Catalyst - 4 comments

Via Dirty Leftie. Have I heard of this think tank? I don't know, there are so many. Anyway, it's been going seven years, so it must have must have been keeping itself busy. Their aims:

Catalyst is not aligned to any political party, but we are an organisation of the left, of democratic socialists, with a clear statement of purpose and an Editorial Board comprising individuals who have all made substantial contributions in the fields of politics, economic and social policy. We intend to use our network of Board members and contacts to identify and publicise radical proposals which conform to our values, as stated in our aims.

Pamphlets cost £5 each. According to their recent press appearances, they seem pretty keen on rail renationalisation, which I find a little disconcerting, but you might not. Plenty of other publications available for free download.

Role of Blogging / Broken News - no comments

A typically intelligent article at Talk Politics to continue the debate on the role of blogging, and highlight our opportunity to disinfect the poisoned well from which politicians and the media both drink.

Dreams of changing the world through blogging are rather premature, although things may change in future should we enter a period where governments are much less secure in their parliamentary majorities and more inclined, therefore, to consider alternate viewpoints and make compromises which reflect a broader range of opinions that at present. Nevertheless bloggers can, taking on board Robin Cook's critique, exert an influence over the direction and tone of political discourse in the UK and offer a counterpoint to the existing politician/press relationship.

Over time it may be possible to build relationships with the political elite in which original thinking on their part is rewarded rather than attacked for being off-message; where it comes to be understood that the UK blog scene offers an arena where serious politics can be debated in a mature, rational and adult manner.

Do people see this changing in the future? Could it be that politicians increasingly rely upon non-partisan bloggers, who lack the commercial pressures of the MSM (MainStream Media), for reasoned arguments? Is there a chance that bloggers become co-opted into politics and the MSM - as paid journalists, or members of Think Tanks - and the independent community dwindle? Will bloggers continue to cherish their freedom - of thinking, and of their own free time - and ability to keep a broad view, or is it possible that partisanship will squeeze independence out so that blogging becomes inseperable in spirit and in kind from the MSM?

Meanwhile, at the other end of the scale, we have a paean for political cynicism at The First Post.

It's probably not a good idea to read their 300-word articles after watching BBC2's Broken News. After half-an-hour of spoof headlines, News-speak, catchphrases, and non sequiturs, sentences like these become comedy:

His mother, I am told, sometimes calls him Dave [David Cameron],
as did some broadcasters last week but that seems to be about it.

The problem for inflation watchers is that economic forces no longer all pull in the same direction.

Being compelled to make francophone friends in some desk-filled chateau hundreds of miles from home would certainly cure the motivation problem, but at what psychological cost, let alone monetary?

Fun with George Bush - 2 comments

Via Jonathan, a bit of ghoulish fun for Hallow'een, which you may find strangely hypnotic.

http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/georgie.htm

If Bush becomes stuck, move him with the mouse - in any direction and at any speed - to send him on his way once more.

New Puritans - 1 comment

Via Eric:

A blanket ban on drinking alcohol on all forms of public transport is being proposed by the Government in a fresh crackdown on binge drinking and anti-social behaviour

How exactly would this be policed? When you have trains with one driver, and one guard who, lacking the authority and the power to tackle (physically if necessary) fare-dodgers and trouble-makers, has to adopt a laissez-faire approach, the only way to prevent alcohol-fuelled trouble is to ban its sale entirely on trains, and scan for it at ticket-barriers.

With a security guard within easy hail, troublemakers can be dealt with. So an inability to tackle trouble when it happens creates a need for more legislation, more restrictions on ordinary people doing what they want safely, more frightened train guards, and still no greater likelihood that offenders be booted out at the next station or bus stop.

The "binge drinking" aspect is too ludicrous: one might drink whisky by the quart at home, regularly waking up on the bathroom floor, but settle for a couple of cans of domestically-brewed lager for a train journey. They might be sober sorts who only drink to pass the time or to help them fall asleep. Either way, how does stopping drinking on public trasnport help their health? Why not just put alcohol on ration?

Only a proposal, of course, but this feels like another of those situations where only one blogger in the world supports it.

Respect - structurally unsound - 3 comments

Via Bob from Brockley, the Socialist Party's latest article, which calls for the establishment of a real new mass party, laments past failures: firstly, Arthur Scargill's pathetic Socialist Labour Party (whoever thought that would fail?), then the Socialist Alliance, and now 'Respect' (their quotes) has been added to the list.

