Remembrance, Memory & War

Remembrance & memory are two different things. Remembrance is an action. Something we usually do deliberately. Memory is the mind storing something from the past. As I've aged I have realised that there have been many memories & a great deal of data stored in my brain over 80 years. Sadly remembrance is becoming more difficult as the years pass.

In the case of memories no one's life is filled with happiness & people or events that are good memories. There are usually things that we would rather forget. It seems that we have little control over what is remembered & what is forgotten. It might be good if we could chose which memories to store & which to erase. Apparently there are techniques to influence & improve memory. But I think it's a bit late for me to do that. The brain itself selects which memories to solidify & which to forget. A lot depends on the emotional impact of the event. 

We are currently celebrating 80 years since VE day. Personally I am very ambivalent about this sort of remembrance. Human history is littered with wars of varying magnitude from skirmishes to full blown world wars. England fought in over 120 wars across 170 countries post the Act of Union in 1707. Prior to 1707 England fought in the Hundred Years' War, the Wars of the Roses, and the English Civil War for example.

We do not celebrate anniversaries of all these wars I'm glad to say. I can see nothing to celebrate about war. It is pointless, cruel & destructive. It is generally brought about by men seeking territory, power & wealth. There is huge death, destruction & suffering. Often it is the weak & defenceless - women, children & the elderly who suffer most. What is there to celebrate? 

This week we are celebrating the end of the 2nd world war. All wars do end. History shows us that war achieves nothing positive. Over the years millions of people have been killed or maimed. Homes & infrastructure has been destroyed & rebuilt. 

Its a repeating, man made cycle. We now have ways of fighting that don't involve hand to hand fighting. It is done from control centres miles away from the actual conflict. Soldiers kill without even seeing the "enemy", led by powerful men in capital cities who have never been in harms way & have no concern for the "collateral damage" they instigate.

The only winners from war are the people & companies who profit from the clearing up & rebuilding after the devastation. Malthus had a theory that because population expands at a faster rate than the earths ability to provide what we need, we need events to control population. War, pestilence & famine.

 

If there is a god perhaps this is the inbuilt way of control & balance? If there isn't maybe we live in a self controlling universe that will carry on despite us & our pathetic ways of trying to be in control of something much greater than us. 

Responsibility & Opting Out - Individual or Corporate?

I have just had an email from an organisation called Swiftaid telling me that one of my major charity  donations has automatically been registered for Gift Aid. There are tax reasons, according to my accountant, why this shouldn't happen & I tell all the charities not to do it. My first thought was that this was a scam. But when I checked it out it wasn't.

I am really cross. Hopefully I have stopped this in it's tracks. But this is the first I have heard about this new change of responsibility, presumably by many charities. Moving responsibility away from organisations onto individuals isn't a new thing. Now there are several. The most well known is automatic organ donor registration, for which there was huge publicity & did not happen overnight. 

Now there is also National & GP Data opt out. The balance has switched from individuals giving consent to them knowing they have to opt out. In other words affirmative action is ending. The responsibility has shifted. I'm sure this is much easier for the organisations, It saves them time & money. I'm not convinced that it is beneficial for the individual though. Personally I want to be able to make a choice, whether to opt in or opt out.

Most people are perfectly capable of making choices as long as they are aware of the choice to be made. We can make a "pre-emptive opt out" or  "withdraw consent". However that relies on individuals being notified in advance of the choice to be made & given any relevant information. The big problem is that despite our advanced technological age often relevant information is hidden away in small print or a button or link that people may not notice. 

Additionally not everyone spends their time on computers as I do. Not everyone is tech savvy. Not everyone has the time to check things out on reliable sources.

This seems to be a growing trend. I really think it is a retrograde step & will cause confusion & individuals being opted in to things they do not want to be. I suspect it is not in the spirit of Human Rights, but I can't think which one it might infringe. 

Basically we are moving to a Big State & increased power away from the individual.    

 

Privatisation - Maggies Mistake?

"In the U.K., privatization accomplished wonders. By 1979, the borrowings and losses of state-owned industries were running at about £3 billion a year. But from 1989 to 1990, companies privatized by the Thatcher government fattened the government purse by some £2 billion" - Harvard Business Review 1992. The key phrase here is "fattened the government purse". As with so many political decisions the short term gain obscured the long term resulting problems. 

The initial premise was the concept of privatisation to propel innovation & efficiency & promote competition. It seems to me that where privatised companies are natural monopolies, like all the utilities, water & rail for example, this simply does not work. There is no competition in either example. The consumer cannot choose between price & service quality. It's a one stop shop. There is no alternative.

To my mind any profit should have gone to investment in both maintenance & improvement of service. Not to inflated salaries & bonuses & shareholder dividends.

I have just watched the BBC documentary "Thames Water - Inside the Crisis". It was illuminating. It changed my perceptions & made me very sympathetic to the people who actually work there trying to make a very inadequate system work adequately. What it revealed about the state of the infrastructure is shocking. The only reason it hasn't failed even more than the dreadful pollution of our rivers, lakes & seas is the dedication of the workers. Workers who don't know whether they will continue to have jobs given the state of the finances. They have a debt of around £19 billion.

How on earth could that happen if the company was being well managed? Obviously it couldn't. At the time of privatisation Thames Water had no debt.

Large companies have a duty to shareholders and have to keep increasing profits. That model will never work for essentials & is even more unsustainable when the owners of the companies are not British. They do not have the interests of the British public at the heart of their business model. 

At least 70% of the English water industry is controlled by foreign-based firms. This includes a wide range of investors, such as super-rich individuals, banks, hedge funds, foreign governments, and businesses based in tax havens.

Half of the "big six" energy suppliers are owned by foreign companies, including EDF Energy. Foreign-owned companies also have a significant stake in other utilities, such as electricity distribution and supply companies.

BT is owned by Bharti Overseas Pvt Ltd (Indian), Patrick Drahi (Franco Israeli), T Mobile Holdings (German), & Altice UK SARL.

There is only one set of railways, one water main, one gas line and one power grid. 

