The war being waged at my library

My location, being provincial, is not as generously served as some areas. Recently I noticed that proposed cuts in library services in a London borough, Hackney I think, while being vehemently opposed by interested parties and scrutinized in the media would still leave that borough with about four times the per capita library facilities that we enjoy here. Such asymmetric allocation of state funding is the main reason my disillusion over the concept of collective benefit has grown so strong.

Now my taste in literature is eclectic, an attribute I acquired from the second hand book stall that used to grace our market. It's marvelous what the availability of cheap diverse literature can do to dig up the tram lines they lay down in the literary supplements. Alas that stall has been defunct for a long time but my local library had served as a reasonable substitute. A while ago though, I began to notice that increasingly books I'd be looking for would be unavailable either through being absent from the catalogue or missing from the shelves. It was intermittent at first but the frequency of which this occurred increased dramatically. It wasn't until I noticed that books that I'd already read, that were in good condition, had been removed from the catalogue that I began to suspect that arcane forces were at work.

Allan Moore, Richard Matherson, H. Rider Haggard, a few of the authors who've had works removed recently. I was particularly wounded by Moore's removal because his unfettered work had gone some way to instill hope that English cultural life could combat the encroachment of cultural dwarfism. Even though, I should note, that Moore has himself done his bit to advance that phenomenon, albeit possibly inadvertently, when he helped get the ball rolling on the current anti Frank Miller mood. I don't have to look far to find an element of commonality between the works that are being withheld. They all share the property that I call, guy stuff, by that I mean works which give insight into masculine life. How many men do you think work at my local library? Here's a clue, it's somewhere between zero and naught and yet amongst the women who work there diverse minorities are represented, coincidence? I wonder...

Death of the Ball Turret Gunner

I've no patience for people who lace rhetoric with moral imperatives. I'm supposed to care about people starving somewhere or some intolerable injustice being perpetrated in another location because it's the right thing to do. I'm presented with deserving cases that are almost always suitably photogenic. I've no patience because I've no faith in their sincerity, blah blah blah, their worthless words trip like lemmings over a cliff. I've witnessed how much people really care, it's not an impressive tally. Unless there's some suitable emotional bribe, something to stoke those cosey 'dogooder' embers in their hearts, such people will the overlook the most bestial brutality.

Randall Jarrell said it all for me in his poem, Death of the Ball Turret Gunner. With it he illustrates the murderous faculty of the state and the callousness with which it is exercised. Jarrell describes the drama of warfare with the imagery of abortion and illustrates the state's pitiless insistence for murder. Now this is where I'm supposed to be expounding my own moral argument, nothing could be further from the truth. I don't believe there's a any practical alternative to either of those practices but please don't lie to me any more. Don't tell me you're doing for the love of humanity, you're doing it for self interest. You're launching missiles into crowded markets or flushing children down the bog because it's better for you. You're not doing it for democracy or a woman's right to choose.

Dale Farm

Been listening to the 5-Live coverage of the drama unfolding in Essex this morning and reflecting on the positions commentators have taken up on this controversy:

1. Oppressed minority and abusive authority
2. Wicked pikeys who're getting what they deserve

It's a bit of a surprise to find that the 5-Live coverage wasn't really coloured overtly by one of those two positions, there seemed to be a genuine spirit of inquiry, at least the reports I listened to. It seems the BBC hasn't totally been given over totally to its intrinsic political bias but lets withhold judgment on that one for the time being. I'm not going to express any opinions on what I think of the rights or wrongs of the evictions because I don't really have any. With controversies such this the public is almost always left in the dark because the media is preoccupied with promoting their view with little regard to the facts. Leaving the rest of us in the dark as to the circumstances leading to the conflict, such is the case here. Sure I can make assumptions based on stereotypes and that is indeed what a lot of people do. The reticence displayed by the male residents when it comes to appearing on camera as led folk to draw negative conclusions about the residents at the site.

There's assumptions being made about the role of authority too, there's a suspicion of connivance and various accusations being leveled at the local authority. Racism, is the word I've held being leveled, somewhat incongruous seeing as there is no racial distinction between the two sides. Such accusations are culturally derived invocations, magic words, spells recited to conjure sympathy. They're a reflection of the people using them, whom in the this case are the protesters who've attracted themselves to this issue. Rent a mob, is what The Daily Mail would call 'em justified in this circumstance because they're there for the aggro and publicity rather than any conviction in the cause. There you go, I've made an an assumption based upon a stereotype rather than evidence.

The practical consequences of the eviction, once it's completed would seem to represent a problem. Just where are the pikeys going to go once they've been turned out?  I did hear an official fielding questions from the press and when he was asked that he said something like:

"We've informed them of the location of unoccupied legal sites..."

"We don't want to go to Liverpool" was the response he quoted. Well I don't blame 'em, If the solution to problem of relocation is to move people hundreds of miles from their present location away from any work, jobs they might have.

Novel ideas on food production

You know The Third World, where the hungry people live. Well I've just read an article by a political activist saying we should stop producing a lot of our own food and import it from those places. They're really serious about this depopulation malarkey aren't they?

