The Pantmawr Inn
Cardiff Council's Planning Committee voted, quite rightly, to reject plans to demolish the Pantmawr Inn and build urban style flats and town houses on the land. However, the applicants - Charles Church and Mitchells & Butlers and now appealed. A public enquiry is being launched. The fact is, the Pantmawr Inn is the ONLY community amenity within easy walking distance for residents of the Pantmawr Garden Village. If the pub is lost, there will be no community focal point.
We all keep banging on about kids roaming the streets, and people gambling and all the rest of it - well to be honest, I'm not suprised. The Pantmawr Inn provides a safe space for people of all ages to socialise, meet friends, hold events, hold meetings for local groups and so on. Demolish the Pantmawr Inn and the result will be over 1000 residents with no where to go, and nothing to do. And that's only one objection....
Facebook group here.
The Three Arches
Rumours have been abounding for years that The Three Arches is under threat of closure - with plans for a hotel for the site. I worked at the pub one summer a few years ago, and it was thriving - busy with meals and drinks throughout the day. Now don't get me wrong, hotels are jolly handy for holidays and business trips, but why there?? Who would EVER want to stay there? There's not much to do in the area apart from wander round the lake. It's not even close to town...If any one knows the fate of the pub, do get in touch.
Facebook group here.
The Vulcan
God have mercy. The Vulcan is Cardiff's last REAL spit and sawdust pub. From what I understand it's due to be knocked down June 2009 so that greedy developers can build YET MORE FLATS in the area....There are THOUSANDS of empty flats in Cardiff...THOUSANDS...what do the developers expect to gain??
Facebook group here.
I heart pubs....
Friday, 30 May 2008
Thursday, 29 May 2008
"Blame the immigrants"
BNP Cllr Richard Barnbrook posted the following article here. Why is the Daily Telegraph allowing Barnbrook a regular column?
This article is about the stabbing of Rob Knox in Sidcup and blames "immigrants".....
I have had enough of political correctness. I have had enough of people being afraid to actually say what they really want to say. Yes....It is the immigrants. Labour closed down free speech and criminalised people for telling the truth. Well Labour are in a state of total collapse.
Soon they will be finished and not a moment too soon. Nobody needs to listen to them anymore. The Police chiefs should simply ignore them and not follow orders to boost statistics by criminalising motorists. The real crime is on the streets, and it is the young people who are being attacked every day now by knives and guns.
Well let me tell you that times are changing. This is our city and we are going to take it back. We are going to take all the weapons of the streets even if that means sending in the Army to do it.
The do-gooder liberal human rights lawyers can scream all they want. Human Rights to me, means people being safe to walk down the street. Liberalism to me, means being free from knife and gun attacks. A free society is one where the police can do their job the way they want to do it.
Today I went to Sidcup and spoke to all the young people there who were attacked on Friday night outside the Metro Bar. It was a blood bath. This will affect them for a long time no matter how tough they are. Even SAS men get affected by Post Traumatic Stress. But our British young people are a resilient lot. They will get over it and the best thing they can do is supress it and move on. The last thing they should do is start going to those disgusting lefty therapists for counselling to relive the trauma. Look at that word "therapist" the rapist....and that is what they do....the rape of the mind.
I have invited all of the young people there to come down to City Hall this Tuesday for 9:30 in the morning. This knife crime has to be stopped. If I have to bring a 100 young people into Boris's office then that is what I will do. He has made a promise to get the knives off the streets. Well we want action Boris. We don't want fancy words or soundbites. I also want any mother and fathers who have been affected to come down too. It is time to start listening to the people again before some other family's life is wrecked.
You can call me on 07869 243 129 and if I can't take your call then leave a message and I promise I will call you back so that you can come down to City Hall this Tuesday for 9:30".
Amusingly, no young people turned up - http://torytroll.blogspot.com/2008/05/richard-barnbrook-shunned-by-london.html
This article is about the stabbing of Rob Knox in Sidcup and blames "immigrants".....
I have had enough of political correctness. I have had enough of people being afraid to actually say what they really want to say. Yes....It is the immigrants. Labour closed down free speech and criminalised people for telling the truth. Well Labour are in a state of total collapse.
Soon they will be finished and not a moment too soon. Nobody needs to listen to them anymore. The Police chiefs should simply ignore them and not follow orders to boost statistics by criminalising motorists. The real crime is on the streets, and it is the young people who are being attacked every day now by knives and guns.
Well let me tell you that times are changing. This is our city and we are going to take it back. We are going to take all the weapons of the streets even if that means sending in the Army to do it.
The do-gooder liberal human rights lawyers can scream all they want. Human Rights to me, means people being safe to walk down the street. Liberalism to me, means being free from knife and gun attacks. A free society is one where the police can do their job the way they want to do it.
Today I went to Sidcup and spoke to all the young people there who were attacked on Friday night outside the Metro Bar. It was a blood bath. This will affect them for a long time no matter how tough they are. Even SAS men get affected by Post Traumatic Stress. But our British young people are a resilient lot. They will get over it and the best thing they can do is supress it and move on. The last thing they should do is start going to those disgusting lefty therapists for counselling to relive the trauma. Look at that word "therapist" the rapist....and that is what they do....the rape of the mind.
I have invited all of the young people there to come down to City Hall this Tuesday for 9:30 in the morning. This knife crime has to be stopped. If I have to bring a 100 young people into Boris's office then that is what I will do. He has made a promise to get the knives off the streets. Well we want action Boris. We don't want fancy words or soundbites. I also want any mother and fathers who have been affected to come down too. It is time to start listening to the people again before some other family's life is wrecked.
You can call me on 07869 243 129 and if I can't take your call then leave a message and I promise I will call you back so that you can come down to City Hall this Tuesday for 9:30".
Amusingly, no young people turned up - http://torytroll.blogspot.com/2008/05/richard-barnbrook-shunned-by-london.html
DANGER! Mortar Boards!
What in the name of all that is holy is this country coming to? Graduates now not allowed to throw their hats? WHAT?"Get hurt"??? Is that a joke?
If I was a student at Anglia Ruskin, I'd be demanding a portion of my fees back.
I heart Jeremy Clarkson
Clarkson's been bragging again....
To be fair, if I'd driven a Bugatti Veyron at 186mph I'd probably brag about it too...who wouldn't?
The Veyron is like sex on wheels. It's a stunning piece of engineering, and let's be honest, if there were some roads in this wretched country where we could really see what engines like this could do, he wouldn't have felt the need to do it in East London would he?
Anyway, wouldn't you rather it was Clarkson doing 186mph than a spotty 17 year old who passed his test yesterday?
Wednesday, 28 May 2008
Tagging Sucks
The Tate Modern is currently hosting a street art exhibition, and whilst the Tate is often a ground for grumbling traditionalists to have a whinge – is a fluorescent tube light really art etc – I rather like graffiti – in fact, I like it A LOT. But I’m not a fan of ‘taggers’.
Of course, there’s always that age olde question of, is graffiti art? (and is ‘tagging’ art?). The olde ‘what is art’ question is not a simple one to answer, and whilst some traditionalists will forever wander round modern art galleries loudly lambasting pickled cows or messy beds, how often do they ask the simple questions?
1) WHAT IS THE NATURE OF AN ART OBJECT? What distinguishes art from non-art? What good is it? What is the function of the object? How can I tell a good one? A question of taste?
2) WHAT IS AN AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE? What goes on inside us when we encounter an art object (cognitive, sensory, emotional etc). What makes such encounters worth having or seeing? Does it cultivate something in us? Is it educational?
3) HOW DOES ART DEVELOP AS A SOCIAL INSTITUTION? Are the things we value about art dependent on what someone decides is valuable? Whose art are we talking about? Is art a timeless concept, or one whose meaning changes over time? Can or should art be critical of society? Does it give us a vision of a romantic or better world?
4) WHAT DOES THE ARTIST DO THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT NON-ARTISTS DO? Art as a practice – what is an artistic creation? Is it purely a matter of technique, or does it involve genius and inspiration? What is the nature of the creative process? What role do intention and self expression play? For art to be art, is an audience necessary? What is communicated to the audience?
More questions than answers perhaps – but is that the very nature of what art is? Something that raises more questions than answers?
