Architects of their Own Downfall: Republicans, Romney and Fox

There are mere days to go before Barack Obama and Mitt Romney go head to head in the first of the US presidential election debates. One would think that the respective campaigns are gearing up to duke it out, stepping out toe to toe as rhetorical pugilists in an effort to secure the kingmakers of the American political system, those undeclared voters in the middle of the American political spectrum. Only 4 years ago, I would stay up to the wee hours to watch presidential debates, swept up by the Obama machine, it was genuinely exciting and interesting. This race though would appear to be as good as over before it really got going.

Obama has recently been dubbed as ‘The luckiest dude in the world’ by the Daily Show’s Jon Stewart and for good reason. Mitt Romney’s campaign has lurched for one disaster to another culminating in a piece of footage being released which would put the best work of Armanndo Iannucci and Chris Morris to shame. In this video the former Governor for Massachusetts successfully alienated even more of the American electorate and joked about how being Latino would have helped his race to the White House. The content of this video has been picked apart in sufficient detail since it surfaced and it is not the purpose of this blog to rehash this material. Let us instead look at how Romney’s campaign had begun to unravel before the video was leaked and the wider reasons underpinning this.

As stated above Romney was the Governor of Massachusetts and in his 4 years in the Governors mansion he presided over a series of policies and political stances which are very much at odds with the policies he is putting forward as the Republican candidate. Perhaps the biggest of these is the universal healthcare bill he introduced and brought to realisation. Since he has entered the presidential race one of the key tenets of his campaign, indeed one of the only concrete things he has said he will do if elected, is to dismantle ‘Obamacare’. Other stances on which Romney has done a 180 are his calls for more gun control, and his policies on abortion.

It would appear that this is a man who will say just about whatever it takes to win and to swing from a socially liberal fiscal conservative to a 100% dyed in the wool conservative Republican. Romney’s campaign is falling apart and Obama is going to be re-elected whilst having the worst unemployment rate of any incumbent president. When you look back at some of the other contenders for the GOP nomination, nutters like Santorum, Perry, Bachman and Cain, you realise that Mitt Romney really was the lesser of several evils. The majority of those nominees came from the loony libertarian right embodied by the Tea Party. It is the Tea Party and Fox News that have morphed Mitt Romney into the flip flopping caricature we see before us today.

The advent 24 hour news coverage means there is an awful lot of time that needs to be filled, 24 hours to be exact. The style, or perhaps brand is a more appropriate word, of news sold by Fox seems to rely on a heady mix of hysterical presenters shouting about red button doomsday topics. The majority of these topics seem to be very close to the heart of the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party itself is a movement, shrouded in thinly veiled racism of the ludicrous ‘birthers’, which is a hotchpotch of conservatism, libertarianism and ‘whoever-can-shout-the-loudestism’. The Fox News Network gave a huge amount of coverage and tacit support to this movement. They made the issues of the Tea Party the issues of Fox viewers. This can be the only reason why the GOP had such a collection of bonkers candidates in the running for their nomination. The candidates were either forced to appeal to the support of the Fox shouty head pundits or run the risk of their campaign dying from a lack of publicity. Romney stood out as the most reasonable candidate up for nomination, which is some feat for a Mormon venture capitalist.

Mitt Romney was right when he stated that there is a chunk of the population that will vote for Obama no matter what; just as there is a chunk of the American public that will vote Republican now matter what. The battle for presidential elections in America has always been a straight out battle for those in the middle who will base their decision on the policies and record of the candidates. Obama has had an incredibly tough 4 years and as stated above the unemployment figures will be the highest of any incumbent President. Romney hasn’t even laid out his policies, instead is relying on the American public to elect him and once he is in the White House he’ll tell them what he’ll do. It would seem that his economic policies are similar to birthday wishes in that if he told us what they were they wouldn’t come true.

The attack dog for the Republican Party, Fox News, is making it impossible for the Republicans to win an election. The agenda set by Fox has forced Romney to flip flop on many issues and ultimately throw away a very winnable election.

Handling Images in the Digital Age.

William, heir to the throne.
Source:http://www.thesuperficial.com/photos/prince-william-kate-middleton-at-the-vaiku-falekaupule-ceremony

Legal representatives of the British Royal family have pursued action in French courts due to the publishing of naked images of one of the most recent people brought into their fold. The first steps of this legal move resulted in (as reported by the BBC News website):

• A court in Paris ruled the publishers of Closer must hand over the original photographs within 24 hours or face a daily fine of 10,000 euros (£8,000).

Before actually taking on board the above statement I think a necessary digression is in order.

Since the horrific chain of events which ultimately led to the death of Diana Spencer there is, understandably,  an obvious sensitivity surrounding paparazzi and her surviving children. However, gradually the media have gone to great lengths to attempt to recapture the public obsession surrounding Diana with her son William and more importantly his wife Kate Middleton. The media frenzy surrounding their wedding is evidence enough. The machine grinds on.