Could it be for supporting a crooked demagogue, for replacing a peaceful campaign for working-class empowerment and democracy - and a return to the economic policies of the 1960s and guaranteed economic meltdown - with one of hatred, anti-Semitism, and Islamic extremism? No, there's something far more important:

Our suggestion, shared by others, for the setting up of a loose federal structure that would allow discussion, debate and action was rejected by Respect. In particular, at the national conference of Respect a proposal to allow 'platforms', as is the case in the Scottish Socialist Party, was also refused when it was suggested by some lefts who looked towards Respect initially.

These are amongst the reasons why Respect is unlikely to make a significant breakthrough amongst broader layers of the working class.

In this ever-changing world its strangely comforting to find that these left-wing fringe groups remain consistent in their inability to recognise the appalling nature of the people they're prepared to sleep with to win votes and gain influence.

Library Thing - no comments

Via Chris at the Virtual Stoa, here's Library Thing, which lets you build an online list of your real-life library of books - with pictures - and share it with others. You can tag your books, look for people with similar tastes (there are six books I share with Chris), and so on. They also have a blog. I'm sure it'll progress over the next weeks and months.

If you're interested, here's my list, as it stands. I also have a widget in the sidebar that does a similar job.

Try it out.

Is Blair a Sociopath? - 2 comments

I can't remember if this did the rounds back in May, but James has brought it up. In Hollow man: Is Blair a Sociopath?, Jim Ennis offers 20 "common traits" of the successful psychopath and asks:

Any of the above sound familiar?

Any? I have to say that "Promiscuous sexual behaviour", "Early behaviour problems", "Many short-term relationships", and "Criminal versatility" aren't the first things to come to mind when I think of Blair. I wonder if they apply to this guy? I'm no psychiatrist - nor is Jim for that matter - but it's completely bonkers and might keep you occupied for a few minutes on a slow Friday morning.

Stephen Pollard - 4 comments

It's a debate that's run and run, but I've finally decided to take Stephen off our list of Labour-supporting bloggers. As with anyone else who might be taken off the list, it's not a punishment, and it doesn't even necessarily mean I think the person is wrong, merely a recognition that people have to broadly back the party, or it defeats the object. I suppose this article was the clincher.

I would still encourage you to look out for his articles, at least for variety, and a link can be found in our sidebar.

Update: We've been picked up - a surprisingly high proportion of referrals seem to be from Universities, for what it's worth. Well, "excommunicated" does give the impression I'm being pious, which isn't the case at all.

I had no idea I was even on the site

Nothing surreptitious though. Basically my role has been to trawl the Net for blogs which give the impression of being Labour-supporting, not all of whose authors necessarily have the time or motivation to actively join our list. I can't say anyone has objected so far. Some research does go into determining whether they're "with us" or not, and I generally err on the side of caution, such that a number of blogs I was initially unsure of turned out to be real stalwarts. Can't get it right all the time.

Independence for all? - 1 comment

Just a quick post, for the time being, on the latest education proposals.

Jonathan has collected a variety of views that are hostile to/unconvinced about the changes here, and I'm sure more critical articles will appear over the next few days.

The idea that it is those middle-class Labour politicians who have had the benefit (oops, there's a point conceded already, I think) of a private education who are now, after all these years, pushing them onto the rest of us, having had a pretty cushy life as a result, is hardly credible. The view always used to be that non-State-educated Labour politicians were the most hostile to private education and to grammar schools, and could therefore be given a booting for wanting to "pull the ladder up". Tony Crosland ("I will smash every f***ing grammar school in the country") went to Highgate School and Oxford. And as for Tony Benn...

Our Cramlington councillor is prepared to put an alternative view. It's more optimistic, less cynical, and doesn't rely on the use of "Christian" as a euphemism for "Dangerous/Creationist/George W. Bush". So, all in all, I find it attractive. Some extracts:

We won't win the argument for secular, liberal education by prescribing from the centre that all schools must be that way. It hasn't been tried for over one hundred years, and in all likelihood it would just encourage religious division. Instead we need to make clear the advantages as we see them of a liberal secular education. Bluntly, we have to win the argument, instead of relying on parliament to make laws that enshrine our beliefs in law.