To my mind we are now paying the price of Thatchers privatisation. The chickens have come home to roost. I can accept that this is perhaps the benefit of hindsight. But it has been a catastrophic mistake. The only winners are the senior managers on inflated salaries & bonuses & the investors.

It is time to try to put this right.

 

Transgender & Body Dysmorphia

I was born a woman & have always thought of myself as a woman. So I am not able to imagine what it might be like experience BDD. I have seen the sexual landscape change enormously in my lifetime. The mores that I grew up with have largely disappeared. That can be both good & bad. It's not my job to judge. I would like to understand though.

The UK Supreme Court has just ruled that the legal definition of a woman should be based on biological sex. Because of my age & experience that does seem to me to be logical. The impact on trans people & many areas of life in the UK will be huge. But Trans people will still have their rights protected by the Human Rights Act.

I can clearly remember when being homosexual was illegal. Naively I didn't think I knew any homosexual or lesbian people at the time. But statistically I must have. Looking back I can identify people who were probably in that category. Thank goodness we have come to realise that being gay is part of being normal. Now I have several lovely close friends who are gay. We have moved on & are mostly more tolerant.

I find transgender a much more complex situation to deal with. So I googled to find out more - as you do.

Body dysmorphia, also known as Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD), is thought to be caused by a combination of factors, including genetics, brain chemistry, & environmental experiences. A family history of BDD or other related mental health conditions, like OCD or depression, may be factors. Differences in brain structure & activity in individuals with BDD, particularly in areas responsible for processing visual information and regulating emotions exist. Some researchers also believe that low levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter, may play a role. Bullying, teasing, abuse, or neglect, can significantly increase the risk of developing BDD. Western society's emphasis on physical perfection and beauty can contribute to negative body image and feelings of inadequacy, potentially triggering or worsening BDD. That is exacerbated by social media, which often portrays unrealistic standards of beauty. Perfectionism & low self esteem can also be factors.

I am wary of the current trend to over medicalising & over diagnosis of people today. I am not convinced that it helps. I'm not talking here about physical conditions like Cancer or Parkinsons. I'm talking more about the power of our brains to create thoughts & perceptions that may not be accurate. There is evidence that we humans have a tendency to live up to a diagnosis, particularly a mental one.

However, the fact is that humans are far more diverse that we knew. Medical science has moved on & there is very interesting neurological research that is producing evidence to explain much that should make us more accepting of difference.

 

Surely we can simply accept that we are different, not only in how we look, but what we believe, what our cultural norms are. If we can't do that we will just become more judgmental & adversarial.  

Role Models & Responsibility.

A role model is someone looked to by others as an example to be imitated. They are admired and their behaviour  is copied. Role models can be good or bad. I might admire someone who has good characteristics such as ethics, skills, experience, humanity. On the other hand many people follow role models that I would consider bad because their characteristics are misogynistic, self serving, unethical even cruel. I could easily name people in both categories, but maybe its better if you decide for yourself. 

The point is we humans do tend to follow other stronger, possibly more charismatic, or even dictatorial people. If we follow role models because they provide inspiration, guidance, and a blueprint for success and positive behavior that is a good thing. Our parents are our first role models. They shape our character. Good parenting is important to the healthy development of a child. 

People may follow bad role models due to many factors, the desire to fit in, the perception of being cool or successful associated with negative behavior, and the influence of peer groups or media. Some may be drawn to negative role models as a way to define themselves or seek validation from those who share their negative views. Again I could easily name some, but I'm sure you can too. 

The reason I'm posting about this is there needs to be a balance with the good role models outweighing the bad, because there will always be "bad actors" trying to achieve prominence. My feeling is that we are at a tipping point & I am going to use the words good & evil here. It seems to me that negative, undemocratic, unethical role models have far too much sway in our world today. Impressionable people worldwide are either voluntarily following them, or are too afraid to speak out against them. A lot of this is driven by the internet & social media. We cannot let that continue.

In order to stop this in it's tracks we all have to take responsibility. We have to be prepared to challenge & speak out against a great deal that is happening in our world. We cannot be passive & hope that others will act on our behalf. Individually we may not have much power, but collectively we can really change things. 

We must retain our freedoms to speak & to act. We must use that to influence decisions & actions.

My Trade Deficit v Trumps

I have a trade deficit with M&S & Sainsbury's among others. I buy most of my food & household goods from them. I must have spent a fortune over the years. But they don't reciprocate, they don't buy anything from me. So I'm really p..... off. I think I should operate tariffs against them. The fact that I don't make anything they might want to buy is immaterial. A trade deficit is unfair & annoying. I feel badly mistreated. 

That is the "logic" behind what Trump has done with tariffs worldwide. He certainly didn't base them on a combination of existing tariffs and other trade barriers (like regulations). He had a mathematical formula 

that no one had ever heard of which took the trade deficit for the US in goods with a particular country, divided by the total goods imports from that country and then divided that number by two. He simply thought he could eliminate the US's goods trade deficit with each country. Unbelievable!

Americans spend and invest more than they earn. The US buys more from the world than it sells. As long as that continues, the US will continue to keep running a deficit despite increasing tariffs with global trading partners. The "great deal maker" simply doesn't understand economics & trade. Worse still, if there are any dissenting voices, & there are, he doesn't listen. All he listens to is the sycophants who actually clap him in televised cabinet meetings. It's all about ego & image.

Thomas Sampson of the London School of Economics said: "There is no economic rationale for doing this and it will cost the global economy dearly." He is not alone.

The markets showed Trump exactly what they thought of his tariffs. Stocks plummeted. Trump panicked & there is a 90 day pause for everyone except China. He is in a trade war with China now. Good luck with that Trumpy. 

This is all very unstable & seat of the pants / back of an envelope stuff. The markets don't like instability. They want to plan years ahead. You don't invest in a new factory or new machinery if the world is unstable. You batten down the hatches.  

Meanwhile people lose jobs & things cost more. Just what America voted for!