True to form, the peddlers of celebrity snap shots (and what a service they provide the world) have yet again crossed the line – thankfully nothing like the aforementioned tragedy – which separates mutually beneficial publicity from what is deemed inappropriate and boy is that a fine line. The recent ‘topless’ images of Kate Middleton have caused all sorts of outcry from Royalists and the like. I won’t delve into why the backlash is so much more severe when it comes to images of a princess – I even shudder at typing the word –  when compared to a ‘regular’ celebrity. That’s a whole other topic of discussion which ultimately revolves around class in society. However, I’ll go on the record and suggest that no one deserves the unwanted attention of paparazzi, and it is indeed distasteful for them to be harassing the family of a woman who died indirectly due to their pursuit, but I also think that this reaction to a topless image of someone who benefits from media attention in the same way as other celebrities who are victims of this extreme voyeurism is certainly disproportionate. Either condemn all voyeuristic, opportunistic pictures of celebrities equally or keep schtum. Kate Middleton is not deserving of special treatment in this regard. It should be one rule for all. She should have no more or less rights than the average Joe.

Getting back on topic. The quote above clearly states that the publishers of the image have to hand over the ‘original photographs’ . Consider that instruction. Assuming the images were digital – which I think is a fair assumption to make in 2012 – you have to wonder what exactly qualifies as the ‘original photographs’? Was it the first digital files saved on the camera? The transferred files from the camera to the computer? The first email with the images attached to it that was sent to Closer? The one of doubtless many emails circulated within the confines of Closer headquarters? Also, how does one go about handing over these originals? Forward an email to the legal team? I think I’ve made my point. This seems like an exercise in futility. If they were printed images with negatives attached this order would make sense but in the digital age it’s almost laughable.

I’m sure all of this will rumble on with continued cries of outrage at the nerve of a French magazine to publish such images of a royal for the foreseeable few days – maybe weeks – but I don’t think this court ruling can be considered a victory since it makes little sense and will have virtually no impact. After all, the images are only a Google click away now and I doubt they fall under the definition of being the originals.

Ireland, our cream has turned sour

Galway is a much nicer place to be in the summer months. It is on the west coast of Ireland, so it is not because of the weather, nor is it a result of the increase in cultural celebrations and events (although, it must be said, that does help). The reason is simple: the students have, for the most part, gone home. They have absconded back into the arms of their doting parents who will once again cater for their every need.

Now that September has rolled around once more though, the inhabitants of the city will again be forced to endure the naïve and idiotic actions of a group of adults who, equipped with loans, grants and their parents’ money, have granted themselves a license to lead a hedonistic, irresponsible and ludicrous lifestyle for the next nine months at least.

This is how many parents imagine their children at university.

First come the ‘Freshers’. As the label suggests, these are the fresh-faced, wet-behind-the-ears kids that have left home for the first time with the noble aim of bringing their education to the next level. Or so it seems. It is an exciting time, no doubt, for those who do manage to fly the nest and into the world. But don’t be fooled – they are anything but noble. And while they may be fresh, they are certainly not refreshing, for each year, the wave of bodies that follows is as dull, stale and predictable as the last.

Then you have the rest. The second years, last year’s ‘Freshers’, who strut around campus unwilling to stifle the desire to re-live the ‘glory’ of the previous year, spurred on by the empty qualifier that “nothing matters until final year anyway”. The final years, who know that they should behave better for the sake of their degree, but find themselves drawn in by the allure of the craic and reassured by the 40 per cent safety net that ensures a pass.

This may be closer to the truth of many a student’s lifestyle.

Engorged on alcopops, spirits, cheap cider, and who knows what else, grown men and women stumble and stagger from their glorified chicken coops and into the heart of the city, so that they can treat their eardrums to an aural assault, while attempting to dance in a dimly lit room. People actually pay money to enter these darkened cattle markets. Don’t ever forget that.

Taxi drivers have the front row seat as the inebriated entities are hurriedly ushered from establishments and the regurgitated spectacle unfolds. Pavement bedecked in multicoloured bile and other bodily fluids, men attempt to impress the high-heeled ladies that struggle to string together so much as a pace. Fights break out, food and rubbish find their home next to the splattered puke and the police attempt to make their presence felt. “They’re out every night of the week,” an affable taxi driver assures me. “You’re thinking, ‘do you do any reading at all?’”

The truth is, they don’t have to. Their recklessness, their gung-ho partying and complete lack of studying does not matter, for university lecturers will hand them grades on a plate. No one likes to see those pass-rates dwindle, after all.

Naturally, this horrific binge culture is not confined to the halls of student residence. It is a widespread ailment that has (always?) gripped wider Irish society (see blog by finishedatlast ), but it cannot be denied that among students, going to college carries with it an expectation to party. Indeed it is viewed as a rite of passage.

This is the future of Ireland. The cream of our crop has turned sour.

Special thanks to Thom Wilcockson for his fine male modelling.

When drink is in, sense is out.