The debate around schools reform, and how willing we all are to get up and argue for what we believe in, rather than rely on the party in government to do it for us, is a microcosm of the challenges facing the parliamentary left in the UK for a generation to come. We might not want to spend more time in debates, and campaigning for secular schools, or schools that aren't the plaything of powerful vested interests, but since those voices are already being heard its our job to raise ours.

The spectre of the "11 plus" still looms from the 1960s, alongside the memory that failing it meant you'd blown your one chance at climbing out of manual, dead-end employment. Would the return of selection in this day of age really have the same social affects in Blair's slick, mobile Britain? I loathe the private education gravy-train with a passion, but since when did selection, per se, mean you only have one chance to climb, and that being shown not to be "academic" condemned you to inferior treatment? Why shouldn't these measures be combined with policies that took from the most academically capable to help those at the bottom of the education scale, for whom life is going to be a struggle, with or without money behind them?

If I get time, I'll post some more thoughts later. I had worked on a piece about school vouchers and thr risk of ghettoisation, but I can't find it now - I always work on scraps of paper, many of these finding their way into the recycling bin before their time.

Maria Hutchings - 2 comments

A link to Stephen Newton's post on Maria Hutchings, a woman famed for taking her chance to lambast Tony Blair during the last election campaign, and for expressing the following progressive viewpoint:

With an increasing number of immigrants and asylum seekers then the pot is reduced for the rest of us. Mr Blair has got to stop focusing on issues around the world such as Afghanistan and Aids in Africa and concentrate on the issues that affect the people of Middle England, like myself who pay the taxes which keep the country going... I don't care about refugees.

Nor they about you. David Aaronovitch was frightened.

Tackling Syria - no comments

From Oliver Kamm:

Tony Blair has declined to rule out sanctions against Syria, but they would be a minimal step. Against Baathist Iraq, sanctions were porous, ineffectual, corruptly administered and a public relations disaster. Against Syria, they need to be more than symbols of disapproval. Political, diplomatic and economic pressure should be exerted with the declared aim of regime change. Forcing that outcome now is right and timely, and may obviate the need to pursue it militarily later.

There can't be many people out there for whom the very word Syria has not become synonymous with "sponsor of terrorism" (even the Beeb will tell you that). Read the full article for points that should dispel most doubts. Doesn't this make a pretty good case for regime change? Who, but terrorists, could possibly lose? Well there's optimism for you.

Funnily enough, there is a sense in which I am in the pay of Big Oil, albeit a few rungs below a level at which I might stand to profit personally from regime change in the Middle East.

Still no serious politics... - no comments

My blog is worth $38,388.72.
How much is your blog worth?

$38K - I think I'll retire now.

Turning to the other picture, while Jo is represented perfectly in the medium of Lego, this is the nearest I could get, via the Stoa.

I'm pictured on a beach, somewhat unlike that of sand-free Hove, looking like a member of a Chamber Orchestra on the way back from his Christmas works do. I can assure readers that my face isn't yellow, my hair's not black, my gee-tar's of a regular shape, and my drink is Euro brown, not American yellow.

Not pictured, recently-arrived shiny black video iPod, complete with Simpsons episodes (definitely not these). Well at least it's not public money I'm having fun spending!

"burn thatchers grave" - 5 comments

Believe it or not, my appeal to the cathartic benefits of performing a traditional English dance upon the grave of Finchley-based female premiers (in hobnailed boots, no less), has just came top of one sicko's AOL "burn thatchers grave" query.

It does rather miss the point of my article. All the same, it seems the desire to perform something akin to a paso doble six feet above the Milk Snatcher is widespread: just look at the other pages the query turns up.

Last man standing - 2 comments

Neil is continuing to hold the line on ID cards, despite Tim Worstall's assertion that he is the only blogger out there who is doing so. It's a nigh-on impossible task and, all in all, an extraordinary situation. All 99.9% votes are suspicious, and even I - an optimist, and someone with a better-than-average understanding of database issues - can see possible benefits. No argument prospers from having one side expunged, so long may the issues be debated, as well as the protagonists can.

Six Degrees - no comments

Perfectly suited for the jaded minds of blogdom, the University of Virginia's Star Links tool gives you the ability to find connections between TV and Movie stars, however obscure or ridiculous they might seem. Just for fun, here are a few serious actors who are connected by just one other person to some rather lesser names from the magical world we call stage and screen:

• Orson Welles to Tony Slattery ... via Bernard Cribbins.
• Erich von Stroheim to Rik Mayall ... via Jean Piat
• Marlon Brando to Julian Clary ... via Richard Wilson
• Marlene Dietrich to Dawn French ... via Rupert Everett
• Greta Garbo to Arthur Mullard ... via you get the idea

Of course these things aren't that amazing at all, and just rely on our ignorance of statistics.