One of the questions that I would like answered – mainly for my own sanity – is the difference between graffiti and tagging. Whilst I think there is a big difference, I haven’t yet been able to rationalise this difference, and why I like one and not the other. Graffiti can be beautiful. It can raise important cultural, political and social questions. It can be ‘technically’ impressive. It can brighten up an area. It makes people think about issues they may not have thought of. Providing it’s not cleaned off walls by local councils, it can be timeless. It can give us a vision of a better world. It involves creativity and inspiration. And so on. What about tagging? Some tags – the more intricate ones – can be beautiful. Some can be ‘techically’ impressive. In fact, it ticks most, if not all, of the graffiti boxes, but it irritates me. You know the ones – like where kids scratch their tag onto a train window, or with one single can of paint, scrawl their tag on a garage door. It seems to me that little thought goes into this. Very few tags provide me with an aesthetically pleasing experience. I think one thing I don’t like about ‘tagging’ is its apparent lack of skill.
Whilst I don’t think these sorts of discussions need to necessarily be grounded in theory of any sort – thinking about theory can raise yet even more questions.
Plato and Aristotle (very difficult to distinguish between the two’s work) believed that the essence of art (assuming tagging is art) is mimesis – a sense of perceptual realism – something that mirrors reality. I rather like these thinkers’ ideas, but I don’t think that art necessarily always mirrors reality – in fact, far from it. Much of art – including graffiti, does and can mirror reality…but tagging doesn’t – what’s in a name?
Later in history, Renaissance writers argued that art is not just a technical skill, and later thinkers’ attention focused on the nature of the aesthetic experience, for example, Abbe Batteux (1746) who believed that fine art should be defined as something which brings pleasure for its own sake (connected to what Aristotle thought about art and beauty). Graffiti brings me an enormous aesthetic pleasure. Tagging doesn’t. Not only does tagging involve next to no skill, it brings no pleasure. None.
Romanticists believed that creating art is far more than just a reliance on rules, and that social inspiration is required to create an artwork – a special power of imagination. In this context, the possession of inspiration is what is meant by genius. Kant’s successor Hegel agreed with this, and took the stance that art embodies freedom (and a sense that people who can produce art are of a higher social status). If this is so, what imagination or inspiration do taggers have? It is quite clear that plenty of graffiti artists create inspired pieces – presumably aroused by their individual imagination and thoughts. But again, I’m not sure that taggers possess this inspiration or imagination.
Psychoanalysis and social theory (Freud, Marx, feminism etc) had a significant impact on those thinking about art and aesthetics, and thought shifted to the idea that artists were attached to a certain culture and therefore expressing deep psychological structures and the values of a particular class. If this is so, what does this say about taggers?...
Let’s forget theory for a second…Britain’s most prominent graffiti artists – by the name of Banksy – is probably the best known artist in his field. Best known by his work of course. Despite trying to keep his identity a secret, the Evening Standard printed pictures of him a few years ago. Banksy’s portolio is impressive. Not only are his stencil’s impressive – they raise important questions and issues, they’re aesthetically pleasing, they provide often utopian imagery, and challenge existing social norms. Examples include the kissing policemen, the ‘by order of the national highways agency this wall is a designated graffiti area’, ‘what are you looking at’ (aimed at a CCTV camera), ‘this is not a photo opportunity’, stencils on the segregation wall in Palestine, Queen Victoria sitting on a hooker’s face, ‘Boring’ on the South Bank, and many, many more. Near most of Banksy’s pieces is his familiar tag. Not exciting. Not skilled. But merely denotes that it’s his work. Those tags I don’t mind. Not because they’re Banksy’s, but because they’re merely a signatory to his work.
Tagging sucks. Anyone disagree?
Here’s what Banksy has to say about it all…
Graffiti is not the lowest form of art. Despite having to creep about at night and lie to your mum it’s actually the most honest artform available. There is no elitism or hype, it exhibits on some of the best walls a town has to offer, and nobody is put off by the price of admission. A wall has always been the best place to publish your work. The people who run our cities don’t understand graffiti because they think nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit. But if you just value money then your opinion is worthless. They say graffiti frightens people and is symbolic of the decline in society, but graffiti is only dangerous in the mind of three types of people; politicians, advertising executives and graffiti writers. The people who truly deface our neighbourhoods are the companies that scrawl their giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff. They expect to be able to shout their message in your face from every available surface but you’re never allowed to answer back. Well, they started this fight and the wall is the weapon of choice to hit them back. Some people become cops because they want to make the world a better place. Some people become vandals because they want to make the world a better looking place.
Of course, there’s always that age olde question of, is graffiti art? (and is ‘tagging’ art?). The olde ‘what is art’ question is not a simple one to answer, and whilst some traditionalists will forever wander round modern art galleries loudly lambasting pickled cows or messy beds, how often do they ask the simple questions?
1) WHAT IS THE NATURE OF AN ART OBJECT? What distinguishes art from non-art? What good is it? What is the function of the object? How can I tell a good one? A question of taste?
2) WHAT IS AN AESTHETIC EXPERIENCE? What goes on inside us when we encounter an art object (cognitive, sensory, emotional etc). What makes such encounters worth having or seeing? Does it cultivate something in us? Is it educational?
3) HOW DOES ART DEVELOP AS A SOCIAL INSTITUTION? Are the things we value about art dependent on what someone decides is valuable? Whose art are we talking about? Is art a timeless concept, or one whose meaning changes over time? Can or should art be critical of society? Does it give us a vision of a romantic or better world?
4) WHAT DOES THE ARTIST DO THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT NON-ARTISTS DO? Art as a practice – what is an artistic creation? Is it purely a matter of technique, or does it involve genius and inspiration? What is the nature of the creative process? What role do intention and self expression play? For art to be art, is an audience necessary? What is communicated to the audience?
More questions than answers perhaps – but is that the very nature of what art is? Something that raises more questions than answers?
One of the questions that I would like answered – mainly for my own sanity – is the difference between graffiti and tagging. Whilst I think there is a big difference, I haven’t yet been able to rationalise this difference, and why I like one and not the other. Graffiti can be beautiful. It can raise important cultural, political and social questions. It can be ‘technically’ impressive. It can brighten up an area. It makes people think about issues they may not have thought of. Providing it’s not cleaned off walls by local councils, it can be timeless. It can give us a vision of a better world. It involves creativity and inspiration. And so on. What about tagging? Some tags – the more intricate ones – can be beautiful. Some can be ‘techically’ impressive. In fact, it ticks most, if not all, of the graffiti boxes, but it irritates me. You know the ones – like where kids scratch their tag onto a train window, or with one single can of paint, scrawl their tag on a garage door. It seems to me that little thought goes into this. Very few tags provide me with an aesthetically pleasing experience. I think one thing I don’t like about ‘tagging’ is its apparent lack of skill.
Whilst I don’t think these sorts of discussions need to necessarily be grounded in theory of any sort – thinking about theory can raise yet even more questions.
Plato and Aristotle (very difficult to distinguish between the two’s work) believed that the essence of art (assuming tagging is art) is mimesis – a sense of perceptual realism – something that mirrors reality. I rather like these thinkers’ ideas, but I don’t think that art necessarily always mirrors reality – in fact, far from it. Much of art – including graffiti, does and can mirror reality…but tagging doesn’t – what’s in a name?
Later in history, Renaissance writers argued that art is not just a technical skill, and later thinkers’ attention focused on the nature of the aesthetic experience, for example, Abbe Batteux (1746) who believed that fine art should be defined as something which brings pleasure for its own sake (connected to what Aristotle thought about art and beauty). Graffiti brings me an enormous aesthetic pleasure. Tagging doesn’t. Not only does tagging involve next to no skill, it brings no pleasure. None.
Romanticists believed that creating art is far more than just a reliance on rules, and that social inspiration is required to create an artwork – a special power of imagination. In this context, the possession of inspiration is what is meant by genius. Kant’s successor Hegel agreed with this, and took the stance that art embodies freedom (and a sense that people who can produce art are of a higher social status). If this is so, what imagination or inspiration do taggers have? It is quite clear that plenty of graffiti artists create inspired pieces – presumably aroused by their individual imagination and thoughts. But again, I’m not sure that taggers possess this inspiration or imagination.
Psychoanalysis and social theory (Freud, Marx, feminism etc) had a significant impact on those thinking about art and aesthetics, and thought shifted to the idea that artists were attached to a certain culture and therefore expressing deep psychological structures and the values of a particular class. If this is so, what does this say about taggers?...
Let’s forget theory for a second…Britain’s most prominent graffiti artists – by the name of Banksy – is probably the best known artist in his field. Best known by his work of course. Despite trying to keep his identity a secret, the Evening Standard printed pictures of him a few years ago. Banksy’s portolio is impressive. Not only are his stencil’s impressive – they raise important questions and issues, they’re aesthetically pleasing, they provide often utopian imagery, and challenge existing social norms. Examples include the kissing policemen, the ‘by order of the national highways agency this wall is a designated graffiti area’, ‘what are you looking at’ (aimed at a CCTV camera), ‘this is not a photo opportunity’, stencils on the segregation wall in Palestine, Queen Victoria sitting on a hooker’s face, ‘Boring’ on the South Bank, and many, many more. Near most of Banksy’s pieces is his familiar tag. Not exciting. Not skilled. But merely denotes that it’s his work. Those tags I don’t mind. Not because they’re Banksy’s, but because they’re merely a signatory to his work.