“Inside or outside” the barmaid barked in her soft lilting Cork accent. The befuddled customer unsure at the consequences of choosing either of these options instead resorted to a deer in the headlights reaction. “Outside it is so” was the response from the barmaid, her patience withered away as Galway lurched towards the end of another festival season and her mind was focused on her yet unfinished thesis.

It has since been completed and celebrated in that inimitable Irish style of several days of drinking until the world outside is a place to be both feared and loathed.

Drink and Ireland’s relationship to it, is a hot topic at any time; just listen to Lifeline and Galway is a buzz at the minute.

I first heard it in the pub one night; it started out as a whisper met with incredulous reactions such as. ‘Feck off’ and ‘Ah they can’t do that’. Galway has a new superintendent, yes folks there’s a new sheriff in town and she (“Wouldn’t you know it’s a woman” I heard a beery sage impart at the bar) has the intention of enforcing the existing licensing laws. I will give you a moment to consider this outrageous affront to the drinkers of Galway.

This has caused such a commotion that a poorly written petition has been slung together by a pickled activist citing the poor put-upon publicans and club owners as people we should have sympathy for.

We are known and even celebrated as a nation of drinkers. We get this where ever we go and no doubt there are many of us who revel in living up to this stereotype when overseas. The year out in Australia as a year of debauchery had become a rite of passage before the economic collapse. Should we look across to the continent for a better way of dealing with our drinking culture? France has long been held up as having a responsible attitude to alcohol but anecdotal evidence from friends, – and journalists – who have recently visited there, has seen a rise in the binge drinking culture which blights Britain and Ireland.

In Sweden off licenses are state controlled, is that the road we need to go down? In Ireland the issue is so deep-rooted in our culture that a mass moment of introspection is required. I don’t profess to have any answers but we have got a lot more going for us than our ability to consume alcohol.

Drink is something that has permeated every aspect of Irish culture. It has been the pub that has long been the epicentre of Irish social life. It is where sporting teams go to celebrate and commiserate. It is the first port of call when lives enter, leave or join together in this world. The very image of a pint of the black stuff is an iconic brand, which immediately associated with this country. Even though Porter is an English invention.

It has for many years sponsored our national games and there are countless apologists when our national leaders are being photographed and recorded in inebriated states. Darren Clarke downs a pint cheered on by the crowd after winning the Ryder Cup whereas Colm Cooper cracks a can of cider on his way up pick up the Sam Maguire. These events happened within weeks of each other and resulted in a hilarious exercise in hypocrisy as doctors lined up to slam Colm Cooper conveniently ignoring Clarke’s indiscretion. This may have something to do with amount of doctor’s cars found in golf club car parks.

I found myself in a heated drink fuelled discussion with the aforementioned barmaid and a fellow Hubris administrator during the Volvo Ocean Race festival here in Galway. I took the side of drink in this argument purely because no one else was and it is in my nature to be contrary and found it a pretty difficult position to defend. It is such a destructive influence on every level of society, one would have to question if this substance had been only just invented would it be legalized. Is there any accounting for our attitude to alcohol or even hope for it changing in the future? Is this a changing in the attitude of the city authorities or merely a PR exercise in anticipation of the return to Galway of its student population? I would imagine it is the latter and that all of this closing time clamp down will blow over in a matter of a few weeks.

What could be done to address this issue? Certainly the banning of sports sponsorship by alcohol companies and pubs would be a step in the right direction. Breaking up the lobbying influence of the Vinters Association, who famously scuppered the ‘Cafe Culture’ legislation a few years ago, would be another positive step. Alternatives to the alcohol dominated pub as a place to celebrate – which the cafe culture legislation may have produced had it got off the ground – is a must. Many will say it is up to the individual to make the changes to their own life but strong leadership from the very top is essential.

I think that all pubs should close at 10pm on the dot whereupon a klaxon would sound 4 times. At 10:15 the klaxon would sound 3 times, at 10:30 it would sound twice and then at 10:45 it would sound just once. If anyone were found wandering the streets from 11pm onwards they would be spirited away to a re-education camp run by Young Fine Gael and The Youth Defence for 2 weeks.

I have to declare a conflict of interest as this proposed change to the law would mean I wouldn’t have to put up with drunken arses outside my window all hours of the night.

Blasphemy and the Impotence of Deities.

Hamza Kashgari awaits his fate at the hands of blood thirsty zealots.

In February of this year Hamza Kashgari was one of the first people in the Muslim world to be held accountable for ‘blasphemous’ tweets. Only a few months later Alex Aan was arrested for tweets deemed blasphemous also.

Kashgari wisely promptly fled Saudi Arabia only to be detained in Malaysia by authorities and deported back to the embrace of the blood thirsty Saudi authorities. There he faces the prospect of execution for his tweets. So, what were these tweets that were so offensive that death is the only reasonable retribution?

• On your birthday, I shall not bow to you. I shall not kiss your hand. Rather, I shall shake it as equals do, and smile at you as you smile at me. I shall speak to you as a friend, no more.

• On your birthday, I find you wherever I turn. I will say that I have loved aspects of you, hated others, and could not understand many more.