I mean, in terms of knowing, or meeting, shaking hands, and talking, there's only one person between Tony Blair and I. Only two between myself and General Field Marshal Montgomery (or King George VI). There would only have been two between myself and Hitler, for that matter.

Just a bit of fun, though. Via Lisa.

Election 05: don't blink or you'll miss it - no comments

A particularly amusing semi-anonymous comment left at the mothballed Hove Labour blog today:

Who is this person called Celia Barlow and when did she become my MP? Who gave her the job and thank you for not telling the people of Hove. This is how Labour works, everything by the back door and hoping no one will notice.

I'm feeling particularly guilty: just imagine what the national turnout would have been if I'd spent more of my time posting, commenting, or added more blogs with a political slant to my stable of three.

This is a heavy burden to carry. Still, it just goes to show that issues like Iraq, public services, and the loss of trust in Tony Blair were irrelevant on the day.

Now I am twice as angry. This is no less than what we can expect from Labour. There is no honour in anything they do.

Oh, put a sock in it.

Update: took four hours to post this successfully, thanks to Blogger's problems. I'm not sure if it was worth the wait...

Tory leadership - 2 comments

I haven't had much to say about the Tory leadership contenders, and I've caught very little of the media coverage, but I'll sum up my position by lazily cutting and pasting a comment I left at Pub Philosopher, which had argued that a victory for Cameron represented a victory for spin:

I think we'd [i.e. Labour people] be in possession of a huge grin if either Fox or Davis were chosen. Particularly Davis. He seems to have the kind of sad face and taciturn nature suited to 5 years in Opposition. Party politics would be truly dire with Fox (OK, and Brown) in charge. At least Cameron has a bit of life about him, and a bit of charisma. At least we'd have to think.

If I thought that Davis and Fox spent their spare time writing philosophical articles, applying their intellect to the problems of the world, or winning voters over with powerful speeches, I might feel a bit of remorse about the election of a media kid, but the fact is they're both nobodies who will not be missed on either side. The quicker the Tories get shot of the Major generation the better for everyone.

The next commenter countered with:

Bit of life about him? He has said virtually nothing apart from he wants to change the Conservative party and 'modernise'. He will be exactly like Blair, the media love him (at first at least) but the voters will turn-out less and less.
I think the voters wanna see someone of substance, not a show man.

Well we're all waiting for a Tory of substance... not that we can be smug, of course.

Opinion changing? - 3 comments

Eric asks if anyone out there, for example: us lot, are willing to admit they have changed their opinions on a specific issue, or changed their more general political stance on a more global scale, because of what they have come across on a blog?

I don't know about "self hating", but by 2003 I certainly had bought into a kind of anti-Americanism that I now find so ridiculous when I see it expressed in the comments section of the BBC website, and before May, in the Guardian Election blog. I was fairly convinced that, with George W. Bush in charge, that was about it for Planet Earth, and that a "bloody nose" in Iraq would suit them quite nicely. Not a thought of the consequences, and barely a thought about Iraqis, just that they generally suffered anyway, and that "our" interpretation of progressive meant doing nothing that shook things up too much (though I was never a pacifist, and it was never entirely about oil for me). I think these views are still common. Anyway, that was my, very brief, Lib Dem period.

Other than that, I don't think I've changed that much. I've been for income tax and benefit reform (as opposed to progressive taxation) since about '99; have supported University funding reform (OK, "fees") and a rebalancing in favour of the most educationally disadvantaged since about '98; have opposed nationalisation since before '97; and continue to support inheritance tax at the highest possible level.

Perhaps I'll expand on these two paragraphs later. Anyone else got a story to tell?

I have a few letters and speeches on file, a few mercifully never sent or delivered, and they throw up some interesting snippets. Here's an extract from a letter I sent to my local Fareham CLP, circa February 1994, which is curiously prescient:

Just as the Tory press seemed to be doing more harm to the government [of John Major] than the official opposition, they will once again turn their fire on Labour as a party willing to do anything to win power, an argument used so effectively against the party under Mr Kinnock's leadership, and accuse them of abandoning their most loyal supporters. Already important Tory figures are welcoming Labour as the latest converts to the heartless free-market dogma of Thatcher's New Right. Now there is so little of substance left in the Labour Party, not only will new members be discouraged from joining the party, but existing members will feel increasingly disillusioned and dispirited.