Tagging sucks. Anyone disagree?
Here’s what Banksy has to say about it all…
Graffiti is not the lowest form of art. Despite having to creep about at night and lie to your mum it’s actually the most honest artform available. There is no elitism or hype, it exhibits on some of the best walls a town has to offer, and nobody is put off by the price of admission. A wall has always been the best place to publish your work. The people who run our cities don’t understand graffiti because they think nothing has the right to exist unless it makes a profit. But if you just value money then your opinion is worthless. They say graffiti frightens people and is symbolic of the decline in society, but graffiti is only dangerous in the mind of three types of people; politicians, advertising executives and graffiti writers. The people who truly deface our neighbourhoods are the companies that scrawl their giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we buy their stuff. They expect to be able to shout their message in your face from every available surface but you’re never allowed to answer back. Well, they started this fight and the wall is the weapon of choice to hit them back. Some people become cops because they want to make the world a better place. Some people become vandals because they want to make the world a better looking place.
Wednesday, 14 May 2008
Internet etiquette
I recently posted a link to this blog on a website, and almost immediately, the website owner retorted with
"If you insist on posting links to your blog on my website, at least have the decency to link to the original article from within your post. It's just good manners".
(In fact, I didn't stumble across her site until after I'd published the post!)
What she says suggests a form of Internet Etiquette exists - something I don't think I've ever even thought about before. The link I posted was relevent to the discussion, and I just figured that readers of her website would be interested....(or not!!). So I figured I'd better find out a bit more....so put 'internet etiquette' into Google, to be met with thousands of pages about this very topic! I feel rather ignorant! For more on 'Netiquette' click here.
"If you insist on posting links to your blog on my website, at least have the decency to link to the original article from within your post. It's just good manners".
(In fact, I didn't stumble across her site until after I'd published the post!)
What she says suggests a form of Internet Etiquette exists - something I don't think I've ever even thought about before. The link I posted was relevent to the discussion, and I just figured that readers of her website would be interested....(or not!!). So I figured I'd better find out a bit more....so put 'internet etiquette' into Google, to be met with thousands of pages about this very topic! I feel rather ignorant! For more on 'Netiquette' click here.
National Student Survey - pressured to be positive?
After students at Kingston University ringing alarm bells that staff were encouraging them to score the institution positively in the National Student Survey, hundreds of students have been contacting the BBC with similar tales.
I was lucky enough to be in the first group of undergrads to be subjected to the survey in 2005 at Goldsmiths. And staff there continuously told us to rate the College positively. Their arguments for it were that if the College kept its excellent reputation, our degrees would be more valuable in the future. Personally, I ignored their advice, and answered the survey honestly.
The National Student Survey results are used by institutions and Students' Unions for quality enhancement purposes, as well as being a really useful resource for prospective students deciding where to study. Institutions who use the data effectively can flag areas for improvement, and highlight areas of best practice to then be disseminated around the institution. Students' Unions can use the data to inform their campaigns and representation activities, as well as using the data to inform their Student Written Submissions if the institution is due for review/audit. Recently I have been involved in writing a Student Written Submission and the NSS data was the single most valuable data source available - to be used of course with other evidence bases.
If institutions honestly think that by pushing students to be positive in their NSS responses, I suspect they'd be gravely mistaken. After studying at undergraduate level for three years, final year students will have developed analytical and evaluative skills, and will do as they please!
In the past some students have accused Ipsos Mori (who coordinate the survey) of using very aggressive marketing tactics to get students to complete the survey - including emailing / texting / phoning students who don't respond. There's even a Facebook group called 'SCREW THE NATIONAL STUDENT SURVEY'. (Students can opt out however). Institutions NSS results cannot be published unless they achieve a 40% response rate (that's massive in real terms - pollsters like Gallup and YouGov struggle to pick up 10%), which is why students are inundated with various marketing messages. One student on the BBC website from Bournemouth University complained via the university's website that he had been disappointed to have a lecture interrupted to "pressurise us into rating the university well in the National Student Survey". I suspect many institutions interrupt teaching to encourage students to complete the survey, but institutions should never fall into the trap of encouraging students to be positive - they should be able to be honest. Without student feedback, universities cannot improve.
Kingston have obviously made a mistake. Rather than causing the institution to be viewed more positively, their behaviour has had quite the opposite affect.
I was lucky enough to be in the first group of undergrads to be subjected to the survey in 2005 at Goldsmiths. And staff there continuously told us to rate the College positively. Their arguments for it were that if the College kept its excellent reputation, our degrees would be more valuable in the future. Personally, I ignored their advice, and answered the survey honestly.
The National Student Survey results are used by institutions and Students' Unions for quality enhancement purposes, as well as being a really useful resource for prospective students deciding where to study. Institutions who use the data effectively can flag areas for improvement, and highlight areas of best practice to then be disseminated around the institution. Students' Unions can use the data to inform their campaigns and representation activities, as well as using the data to inform their Student Written Submissions if the institution is due for review/audit. Recently I have been involved in writing a Student Written Submission and the NSS data was the single most valuable data source available - to be used of course with other evidence bases.
If institutions honestly think that by pushing students to be positive in their NSS responses, I suspect they'd be gravely mistaken. After studying at undergraduate level for three years, final year students will have developed analytical and evaluative skills, and will do as they please!
In the past some students have accused Ipsos Mori (who coordinate the survey) of using very aggressive marketing tactics to get students to complete the survey - including emailing / texting / phoning students who don't respond. There's even a Facebook group called 'SCREW THE NATIONAL STUDENT SURVEY'. (Students can opt out however). Institutions NSS results cannot be published unless they achieve a 40% response rate (that's massive in real terms - pollsters like Gallup and YouGov struggle to pick up 10%), which is why students are inundated with various marketing messages. One student on the BBC website from Bournemouth University complained via the university's website that he had been disappointed to have a lecture interrupted to "pressurise us into rating the university well in the National Student Survey". I suspect many institutions interrupt teaching to encourage students to complete the survey, but institutions should never fall into the trap of encouraging students to be positive - they should be able to be honest. Without student feedback, universities cannot improve.
Kingston have obviously made a mistake. Rather than causing the institution to be viewed more positively, their behaviour has had quite the opposite affect.
How many people would have to panic buy carrots to create a global shortage?
Tuesday, 13 May 2008
Oh to go back to the 1990s
Knocking about in the 1990s? This took me back...
1) You once used Wella Plum mousse or Sun In in your hair and you thought was totally original and stylish
2 ) You thought blue mascara looked good on EVERYONE
3) You could do or tried to do the Prodigy step
4) You owned or longed for an Adidas three stripe tracksuit
5) You owned a compilation tape with TOP TUNES such as "Mr Vain", What is love" and "Rhythm is a dancer" on it
6) Hour long debates on who was better? East 17 or Take That
7) You judged a girl on who she fancied from Take That! Robbie: you were cool, Gary Barlow: you were not!)
8) For all you die hard East 17 fans: "Outside it's raining, inside it's wet!"
9) You owned a pair of Nike Air Max
10) Going into town with £5, getting the bus there and back, lunch and a top with it!
11) Running on the spot dancing!
12) You wore leggings/cycling shorts with long t-shirts
13) You owned a Bennetton/NafNaf jumper
14)You owned scrunchies in an array of colours
15) You went to or dreamed about going to a Smash Hits concert
16) You bought Smash Hits for the song lyrics and the immense amount of stickers that you would stick everywhere!
17) You had a pen pal
18) You watched Sweet Valley High after school
19) Then on a Saturday afternoon you watched Catchphrase, Gladiators, Generation Game, Noels House Party and then Casualty
20) You wore black opaque tights with a wrap round skirt
21) Just 17 and More magazines had the best problem pages
22) 10p crisps!
23) A grey Fruit of the Loom jumper was a must have
24) Sharkie & George were the crimebusters of the sea
25) Puffa jackets
26) You used the line "it's a free country" every day
27) Do the Bartman "i didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything"
28) Impulse body spray
29) Woodies alco pops were the best thing EVER!
30) Don't forget your toothbrush and Big Breakfast with Chris Evans
31) You had at least one troll
32) You know the dance to Macarena and Saturday Night. You also tried to scat like Scatman John!