• On your birthday, I will say that I have loved the rebel in you, that you’ve always been a source of inspiration to me, and that I do not like the halos of divinity around you. I shall not pray for you.

Clearly unreasonable and vulgar stuff! The most obvious questions that spring to mind are these. Suppose Mohammed was a prophet and not a charlatan and that Allah exists and is all powerful, then is Mohammed really that insecure about what one random person tweets in a virtual realm and is Allah so impotent that he needs people to carry out his ‘justice’ for him? Why are the authorities and many followers of Islam calling for the death penalty? Do they not think Kashgari will be sufficiently punished by Allah in this life or the next? Why do they empower themselves with the responsibility of carrying out the gruesome task of murder? – which is what we’re really talking about here.

Obviously one might think that it is the writings from the Qur’an that inform the overzealous decision making process here. You would be wrong. In fact it was the meek and weak mortal humans who decided the punishment for blasphemy. Again, over ruling the supposed all powerful Allah’s ability to enforce justice as he sees fit. Here is a nice brief history of laws that punish blasphemy from a follower of Islam.

Laws to punish blasphemy are inventions of the human mind – whatever about gods and demons there is no doubt or room for debate on this one – and as such have no need for existence other than to control what people say. This is a very transparent attempt to ensure that no one openly questions religious dogma. When one considers that the Republic of Ireland – republic indeed – passed an anti-blasphemy law only a few short years ago (July 2009) it really strikes the reasonable mind like a sledgehammer. Granted the death penalty is not on the table as a punishment and rather a monetary fine is instead (€25,000 no less) it is a poor reflection on a Western state that has long enough been scandalised by organised religion and its demands. What are the supporters of these laws afraid of? Well, I think that is obvious when considering the clear hypocrisy of humans thinking they need to interfere in the affairs of their deity when they claim he is all knowing, all powerful and has a plan for each and everyone of us.

What is arguably most concerning about Kashgari’s predicament – outside of what has been outlined above – is that there are accusations that Interpol allowed Saudi authorities to use their red notice system to detain and arrest him. Interpol reject the accusations. I truly hope that they are not involved in the perpetuation of barbarism otherwise no one will ever truly be safe to take refuge from a dangerous and, in this case, murderous regime. This story like many others has been under reported since its initial breaking point back in February but Kashgari is still waiting to find out his future for his heinous crimes. As I type he awaits the outcome of not only facing blasphemy charges but charges of apostasy which is certain to lead to death if found guilty. Please follow this link and add your name to the petition for his release. It is unlikely to have any real impact but in the event that it may sway someone, somewhere in a position of influence it is worth the expenditure of a few seconds of your time.

Democracy or Theocracy: What Does Egypt’s Future Hold?

Clay Bennett’s take on Egypt found at: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/feb/01/egypt/?opinioncartoons

The election of Egypt’s first freely elected President has not brought the relief or sense of closure many hoped for after nearly a year and half of uncertainty. Many questions are left unanswered and Egypt’s future is still quite fragile and tentative. The citizens of Egypt fought to overthrow an autocracy but are now on the precipice between a democracy and a theocracy. Morsi, Egypt’s President-elect was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, an organisation which resists western influence and seeks to enforce Sharia law. So how can the citizens of Egypt overthrow an autocracy in an effort to attain liberty only to have the freedom limiting laws of Sharia imposed upon them?

Well Egyptian citizens were not seeking freedom when they revolted. Western media simply romanticized the Egyptians’ motives and portrayed our idealised notion of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ as their motivation.  Those revolting were more concerned with economic and social issues, such as high unemployment, corruption, and inflation. Of course free elections and democracy were a part of the revolt but it was the former that occupied the thoughts of the voters and it was for these reasons that Morsi was elected. His Muslim Brotherhood background is not important to most voters providing the economy gets fixed. Another reason he was elected is due to the fact that he is the lesser of two evils. His election rival, Shafik, was Prime Minister under Mubarak so his campaign was tainted by this association. The fear of Sharia was also allayed by the military. During the transitional period the military, The Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF), commandeered many Presidential powers. The state budget, the legislature, and the promulgation of the constitution are now all under the control of SCAF. Many still fear Sharia may grip the nation, especially given Morsi’s comments, ‘the Qu’ran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal’, which is almost identical to the Brotherhood’s creed. This statement, however, was blown out of proportion by the media due its Brotherhood implications and our interpretation of ‘jihad’. Firstly, jihad is merely a struggle for a cause which the Egypt revolt was and secondly the mention of the Qu’ran and Mohammad could just be a nationalistic affirmation; a statement that Egypt will no longer be under the control of the West, which Mubarak was.