Where did the Plymouth Brethren go?

Back in the day when my town had a reasonably broad retail base there was an artist materials and drawing supply shop. I used to buy my pens and Inks there, it was one of the few locations you could buy Higgens drawing ink.  Our government has deliberately extinguished smaller retail enterprises through such means as the Universal Business Rate in order to extract greater revenue from such concerns as betting shops, coffee house franchises and mobile phone shops because such concerns have much higher margins than traditional retail. One effect of this would seem to be the virtual disappearance of the local Plymouth Brethren population, that used to be a visible presence in my locale. Plymouth Brethren being beyond the pale of the normal standards of conformity would like many such groups often have their own businesses, the art supply shop being one such example. I wonder where they've gone?

The two reply rule.

I've got a set of informal rules that I use web forums and such:

1. Only post two replies or comments on any thread
2. Never explain the same thing twice, i.e. don't expand or walk through your previous post, it's much better just to post something like, "Are you thick?"
3. Let the other guy have the last word.

Never the less I do occasionally break those rules, I think I've done it probably twice in the last year. Once on the subject of Special Relativity, which doesn't count really because I was being inquisitive rather than expounding my own opinion. The other occasion concerned the perennial pimple on the arse of Youtube i.e. the atheist v. god botherer slug-fest.

I remember my first encounter with Pat Condell's Youtube channel, I was left scratching my head and my jaw on the floor. It was a video proffering the idea of banning people from wearing burkas. I rather naivly posted something like, "Just let folk wear what they want, within reason, don't let 'em into banks or anything stupid like that." It took me a little while to adjust my input filter to Pat's rather rhetorical style but once I started to listen to him I began to realize that even though I like to consider myself inured to the tar brush of political correctness, even I had been projecting preconceptions upon him. I began to find him interesting even if there's very little common ground between us and appreciate his PC free oasis. So began my initiation to the world of YT's religious debate.

It wasn't long after I'd subscribed to him that I started to get, strange looking recommended for you videos, friend invites and video referrals on the subject. Naively again, I entered into the debate but quickly found my facetious manner to be not just unappreciated but saw it provoke some rather bizarre hostility. Being English, it was something of a culture shock to find the issue so contentious, the only occasion I'd encountered such fervor on the subject was when an acquaintance of mine started to argue over my religious affiliation. He kept telling me I was an atheist, an assertion to which I countered in a rather bemused fashion with the fact that I'm a Roman Catholic.

So a month or so ago I encounter this video where a guy is debunking some god botherer, Ray Comfort, I think but don't take my word for that, the subject of contention being Noah's Ark. So Ray or whoever come up with some specious rationalization as proof of the diluvian catastrophe and this guy is countering it with science and maths, well just basic arithmetic actually. Now most people here have gathered enough congnitive function by the time they're about eight years old to work out the veracity of the account of Noah, his Ark and the Flood, is questionable. So when I saw the nodding dog comments on this guy's video I kinda couldn't resist the urge to say something like, "Arguing about the flood is stupid you know." The point I was trying to communicate being that everyone with a full set of marbles can work out every thing in this guy's video for themselves and the only reason not to do so is as either an act of faith or some kind of self delusion. It's impossible to argue against such rationally because they have no rational foundation. What came next I have to admit I was unprepared for, he employed two devices that should be anathema to any self respecting atheist, the Matyr Defence and an appeal to faith.

I should quote his Matyr Defence but I can't be bothered looking it up at the moment so I'm going to paraphrase, it went something like this, "I refused to be intimidated into silence..." yeah you get the idea. It was his appeal to faith that really raised my hackles though, he wrote something like, "If I can can just convince a single person of the truth..." I cannot convey the feelings of contempt that aroused when I read his reply. "There is no continuity between intention and consequence" I replied, trying to convey my sense of irony at the fact that he, an atheist was employing his faith in benign intent would ensure a positive outcome. That's an act of prayer in my estimation.

Dancing to the key of pain

I've got my second physiotherapy session today, the first was a fortnight ago. Folk in other countries, even other parts of this country have expressed surprise at the length of the gap between sessions. It doesn't surprise me of course because I now that NHS resources are allocated according to regional priority. My location takes a double hit, it's both rural and a safe political constituency so the per capita funding here is between a 1/3 and 1/2 of that of the most favoured locations. According to my appointment card they're booking me in with the same therapist, which will be nice, she's a rather attractive ging, well she was a redhead, the flame of youth has dulled upon her brow. I came away from the last session with a somewhat elevated mood, conversation with an intelligent woman is a rather rare occurrence for me and it was a welcome if brief interlude even though the conversation was rather limited in scope. The scope of our discourse did broaden somewhat though, they ask you about your personal life, nothing too deep, hobbies, job, etcetera. I told her I enjoy fishing and keep a few hens, coincidentally she also has a few birds, bantams, so we exchanged thoughts on this topic for a few moments. Oh well I'd better shave 'n' stuff, the appointment is in just over an hours time.