33) You watched Baywatch and longed for the day that Eddie & Shauna got together! You fancied Eddie (Billy Warlock) too!
34) You watched Byker Grove
35) You went into Body Shop to put on Vanilla or White Musk perfumes
36) Shellsuits & bumbags!
37) You longed to live in Beverley Hills 90210
38) Fruit shaped soaps that usually came from Body Shop for your birthdays
39) You owned the TLC album
40) Fruit salads and black jacks!
41) Strike it lucky on a sunday night with Michael Barrymore when he was straight & married
42) Chain letters
43) You had fake ID
44) Slouch socks
45) Skip it game (loop round your foot you had to jump over)
46) Pogs!
47) When starburst were called Opal fruits
48) Sour nerds
49) Clip on earrings
50) Magic steps clarke shoes (princess in the woods advert)
51) Cheap eye showdow sets of gross colours
52) Peel off Tinkerbell nail varnish
53) Timmy tears baby doll
54) Sylvanian families
55) Drawing Nike ticks everywhere
56) Playing Bulldog
57) LA lights (trainers)
58) Transparant coloured visors with the elastic which were just cool
59) Shag bands (& what it meant if you broke someones)
60) Edd the duck
61) 5 alive & Umbongo
62) wanting glasses, trying to fake the eye test, or wanting braces.
63) Fringes that came from the back of the head.
64) Easter bonnets
65) Having to make a miniture garden in school
66) Making bookmarks & wanting to buy absolutely anything from the years school book stall.
67) Chip, biff and Kipper books (what names!!!)
68) Cullotte shorts that made your arse look huge
69) Waistcoats, mainly denim
70) Making perfume out of water and flower petals, never worked
71) Puddlelane books .... Mr Go to bed with the dripping water on his toe
72) Baby G watches and the watches with blue water in with floating objects
73) They looked like gameboys but they were really water games.
74) Bike spoke beads and lights, usually free with Frosties
75) Everyone that went on holiday had to come back with a multi coloured hair wrap
76) Had to buy your clothes from Tammy Girl
77) Jem girl and Heman
78) Care bears
79) Desk tidies were cool!
80) Rollar skates with the stopper on the front, impossible to use.
81)Animal shaped slippers, the bigger the better.
82) Crimping your hair, afro style
83) Yoyo's .... around the worls & making it sleep
84) Tamagotchi's, little annoying bastards
85) Forever friends
86) Flask with holder was a must on every bike, for the long cycle rides!!
87) Hard lunch boxes
88) Live & Kicking on a saturday morning ... Zoe Ball!
89) Now 35 was the album of the time with Gangsters Paradise being the tune you had to know the words to.
90) Youth club
91) White cotton briefs with either disney characters or forever friend on. (Marks n sparks pack of 3)
92) Strawberry liquid toothpaste
93) Fruitina tins in pack lunches
94) Alfabetti Spagetti
95) Turkey drummers
96) Guess who board game ( fat ugly ginger guy with goaty, Bill)
97) Wanting to name your child of the future Cloe or Page
98) Magic shell chocolate sauce which went hard when squirted on ice cream.
99) Pagers were the latest in communication technology
100) Mittens or gloves on a string which was threaded through the arms of your coat.
1) You once used Wella Plum mousse or Sun In in your hair and you thought was totally original and stylish
2 ) You thought blue mascara looked good on EVERYONE
3) You could do or tried to do the Prodigy step
4) You owned or longed for an Adidas three stripe tracksuit
5) You owned a compilation tape with TOP TUNES such as "Mr Vain", What is love" and "Rhythm is a dancer" on it
6) Hour long debates on who was better? East 17 or Take That
7) You judged a girl on who she fancied from Take That! Robbie: you were cool, Gary Barlow: you were not!)
8) For all you die hard East 17 fans: "Outside it's raining, inside it's wet!"
9) You owned a pair of Nike Air Max
10) Going into town with £5, getting the bus there and back, lunch and a top with it!
11) Running on the spot dancing!
12) You wore leggings/cycling shorts with long t-shirts
13) You owned a Bennetton/NafNaf jumper
14)You owned scrunchies in an array of colours
15) You went to or dreamed about going to a Smash Hits concert
16) You bought Smash Hits for the song lyrics and the immense amount of stickers that you would stick everywhere!
17) You had a pen pal
18) You watched Sweet Valley High after school
19) Then on a Saturday afternoon you watched Catchphrase, Gladiators, Generation Game, Noels House Party and then Casualty
20) You wore black opaque tights with a wrap round skirt
21) Just 17 and More magazines had the best problem pages
22) 10p crisps!
23) A grey Fruit of the Loom jumper was a must have
24) Sharkie & George were the crimebusters of the sea
25) Puffa jackets
26) You used the line "it's a free country" every day
27) Do the Bartman "i didn't do it, nobody saw me do it, you can't prove anything"
28) Impulse body spray
29) Woodies alco pops were the best thing EVER!
30) Don't forget your toothbrush and Big Breakfast with Chris Evans
31) You had at least one troll
32) You know the dance to Macarena and Saturday Night. You also tried to scat like Scatman John!
33) You watched Baywatch and longed for the day that Eddie & Shauna got together! You fancied Eddie (Billy Warlock) too!
34) You watched Byker Grove
35) You went into Body Shop to put on Vanilla or White Musk perfumes
36) Shellsuits & bumbags!
37) You longed to live in Beverley Hills 90210
38) Fruit shaped soaps that usually came from Body Shop for your birthdays
39) You owned the TLC album
40) Fruit salads and black jacks!
41) Strike it lucky on a sunday night with Michael Barrymore when he was straight & married
42) Chain letters
43) You had fake ID
44) Slouch socks
45) Skip it game (loop round your foot you had to jump over)
46) Pogs!
47) When starburst were called Opal fruits
48) Sour nerds
49) Clip on earrings
50) Magic steps clarke shoes (princess in the woods advert)
51) Cheap eye showdow sets of gross colours
52) Peel off Tinkerbell nail varnish
53) Timmy tears baby doll
54) Sylvanian families
55) Drawing Nike ticks everywhere
56) Playing Bulldog
57) LA lights (trainers)
58) Transparant coloured visors with the elastic which were just cool
59) Shag bands (& what it meant if you broke someones)
60) Edd the duck
61) 5 alive & Umbongo
62) wanting glasses, trying to fake the eye test, or wanting braces.
63) Fringes that came from the back of the head.
64) Easter bonnets
65) Having to make a miniture garden in school
66) Making bookmarks & wanting to buy absolutely anything from the years school book stall.
67) Chip, biff and Kipper books (what names!!!)
68) Cullotte shorts that made your arse look huge
69) Waistcoats, mainly denim
70) Making perfume out of water and flower petals, never worked
71) Puddlelane books .... Mr Go to bed with the dripping water on his toe
72) Baby G watches and the watches with blue water in with floating objects
73) They looked like gameboys but they were really water games.
74) Bike spoke beads and lights, usually free with Frosties
75) Everyone that went on holiday had to come back with a multi coloured hair wrap
76) Had to buy your clothes from Tammy Girl
77) Jem girl and Heman
78) Care bears
79) Desk tidies were cool!
80) Rollar skates with the stopper on the front, impossible to use.
81)Animal shaped slippers, the bigger the better.
82) Crimping your hair, afro style
83) Yoyo's .... around the worls & making it sleep
84) Tamagotchi's, little annoying bastards
85) Forever friends
86) Flask with holder was a must on every bike, for the long cycle rides!!
87) Hard lunch boxes
88) Live & Kicking on a saturday morning ... Zoe Ball!
89) Now 35 was the album of the time with Gangsters Paradise being the tune you had to know the words to.
90) Youth club
91) White cotton briefs with either disney characters or forever friend on. (Marks n sparks pack of 3)
92) Strawberry liquid toothpaste
93) Fruitina tins in pack lunches
94) Alfabetti Spagetti
95) Turkey drummers
96) Guess who board game ( fat ugly ginger guy with goaty, Bill)
97) Wanting to name your child of the future Cloe or Page
98) Magic shell chocolate sauce which went hard when squirted on ice cream.
99) Pagers were the latest in communication technology
100) Mittens or gloves on a string which was threaded through the arms of your coat.
Today is my favourite news day for a long time...
- Father 'killed son in chips row' - full story here
- Drunk 'Darth Vader' spared jail - full story here
- Driver fined for putting beer's safety before child's - full story here
- Boy detained after 110mph chase - full story here
- Teenager charged after trying to have sex with a car - full story here
- Pupils sent home for turf 'prank' - full story here
Monday, 12 May 2008
Can you blame him?