 

Protectionism

Trump doesn't seem to understand that he is not protecting America by imposing tariffs. Quite the opposite, but more of that later. Tariffs are normally put on goods, not on entire countries. Trump is acting like a Mafia boss going round businesses for "protection money" so that he won't do something worse. Considering the harm already done it's hard to imagine what that might be, but I'm sure Trump will do his best.

To protect something is to preserve or guarantee it, often by legislation. Protectionism is shielding a country's domestic industries from foreign competition by taxing imports, using import tariffs, quotas on imports, or the use of subsidies. Protectionism raises prices on imported goods for consumers so causes inflation. Domestic producers may be better off if consumers buy alternative goods made at home. It may preserve some jobs, but considering what Musks DOGE has done, that seems very unlikely. Many American jobs have already gone. Generally it's a right wing, nationalist, way of doing economics. In Trumps case, he is completely re-writing the playbook & the markets are responding in horror.

China in particular is playing hardball. "Losing face"in China is equal to losing the respect of others, so avoiding this situation ("saving face") is very important in Chinese culture. The Chinese government prides itself on being strong & cannot afford to allow Trump to win this fight, however much it costs them, because it would make them look weak. The imposition of 125% on Chinese goods is frankly ridiculous.

I think I am fairly rational, so I find it impossible to imagine the reasoning, (I use the term loosely in Trumps case), or rationale, that led him to go down this self destructive route. Unless America can find a way to stop him, I think they are doomed & the world will suffer the consequences until he is booted out. 

I just hope that can happen before he serves his full term. Wake up America! 

Sycophants

A person who acts obsequiously towards someone important in order to gain advantage is a sycophant. In simple terms a leech, parasite or a toady. Sycophants are obsequious. They are too eager to help or agree with someone more important than them. As in my favourite Hans Christian Anderson story - The Emperors New Clothes, where the emperor is exposed before his subjects as a vain idiot wearing nothing.

https://andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html

I imagine, by now, you can see where I'm going with this. Trump is surrounded by sycophants who will tell him what he wants to hear, however bizarre. 

The latest tariff debacle is a case in point. The evidence over decades since the Wall Street crash shows that tariffs do not work. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act sparked the crash & everything that followed. Yesterday global stock markets were reeling as the worse-than-expected levies were seen to damage US and global economic growth even as they pushed inflation higher. Tariffs cause recession.

Consumers, both individuals and businesses, are negatively impacted by higher prices. Tariffs reduce demand for foreign goods which negatively impacts relations with other countries. A consumption tax costs less than a tariff if the goal is to lessen consumption of imported goods.

Only 35% of Trump's Cabinet graduated from "elite" institutions, where previous administrations ranged between 52% and 60%. Out of 28 members only 8 have degrees from elite institutions like the Ivy League schools and MIT, Stanford and Oxford. It's a definite shift away from expertise. Scott Bessant the treasury secretary seems well educated & qualified, so it is hard to understand why he would go against the consensus about tariffs. The key qualification is loyalty, which brings me neatly back to sycophants.

Speaking truth to power has never been more important. The capacity for Trump to do real harm internationally on so many fronts is enormous. We really do need world leaders to unite & challenge his unfounded & protectionist policies. America will suffer from them too. 

 

 

 

 

Tariffs & the Free Market

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum supposedly responded brilliantly to Trumps tariff policy against Mexico. Fact checkers don't seem to be able to verify what is circulating on social media is true. But even if it isn't, it's a brilliant put down & she achieved a months pause in the imposition of tariffs.

A tariff is tax or duty to be paid on a particular class of import or export. The historical consensus is that tariffs raise the price of the goods in the destination country. Near unanimous consensus among economists says that tariffs are self-defeating and have a negative effect on economic growth and economic welfare, while free trade and the reduction of trade barriers has a positive effect on economic growth.  

I will probably never understand economics. But it seems self evident to me that if tariffs are imposed on a country they are going to retaliate. Then there is a self defeating spiral of increased prices. The worst case scenario is a trade war.

Sheinbaums point seems to be that Mexico has a huge population who buy things, many of which come from America. All these consumers have choices & can stop buying American goods because there are always alternatives. The same is true of any country America chooses to target with tariffs. Lets take cars for example. The most popular American cars in the UK are Chevrolet, Dodge, Jeep, & Ford. Instead of buying those we have a huge choice of non American cars. For example - Toyota, KIA, Mazda, Honda, Hyundai, Volvo, Subaru, Renault, or BMW. Many of which out perform American cars. 

Trump, Musk & their largely unqualified appointees don't seem to understand the "quid pro quo" of tariffs. Countries are already retaliating. If they coordinate their actions it will be a very powerful response. There is a groundswell of opinion against Trump policy. Ordinary people are not happy with the aggressive way American politicians are behaving & are boycotting not just American goods, but services too. The "Star Spangled Banner" has been booed. 

Personally I think that the UK is wrong to imagine that we or anyone has a "special relationship" with the Trump administration. Trump is very binary & transactional. He can't be accused of overthinking anything. He simply doesn't factor in cause & effect. So our response, which according to Starmers team is apparently to be “pragmatic” if need be, suggesting he may not retaliate immediately, in the hope of talking Trump round over time and with the aim of creating the conditions for signing a wider UK-US trade deal, doesn't seem emphatic enough to me.

The "Free Market" is an economic system in which prices are determined by unrestricted competition between privately owned businesses. Tariffs are completely counter to that. My only caveat is that there does need to be real competition. Our water industry is privately owned & is a complete mess because there is no competition at all. I have no choice but to get my water from Thames Water. There is no other supplier. So I am forced to pay for their years of mismanagement & lack of maintenance of infrastructure. Their profits have gone to huge salaries & bonuses & shareholders.

The world is paying a price for American "democracy". But I do believe that Americans will eventually realise that the price they pay for electing Trump for a second term will be higher. Goods & services will cost more & huge numbers of American jobs will go. Musks DOGE policy will make thousands unemployed. 