I find it difficult to believe that Morsi will continue with strong links to the Brotherhood. Egypt is still quite volatile and has a high Christian population (10%) and a developed middle class which will not accept Sharia. The most important factor, however, is the military. They are notoriously against the Brotherhood and hold all the power. Morsi is only the President-elect and there is every chance that there will be another election in nine months. So it is my prediction that Morsi will distance himself from the Brotherhood over the next nine months and cosy up with the military in an attempt to remain President or the military will call another election in nine months and a stronger candidate with no links to Mubarak will oppose Morsi. Either way, although some Islamic laws may be enacted, I do not think Sharia will be implemented because to stay in power the Brotherhood has to contend with the Christians, the middle class, and most importantly the military. A bigger issue will be if the Military fail to surrender their powers back to the President and Parliament, which will plant Egypt back into the realm of revolution.

Peter Ferguson is a classicist at the National University of Ireland, Galway. He is a member of  Atheist Ireland and the Humanist Association of Ireland. Read more of Peter’s work at his website: www.humanisticus.com

Painting Post Boxes

On Thursday the 31^st of May we are going to be asked to vote on the European Fiscal Stability Treaty. I will be perfectly honest, I don’t completely have a firm grasp on what it is we are being asked to do. It would appear that we are being asked to commit to several more years of austerity and pain. Now, not being a masochist – one brief flirtation ended with a Black and Decker power tool, a pineapple and a series of uncomfortable visits to my GP – I have no desire to pursue polices that are going to continue to punish citizens for the sins of others.

What is most worrying is that events seem to be moving so fast in Europe at the minute that we seem to be getting locked into an agreement which will be redundant before we even vote on it. Since our government has announced this referendum, France has had a presidential election that swung to the left and the Greeks are on their 4^th election this month (or something close to that anyway), which are flying even further left. It has displayed a remarkable lack of foresight on our government’s part to not spot that there was a potential sea change in Europe. One can imagine how the cabinet meeting went.

 

Enda “ Lads we’ll have to agree on a date for this referendum or Angela is really going to have my boys in the vice next time I see her”.

Noonan” Aw yeah Inda sure set any auld date der like a good fella”

Lone dissenting voice “ Maybe we should hold off and see how the next few weeks pan out”

Enda “Era no, lets push this thing through and find out what they want of us next”

 

Of course that was absurd, the thought of a dissenting voice not toeing the cabinet line is highly unlikely. Is this indicative of a breed of spineless yes men politicians or of a wider deficiency in our national psyche?

There is a theory that countries that have suffered under the yoke of colonialism suffer from a certain degree of emasculation. Post-colonial emasculation is certainly supported by the degree of acquiescence that is evident in our national response to power structures. For a long time it was the British Empire that wielded control; they were then replaced by the strangling control of the Catholic Church whose influence permeated through every level of Irish society and now it would appear that we are the willing recipients of the dictates of the EU, ECB and the IMF.

So, it does warm the heart to see the recent civil disobedience over our government’s ham-fisted attempts to introduce household charges and water charges. Interestingly both policies were at the behest of the IMF. Although not on the scale of protest that our European cousins have exhibited it is a marked improvement. Even when faced with the option to remove the political party whose policies added to our woes we chose to replace them with a party from the same ideological school. But hey, baby steps I guess.

So how far are we prepared to go? This economic crisis is going to necessitate a serious overhaul of how we allow people to do business. This is an opportunity for the leaders of Europe to establish a much fairer system and society. Unfortunately the IMF playbook of how to fix a country consists of opening up every possible area to the will of market principles. The skewed morality of the market is what got us into this bother in the first place.

The Harvard political philosopher Michael Sandel was on the BBC politics show yesterday speaking about the sale of death bonds on the New York stock exchange. This is where you buy bonds in someone’s life insurance policy, in effect gambling on when they will die. The reigns really do need to be tightened on the worst money grabbing characteristics of our species. Mixing my metaphors as is my want, the social democratic cornerstones of altruism and solidarity need to be re-established as the anchors of public policy.

The truth is that unless we make our wishes clear to our government, there will be little or no significant change where it matters. To echo and paraphrase the words of James Connolly nearly a hundred years ago, unless there is serious change we may as well just change the colour of the post boxes.

Religion and the Media.

 

What does Rowan Williams think of it all?

 

For a celebrated secular society such as the UK, why do religious leaders automatically get media air time when they have an opinion they wish to express? What is it about ‘men of the cloth’ such as Rowan Williams that the media find so worthy of attention when they wish to wade into an issue in the public domain? Williams’ most recent foray into the public sphere is his concern over any potential “downgrading” of religious education in schools. One can argue that it makes sense that his view be reported on since this is a public issue that directly relates to the perpetuation of religion. I, for one, have no problem with religion being taught in schools, but it must be taught honestly. If the likes of Williams want religion to remain in schools it is only reasonable that any such class should teach every belief held within that religion and every ‘word of God’ should be mulled over. There is no room for cherry picking information in an educational situation. So, not only should children be taught about how Jesus was a super guy (with super powers) but children should be told about how Jesus’ father (who was also himself) thought it was perfectly reasonable to burn two children to death for the lighting of incense against his wishes (Leviticus 10:1-2). If it is to be taught, then teach it all, no holds barred, with the obvious caveat that it should not be sold as fact but rather ‘This is what this religion believes’ and of course there is never any room for creationism being touted as an alternative to evolution.

