The BBC's open hostility to the incoming Trump administration

I am disturbed by the BBC's open hostility to the incoming Trump administration.

The behaviour of the national broadcaster may be doing serious damage to the interests of the United Kingdom.

I am not willing for my taxes to used by individuals in the BBC to propagate their extreme "liberal" (sic) views.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38575592
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38589427
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38582441?intlink_from_url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/78080d81-2849-497e-bc3a-bf364626456b/donald-trump&link_location=live-reporting-story

CDU party colleagues, INSIST that free movement comes to an end

This statement by Chancellor Angela Merkel (reported by Reuters via Sky News) about the non-negotiability of "free movement" may well prove to be a hubristic gesture.

Frau Merkel may well find that her own countrymen, indeed her own CDU party colleagues, INSIST that free movement comes to an end.

Concentration camps indeed!  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/angela-merkel-s-coalition-split-over-border-concentration-camps-as-pressures-of-refugee-crisis-in-a6694701.html

No intervention in Syria of any kind

Michael Fallon needs to be told:  NO AIR STRIKES ON SYRIA:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33358267

No intervention in Syria of any kind.

As soon as the United Kingdom intervenes in a Middle East country the left here will start the usual incessant clamouring:  we messed up their country therefore we must let in thousands (then tens of thousands, then hundreds of thousands) of Syrian refugees.

And unfortunately the ministers at the Home Office do not have the strength of character or the managerial ability to be able to stop immigration.

Therefore we do not get involved in Syria (or any overseas adventure) until we have mopped up the previous immigration overspills.

If we (the people) cannot have immigration control you (the bigshot government ministers striding the world stage) cannot have foreign adventures.

Have I said that plainly and clearly enough?

His morality is false

Re-reading Daniel Trilling's article about migration in the New Statesman on 11th December 2014 I was struck once again at what a profoundly dishonest argument he makes:  http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2014/12/africa-kent-following-footsteps-migrants

Of course, he is quite right in his implicit suggestion that the plight of these people is terrible, and we could probably fit in many millions if we wanted to.

But that would not change the moral situation.

There would still remain in the world many millions (billions actually) who will not have the same standard of living as Mr Trilling and myself.

Only if we are prepared for everyone in the world to have the same standard of living can we describe the efforts made to secure our borders as immoral (for that is what Mr Trilling is doing through his emotive descriptions of sad eyed soft-voiced migrants fleeing poverty and injustice).

Unless we are willing to take migration to its ultimate logical conclusion of everyone in the world having the same standard of living (in terms of income, food consumption, energy consumption, education, sanitation, medical treatment etc) the moral position on borders will not change.

As individuals we could, at any moment, assume a genuinely moral position by giving up everything we have and giving it to the poor and living ourselves among the poorest in the world as one of the poorest in the world.

I wish I had the courage to do this, but I know that I don't.

I also know for certain (without having even met the man) that Daniel Trilling does not have the courage to do this either.

Therefore his morality is false.

Therefore he is a hypocrite.

Daniel Trilling is editor of the New Humanist magazine.

How is a Spanish king any different to an American president?

I am just thinking aloud here, but the abdication of the Spanish king makes me wonder if he was ever a real king in the first place.

Easy come, easy go as they say.

There are five key stages in the creation of an British monarch:  election (which means choosing), proclamation, acclamation, coronation (with an actual crown), anointing.

As far as I am aware, the Spanish king just ticked three of those boxes - hence my question whether his regnal status was genuine.

An American president is elected.  He is proclaimed.  He is acclaimed at an investiture.

Many of the American presidents have been from hereditary power dynasties.

So how is a Spanish king any different to an American president?

Propaganda in favour of EU free movement of people

Someone called Oana Romocea, writing for an organisation called British Influence has produced a solipsistic piece of propaganda in favour of EU free movement of people:

http://britishinfluence.org/point-of-view-eastern-european-migrants-vs-western-european-expats-western-european-expats/?utm_source=British+Influence+supporters&utm_campaign=391ef7268e-EuropeWatch+2013-07-04&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c24f34caff-391ef7268e-315145893

"need to choose either populist-driven or evidence-based policies" says Oana Romocea, ignoring the fact that the opposition of the electorate is a bloody big piece of evidence that the pro-EU lobby seem determined to ignore.

On another point, the fact that some British people go to live in Spain is totally irrelevant to the objections most people have to the huge influx of Eastern Europeans moving into the United Kingdom.  The people who leave the United Kingdom have left.  They are nothing to do with us now.  The ability of a relatively few well-off pensioners to have a comfortable sunny retirement in Spain means nothing to the rest of us who have to tolerate millions of foreigners arriving here.  I would rather not have the "freedom" to go and live in Spain and ask the Eastern Europeans to leave the United Kingdom - and I am sure that would be the view of the majority.  And if the Spanish do not want British pensioners living in Spain my advice would be to chuck them out (they can move back to Eastbourne and Frinton).

