in power are above reproach. I have less trust and faith in our current Thatcher-Lite leader than I had in the original, but I am positive she won’t be caught out with anything other than political criminality.

What is the problem for men? Really, what is their problem? They have held the power across every sector of life since records began, and have fought tooth and nail to retain that as the status quo.

And yet they cannot keep their metaphysical or actual dicks in their pants.

Yes, I know there are plenty of men who have served high office in every area with honour, or at least with honesty. And yet there are endless lists of those that have fallen foul of their assumption that, if they can reach the heights, they are somehow immune from the norms that the rest of us see as appropriate.

I find the methods used to ‘out’ these numbskulls significantly less than attractive, but you would think that, with all that has gone on before, they would think twice before getting snared in yet another exposé.

Time for a change, chaps. Time to accept that you are not above the common hoard, that you need to abide by the same rules as the rest of us. Or we will have to let the women run things. And then where would we be?

Better off, that’s where.

 

Shame on you Mr Corbyn. You have now been re-elected, with a bigger majority, as leader of your party. You have had 3 or 4 days now, so why have you not got all the details – the costs, the organisational structures, the Terms and Conditions – done, dusted and at your finger tips?

Shame on you Mr Corbyn. You won the election, and beat the coup, and have boosted the membership of the party to be the largest in Europe – sorry, swear word – and yet you still insist on sticking to your fundamental beliefs in unilateral nuclear disarmament, investment in the country to build our way out of stagnation, not stigmatizing immigrants.

Shame on you Mr Corbyn. Instead of falling into line with the media – ‘We like to do our interviews live’ – by doing an interview recorded last night so that you could have some control over how your statements are presented, rather than allowing media outlets to cut and paste as they see fit to squeeze an explanation into a sound bite that suits THEIR narrative. Don’t worry, they will do their best to get the extremist Corbyn train back on track soon.

Shame on you Mr Corbyn. As you did the first time round, you have said you want to move forward, put the arguments and splits behind us, create a new consensus in the party to do what needs to be done to beat the Tories in the next election. And yet those that looked to bring you down before you started seem unable to accept this underhand approach. After all, why should they? Because they are right, or certainly right of centre. And that has been such a successful position in the last two elections.

Shame on you Mr Corbyn. For enthusing a new wave of party members. For actually having the cheek to propose a real alternative to ‘screw the defenseless’ policies. And to attempt to approach political debate in a – heaven forbid – civilised way, rather than fitting into the media template that manages the current discourse.

Shame, shame, shame.