A man has sawn his car in half with an angle-grinder in protest at it being clamped outside his home. Ian Taylor, from Tredworth, Glos, said the untaxed Ford Fiesta was parked on his drive with only part of a rear wheel poking out on to the pavement. The 40-year-old builder said the vehicle was going to be scrapped anyway, but he wanted to make a point. A spokesman for NCP Services said half of the car was parked on the road and should therefore have been taxed.
Full story here.
A 'socialist' called me an 'arsehole' then voted New Labour!
Yes, the 'socialists' have been getting annoyed again....
(Socialists is in inverted commas because I don't believe the socialist in question is a true socialist - he voted New Labour!)
SWP activist: OH MY GOD YOU'RE STANDING FOR THE LIB DEMS! How could a Lib Dem have infiltrated the Socialist Review editorial process? Patrick has obviously turned to the dark side, I will warn Judith forthwith that there is a plot to pervert our lovely marxist publication with petty bourgeois radicalism!
Me: Hahaha....yes indeed. I stood as a paper candidate in Rhiwbina Pantmawr. I hardly think there's anything radical about the Lib Dems Jonny!!
SWP activist: Jesus, they've done well in Cardiff too. It's just a shame they are a bunch of absolute arseholes who're now much better placed to push through their "green paper" for the council - there's an embargo on it right now so it's not been reported in the press but I got a sneak preview of it. It's essentially all about contracting out as many council services as possible to the private and voluntary sector, a root and branch review of what services can be cut altogether... pretty darned radical, just a shame it's radical in that Thatcherite sense!
Me: Are you calling me an arsehole Jonny?If you want to have an informed political debate, let's have one. If you don't, please don't send me abusive messages.
SWP activist: Sorry, I wasn't suggesting you are an arsehole, rather that the leadership of Cardiff Council are ... arseholes. Particularly that Berman guy. Other than that misunderstanding, my substantive point remains - the Lib Dems are wedded to privatisation and will be doing everything they can to push it through this time round. They'll be coming back for Cardiff Bus. Even on a national level we had the undignified spectacle of Nick Clegg calling for a ban on teaching strikes in response to the NUT action last week.
Me: What do you have against Berman? I'm not a huge fan, I'm just interested. I don't think we're wedded to privatisation at all. I agree with your point about Cardiff Bus - and it's very concerning, and it's one which is a growing trend in areas all across Britain. You have to remember though that the membership of the Lib Dems (as with any political party) is diverse, and the vast majority of members are social liberals - standing for freedom, supporting the welfare state, keeping taxation fair and protecting the environment. Personally I am not a huge fan of Nick Clegg, and I think as leader he's made some foolish decisions...but every party needs a figurehead. I didn't vote for him. However Jonny, what's the real alternative?
This conversation happened on Facebook. Interestingly, the SWP activist chose not to reply to my last message. On Friday night I found out why. The chap in question votes New Labour!
(Socialists is in inverted commas because I don't believe the socialist in question is a true socialist - he voted New Labour!)
SWP activist: OH MY GOD YOU'RE STANDING FOR THE LIB DEMS! How could a Lib Dem have infiltrated the Socialist Review editorial process? Patrick has obviously turned to the dark side, I will warn Judith forthwith that there is a plot to pervert our lovely marxist publication with petty bourgeois radicalism!
Me: Hahaha....yes indeed. I stood as a paper candidate in Rhiwbina Pantmawr. I hardly think there's anything radical about the Lib Dems Jonny!!
SWP activist: Jesus, they've done well in Cardiff too. It's just a shame they are a bunch of absolute arseholes who're now much better placed to push through their "green paper" for the council - there's an embargo on it right now so it's not been reported in the press but I got a sneak preview of it. It's essentially all about contracting out as many council services as possible to the private and voluntary sector, a root and branch review of what services can be cut altogether... pretty darned radical, just a shame it's radical in that Thatcherite sense!
Me: Are you calling me an arsehole Jonny?If you want to have an informed political debate, let's have one. If you don't, please don't send me abusive messages.
SWP activist: Sorry, I wasn't suggesting you are an arsehole, rather that the leadership of Cardiff Council are ... arseholes. Particularly that Berman guy. Other than that misunderstanding, my substantive point remains - the Lib Dems are wedded to privatisation and will be doing everything they can to push it through this time round. They'll be coming back for Cardiff Bus. Even on a national level we had the undignified spectacle of Nick Clegg calling for a ban on teaching strikes in response to the NUT action last week.
Me: What do you have against Berman? I'm not a huge fan, I'm just interested. I don't think we're wedded to privatisation at all. I agree with your point about Cardiff Bus - and it's very concerning, and it's one which is a growing trend in areas all across Britain. You have to remember though that the membership of the Lib Dems (as with any political party) is diverse, and the vast majority of members are social liberals - standing for freedom, supporting the welfare state, keeping taxation fair and protecting the environment. Personally I am not a huge fan of Nick Clegg, and I think as leader he's made some foolish decisions...but every party needs a figurehead. I didn't vote for him. However Jonny, what's the real alternative?
This conversation happened on Facebook. Interestingly, the SWP activist chose not to reply to my last message. On Friday night I found out why. The chap in question votes New Labour!
Tuesday, 6 May 2008
Ever had a discussion with a socialist?
After discovering (through the world of Facebook) that I was supporting the Lib Dems in the local council elections last week, I was the recipiant of a series of messages from friends of mine who I guess would class themselves as socialists. See what you think...
Local Red: Vote Liberal Democrat? Surely you cannot be serious?!?!
Rachel: Hahaha! I am very serious. I don't believe there is a decent alternative. Do you?
Local Red: I couldn't support a party that supports the occupation of Afghanistan, supported the Iraq War as soon as the going got tough, is trying to close down schools, wants to ban people like teachers from striking and is totally unprogressive and anti-working class.I mean I saw you at an anti-racist protest, are you not aware of the LibDems role in helping the BNP get their first councillor in the Isle of Dogs with their racist leafleting?
Rachel: I am not sure that there is one political party that exists where I can agree with every single policy they hold - they just don't exist (unless I started my own!). What evidence do you have to back your claims that the party is unprogressive and anti-working class?No I was not aware of that - send me the link??
Local Red: How are the LibDems anti-working class? well for a start they both opposed the minimum wage and oppose raising it - they support poverty pay.They want to extend anti-trade union laws, For example, during the recent teachers strike, your spokesperson said they wanted to ban teachers from striking for decent pay. in fact, not only teachers, they want to abolish the right to strike and replace it with "binding arbitration" - but who arbitrates?They want more privatisation, whether it's selling off Cardiff Bus or privatising the royal mint.Your leading economic spokesman is Vincent Cable, is an opponent of trade justice:. Former chief economist with Shell International PLC, he is an ideological neo-liberal who has written various books and articles on globalisation and trade liberalization. This was widely commented on in the press at the time of his appointment as an attempt by the Lib Dems to turn themselves into a Thatcherite party. They claim to be against council tax, but LibDem councils charge the highest in UK. Their much heralded plans for a local income tax will be a regressive tax that has a cap on contributions for those earning over £100000 (don't want to TAX THE RICH!), and may lead to some lower income families paying more than they do now in council-tax (because it will extend the burden of direct taxation for the lowest paid). Council tax certainly needs to be abolished and replaced with a progressive income tax, but not some tax which could lead to people on low incomes paying more!That covers it for now!
Re. The LibDems and the BNP, when Derek Beacon got elected as the BNPs first councillor their was much furore and comment in the media about how racist the Lib Dem Council had been. This gives good background: http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr168/nineham.htmThey still play the same game, when I went up to Brum in 2004 to leaflet for Respect, the LibDems had put out two leaflets with almost identical leaflets of Charles Kennedy - one had him surrounded by white, black and asian people, but in a leaflet aimed at very white areas of Brum, it had the same picture, only the LibDems had airbrushed out all the non-white faces from the photo.What kind of politics is that?
Rachel: I was fascinated that as soon as you found out I was standing for the LDs you both messaged me immediately as though it was the most outrageous thing you'd ever found out ever! It's almost like a socialist knee jerk reaction to anything other than socialism. I don't think the LDs support poverty pay at all - in fact quite the contrary - have a look at http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/story.html?id=11072&navPage=news.html and http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/story.html?id=11032&navPage=news.html - there's tons of examples of this. Like I said earlier, I'm not a fan of Mr Clegg and I didn't vote for him, however, every party needs a figurehead. The fact is, you need to put your arguments into context. Firstly you need to remember that the membership of the party (as with any political group / movement) is very diverse, and whilst there are pockets of people / policy I (or you) might not agree with, the vast majority of the membership are social liberals, standing for the welfare state, fair taxation, protecting the environment and so on. I also said earlier that I was very concerned over the proposals to privatise Cardiff Bus, and unfortunately this is a phenomenon ocurring across Britain. In terms of the Royal Mint, I must be honest and say I'm not really sure what the implications of privatising it would be....Hahaha - I can assure you that the Lib Dems are not trying to turn themselves into a Thatcherite party! (that did make me laugh though!)The LDs stand for fair taxation - you might want to read this - http://www.libdems.org.uk/media/documents/policies/Tax_policy_paper_120707.pdfSo let me pose you a question AGAIN which so far have ignored!! What's the alternative? The Tories? I think not. New Labour? I think not.