Annoying Filler Words

 The UK’s most annoying filler words:

1. Innit, 47 per cent
2. Like, 32 per cent
3. Basically, 22 per cent
4. Err, 21 per cent
5. You know, 20 per cent
6. Uh, 17 per cent
7. Umm, 15 per cent
8. Yeah, 13 per cent
9. Literally, 12 per cent
10. Oooh, 10 per cent

The UK’s most used filler words:

1. OK, 30 per cent
2. Err, 26 per cent
3. Right, 22 per cent
4. Umm, 20 per cent
5. Actually, 18 per cent
6. Anyway, 16 per cent
7. Basically, 16 per cent
8. Yeah, 14 per cent
9. Like, 14 per cent
10. Really, 13 per cent

The highlighted ones are the ones I most dislike. I would also add My Bad, So & Awesome. I also realise that I use the word "Absolutely" far too much. The sad thing is that repeatedly using these filler words makes people appear less intelligent, less educated and lacking in people skills. Apparently 23% of people don't realise they are using them. I'm surprised that statistic isn't higher. I have at times been tempted to count the number of times I hear people use the word "like" pointlessly in sentences or phrases  - But I do realise that would be a bit anal & weird.

Why do we do it? Why don't we realise that we are doing it? Sometimes, apparently it's to give us time to formulate what we want to say. But I don't think that applies to "like". I also don't think hesitation or uncertainty explains the over use of "like". I just think it's possibly nervousness, lack of preparation, or an  unconscious habit. I just find it really irritating.

We have been given a brain & a wonderful language. Why don't we use them?

Watchers & Doers

Are you a watcher or a doer? Do you live your life vicariously through the lives of others & not actually live your life? Do you let others influence what you think & do? 

I was watching a football match while changing after a swim today. Not much choice, the screen is always on in the pool changing room. It made me think of the fact that we now have wall to wall womens & mens football on TV & thousands of people actually go to matches. 

Then I thought of the plethora of people who watch cookery programmes on TV & buy millions of cookery books.

Its all relatively passive for a lot of people. Approximately 40.7% of male adults and roughly 31.7% of female adults participate in sports on a weekly basis in the UK. The % of physically active adults (19+ yrs) in the UK is 67.1%. Not dire statistics, but not good enough either. Watching doesn't get you fit.

Then there is cooking. Nearly one in five,19%, say they almost always prepare food using basic ingredients, while 23% cook from scratch most days. Another 21% do so a few times a week. A significant portion of the UK population regularly consumes takeaways or supermarket meals, with nearly half of Brits eating takeaway food up to four times a week, and a substantial amount of the population consuming takeaways at least once a week. So why do we buy so many cookbooks? Is it just food porn?

The psychological type of a doer is ESTP according to Myers - Briggs, which stands for Extraverted, Sensing, Thinking, Perceiving. Watchers probably tend to be supporters - they are loyal & have a team approach. There are loads of sites on the web about personality if you are interested.

My point is that although we all have our own distinctive personality, we humans are changing a lot. We no longer live in caves & have to hunt & forage or even farm ourselves. We are all much more sedentary & time poor. We have stopped getting enough exercise to remain healthy & mobile. We have stopped eating a healthy diet that is good for us. As a result we are becoming more & more unhealthy.

In 2022, an estimated 64% of adults in the UK were classified as overweight or obese, with 29% specifically living with obesity. The largest impairment groups in the UK are people with a mobility impairment (48%). Those statistics are ever increasing with the impact on both the NHS & peoples lives.

We are all responsible for ourselves & our families. No one can make us healthy however skilled. I'm sure almost everyone could do something to not only be healthier, but also enjoy actually living life more. Then possibly there wouldn't be such a huge upswing in mental illness. 

In 2023, about 1 in 5 children and young people aged 8 to 25 years had a probable mental disorder. Life expectancy of people with a severe mental illness is about 15-20 years shorter than those without. My generation cannot understand why this is happening. Life has always been problematic - shit happens. Were we more resiliant? If so why? I heard a programme on radio 4 recently postulating that over diagnosis is part of the problem. Simply put, if a medic tells someone they have a medical problem they live their lives accordingly. 

Whatever the truth is - we are not a healthy society & we all need to do something about it.  Life expectancy of people with a severe mental illness is about 15-20 years shorter than those without. 

The largest impairment groups in the UK are people with a mobility impairment (48%)

Tax Should be Taxing

I truly don't mind paying tax. It is important that tax should be commensurate with income though. So I do think that the wealthiest should pay the same proportion of their income as the poor. Most income groups are taxed at 20% in the UK after a tax free allowance of £12,570. (Your allowance is zero if your income is £125,140 or above). If you are better off tax increases, but not proportionately. Over £125,141 you pay 45% 

Countries in Scandinavia pay quite a lot more basic tax & get better services. 

Netherlands – 49% ...

Sweden – 50% ...

Belgium – 53.7% ...

Austria – 55% ...

Denmark – 55.9% ...

Japan – 55.97% ...

Finland – 56.95% ...

Those in the lowest decile of income earners in the UK pay tax at around 44% on their  income and gains in financial wellbeing, whilst those in the top decile pay at 21.5%, less than half that rate. Why? What is the logic?

There isn't any that I can see, other than making the wealthy even more wealthy & the poor poorer. Wealth inequality is ever increasing in the UK. In 2021 the richest 50 families in the UK held more wealth than the bottom 33.5 million people. The wealthiest 1% of households had wealth of at least £3,121,500, while the least wealthy 10% had £16,500 or less. 

That can't be acceptable surely. Nor can placing the biggest tax burden on the least wealthy.There are several arguments -

• Taxing the wealthy excessively could discourage investment, entrepreneurship, and economic growth, potentially leading to job losses and a decline in overall prosperity. 
• High taxes could cause wealthy individuals and businesses to relocate to countries with lower tax rates, leading to a loss of tax revenue and skilled labor. 
• Strong opposition from the wealthy themselves, although there is a group of 250 wealthy individuals, (Patriotic Millionaires), who are actually asking to be taxed.

