Question Time
Thursday, 28 June 2007

Just watching Question Time; Ming is doing well. However, I am just going to quickly drop in a link so that you can pick your favourite young person to be a pannelist on next week's show. I won't say who my favourite is but...choose wisely!

Clicky!

Labels:

posted by danny @ 14:46, ,


Am I A Fascist Liberal?
Saturday, 12 May 2007

It seems a funny sort of question, but is it possible? It's long been said that the only things liberals can't tolerate is intolerance, and there is perhaps a grain fo truth in this. As a liberal, I hold two important beliefsa that inform the way I think about cultural pluralism. Firstly, I believe that the world is made of a huge number of diverse and unique cultures. Secondly, I believe that we cannot pressume the infallibility of our opinions, simply because they are our opinions. Mill bangs on alot about this, it forms the cornerstone of much of his work in On Liberty.
All silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility.
These two beliefs together lead to the conclusion that all peoples should be free to pursue their own goals, realise their interests. But is there a point where belief in these ideas becomes an apparent certainty. Is there a danger that liberal views might become accepted as fact, and in a rather poetic twist, impose limitations on the freedoms of others, especially with the Western world increasingly embracing a more liberal position? What brought about this question was the banning of BNP leader Nick Griffin from Bath University, when staff who agreed to have him speak there became aware of such huge disapproval and plans for disruption that they feared the saftey of the students. First of all I will say I think the University itself probably made the right decision; if there was a genuine risk to students then obviously this had to be addressed before anything else. But what does it say about liberalism? As far as I can see it, anyone claiming to be a liberal should not seek to silence such views as Mr. Griffin's, so long as they do not incite violence (it's worth noting for the record that they previously have; he has been convicted for inciting racial hatred) If liberalism cannot continue to champion it's ideology of providing as much freedom of expression as possible, then it loses the dynamicism of its ideology, but more importantly, it has lost it's voice altogether. Certainly you can be a liberal and disagree with views, you can hold them to be unpalatable, or hold them to go against your own values. But to say that a view is wrong is extremely difficult; it demands a degree of certainty which seems to contradict the values of freedom of expression and the idea that our views are fallible. I am reminded of a discussion I had once about the hijab, immediately after Jack Straw's comments, that the use of the hijab entailed a, "visible statement of separation and of difference". My intelocutor said that some countries might demand certain dresscodes for foreigners because of religious requirements. This being so they argued, we had a right to demand hijab was not worn, this after all is a democracy they noted. Unfortunately there was no sense of irony. So, with my mind unresolved about this paticular problem, I can only hope that by ensuring I try not to fetishise liberalism as some kind of pinnacle of human thought, I might preserve those very values which drew me to it.

I leave you however with a cartoon which makes me a little more comfortable. Sure, I might be debating what actually it means to be liberal, but then I see this and realise that conservatives are just a fraction silly, comparing liberalism to communism. Surely not apt?!


Labels: ,

posted by danny @ 11:14, ,


Europe and ID cards. But not how you expect.

Scooch. UK entry for Eurovision 2007. Not good by any stretch of the imagination. You know when it's bad, when even The Sun, that bastion of British journalism, and purveyor of ridiculously good reviews for even thr poorest tripe has said the group is 'outstandingly bad.'

I fear another nul-point this year, or rather, I don't really care. The songs are always terrible, Wogan is always revoltingly pleased with himself for remarking on politicaly motivated scoring in a terribly clever, 'told you so' tone, and really, it's a little bit too camp, even for my normally highly liberalised tastes. Although if I'm honest with myself the other reaosns were just trying to justify what is essentialy a hatred for Terry. Well, congrats on being so very clever, but on the other hand, I've listened to your programme, and you are hardly Peel are you, so I suppose it's true that things tend to even themselves out.

In other news, Jack Straw has hinted that under Gordon Brown (for whom he is of course campaign manager) the ID cards initiatives going ahead could be under review. This is a mighty turnaround from Blair who seemed adamant that we would have them, and, if I'm honest, was a major motivation in how I voted at the locals. Afterall, who wants to threaten civil liberties? Apart from the contented majority who care not a jot about it and have been convinced in their ignorance that it's worth it for the terrorism controls they might afford...Who needs enemies when you have citizens like these?! Still, a very poisitive, if tentative statement from Brown's camp, and one which I'm incredibly happy to see. Let's hope this is more than an appeasement and might be the precursor to a genuine reconsideration of ID cards.

Labels:

posted by danny @ 09:25, ,


The rise of the British Political Personality
Friday, 11 May 2007

Whilst chatting to a guy named Sam today in college we got onto the subject of Labour party leadership. We were discussing how Gordon Brown, who almost inevitably will get the position, although, not nessecarily without competetion, was widely mistrusted by the public. I jokingly said it was the scotsman in him, but we had raised a fairly valid point. Despite, in our minds at least, Brown doing very little which could be seen in a negative life when compared to Blair, many people just seem to prefer Blair. Brown's economy has been pretty decent, Blair took us to Iraq. Go figure. The question is, how much importance do the public give the charisma orcharm of party leaders when voting? How much of voting is manifesto led, and how much is run by charachters, the big names in politics?



The film above shows just such views in the supposed emulation of Blair by Cameron; the man with fingers in every policy-related pie. After disappointing results for the Lib-Dems, I have to wonder, how much are the Yellows at a disadvantage having Campbell; generally not in the news to the extent Cameron or Blair are, as their leader? As people seem determined to make comparisons between Blair and Cameron, and even wider comparisons to modern Labour and Cameron's reformed vision of the Conservative Party, just how much is Campbell edged out of what, in terms of media, if not politically, is increasingly looking like a two'horse race? Is it no news is good news, or there's no such thing as bad publicity? With poor results across the UK, I expect the LibDems would have to say the latter...

Labels: ,

posted by danny @ 17:02, ,


Conservatives and snapshots
Wednesday, 9 May 2007

Although I am not actively on the internet, I have been enjoying popping onto Facebook everyonce and a while to see what has been going on. Sadly, not much, however, things of note rank in the '2' category today as I hit the triple digits in the old 'See More Photos' category, which is a minor but nonetheless overwhelmingly proud achievment for me. Secondarily, I came across what might just be the best group I have ever seen on Facebook.

"Abortion: The Only Way Conservatives Don't Approve of Killing People"

here is the quite perfect description to go along with that same group:

Yay war!
Yay guns!
Yay death penalty!
but don't you DARE abort that unborn fetus!!
LIFE IS SACRED!!!

Labels:

posted by danny @ 13:45, ,


Update 2
Tuesday, 8 May 2007

Right, time for a recollection of the last week or so since I posted. Apologies for the late one, but c'est examens. Unfortunately this means it's unlikely that there will be any reviews any time soon, which I know my readership of exactly one will be bitterly disappointed about. Since I last spoke:


Apologies for the brevity of this post, but if you really cared, you would email me or comment to let me know. But you clearly dont. So boo you whore.

Labels: ,

posted by danny @ 09:19, ,