Like I said earlier, the party's membership is extremely diverse, and as with ALL political parties, there will be pockets of VERY questionnable behaviour, but let's not forget that the only way we know about this is through the media - do you trust them??I would also be VERY concerned if your claims about the Brum leaflets were true - can you get hold of copies please? If that's true, I will personally take that up with senior party members.
Local Red: "I was fascinated that as soon as you found out I was standing for the LDs you messaged me immediately" - take it as a compliment, if we just thought you were an out and out reactionary we would have just abandoned you to your fate/career"What's the alternative? The Tories? I think not. New Labour? I think not."Er, I don't really see much difference between LibDems, New Labour and Tories. They all are wedded to the same neoliberal consensus.In Cardiff, the LibDems attack Labour for closing post offices, but LibDems are trying to close schools, Plaid attack LibDems for closing schools in Cardiff but are closing more in North Wales, the Tories started the whole thing.Rachel, your party leadership is very clear - they want to ban strikes. Now I'm sure there are decent people in the LibDems, ditto New Labour, but the terrain of the LibDems in power is very far from progressive.One in three people in Wales works in the public sector, but across the board, Gordon Brown wants to cut wages across the public sector, working people are fighting back to preserve their living standards through the collective organisations that defend working people from big business - trade unions, Libdems Response? To call for strikes to be banned.Face it Rachel, the LibDems will put out right wing polices, left wing policies, what ever will get them elected. In Cardiff, they have managed to make a worse hash of the council than even Labour! Rachel, turn away from the dark side!In your heart of hearts you know what I say about the Neo-Liberal Democrats is the truth . . .
Rachel: I don't disagree that the three main parties have many similar policy ideas, however, I could not join a party which went to war with Iraq. I cannot support a party that's royally screwed up funding for HE, and so on and so forth. And I obviously cannot support the Tories. *shudder*I agree that Cardiff's Lib Dem Council has had to make some very challenging decisions, for example, about school closures, but, do you honestly believe any liberal individual would vindictively close a school just to piss off the electorate? No, of course they wouldn't. You have to remember the various pressures that local councils are under. In terms of the school closures, what would you suggest instead?Like I said, I don't agree with what Clegg said about the strikes, however, (I feel like a stuck record), the party's membership is diverse, and you can NEVER expect EVERY member to agree with every single policy. That would never happen. EVER. Do you understand why back bench rebellions etc happen??I think ALL political parties are guilty of pulling out specific policies just to get votes - c'mon Adam, you're an intelligent guy, you know that as well as I do. That's just something we have to accept about our current political system. Ummm....I hate to be rude, but you STILL haven't answered my question, what's the alternative?I eagerly await your answer. By the way...I don't think "truth" comes into it. "Truth" is a complicated concept anyway - do you want to complicate this debate further??
Local Red: "I don't disagree that the three main parties have many similar policy ideas, however, I could not join a party which went to war with Iraq"But a party that supports the disastrous invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is okay? Don't forget the LibDems don't want to bring the troops home, they want to pull them out of Iraq to send them to Afghanistan, a war they deem 'winnable'. Remember at the start of the 'war on terror' Charles Kennedy stating he stood shoulder to shoulder with Blair shortly after 9.11?On Iraq, are you kidding? The LibDems suddenly came out against the war, 24 hours before 2 million people marched rather than from principled opposition to war and imperialism. A month later, as soon as the bombs started dropping, the LibDems swung behind the war with Charles Kennedy saying, "it would be inappropriate to oppose the war with our soldiers fighting, we must all rally behind the troops", the LibDems have also voted for more funding for the occupation of War, Menzies Campbell supported more troops being sent to Iraq, and if the LibDems are now against the war, it is only because they can tell which way the wind (and public opinion) is blowing, not from any principle."You have to remember the various pressures that local councils are under. In terms of the school closures, what would you suggest instead?"What pressures? Lack of funds when we live in the 4th richest economy in the world? Trouble is that three-quarters of the wealth in Britain belongs to one-tenth of the population. We need to take the money back!A good article that deals with some of these themes:http://cardiffrespect.blogspot.com/2008/02/dim-ysgol-dim-cymuned-no-school-no.htmlAs to the alternative, 100 years ago, the trade unions launched a party to represent working people out of grassroots mass movements, in a sense what happened in Seattle in 99, in Genoa in 2001, in Hyde Park in 2003, the thousands of working people taking strike action points the way forward, to weld these social movements together into a movement that will establish genuine democracy in our society and break the power of the wealthy once and for all.
Rachel: The situation in Afghanistan is extremely complicated. I don't know the solution. Do you?The vast majority of LD MPs voted against the invasion, and whilst some voted for, you could argue that for any of the parties - Iraq caused immense fractions in all the parties. What many liberals believe is that whilst it was wrong (obviously) to invade Iraq and cause mass devastation etc, now that we've made a complete cock up, surely it's our responsibility to help clear up the mess? I know the socialist stance is just to pull all the troops out immediately - but what would that achieve for Iraq? It is not a stable country, and if British influence can help the process of building stability - surely that's a good thing?? Like I keep saying (stuck record...) not every single member of the party agrees with every single policy / decision attached to the party. That doesn't even happen with the socialists, so don't even start pretending it does!! I don't think the party swing their opinion purely because of public reaction....I believe that key members of the party have wavered over certain policies, but again, we're only human - and again, the same can be said for all the other parties!!Whilst I don't deny that we live in one of the richest economies in the world, local councils have a finite sum of money to spend. They have to decide where this money can be used best. I do agree that the richest section of the population don't exactly help (that's putting it mildly!), however, can't you see that finance departments of councils have VERY difficult decisions to make? What do you suggest? Give all the money to save local schools, and ignore communities who need community facilities, or roads that need fixing, or extra policing???"We need to take the money back!" - ummm....how do you propose you do that?I agree....Ummm....is that party standing in my ward??????!!!!!! Which box do you suggest I tick??????!!!!!!And as for Che, you might want to read this - http://www.therealcuba.com/MurderedbyChe.htm
Local Red: Rachel, the majority of Iraqi people want our troops out of the country - that should be enough. Add that to the fact that the British army says that we are part of the problem not the solution and you see your modern day 'white man (or woman's) burden' doesn't really hold water."I know the socialist stance is just to pull all the troops out immediately" - yes, that is what the people of Iraq want.You seem to be suggesting that the Iraqis are all at each others throats while the British and Americans are just the good guys trying to keep order and reconstruct the country, actually much of the sectarian strife in Iraq is being caused and whipped up by the occupying powers, because that's the only way an imperial country can dominate a country that doesn't want to be occupied. The instability arises because the occupying powers have a different agenda to that of the occupied people.As it happens I'm not one of these people who romanticise Cuba or think that it is anything other than a dictatorship, but Che Guevara does have the same birthday as me, so I have to respect that. Your link is a bit of a non-starter. The French resistance executed hundreds of people post-liberation, our government takes part in a lot more dirtier stuff, the political class in this country - Labour, Tories, LibDems have far more blood on their hands, I mean doesn't the leadership of your party strongly support the violent surpression of Palestinian human rights? But the violence of your party is slightly removed so it's more palatable?"Whilst I don't deny that we live in one of the richest economies in the world, local councils have a finite sum of money to spend. They have to decide where this money can be used best. I do agree that the richest section of the population don't exactly help (that's putting it mildly!), however, can't you see that finance departments of councils have VERY difficult decisions to make? What do you suggest? Give all the money to save local schools, and ignore communities who need community facilities, or roads that need fixing, or extra policing???"I grasp your point. Nobody denies that councils face genuine problems of funding, the question is do they accept the status quo or organise in the community to fight for more. Google 'the rebel councillors of poplar' or even what Militant tried to do in Liverpool - unfortunately they were sold out by the Labour Party leadership.The problem is that the choice neoliberalism offers us is a false choice, and we have to organise for a different choice.Anyway, I fear we have to agree to disagree as they say, if you want to continue this discussion buy me a beer sometime!
Feel free to join in! Click to comment :)
Local Red: Vote Liberal Democrat? Surely you cannot be serious?!?!
