The Alternative Pope.

What good would it do for me to “call for peace” in the Middle East? Who, from ISIS to Assad, the Western Alliance, Palestine and Israel, is likely to listen? I could perhaps ask questions that in their answering might move intentions. Why are you fighting? Do you want to be motivated by hate when your prophet tells you to love? Do you see heroism in causing harm, worship in warships? Do you want more arms when all they will do is prolong the fight till your dying day? Do you want Power when all will fear you and no one will love you? Do you want land when you can’t till it on your own and those who do will grow to resent you? Do you want to spread your ideology if it can only be spread by terror and bloodshed? Do you want to defend yourself when defence only makes more enemies? Do you really believe that your comfort will come from creating discomfort, that love will come from fear? I’m a weak old man with nothing to tell you. You must decide for yourself what you want. 

This is why I'm Green.

Last weekend thousands protested in Spain’s major cities against new totalitarian laws. Not students or ideological radicals but very ordinary people with fresher memories than most of that term. But where Franco was a fascist dictator this seems to be the action of a bewildered, cornered government. One of the problems with democracy is that to gain power one must appease the electorate. This pretence of niceness is the basis of many failed marriages where underlying reality goes un addressed. Democracy thus tends to pretend government focusing on facile issues rather than long-term solutions to deep-seated problems. To me Spain exemplifies where you get to after a long period of pretend government. The government perceives it must continue to govern ‘for the sake of the country’ and the electorate, the wife in this case, has had enough of obfuscation. Spain’s new gagging laws and the public’s reaction become the equivalent of domestic violence, and England’s not far behind. The electorate, we, know there are issues needing to be addressed at a fundamental level, global warming, education, the wealth gap, corporate dominance and tax evasion, fracking, the NHS, mental health, housing etc, and that tinkering and spin are no longer enough. We are disillusioned with pretend government and where it’s leading us. Our government cannot see alternatives to what they’re doing, aren’t imaginative enough to grasp the fundamental problems or bold enough to forge solutions. Their only perceived option is to police our discontent. A divorce of sort is already happening with voting numbers falling but we do still need active government. In this situation a vote for any party that is not bold or perceptive enough to see the underlying problems and tackle them is wasted. That’s why I’m joining the Green Party. They may not win but at least my vote won’t be wasted. 

Becoming the Enemy of the Police?

A deeply emotional talk by an ex Israeli soldier from a family militarised by experiences of the holocaust. He described his army service policing Palestinians. Though brutal what disturbed him most was the inculcated assumption that that they, ordinary Palestinian men, women and children, were ‘the enemy.’ Any disobedience of Israeli rule was perceived as an act of war by this ‘enemy.’ His moral self came into conflict with his militarised self, and, mimicking this in reality, when he protested he was shot at and tear-gassed by his own army. After his army service his research showed that the Israeli arms industry was using the Palestinian conflict to develop and test new weapons and strategies of suppression. For a small ‘peaceful’ country Israeli arms exports are huge (10% of the world total in 2007) and contribute much to the country’s wealth. He moved to America and in a chance conversation with an NYPD police officer he mentioned he was ex Israeli army. The police officer replied, “Wow man you guys are bad ass. We’ve been over there doing training. (in methods of public suppression)” He was horrified. These police will have been trained as he was and come back believing the public are ‘the enemy’. From their fear of being vulnerable to another holocaust the Israelis have grown a huge arms industry dedicated to suppressing their enemy, ordinary Palestinians, and were now exporting both products and techniques of suppressing the public to police forces around the world; a perfect mirror of what happened to them in the German holocaust. My concern here is that the UK police are also being trained in Israel. 

How did This get in my Poetry Folder?

Fucked.

Talkin to the old Tit in the pub last night. Actually a bar, twopoundsfuckinthirty a Becks it was. About this fuckin’ fucked up fucker. Lovely bloke.

She says “we’re all fucked ain’t we Sweep”.

I says “Yea.” you know in that inevicable way like it’s true.

Then she says “So how come you’re alright?”

I finks. I says, “Well being fucked ain’t werf a fuck is it.” We larf. “I mean you fink you’re special, like the only fucker in the universe wiv a fuckin problem and you’ll be like ‘I ain’t goin to share this shit with anyone, I’ll look a right plonker.’”

She says “Yea, it’s bollocks ain’t it.” I give her a little cuddle.

“I mean once you can like put your hands up an say ‘OK, I’m fucked’ what happens? Every other fucker says ‘Thank Christ for that, I’m not the only one’, except for the really stupid bastards who’re so fucked they’re still holdin on to bein perfect, and you’re like ‘la, la, la’  cos you ain’t keepin it in no more.”

“Is that your secret?”

“Well it’s hardly a fuckin secret, I’ve just told you ain’t I.”

She smiles. “Yea but people are scared ain’t they?”

“Well walkin under a fuckin bus’ll kill ya, be scared of that. Anyway no one’s ever died of lettin it out, they might of died of keepin it in, not letting it out.”

“So how did you do it smart arse?”

“Well I figured you never let go of anything by keepin hold of it do you.”

“No?”

“Well you don’t do you? ,” I gets on a trot here, “Like you’ve got a bird; you hold it tight to stop it flappin about, but when it’s time to let it go you like open your hands,” I makes the gesture, “and it flies away. See it? See it go?” We watched it flap across the bar and out the window. Which was interesting seeing as how the window was closed.