Most offensive is Oana Romocea's glib assumption that the EU is about "its ultimate goal of unity".  I do not want a United Europe and I am sure this is the view of the majority of the British population.  It is likely of course that other European populations, mired in the depravity and collaboration of the Second World War, see European unity as the only way they can redeem themselves, but we should see this for what it is - an irrational attempt to escape the guilt of a terrible history by pretending they have become different people.

The most famous Jamaican-heritage woman in the world

Sadiq Khan MP tells us:  "Baroness Doreen Lawrence raises racial profiling stop and search and cuts to legal aid... She will be fab in Lords"

Whatever your views on the recent appointments to the House of Lords (and it seems to be the most dubious assortment of paybacks since the Harold Wilson lavender notepaper list) the investiture of Doreen Lawrence will at least allow the issue of homophobia in the Jamaican diaspora to be raised at the highest level.

Doreen Lawrence has now overtaken Diane Abbott as the most famous Jamaican-heritage woman in the world.

Homophobia in Jamaica and the Jamaican diaspora is a human rights scandal.

Is it a legitimate question to ask Doreen Lawrence what her plans are to address this issue?

http://labli.st/12IdBQT  

Special relationship

Matthew Barzun, the new American ambassador to London, has told the American Senate Foreign Relations Committee: "If confirmed, I will work every day to nurture and deepen this special relationship..."

Let's get this straight Mr Barzun.  There is no special relationship.  You are not our friend; we are not your friend; the United States and the United Kingdom are sovereign nations who currently have common interests.

So stop the patronising and infantalising garbage about special relationships.

The new Chinese leadership has promised to double average incomes

Dateline London on BBC2 this afternoon discussed the change of leadership in China.

Writer Diane Wei Liang said that the new Chinese leadership has promised to double average incomes within ten years.

Surely that will release a huge amount of inflation into the Chinese economy?  "Too much money chasing too few goods" as Lord Barber said.  And how will they prevent wages in the developed eastern cities from being undercut by desperate internal migrants from the impoverished west of China? (unless they have an incomes policy, and that would put them in the Jim Callaghan bin of economic competence).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01nzbz6/Dateline_London_10_11_2012/

http://www.dianeweiliang.com/

China is also choosing a new leader

In all the blanket coverage of the American election we should not forget that China is also choosing a new leader this week.  Tania Branigan wrote about it in yesterday's Observer, but otherwise there is not much on the subject.  Will Jon Snow be travelling to Beijing to cover Thursday's leadership process? (that was a rhetorical question).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/04/changing-of-the-chinese-old-guard

Who is Xi Jinping?  What are his thoughts towards the United Kingdom?  Will Andrew Neil be broadcasting a live edition of This Week from Beijing on Thursday evening? (or perhaps hosting a boatload of celebrity commentators on the Chaobai river).  

Will the BBC be covering the 18th party congress live on the Parliament channel?

Another self-immolation?  ANOTHER one?  Who is advising the Chinese government?  

Surely they realise this cannot go on.  

Even the most positive friends of China are sickened by this.

Rainforest

Apparently there is a Brazilian law that requires all rainforest purchased privately must be cleared.

This means that no rainforest can be purchased for conservation.

Surely this cannot be the policy of the current Brazilian government?

The EU is a Marxist state

Interesting article by the Russian think tank the Institute for Democracy and Co-Operation that suggests the EU is a Marxist state:  http://www.idc-europe.org/en/The-European-Union:-a-Marxist-Utopia  Marx, Engels, Goethe, Hegel - the article quotes them all.  It's mischief-making, but sophisticated interesting mischief-making.

中国头IMF

In my view it is time for a Chinese head of the IMF.  "Europeans" (by which I mean the tired old self-perpetuating political elite) have hogged these institutions for too long.  It's time to see what China can do.

引人入勝的研究

Above:  I learned about the research from an article in The Guardian yesterday.

Fascinating research by Nottingham University about Chinese attitudes towards Europe.  "A reservoir of goodwill" exists towards Europe and European products according to commentators of the survey.  There is something about data of this kind that always makes me feel excited.

Patterns, clusters, trends - they are all there waiting to be discovered.

And who will be the first to do a Mosaic-style geodemographic classification of the households of the Middle Kingdom?

More:  http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cpi/research/funded-projects/chinese-eu/consortium.aspx

Mosaic:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(geodemography)

Like the layers in an archaeological excavation

I saw this photograph on a Chinese Flickr page http://www.flickr.com/photos/gaobo/ The scene is in Shanghai. I like it because of the layered effect - the roadside kiosk, the traditional-style red brick building, the modern structure, the soaring tower off to the left. It's like the layers in an archaeological excavation (Kathleen Kenyon's tel at Jericho perhaps). Also interesting is the use of the word "NEW" in the hoarding. It leaps out at you. And I didn't realise that the English language is so widely understood in major cities in China that English words are used in advertising. Most fascinating are the people. Who are those people on scooters? Who are those people walking on the pavement (and will they buy anything from the kiosk)? What are their lives like? Where are they going? What is just round that corner...