I struggle to have much sympathy with any of that. The wealthy have advisors who utilise the loopholes in our ridiculously complex tax system to minimise what they pay. The big four accounting firms not only advise taxpayers, they also have their fingers in the pie of advising HMRC. Unbelievably they sit on tax advisory panels and also second staff to government to provide technical advice when tax legislation is amended or created. I simply cannot believe they are impartial & unbiased. Talk about letting foxes into the henhouse.

The whole thing is a mess & it's the majority of ordinary taxpayers who don't get a fair deal.

 

Free Speech & Thought Control

Trump said - “I’ve stopped all government censorship and brought back free speech in America.” Really? Actions mean more than words. He has cut $400m from Columbia University because he wants to stifle criticism of Israel. But the real target is dissent of any sort. Obviously in Trumps world "free speech" means speech he approves of.

In his dystopian novel "1984," Orwell explores the concept of Thought Control through the Party's manipulation of language (Newspeak) and omnipresent surveillance, aiming to eliminate independent thought and maintain absolute power. In Oceania, the Party views any thought that challenges its authority as "Thoughtcrime," punishable by the "Thought Police", who use telescreens, informers, and psychological techniques to monitor citizens. 

Is that ringing any bells? Isn't that what Trump & Musk are actively setting out to do in today's America? 

Voltaire supposedly said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" Actually it was paraphrased by Evelyn Beatrice Hall in her Voltaire biography.

In todays world we really need to understand what is at stake in the actions of people like Trump, Musk, Putin, Netanyahu.......They are deliberately undermining truth & freedom. They want us to be subserviant & compliant in order to gain as much power & wealth as they can. Their actions are entirely self serving. It is very dangerous. Over & over history shows us this type of pattern of behaviour by leaders, notably in the rise of the Third Reich. For milennia civilisations have come & gone. Toynbee said that cilvilisations  have a life cycle of four stages: genesis, growth, breakdown, and disintegration. (Read Jared Diamond "Collapse"). It seems to me that we are very close to the final stage if we do nothing.

There are many ways for countries to be governed. Each country has it's own distinct character & culture & within that people vary hugely. Despite all of that difference, every country & it's population must have freedom if they are to survive well for the benefit of everyone. 

We must all be able to think, speak & argue our point of view freely. We must all be open to the idea that we can be wrong & be able to change our opinion. We must all listen to varying points of view & challenge or support where necessary.

If we lose that ability we are lost. 

Funerals & the Big Issue

When you see a "Big Issue" seller on the street do you walk on by as though they don't exist? The chances are you do - Tides of humanity do.

I went to a funeral yesterday in Summertown, Oxford, for one of my local Big Issue sellers Dan Cordas - Cousins. I had known him & his partner Paul for 12 years. We chatted regularly in the street. As did quite a few other Summertown residents. Dan & Paul were, are, an institution. St Michaels church was full. Far more people than expected. Mostly seemingly my age or even older. They ran out of orders of service despite printing 70.

A third of Big issue sellers are homeless. They are not beggars. They are not allowed to beg. They are trying to earn money to live rather than be dependent. We should all respect that.  

The Big Issue used to only be sold on the streets by authorised vendors, but from 2020 it has been sold in some shops in order to raise money because of the effects of Covid. The Big Issue was founded by John Bird & Gordon Roddick in 1991 as a social enterprise. It is a self-sustaining business, generating income through magazine sales and advertising revenue. It gives sellers an income & dignity. Vendors buy the magazine for £2 each and sell it for £4, keeping the £2 profit. In effect vendors are running their own mini business.

For years Dan & Paul were on their pitch daily outside Tesco's in all weathers. Both of them had mobility & health issues. Both of them were mostly surprisingly cheerful. It was always interesting to talk to them. I knew a little of their back story & both had very difficult experiences in their lives, which shaped the lives they lived. The majority of people in North Oxford thankfully have not had to deal with such difficulties, but quite a few of us really valued Dan & Paul.

Dan had health issues for years, but had deteriorated massively over the last year. He died in January. He will be much missed by those of us who took the trouble to talk to him. Paul will find it very difficult to continue without his friend by his side. 

The real Big Issue is how we as a society treat the less fortunate in our country. We could all do better.

Digital Marketing, Data Centres & the Carbon Footprint

When we think about carbon footprints aviation tends to top the list, with energy, industry & fashion. The Ecologist has done a piece this week about Digital Marketing. When I see images of cities like Tokyo, New York & London for example, I wonder why we don't consider this a complete waste of energy. It is costly in both financial & energy terms. It also causes huge light pollution & could possibly over stimulate the brain. Personally I can't see anything to recommend it.

https://theecologist.org/2025/mar/05/digital-marketings-carbon-footprint    

Data centres, which power everything from websites to social media, digital ads & streaming, online gaming, cryptocurrency & blockchain services, account for 2.5 per cent of global CO2 emissions - more than the entire aviation industry at 2.1 per cent. As the internet grows, so does its footprint. Data centers have a significant environmental impact due to their high energy consumption for running servers and cooling systems, contributing to increased carbon emissions and climate change. They also generate e-waste and require substantial infrastructure, including materials for construction and cooling systems. Data centres use about 1-1.3% of global electricity, largely sourced from fossil fuel, releasing substantial amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. 

As of March 2024, there were approximately 11,800 data centers worldwide, with the United States leading with 5,381, followed by Germany (521), and the United Kingdom (514). Data centers come in various sizes, ranging from small, micro data centers to massive hyperscale facilities, with the average full-scale data center typically occupying around 100,000 square feet. That's over two football fields.

If we are truly going to take action to stop our devastating CO2 emissions causing the Climate Emergency we really need to look at how much energy we are wasting on trivia. We do need to switch off our lights when no one is in the room, but frankly that is a drop in the ocean of CO2. We need to tackle the waste & pollution our digital world is creating.

Bystanders

Many years ago, when I was in my 20's, I felt unwell when I was in a pub with my husband & his friend. I went outside to get some air & ended up sitting on the pavement. No one stopped to ask if I was OK or helped me. I was wearing a new suede coat & looked smart. Obviously eventually my husband realised I'd been gone a while & came to find me. I thought it was strange that people just walked on past me.