Getting back onto topic, Williams has a track record of getting airtime for his political opinions, despite not being an elected political figure but rather an appointed theological one, which, might I point out, doesn’t make him an expert in any realm other than the word of his ‘God’. His opinions are often as progressive as is likely to be found in any leader within a religion, for example he defends equality for women and homosexuals (both the favourite piñata of the religious zealot) in the sense that they should be allowed to hold positions of influence within the church. Naturally this does not extend to a potentially gay bishop having a partner. Even Williams’ liberal sensibilities have their limits. Beneath these almost reasonable positions lies less acceptable opinions in a secular society such as the UK. Williams advocates the introduction of sharia law in affairs of marriage, in effect having separate laws for one segment of society, while he simultaneously holds the view that the UK is fixated on ‘identity politics’ – things such as gay rights and feminism – and now is the time to focus on what is “good for all of us” . To me it looks like he wants two things at once. Separation and unity. Perhaps this is merely being consistent with the contradictory nature of the bible.

So here we have a man getting airtime for his opinions on subjects as diverse as sharia law (despite not being a representative of the people who wish to see it come into effect) gay rights (where he has also been reported as saying the government have no right to change the law to allow gay marriage; see here for a rebuttal to anyone who agrees with him), feminism and what gets taught in the classroom. Again the question has to be asked. Why? Is he an expert in political theory regarding the rights of minorities such as Muslims in the West or the gay community? Is he an expert in the struggle of women seeking equal and fair treatment in a patriarchal society? He gets air time for none of these reasons. It seems he gets airtime because of tradition. The tradition of the religious advisor. This hails back to the time of total rule by the monarch where a ‘man of the cloth’ was always on hand to advise the ruler. This was a time when it was believed that Kings and Queens were chosen by the God of the land and appointed to rule and therefore it was quite natural to have a representative of God on hand when making decisions. Somehow this tradition of valuing the opinion of the church has carried over into current society, but perhaps for more than traditions sake. It is likely that as the UK has become more secular there is a vocal religious minority that kicks up a fuss when there is any indication that their biased, religiously fuelled views are not being taken seriously. In essence the media is almost afraid of being accused of being discriminatory or unbalanced in their coverage by not including the likes of Williams in reporting of an issue. It all seems so utterly insane and arbitrary.

Now that Williams has stepped down from his role as Archbishop he will likely slowly fade into the background scenery and his replacement will begin to pop up in any realm to rant about his position on any issue that piques his interest and so the circus of taking seriously the opinion of a man who is informed by a Bronze Age book as the source of moral guidance in 2012 continues.

Spin and stop

Now I have been called a lot of things in my life and as hard as this may be to believe not all of them have been complimentary. Several of my former school teachers, friends, enemies, family members, casual acquaintances and random members of the public have gone to colourful lengths to best verbalise my character. I would like to say that I have a thick skin and those barbs on my character slide off me with such speed and fluidity as to suggest that my muscle, bones and organs are encased in some space age polymer. So, I have a thick skin and those barbs on my characters slide off me with such speed and fluidity to suggest that my muscle, bones and organs are encased in some space age polymer.

One thing I have never minded being called is cynical, whether this is a healthy mindset to have or not is moot; this is how I am. As George Bernard Shaw once said “The power of accurate observation is often mistaken for cynicism by those who do not have it” then again he maintained an interest in eugenics throughout his life which would make anyone cynical about his views.

I was not always like this; there was a time when I marvelled at the trickery of special effects. I remember being wowed by special effects when I was a kid, wondering, how they did that rolling boulder in Indian Jones or the ring shaped space station in 2001: A Space Odyssey, but in truth I really did not want to know. Unfortunately watching a documentary about Kubrick, I learned how he pulled off some of his tricks. This revelation was followed by thinking “oh that was clever” but this was quickly followed by the feeling that I have been cheated out of a sense of wonderment. Now I go to the cinema to see some special effects blockbuster and frankly I am bored and unimpressed because I just think of some programmer sat at a computer punching in code. The last piece of trickery I saw that that made me sit up was the zero gravity fight scene in Inception. We are all so jaded, although the prospect of watching two giant intergalactic robots duke it out should bore anyone over the age of 14. Fear not though there are no shortages of examples of people trying to pull the wool over our eyes on a daily basis.

The phenomenal success of the Kony 2012 campaign by the “invisible children” group is a fascinating example of the power of a piece of slick manipulative propaganda. It has been superbly exposed by Charlie Brooker, as the possibly dangerous meanderings of a quasi fascist evangelical group advocating military action in central Africa.

(www.commondreams.org/video/2012/03/15-1)

Someone might want to run this by the current owners of Central Africa: China. It is an internet phenomenon, although that phrase has been some what tempered by the success of piano playing cats and doped up children, clocking up over 70 million hits at the most recent count. There is no doubt that at this moment there are millions being flooded into the coffers of this organisation with roughly 70% of it being poured into the organisation and 30% heading to Africa.