Rachel: Hahaha! I am very serious. I don't believe there is a decent alternative. Do you?
Local Red: I couldn't support a party that supports the occupation of Afghanistan, supported the Iraq War as soon as the going got tough, is trying to close down schools, wants to ban people like teachers from striking and is totally unprogressive and anti-working class.I mean I saw you at an anti-racist protest, are you not aware of the LibDems role in helping the BNP get their first councillor in the Isle of Dogs with their racist leafleting?
Rachel: I am not sure that there is one political party that exists where I can agree with every single policy they hold - they just don't exist (unless I started my own!). What evidence do you have to back your claims that the party is unprogressive and anti-working class?No I was not aware of that - send me the link??
Local Red: How are the LibDems anti-working class? well for a start they both opposed the minimum wage and oppose raising it - they support poverty pay.They want to extend anti-trade union laws, For example, during the recent teachers strike, your spokesperson said they wanted to ban teachers from striking for decent pay. in fact, not only teachers, they want to abolish the right to strike and replace it with "binding arbitration" - but who arbitrates?They want more privatisation, whether it's selling off Cardiff Bus or privatising the royal mint.Your leading economic spokesman is Vincent Cable, is an opponent of trade justice:. Former chief economist with Shell International PLC, he is an ideological neo-liberal who has written various books and articles on globalisation and trade liberalization. This was widely commented on in the press at the time of his appointment as an attempt by the Lib Dems to turn themselves into a Thatcherite party. They claim to be against council tax, but LibDem councils charge the highest in UK. Their much heralded plans for a local income tax will be a regressive tax that has a cap on contributions for those earning over £100000 (don't want to TAX THE RICH!), and may lead to some lower income families paying more than they do now in council-tax (because it will extend the burden of direct taxation for the lowest paid). Council tax certainly needs to be abolished and replaced with a progressive income tax, but not some tax which could lead to people on low incomes paying more!That covers it for now!
Re. The LibDems and the BNP, when Derek Beacon got elected as the BNPs first councillor their was much furore and comment in the media about how racist the Lib Dem Council had been. This gives good background: http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr168/nineham.htmThey still play the same game, when I went up to Brum in 2004 to leaflet for Respect, the LibDems had put out two leaflets with almost identical leaflets of Charles Kennedy - one had him surrounded by white, black and asian people, but in a leaflet aimed at very white areas of Brum, it had the same picture, only the LibDems had airbrushed out all the non-white faces from the photo.What kind of politics is that?
Rachel: I was fascinated that as soon as you found out I was standing for the LDs you both messaged me immediately as though it was the most outrageous thing you'd ever found out ever! It's almost like a socialist knee jerk reaction to anything other than socialism. I don't think the LDs support poverty pay at all - in fact quite the contrary - have a look at http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/story.html?id=11072&navPage=news.html and http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/story.html?id=11032&navPage=news.html - there's tons of examples of this. Like I said earlier, I'm not a fan of Mr Clegg and I didn't vote for him, however, every party needs a figurehead. The fact is, you need to put your arguments into context. Firstly you need to remember that the membership of the party (as with any political group / movement) is very diverse, and whilst there are pockets of people / policy I (or you) might not agree with, the vast majority of the membership are social liberals, standing for the welfare state, fair taxation, protecting the environment and so on. I also said earlier that I was very concerned over the proposals to privatise Cardiff Bus, and unfortunately this is a phenomenon ocurring across Britain. In terms of the Royal Mint, I must be honest and say I'm not really sure what the implications of privatising it would be....Hahaha - I can assure you that the Lib Dems are not trying to turn themselves into a Thatcherite party! (that did make me laugh though!)The LDs stand for fair taxation - you might want to read this - http://www.libdems.org.uk/media/documents/policies/Tax_policy_paper_120707.pdfSo let me pose you a question AGAIN which so far have ignored!! What's the alternative? The Tories? I think not. New Labour? I think not.
Like I said earlier, the party's membership is extremely diverse, and as with ALL political parties, there will be pockets of VERY questionnable behaviour, but let's not forget that the only way we know about this is through the media - do you trust them??I would also be VERY concerned if your claims about the Brum leaflets were true - can you get hold of copies please? If that's true, I will personally take that up with senior party members.
Local Red: "I was fascinated that as soon as you found out I was standing for the LDs you messaged me immediately" - take it as a compliment, if we just thought you were an out and out reactionary we would have just abandoned you to your fate/career"What's the alternative? The Tories? I think not. New Labour? I think not."Er, I don't really see much difference between LibDems, New Labour and Tories. They all are wedded to the same neoliberal consensus.In Cardiff, the LibDems attack Labour for closing post offices, but LibDems are trying to close schools, Plaid attack LibDems for closing schools in Cardiff but are closing more in North Wales, the Tories started the whole thing.Rachel, your party leadership is very clear - they want to ban strikes. Now I'm sure there are decent people in the LibDems, ditto New Labour, but the terrain of the LibDems in power is very far from progressive.One in three people in Wales works in the public sector, but across the board, Gordon Brown wants to cut wages across the public sector, working people are fighting back to preserve their living standards through the collective organisations that defend working people from big business - trade unions, Libdems Response? To call for strikes to be banned.Face it Rachel, the LibDems will put out right wing polices, left wing policies, what ever will get them elected. In Cardiff, they have managed to make a worse hash of the council than even Labour! Rachel, turn away from the dark side!In your heart of hearts you know what I say about the Neo-Liberal Democrats is the truth . . .
Rachel: I don't disagree that the three main parties have many similar policy ideas, however, I could not join a party which went to war with Iraq. I cannot support a party that's royally screwed up funding for HE, and so on and so forth. And I obviously cannot support the Tories. *shudder*I agree that Cardiff's Lib Dem Council has had to make some very challenging decisions, for example, about school closures, but, do you honestly believe any liberal individual would vindictively close a school just to piss off the electorate? No, of course they wouldn't. You have to remember the various pressures that local councils are under. In terms of the school closures, what would you suggest instead?Like I said, I don't agree with what Clegg said about the strikes, however, (I feel like a stuck record), the party's membership is diverse, and you can NEVER expect EVERY member to agree with every single policy. That would never happen. EVER. Do you understand why back bench rebellions etc happen??I think ALL political parties are guilty of pulling out specific policies just to get votes - c'mon Adam, you're an intelligent guy, you know that as well as I do. That's just something we have to accept about our current political system. Ummm....I hate to be rude, but you STILL haven't answered my question, what's the alternative?I eagerly await your answer. By the way...I don't think "truth" comes into it. "Truth" is a complicated concept anyway - do you want to complicate this debate further??
Local Red: "I don't disagree that the three main parties have many similar policy ideas, however, I could not join a party which went to war with Iraq"But a party that supports the disastrous invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is okay? Don't forget the LibDems don't want to bring the troops home, they want to pull them out of Iraq to send them to Afghanistan, a war they deem 'winnable'. Remember at the start of the 'war on terror' Charles Kennedy stating he stood shoulder to shoulder with Blair shortly after 9.11?On Iraq, are you kidding? The LibDems suddenly came out against the war, 24 hours before 2 million people marched rather than from principled opposition to war and imperialism. A month later, as soon as the bombs started dropping, the LibDems swung behind the war with Charles Kennedy saying, "it would be inappropriate to oppose the war with our soldiers fighting, we must all rally behind the troops", the LibDems have also voted for more funding for the occupation of War, Menzies Campbell supported more troops being sent to Iraq, and if the LibDems are now against the war, it is only because they can tell which way the wind (and public opinion) is blowing, not from any principle."You have to remember the various pressures that local councils are under. In terms of the school closures, what would you suggest instead?"What pressures? Lack of funds when we live in the 4th richest economy in the world? Trouble is that three-quarters of the wealth in Britain belongs to one-tenth of the population. We need to take the money back!A good article that deals with some of these themes:http://cardiffrespect.blogspot.com/2008/02/dim-ysgol-dim-cymuned-no-school-no.htmlAs to the alternative, 100 years ago, the trade unions launched a party to represent working people out of grassroots mass movements, in a sense what happened in Seattle in 99, in Genoa in 2001, in Hyde Park in 2003, the thousands of working people taking strike action points the way forward, to weld these social movements together into a movement that will establish genuine democracy in our society and break the power of the wealthy once and for all.