Since then I have had other more positive experiences showing that people vary in their behaviour when it seems that someone is in trouble. 

There is a Bystander Effect - a theory describing when people are less likely to help someone in need when others are present. People may believe that a situation cannot be an emergency if no one else is helping. Being part of a large crowd can make it so no single person has to take responsibility. People may be concerned about getting involved or fear judgement, legal action or personal harm. It can occur during emergencies, assaults, or other crimes.  

In a macro way I think that we are suffering from the Bystander Effect now. We can all see what is happening in the world - the climate emergency, war in Ukraine & Palestine, Political instability & the rise of dictators acting with seeming impunity, famine & unfair wealth & resources distribution...The list seems endless & very serious. We live in an interlinked world of instantanious communication. We know.

I would argue that each & every one of us cannot afford to be a bystander. We are transitioning to a very different world. The future of that world depends hugely on what we each individually do now. We do have choice. We can stand aside & say that we have no power to influence or change. Or we can ensure that our voice is heard. 

If we have "Influencers" making money out of selling themselves, their ideas & products, then we can all be "Influencers". We have the power of communication today that has never existed before. We just need to use it for the right purposes.

It is vital that the liars, misinformers, power & wealth hungry "bad actors" who are in the ascendent today are stripped of "the Emperors New Clothes" that they wear. They believe they are invincible. They are, but only if we let them. If we do that we deserve what will follow.

Too many Books - Not Enough Time

 

I've always been a reader. When I was 11 my family moved to a house on the Wolverhampton Rd in Birmingham. A 5 minute walk away there was a public library on Bleakhouse Rd, so I had access to a lot of books. My parents did not have disposable income for luxuries like books. I thought a book for Christmas was a wonderful present. Books informed & transported me. According to Google maps the library is still there thank goodness. As is my family home, number 187, although it has been modernised & improved. 

I can't resist books. I never go to sleep without reading first. I like fiction & non fiction & often have both on the go at the same time. I've been a member of 2 book clubs which have broadened my interests & choices. I have shelves of books & also cupboards full in several rooms. I regularly go to charity shops to see what they have for sale. I would be bereft if I didn't have a book to move onto after I finished my current book.

My main problem is I probably won't be able to read all of the books I own, because I keep finding more to interest or entertain me.

Public libraries are in crisis.The BBC did an analysis in 2024 & found that more than 180 council-run libraries have either closed or been handed over to volunteer groups in the UK since 2016. That is one in 20 libraries since 2016, which has had more impact on deprived communities, who were four times more likely to have lost a publicly-funded library, not to mention the jobs associated with them. A third of those remaining, have had their hours reduced and at least three councils have at least halved their provision since 2016.

Council-run libraries offer more than just book-lending facilities - stay-and-play sessions for children, literacy clubs, access to computers & crucially, warm spaces for people who can't afford heating costs. Upper-tier local councils such as county councils and unitary authorities have a statutory duty to provide a “comprehensive library service". But funding is under attack.

We still need books in this tech age. In 2024, the number of independent bookstores in the UK fell from 1,063 to 1,052. However, this is still higher than the 2016 low of 867. Good book shops are thriving despite Amazon. There is nothing like having a book in your hand. Now my short term memory is declining I can write pencil notes or underline when a new character enters the story. 

Unlike mobile phones, the TV, or film, books don't rely on pictures to stimulate our intellect or imagination. Like radio, books enable us to actually use the brain we were given. 

One of the most joyous things you can do is read a story to a child, thus leading them towards being readers.

 

Confrontation & Bullying - Trump, Putin & Zelensky

Trump built up to yesterdays debacle by making totally unfounded & provocative comments about Ukraine, Zelensky & the war.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9814k2jlxko 

It seems entirely possible that the unedifying, bullying, shouting match was pre planned by Trump & Vance who were like attack dogs. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/28/trump-zelenskyy-meeting-transcript

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2019j0w9glo

I was listening in horror to PM on radio 4 as it unfolded & then watched on BBC TV news. T & V accused Zelensky of not being grateful or thankful enough for American aid. Yet Zelensky is on record as repeatedly acknowledging how grateful Ukraine is for everything both America & Europe has done for 3 years since Russias unprovoked  invasion of a sovereign state. I would argue that America & Europe should be grateful & thankful for the way Ukraine has endured the Russian onslaught & has fought back bravely at huge cost in death & destruction. Ukraine has been & is defending Europe from a dictator who according to the BBC has caused "Russian military deaths (that) could range from 146,194 to 211,169. If one adds estimated losses from DPR and LPR forces, the total number of Russian-aligned fatalities may range from 167,194 to 234,669". A man who can tolerate those numbers of deaths & the concomitant number of injuries of his own people is not to be trusted an inch.

 

T & V accused Zelensky of being disrespectful. The world has now seen that deliberately playing out this shocking scrum in the Oval Office is disrespectful to the remnants of American democracy. Zelensky has been President of Ukraine in extremely difficult circumstances. He has been exemplary & I'm not in the least surprised that T & V managed to goad him into a response that I'm sure he didn't want. Personally I would have wanted to punch T & V's lights out for their total lack of respect for what Ukraine & Zelensky have endured. Respect goes both ways. T & V owed respect to Zelensky as the democratically elected president of a sovereign country. Instead they wouldn't even let him speak & harangued him stereophonically.

Trump & Vance have never been to Ukraine. They don't appear to have had balanced intel & advice about the war. Basically neither man seems to want to listen to alternative views to their own populist, right wing, perspective. They were both bullish & arrogant.

This is serious. It is the end of diplomacy as we know it. Maybe it does need to change, but not like this. It is a sad day when extremist, power hungry, bullies who want to dominate & manipulate are in charge of one of the most powerful countries in the world. 