Perhaps what is more worrying than a private organisation turning out slick propaganda for their own financial and ideological aims, is state sponsored propaganda. During the days of the Soviet Union, Pravda produced reams of propaganda to assure their citizens that the path of communist solidarity was virtuous and successful. State sponsored lies that illuminate a lack of respect of those living the harsh realities on the ground. This proud tradition is continued to Russia today. Only in the past week there is an article in the Guardian about the reality of Vladimir Putin’s encounter with an endangered amur tiger (www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/15/putin-tiger-pr-stunt) .The tiger was driven in from a zoo several hundred kilometres away and told to get into character as an endangered wild animal, for a photo op with the Russian president. During which Vladimir shot the beast with more tranquilizer, fitted him with radio collar and gave the tiger a loving kiss. Tragically the tiger died on the return trip to the zoo due to the fact that it had been administered 3 times the recommended dose of tranquilizer. Vladimir Putin’s seemingly never ending reign, President to Prime Minister to President to Supreme and Gracious Leader, is a veritable cornucopia of highly stylised photo ops. Stripped to the waist arm wrestling a bear or taking down an eagle with a Judo chop, the diminutive former KGB man has done it all in an effort to reinforce his image as the walking embodiment of machismo; but is anybody buying this anymore. The lengths that Putin has gone to recently to steal another election, the amount of imprisoned journalists and political rivals in Russia suggests the many people see through this flimsy charade.

Our own politicians here in Ireland only this week cancelled a photo op where the respective departments would brandish gold stars making their achievements during their brief tenure in power. From a quick glance this seems to amount to doing what they are told by the Troika and blaming the rest of the problems on the last shower of chancers and ne’er do-wellers that sat in power. Our government is at pains to tell us of the drain on the nation’s resources that is benefit fraud and is encouraging us to be vigilant and to report any possible fraud. (www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/0216/1224311854911.html) This is what our friends in the political game call a “bait and switch”, you get everyone suspicious of their neighbours and distract them from the people who are really selling us down the river.

It is a worrying trend as we see more and more right wing governments coming to power that it seems to be perfectly acceptable to poke fun and laugh at the lower rungs of society. Whether it is My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding, Tallafornia, Geordie Shore or this particularly tasteless number from Paddy Power bookmakers(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu5Q86V8lT4&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fresults%3Fsearch_query%3Dpaddy%2Bpower%2Bchav), there seems to be a willingness to sneer at cartoonish representations of the lower rungs of society and portray them all so thieving layabouts with an inability to control their base urges. I guess it is supposed to ease our guilt about the savage cuts to public services that will have genuinely tragic consequences on those who rely on them the most.

I firmly believe that a healthy dose of cynicism is essential to getting through this life. Now even more so than ever, the ruling elites have nearly had the rug pulled out from underneath them and the 99% are rumbling. The internet and social media can create and destroy stars and causes in the flash of an eye. Who is to know if someone is being straight with you anymore? (Apart from me of course)

The State of the States.

So here we are in 2012 .The dawning of a new year, with new hopes – of those privileged enough to have any – as well as old being projected into the next 12 month period. We all witnessed great change and upheaval in the world in the last few years, particularly regarding the world wide fiscal crisis, but it also seems there are more sinister changes afoot. I turn your attention to the USA where the Republicans – while simultaneously grinding Obama’s administration to a halt in the immediate – are deciding on who will run against Obama in the next Presidential election. I won’t get drawn into the incredible bunch of candidates that are running for their chance to, in many cases, begin a theocracy of sorts in the country and how most are clearly not of rational mind when evolution is cavalierly resigned to the dustbin of mere opinion and conjecture despite ground breaking research by evolutionary biologist Richard Lenski which has categorically shown that evolution can be observed and repeated on a micro level. No. The calibre of the political candidates in the USA is not the primary focus here, although arguably they are a reflection, and in many cases the source, of the wider problems facing the country.

The sinister changes occurring in the USA at present all revolve around freedom. That word. Freedom. It has over the years been synonymous with the USA. America, the land of the free and the self appointed liberators of the oppressed. This freedom of course ranges from the right to bear arms to the right to free speech. This country proudly boasts of these intrinsic freedoms afforded to their citizens. However, it is becoming clear that, to paraphrase a song writing great, times they are changing, and not for the better as the sentiment originally intended.

Do you remember going to school? The abject boredom of some classes, the joy of others, the various ups and downs, the crushes on peers, making new friends, the police presence? I think most people reading this will identify with everything except the last point. It seems in some parts of the USA that police are routinely walking the corridors of schools enforcing law and order. Where would the Americans of today be without the brave men and women putting their life on the line by stopping a young girl from spraying perfume on herself in class as a result of being bullied about smelling badly? If it wasn’t for these brave souls such menaces would have gone on executing their evil doing with immunity and would never have ended up in court. I recommend reading the article linked which makes it clear how the basic freedom of being a child and acting like one – making mistakes included – is forcefully being removed from schools. This could of course be seen as limited in its scope, after-all it is largely a problem within Texas and everybody knows that things are done… differently in Texas. This doesn’t effect the nation as a whole and, hopefully, is unlikely to. Fair point. Well, what about the insightful and progressive new law that Obama promised he’d veto but went ahead and signed anyway? I am of course speaking of the National Defence Authorisation Act (NDAA).