Rachel: The situation in Afghanistan is extremely complicated. I don't know the solution. Do you?The vast majority of LD MPs voted against the invasion, and whilst some voted for, you could argue that for any of the parties - Iraq caused immense fractions in all the parties. What many liberals believe is that whilst it was wrong (obviously) to invade Iraq and cause mass devastation etc, now that we've made a complete cock up, surely it's our responsibility to help clear up the mess? I know the socialist stance is just to pull all the troops out immediately - but what would that achieve for Iraq? It is not a stable country, and if British influence can help the process of building stability - surely that's a good thing?? Like I keep saying (stuck record...) not every single member of the party agrees with every single policy / decision attached to the party. That doesn't even happen with the socialists, so don't even start pretending it does!! I don't think the party swing their opinion purely because of public reaction....I believe that key members of the party have wavered over certain policies, but again, we're only human - and again, the same can be said for all the other parties!!Whilst I don't deny that we live in one of the richest economies in the world, local councils have a finite sum of money to spend. They have to decide where this money can be used best. I do agree that the richest section of the population don't exactly help (that's putting it mildly!), however, can't you see that finance departments of councils have VERY difficult decisions to make? What do you suggest? Give all the money to save local schools, and ignore communities who need community facilities, or roads that need fixing, or extra policing???"We need to take the money back!" - ummm....how do you propose you do that?I agree....Ummm....is that party standing in my ward??????!!!!!! Which box do you suggest I tick??????!!!!!!And as for Che, you might want to read this - http://www.therealcuba.com/MurderedbyChe.htm
Local Red: Rachel, the majority of Iraqi people want our troops out of the country - that should be enough. Add that to the fact that the British army says that we are part of the problem not the solution and you see your modern day 'white man (or woman's) burden' doesn't really hold water."I know the socialist stance is just to pull all the troops out immediately" - yes, that is what the people of Iraq want.You seem to be suggesting that the Iraqis are all at each others throats while the British and Americans are just the good guys trying to keep order and reconstruct the country, actually much of the sectarian strife in Iraq is being caused and whipped up by the occupying powers, because that's the only way an imperial country can dominate a country that doesn't want to be occupied. The instability arises because the occupying powers have a different agenda to that of the occupied people.As it happens I'm not one of these people who romanticise Cuba or think that it is anything other than a dictatorship, but Che Guevara does have the same birthday as me, so I have to respect that. Your link is a bit of a non-starter. The French resistance executed hundreds of people post-liberation, our government takes part in a lot more dirtier stuff, the political class in this country - Labour, Tories, LibDems have far more blood on their hands, I mean doesn't the leadership of your party strongly support the violent surpression of Palestinian human rights? But the violence of your party is slightly removed so it's more palatable?"Whilst I don't deny that we live in one of the richest economies in the world, local councils have a finite sum of money to spend. They have to decide where this money can be used best. I do agree that the richest section of the population don't exactly help (that's putting it mildly!), however, can't you see that finance departments of councils have VERY difficult decisions to make? What do you suggest? Give all the money to save local schools, and ignore communities who need community facilities, or roads that need fixing, or extra policing???"I grasp your point. Nobody denies that councils face genuine problems of funding, the question is do they accept the status quo or organise in the community to fight for more. Google 'the rebel councillors of poplar' or even what Militant tried to do in Liverpool - unfortunately they were sold out by the Labour Party leadership.The problem is that the choice neoliberalism offers us is a false choice, and we have to organise for a different choice.Anyway, I fear we have to agree to disagree as they say, if you want to continue this discussion buy me a beer sometime!
Feel free to join in! Click to comment :)
Don't blame me. I didn't vote for Boris.
Well, you can't blame me, that's for sure. Boris is in, and it ain't my fault. All we can do now is sit back and watch....
Just remember that London's newest addition has said the following things during his time in politics...
"We don't want our children being taught some rubbish about homosexual marriage being the same as normal marriage, and that is why I am more than happy to support Section 28." · Daily Telegraph, 2000
"My chances of being PM are about as good as the chances of finding Elvis on Mars, or my being reincarnated as an olive."· The Independent, 2004
On George Bush and Iraq:
"He liberated Iraq. It is good enough for me."· Daily Telegraph, 2004
On race
"I'm down with the ethnics. You can't out-ethnic me, Nihal ... My children are a quarter Indian, so put that in your pipe and smoke it."· To Nihal Arthanayake, BBC Asian Network, 2008
On Liverpool
"A society that has become hooked on grief and likes to wallow in a sense of vicarious victimhood."· A Spectator editorial, 2004 (Johnson didn't write the editorial, but he approved it
The Lib Dems Mayoral candidate. Brian Paddick said: "Boris Johnson, born in New York, raised in Eton and MP for Oxfordshire, never did understand what it meant to be a Londoner". Hear Hear Brian. Of course....if Boris REALLY screws up, what will that mean for the Tories in the next general election???
Friday, 2 May 2008
Boris ahead....
Early indications show that Boris is ahead in the race for London Mayor. Amusing comments on the Guardian website:
"I'd sooner vote for a dog than Boris Johnson. Cartoon characters should only run cartoon cities. You can indicate a second preference, so it's Paddick or Livingstone or no one. Don't toss London to a rightwing moron, no matter how funny you find his bumbling persona."
Zia Ahsnain, 50 IT director
"If I woke up and Boris Johnson was mayor I'd want to give Ken Livingstone a big kick up the arse because it's all his fault. Boris Johnson is as much Ken's fault as bendy buses. In fact, Boris Johnson is the human equivalent of the bendy bus: looks like fun but essentially is dangerous and annoying."
Mark Bell, 27
"It's hard to know what a Boris victory might mean for London because all he offers are vague, uncosted, headline-grabbing policies. He says he'll cut crime, but how? He says he'll tackle immigration, but his proposal is to have a debate - well, what the hell does he think is happening at the moment? The upshot for London could be disaster: he can't possibly do what he says he's going to do because he's got no clue as to how he's going to do it. It's all part of his programme to come across as some bumbling, lovable moptop, but the reality is he's a rightwinger posing as a moderate and that's very dangerous for London."
Diana Melly Writer
"I'd sooner vote for a dog than Boris Johnson. Cartoon characters should only run cartoon cities. You can indicate a second preference, so it's Paddick or Livingstone or no one. Don't toss London to a rightwing moron, no matter how funny you find his bumbling persona."
Zia Ahsnain, 50 IT director
"If I woke up and Boris Johnson was mayor I'd want to give Ken Livingstone a big kick up the arse because it's all his fault. Boris Johnson is as much Ken's fault as bendy buses. In fact, Boris Johnson is the human equivalent of the bendy bus: looks like fun but essentially is dangerous and annoying."
Mark Bell, 27
"It's hard to know what a Boris victory might mean for London because all he offers are vague, uncosted, headline-grabbing policies. He says he'll cut crime, but how? He says he'll tackle immigration, but his proposal is to have a debate - well, what the hell does he think is happening at the moment? The upshot for London could be disaster: he can't possibly do what he says he's going to do because he's got no clue as to how he's going to do it. It's all part of his programme to come across as some bumbling, lovable moptop, but the reality is he's a rightwinger posing as a moderate and that's very dangerous for London."
Diana Melly Writer
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
"Unbelievable as it may seem, Boris Johnson has a real chance of being elected London mayor today. Zoe Williams and other Londoners imagine what it would be like if this bigoted, lying, Old Etonian buffoon got his hands on our diverse and liberal capital. Ach. That floppy hair, and that sodding bicycle. Has any man ever before managed to persuade such a huge number of people that he was a decent chap on two such flimsy, trivial, irrelevant, modish pieces of ephemera?
Never mind what a laughing stock we'd be, internationally, if we elected Boris Johnson as mayor. Never mind what a mess he'd make of the whole thing, how unproven he is in anything beyond having a big gob, never mind that if we think Ken Livingstone lives high on the taxi hog, God alone knows what this moneyed creep would get up to. Never mind all that for the moment. Let's just concentrate on this myth of his being a nice guy. He is not a nice guy".
Never mind what a laughing stock we'd be, internationally, if we elected Boris Johnson as mayor. Never mind what a mess he'd make of the whole thing, how unproven he is in anything beyond having a big gob, never mind that if we think Ken Livingstone lives high on the taxi hog, God alone knows what this moneyed creep would get up to. Never mind all that for the moment. Let's just concentrate on this myth of his being a nice guy. He is not a nice guy".
Read the full story here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/may/01/boris.livingstone
Catastrophic night for Labour
Labour have made losses across the country, whilst the Tories have made substantial gains - including gaining the Vale of Glamorgan from NOC. The BBC put Labour behind the Tories at 24%, Lib Dems at 25% and the Tories at 44%. Whilst we anxiously await more results to come in, the Tories reckon the London Mayor is in the bag. They might be right, but let's hope not. More to come...
This just made me laugh....http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7376169.stm
This just made me laugh....http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7376169.stm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