“See how it stopped struggling when I open my hands and it like knew what to do, stopped struggling, stopped being frightened. That’s like all your fucked up stuff. Hold it tight and it’s a pain in the arse, open your hands and poof, out the window.”

“It’s that simple?”

“OK, so it is and it isn’t. But it is. Look, it’s just as hard as you want it to be. Yea that’s it, it’s as hard as you want it to be.” I turned to her, enthusiastic like, “it’s like what you really want, not what you think you want, that’s bollocks, look at what you really want. Do you want to hold that bird, stop it pecking your fuckin eyes out, stop it shittin in people’s beer, knockin ‘em overm flyin round the bar in a mad fuckin frenzy? Cos that’s what it’ll do won’t it? You know that’s what it’ll do. But it didn’t, did it? You saw it. Flew straight out the window, happy as fuckin Larry it’s got away. Am I right or am I wrong?” She was eating crisps. “See what you really want comes out of what you really know.” I’m like this is shit hot, answers to the Universe stuff. “If you know the birds just glad to get away, you’ll open your hands, won’t you? Till then you’re stuck holding the fucker. Well won’t you?”

“Yes Sweetheart. I love you. Know why?”

“Why?”

“Cos you’ve got a big fuckin dick.”      We larf.

The Power of Agreement.

Several years ago my son told me a story about a man searching for wisdom and happiness. He travelled the world searching until he was told of the wisest person, a hermit living in a cave high in the mountains. He made the harsh journey and asked his question. The hermit said the answer was to agree with everyone you meet. The man became angry saying that was a ridiculous answer, to which the hermit replied, “Yes, I see that it is.” Funny, yes, but thought provoking. It came to mind after seeing a snippet of Nigel Farrago and Russell Brand on Question Time that eschewed agreement at all costs. When one looks at one’s mind’s fluidity disagreement produces a gridlock of some entrenched position, one is reduced to continually rehearsing a dialogue with oneself. One instinctively feels any sign of agreement would be used to create a weakness in one’s defences, but alone in a castle one cannot find happiness or wisdom. Agreement though is not being beaten in an intellectual battle it’s an incremental step in awareness. When ‘the map is not the territory’ no one of us sees the territory only our map of it and finding some agreement with another person might well put a little extra detail to it. That’s not to say agreement is acceptance. If one simply accepted another’s opinion one would only join in a possible mutual error. True agreement is a willingness to find one’s mind’s fluidity and thus continue one’s journey towards wisdom and happiness. Nigel Farrago and Russell Brand did not move forward in this respect, yet I found some agreement with both of them. Does that make me wise? If you say no it’s likely I’ll agree with you. 

TTIP and ISDS.

This evening I spent an hour watching the Commons Select Committee discussing TTIP with the Head of the TUC and a spokesman for the CBI. (look on BBC catch up under S) The TUC, a woman, was balanced and spoke well. The CBI man attempted to intimate by groundless assertions that it was all a jolly good idea but didn’t convince anyone. The whole hour was vacuous in that they had no, that’s zero, facts to work on and they could not see the treaty because of secrecy. Every concern many of us have about TTIP and ISDS could not have been written more clearly between the lines. America is a bully; it’s how they operate. The CBI man basically said if we want an agreement with the big dog we must bend over and get shafted, otherwise they won’t sign it. My agent would have laughed. I was appalled that a dozen intelligent serious people did not show disgust and anger at this banal level of interaction. In any meeting I’ve been involved in to be so unprepared, so devoid of facts and arguments and relying solely on groundless assertions one would have been laughed at, torn to shreds and most likely sacked. Here's a suggested defense against an ISDS action.

Your Honour, this case is between Philip Morris (PM) and the British Government (BG) under the ISDS framework of the TTIP Agreement. PM is suing the BG for loss of future earnings over its restriction to only plain paper packaging for all cigarettes. PM believe this will reduce sales.

BG. Do you agree that PM have no right to sue me as an individual if I decide to give up smoking or change to another brand or choose to spend my money elswhere? That after all is the essence of a free market.

PM. Yes.

BG. Dou you agree that Britain is a democratic country?

PM. Yes.

BG. As such is it correct that the British Government, having been voted into power by a democratic election is mandated by the electorate to implement laws in accordance with the wishes of the majority of that electorate?

PM. Yes.

BG. Is it correct that under a democratic system the majority decision is taken to form the decision of the whole?

PM. Yes.

BG. In this case you believe this decision will result in a reduction of cigarette sales. Do you agree that this was the underlying reason for the British Government’s decision to implement this law? Realistically there can surely be no other explanation.

PM. Yes.

BG. As such the government’s implementation of plain paper packaging reflects the mandate of the electorate as a whole to reduce smoking: Do you agree?

PM. Well yes but..  (BG. Shut up, I’m talking)

BG. It hardly needs stating that the electorate consists of individuals and that each of those individuals, as you have previously agreed, has free choice to buy or not buy PM cigarettes without fear of litigation. If then these individuals have mandated the British Government, under the accepted norms of our democratic system, to reduce smoking and the government has acted on their behalf by implementing plain paper packaging the government’s action can be said to represent the decision of individuals, which as you have previously agreed is totally acceptable in a free market. 

Your Honour as the plaintiff is in total agreement with the defendants case I suggest there are no grounds for this case to go forward.