Bradley Manning feature on Newsnight

Interesting feature on Newsnight yesterday about Bradley Manning, the person who is accused of giving away secret American data to Wikileaks. It sounded like a variation of Ibsen's Enemy of the People. Whether he is guilty-and-damned or guilty-but-morally-innocent is hard to judge. It's a dramatic story with a palimpsest theme (the argument of each side mirrors that of the other, so that everyone is claiming moral authority and everyone is accusing "the others" of being corrupt). Also it is not clear that the revelations (which were vast in scale) have actually harmed American interests - there is a strong argument that they make American diplomats look reasonably competent. Presumably Ken Loach will want to make a film of this.

More: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9434978.stm

American foreign policy

There was a report on the Today programme this morning about American foreign policy. Apparently it has become so inscrutable that no-one really knows what is going on. The French foreign minister has been openly critical of this dysfunction. The fact that interpreting American foreign policy seems to be developing into a science similar to kremlinology is mildly interesting in itself, but has an importance in the United Kingdom given the reliance the Foreign Office places on trans-Atlantic links. Which leads to the question: what are we trying to achieve in the world, other than follow the lead of others? Robin Cook's "ethical foreign policy" proved to be an exercise in hypocrisy, even before he resigned. Blindly following NATO and the Americans has led to two unwinnable wars (and a British defeat in Iraq, although no-one seems to be acknowledging this). Participating in a joint European foreign policy is flawed because there is a democratic deficit over the Lisbon Treaty (which has not been legitimised by a democratic vote of the British people). So what does our foreign policy amount to? This is a crucial question for the self-identity of the British people collectively, and for the self-identity of all of us as individuals (and therefore, in a tortuous roundabout way, affects marketing since you cannot communicate with people unless you properly deal with the issue of identity).

In Beijing

One of the amateur photographers on Flickr I like to follow is Gong Shore in Beijing (although not from there originally).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/27708011@N04/

This picture is typical of the glimpses you get into ordinary life in China.

I like the youthfulness, the sense of optimism, the bustle.

No idea what the text 可不可以，你就恰好喜欢我这个样子，不改动我一寸，我也不改动你一尺。 says. I've tried putting it into an auto-translate but it doesn't translate logically. Also, why is the central figure wearing a red armband?

Prince from Western Libya

This has been going through my mind all this week:

Aristomenis, son of Menelaos,
the prince from Western Libya,
was generally liked in Alexandria
during the ten days he spent there.

In keeping with his name,
his dress was also suitably Greek.
He received honours gladly,
but he didn't solicit them;
he was unassuming.

He bought Greek books,
especially history and philosophy.
Above all he was a man of few words.
It got round that he must be a profound thinker,
and men like that naturally don't speak very much.

He wasn't a profound thinker or anything at all -
just a piddling, laughable man.
He assumed a Greek name, dressed like the Greeks,
learned to behave more or less like a Greek;
and all the time he was terrified he'd spoil
his reasonably good image
by coming out with barbaric howlers in Greek
and the Alexandrians, in their usual way,
would start to make fun of him, vile people that they are.

This was why he limited himself to a few words,
terribly careful of syntax and pronounciation;
and he was driven almost out of his mind, having
so much talk bottled up inside him,

Constantine P Cavafy

Although he wrote mostly in Greek, Cavafy has had an enormous impact on English poetry.

NOTE: Professor Starkey admitted on Question Time last night that the LSE "sells" worthless degrees to overseas students. The director of the LSE, Howard Davis, has resigned because of an association with Libyan blood money. Even Shami Chakrabarti, head of Liberty and member of the LSE Council, is tainted by this association.

More: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12644802

They knew the sort of unstable country they were going to

I don't wish to sound uncaring, but I am not impressed with the endless complaints of ex-pats in Libya, complaining that the rest of us (through our tax-sustained armed forces and civil service) have not rushed to "save" them.

They knew the sort of unstable country they were going to. Are they not willing to take responsibility for the situation they have got themselves into? Do they intend to pay for the cost of their rescue? (this is a rhetorical question, of course they are not going to pay anything).

These ex-pats are the same people who loudly proclaim when they leave the United Kingdom that the country is "finished" and they would never live here again.

A substantial part of yesterday's Today programme was taken up with a whining Scottish voice complaining that the locals had AK47 rifles and seemed out of control. Did that idiot not realise that the locals always had AK47 rifles and were just waiting for an opportunity to raid and pillage? Or did he think Libya was as safe as Aberdeenshire?