Politics & Politicking

Britain is not in the top 10 most democratic countries of the world. They are;- 

Rank	Country	Total Value Index
1	Denmark	0.958
2	Norway	0.956
3	Finland	0.946
4	Sweden	0.946
5	Germany	0.944
6	Switzerland	0.934
7	Netherlands	0.93
8	New Zealand	0.928
9	Belgium	0.925
10	Costa Rica	0.914

The UK actually comes 17th or 18th according to;-

https://www.democracymatrix.com/ranking

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/democracy-countries

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2025/uphill-battle-to-safeguard-rights 

"Violence and the repression of political opponents during elections, ongoing armed conflicts, and the spread of authoritarian practices contributed to the 19th year of declining freedom. In the year to come, all those who understand the value of political rights and civil liberties must work together in the defense of democracy".

Anyone who thinks that because they live in a democracy they are safe, should think again. We live in a complex, interconnected world. We rely on other countries for basic necessities. Our biggest imports are cars & oil, closely followed by medicinal & pharmaceutical products & gas. The UK's biggest food imports are fruit & vegetables. 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/281818/largest-import-commodities-of-the-united-kingdom-uk/

We are an island. We don't have a huge land mass & what we have is diminishing due to construction of one sort or another. There is a limit to how self sufficient we can be. Our skills & manufacturing capabilities have declined drastically. We depend on other countries for vital goods. We don't even have the capability to defend ourselves adequately any more. This has all been a result of political decisions, particularly over the 13 years of Conservative rule. 

Many people are disinterested in politics. Considerable numbers don't trust politicians to tell the truth or make decisions in the best interests of the country as a whole. When politicians are unwilling or unable to answer simple direct questions, but spout the PR they have been trained to say, is there any reason for people to think otherwise?

Labour came into power promising change. I don't see any reason to trust them any more than I did the Conservatives so far. We need & deserve better politics than this.   

Redistribution & Economic Justice

Redistribution - distribution of something in a different, fairer, way, typically to achieve greater social equality.

200 million migrants regularly send back money to support their families and communities. These cash transfers reach around 800 million people — about one in ten people globally.

I have given quite a bit of money to my family & to charities for years. I am fortunate, I can afford to do that. I don't come form a wealthy background. My parents owned their own house, but had no capital savings to speak of. But because both my husband & I had a grammar school education, we both also had well paid, secure, professional jobs with good pensions. In my own small way I have tried to put into practice Economic Justice - a set of principles that aims to create equal opportunities for all people.

Economic Justice sets out to eliminate glaring inequalities in wealth, income, and property. It's about fairness. That seems to be seriously lacking in our world today. I have been watching "Go back to where you came from" on channel 4. It is enlightening - https://www.channel4.com/programmes/go-back-to-where-you-came-from  None of the participants are "bad " people, but they have very different views on refugees & migrants, which possibly represent the polarity of view in the UK from the far right to the liberal socialist. 

The one fundamental thing I feel is at the root of so many problems facing the world today is inequality & unfair distribution of everything from the basic necessities of life to wealth, education, justice & health care. People who don't have those things don't need our sympathy. They need our empathy & following on from that our will to share more equitably.

I increasingly do not recognise the UK. I think we have become a populist travesty of ourselves. We want to reinforce our borders & keep migrants, whether refugees or economic, out. We seem to be getting more & more insular on our island. We are also becoming less & less tolerant, more & more frightened & angry.

I just wish every one of us could really put ourselves in the place of so many people in our world who do not have what we have - a safe home, enough food, access to basic services, freedom of speech & freedom to be ourselves whatever our sexual orientation. We are not living under dictators - yet. 

We cannot, as a country, take in every refugee & migrant who wants to come here. We only have a relatively small land mass & we are financially broke. But we can & should work with other free countries to help solve the root problems that are causing a huge mass movement of people around the world that is ever increasing.

The problem will not go away. We have to find a humane way to fix it in the countries of origin of the migrations.  We also have to have proper legal ways for people to claim asylum here in order to help stop boat crossings. Currently we are not generally considered to have a "good" asylum process for applicants. They are complex and strict, with many challenges for applicants, including long processing times, a high burden of proof, and recent legislation making it more difficult to claim asylum. 

 

 

 

Compromise - компромисс

Compromise is a basic negotiation process in which both parties give up something that they want in order to get something else they want more. There is a pie to be divided up, and whatever one side gets, the other side loses. Each side must be willing to make concessions in order to achieve a resolution. By definition both sides need to be involved. A negotiater or mediator might well help the process, but an agreement cannot be achieved if one of the parties is not present.

It seems self evident to me. So why isn't it self evident to Trump & his acolytes? 

I have to wonder why the USA are behaving in such a transactional & confrontational way, which is certain to offend Ukraine & Europe, who are directly affected by the war between Russia & Ukraine. Historically war always ends in negotiation & compromise. At some point the pointless death & destruction has to end. 

The Spanish Reconquista lasted 781 years & ended in 1492. The UK's longest is a hypothetical state of war between the Netherlands and the Scilly Isles which lasted 335 years without a single shot being fired. But these are unusual.  Currently Myanmar has been at war for almost 80 years. 

The senior US delegation headed by Marco Rubio sat at a table for almost 5 hours with the Russian delegation headed by Sergey Lavrov. No other interested parties were invited. The US has sanctions in place against Lavrov, (for his part in a "brutal war of choice") & Putin, their assets have been frozen during the Ukraine war.

 

Does Trump really see no reason why this seems odd to more rational people? The only reasons I can see for Trumps behaviour are twofold;-

• He wants the "glory" of supposedly ending the war & desires a Nobel Peace Prize. God forbid he gets it, but Obama got one in 2009...... 
• He know that reconstruction after wars generates huge profit for the countries & businesses that do the work. He wants a slice of that. He is one of the many, very wealthy, Americans for whom enough money is never enough.

Trump is the arch appeaser & capitulator. How dare he ask Ukraine for mineral rights for critical minerals including aluminum, gallium and titanium as "payment" for America's support in the war. The Ukrainians must win. If they don't there are repercussions that simply don't bear thinking about. Repercussions that will affect America too. But Trump only sees a deal, money & power. He isn't capable of rational thought about world consequences. 

If it weren't all so appalling it would be funny.