This new law affords powers to the military to arrest a foreigner and detain them indefinitely without trial. It, at face value, may seem reasonable. If someone is suspected of being a terrorist or aiding terrorism then they are fair game for being subjected to the enforcement of this law. It’s only when you realise that offences such as committing a “belligerent act” against the USA or its allies also makes you a valid candidate for indefinite imprisonment and first class care that the military is known to provide. I would be curious to know what the exact definition of a ‘belligerent act’ is in this context. As it is it appears to be conveniently broad.

It is quite clear that terrorism is the new communism – where by merely being branded a terrorist is enough justification to persecute a person, there are many examples of activists being labelled terrorists for example – but with one distinct advantage. Whereas communism was promoted as a threat to a way of life by the propaganda machine, terrorism is a threat to life itself. ‘Allow us to do what we want or you will die at the hands of big scary terrorists’. Essentially the USA finds itself in the situation where, let’s face it, if you piss off the wrong people you’re going to disappear into the ether of indefinite and secretive detention. It’s quite ironic how on his election ticket Obama promised to close down Camp X-Ray – which he failed to do – where indefinite detention without trial was the order of the day and now he’s signed this new bill into law. Is anyone disillusioned and disappointed in the political system of the world even more so now? I for one regret ever hoping he got into office.

As if the NDAA was not enough the censorship of information itself is the next threat from the powers that be. Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA) made headlines recently. These bills were modelled on censorship trailblazers such as China. They were being promoted as a means to block internet content that facilitates or promotes piracy. Again, this seems reasonable until looked at closely. The only problem is, as many commentators have pointed out, that they would be all too easy to abuse and since it is essentially for big corporation it is very likely it will be abused. I point you towards the case of Megaupload being wrongly censored by UMG on YouTube (before said company was taken offline completely). One potential risk is that in a comment section of a website if someone was to post a link to illegal pirate content then the site hosting the link would itself be at risk. You see where this could take us? There are many other issues highlighting why SOPA/PIPA are a danger to freedom of information and I’d urge all to read up on it. Essentially it means that if a US government was determined enough it could bring down ANY website it saw fit. All it has to do is meet the broad criteria of the SOPA/PIPA bills. Imagine what power that could afford the rulers in a country, say, where a popular uprising was occurring. As it stands, after a virtual revolt by Internet users, SOPA/PIPA appears to have fallen at the last hurdle and appears to be in hibernation, for now.

The USA today is not recognisable as the pinnacle of freedom it once was to many. Its own constitution is not worth the paper it is written on. While there are people in power bemoaning the treatment of prisoners held indefinitely elsewhere while allowing it in their own country, and while these same people criticise the likes of China for heavily censoring the Internet while simultaneously putting into place the mechanisms where just that could conceivably happen in their own country you have ask, who do they think they are kidding? As well as, what the hell is going on? It looks like the USA is changing for the worse. It all seems so dream like, surreal. Once NDAA was signed into law the USA crossed a line – indefinite detention is no longer confined to foreign soil – and there is a real risk that line may not be uncrossed without some terrible consequences for the nation first.

Oh and other countries that allow indefinite detention without trial? Shining examples of human rights abuses that are China, North Korea, Cuba (how could we forget) and Myanmar. Go a little further back into history and the likes of Stalin and Hitler’s regimes also come to mind. Who’d have thought Obama’s administration would have so much in common with such fine states and historical figures? I wish the hopes of the citizens of the land of the free are realised and that 2012 brings with it some perspective for this once great nation. If not, the USA as we once knew it may remain a distant memory. I wonder how long it will take for someone in a position of influence to convince citizens that the NDAA should be amended to allow for the indefinite detention of US citizens? This would have been unthinkable only a few short years ago but it doesn’t seem to be so outlandish an idea anymore. McCarthyism seems to be making an unwelcome comeback.

Of course the greatest fear of the changes in the USA is that they may not be isolated to that country and other Western governments may adopt similar policies. The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is an international equivalent to SOPA/PIPA and Europe seems keen to pass this into law alongside the USA and others. Perhaps it is unfair to single out the USA. Perhaps it is the West as a whole whose future freedoms are at a crossroads. That said, the USA has always been a symbol of what it meant to be free. It inspired the French, the Irish and many others to throw off the shackles of unwanted rule. It has inspired the downtrodden to want more, to believe there was more to be had. However, I posit that this is rapidly changing and the USA is increasingly being looked at by other Western nations as a deteriorating nation with no obvious way back from the brink. It is worth remembering the words of one of the celebrated citizens of this once great nation, Benjamin Franklin, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”. To expand upon that thought, it is arguable that giving up essential liberty will lead to neither liberty nor safety but something all together unforeseen.