 

Morning Coffee & Afternoon Tea

I remember, when I was a young married woman with a small child, having morning coffee with women friends. It started off as just coffee & biscuits, but ended up as coffee & gateau as everyone tried to outdo everyone else. At that point I think I stopped going. Too much pressure & not relaxing at all. 

Coffee was supposedly discovered by an Ethiopian goat herder, Kaldi, after he noticed his goats became more energetic after eating the berries of certain trees. If you want to know more this is a link;-

https://stonestreetcoffee.com/blogs/brooklyn-coffee-academy/the-history-of-coffee

The first recorded coffee house in England was opened by a Turkish man Jacob in Oxfordshire in 1652. This was followed by the first in London in that same year, established by a Greek man Pasqua Rosee. 

https://oldspikeroastery.com/blogs/blog/history-of-london-coffee-houses

Coffeehouses were "penny universities" where politicians, artists, writers and other intellectuals  met, each frequenting their own establishments. They were places of discussion, knowledge sharing & a hub for creative ideas. Many influential historic individuals met there including Samuel Pepys, John Dryden, Samuel Alexander Pope and Isaac Newton. 

I really don't feel properly alive until I've had my morning cup of coffee & I look forward to it every day. Friends I meet for coffee carry on the tradition of interesting discussion.

Afternoon tea is a whole different thing to my mind. Drinking tea began in China & Charles II started the habit in England. But afternoon tea didn't begin until 1840, started again by the aristocracy. It became a fashionable social event for the upper classes.

https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Afternoon-Tea/

My experience of afternoon tea is a mug of tea using a teabag & occasionally a biscuit. I drink it playing Solitaire on my iPad or reading. Sometimes friends & family come, but it isn't really an event, it's a pleasure. What I really don't understand is why a very upper class tradition continues today, mostly in the middle classes. 

According to the British Social Attitudes Survey we still define ourselves in terms of social divisions. We have a monarchy and an aristocracy still owning much of the land the Conqueror gave them, with privileges reinforced by public schools. We also have a working class, inheritors of serfdom, for whom trade union leaders such as Mick Lynch, who just like Watt Tyler, sees it as his role to fight. 

Is this really a good thing in the 21st century? Are we hidebound by "tradition" & the mores of the upper classes? I think we are if we continue to think that apeing the behaviour of a supposedly higher class is sensible or necessary. Shouldn't we want to be a meritocracy? Shouldn't we value people for who they are and what they do, rather than where or to whom they were born? 

Honours & Honour

Should Honours be automatic or assumed due to a job or position an individual holds? Is it appropriate to give honours to celebrities? Or should there be more variety in the types of work rewarded?

6% of higher awards went to people in the north of England and only 4% to people from working-class backgrounds. 60% of beneficiaries of "higher" awards, such as Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) and knighthoods and damehoods, lived in London and south-east England. Prestigious awards seem to be concentrated on affluent people from affluent areas. Chief executives, professors and senior civil servants were common recipients. It is not based on merit; it's based on the top-down nature of our UK society.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpdx91g00g2o 

Some people feel so strongly about this issue that they turn down an honour like Benjamin Zephaniah.

Rarely an honour is handed back, like Paula Vennells. Sometimes an honour is removed, like Rolf Harris.

Do we know who nominated recipients? If not why not? How many are nominated by community groups or the public? Do we really want the British Empire anywhere near an honours system - MBE CBE OBE? Should a Prime Minister automatically have the right to bestow honours regardless of how long they have held office or how good they have been at the job? (I won't name names, but I'm sure you can guess). I can see that it might be appropriate for someone like the monarch to present the honours, but why do they have the right to nominate recipients? How in touch with people deserving of honours are the Aristocracy, the Mandarins of the Civil Service or the Politicians?

There was a Select Committee report on reforming the honours system in 2004 which recommended "an end to further appointments to the Order of the British Empire, the Order of the Bath and the Order of St Michael and St George; the foundation of a new Order of British Excellence; a phasing out of titles and name-changing honours; reforms to increase the independence of the selection process through the establishment of an Honours Commission and the end of the ‘Prime Minister’s List’ and other ministerial honours lists; and proposals for increasing public awareness of the system".

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmpubadm/212/212.pdf  

Not a lot seems to have happened as a result. In 2006 -7 there was the "Cash for Honours" scandal. We still have a class & wealth ridden society. Successive governments continue to nominate people to the Lords to bolster their party representation & create political imbalance. But that is another Blog Post.

 

 

Justification & Trump

Justification is showing something to be right or reasonable. Neurologically our brains create our thoughts, which may or may not be accurate. We all do our best to justify what we say or do. Or what we don't say or do, which can be equally wrong. We have to accept that there are always different ways of looking at things. What we ourselves believe may or may not be true.

The trick is to remain open in our thinking & accept that complexity exists & there are often different interpretations of reality. We might be right, but someone else may have a different perception & they may also be right. 

All of that said, it seems to me that we are living in an alternative universe. 

We are living in a world of "post truth", of lies & obfustification, of people in power not answering reasonable questions, of manipulation & indoctrination. We are at the mercy of "bad actors" who crave wealth & power at any cost. People who not only don't mind "collateral damage", but don't even have it on their radar because they are narcissists or worse. 

I doubt that people with these personality types even contemplate the need to justify their actions or what they say. The idea floated by Trump, (such an appropriate & accurate surname for the man), to make a holiday playground for the rich out of the devastation that is Gaza is obscene. It would contravene international law & amount to ethnic cleansing, never mind the absurdity of expecting nearby countries to accommodate all the Palestinians. 

When Gaza is eventually rebuilt it could be much better than it was with modern building techniques. But what happens to Gaza should be in the hands of the Palestinians with help from the international community. Not in the hands of a seemingly unhinged American president who sees everthing through a narrow transactional lens. The opportunity he sees is to make himself even more wealthy & to have yet another exclusive playground for a golf course.

I have no idea how Trumps mind works, or Musks for that matter. But I do wonder how on earth they justify what they say & do. I just do have to hope that at some point they have a Damascene Conversion & realise that they could be agents for so much good in this unstable & unfair world we live in.