I think that was round about the time John Smith dropped Labour's commitment to nationalisation, which is of course a great idea in principle...

Getting off the main topic slightly, I spent about 15 minutes in Fareham City Centre a couple of Friday nights ago, for the first time in about 7 years, and a more fractured, threatening, and soulless environment it's hard to imagine. It's just the kind of thing I'd expect from a Council which no longer has any Labour representatives. Unless you regularly travel between Brighton/Hove and Southampton Central and are used to being dumped out halfway due to a fault on a preceding service, you may be able to avoid the place your entire life.

Weblog Usability: The Top Ten Design Mistakes - 2 comments

Today's article from Jakob Nielsen, the usability expert.

I'm not entirely sure he's on the same wavelength, though:

#9. Forgetting That You Write for Your Future Boss

Similarly:

Having a weblog address ending in blogspot.com, typepad.com, etc. will soon be the equivalent of having an @aol.com email address or a Geocities website: the mark of a naive beginner who shouldn't be taken too seriously.

So that's where you've been going wrong. Still, the guy's usually worth a read.

Anyone got their own dos and don'ts? How about these pet hates, for starters:

• blogging under the influence of strong ideologies (or alcohol)
• use of the F****** and the N*** word
• use of the words "Insightful" and "Thoughtful" (shudder)
• writing posts that consist of a single link to Harry's Place.

Brighton & Hove Web Awards - no comments

Someone's nominated us for Best Community Site in this year's Brighton and Hove Web Awards. We're up against 20 others already, including our very near neighbours, the Goldsmid ward Labour Councillors (Simon and Vince), who provide an excellent resource.

If someone would care to open a book on the winner, drop us a line. I'm prepared to offer 5-1 now (PayPal bets to us, please) for those who'd like to make the contest more fun. Bear in mind we'd need to make the shortlisted 5 sites to stand a chance of winning.

Voting will start on 31st October and finish on the 8th November, and if you have an interest in the competition, visit the site, give them your email address, and they'll keep you in touch with developments.

Of course I expect our political stance (especially mine) to put off most neutral local bloggers, but hopefully our "community" focus will recoup some votes. We've certainly put a few quid into the local economy. Also, our technology kicks ass.

There are lots of interesting sites in the "Personal" category, and I know quite a few of the perpetrators. I'll comment on the entries in due course. A number of local political blogs that are well known to you weren't even nominated, which, I guess, shows the strength of the Brighton and Hove scene.

Thatcher's Legacy - no comments

Two days late, but I'm not a machine, you know.

Stumbling and Mumbling (now belatedly installed in our sidebar) weren't celebrating Thatcher's 80th birthday on Thursday, instead offering six reasons why her period in office had a disastrous influence upon the economy. Not, I hasten to add, six ways in which Thatcher found disaster through undermining the social democratic utopia that was Britain in April 1979. On the contrary: lack of commitment to macroeconomic reform, microeconomic reform, and to reform of the public services, as well as undermining social mobility at a time when mass unemployment made that so important. One small quote to finish:

She has given a generation of non-economists the impression that support for free markets is equivalent to support for the vested interests of the rich. Nothing could be further from the truth.

There are also some excellent comments.

Our resident (practising) economist, Owen, adds some more points here (with more comments). Another choice quote:

I think Mrs Thatcher did, in some undefinable way, change our attitudes - largely for the better - to the role of the state in private enterprise. Before her, there was a widespread assumption, under both Labour and the Conservatives, that the state should step in to prevent the collapse of particular firms or industries. That was mainly an expensive mistake, and Mrs Thatcher was robust in refusing to come to the aid of many sunset industries. (She was, however, not entirely consistent on this: her friends in industries such as aerospace continued to receive large public subsidies.)

On a slightly different tack, and going beyond economics, Neil has 20 reasons we should (continue to?) hate Thatcher, to which we could easily add reactionary social measures like Section 28.

If you had asked people their views on Thatcher in 1979, in 1981, in 1991, or even in 1997, I doubt many people "on our side" would have much that was positive to say about Thatcher or her legacy. Today, though, it's pretty difficult to make a better case for a patched-up 1979-style Britain than the one we inhabit now, which, having been moved on a path of macroeconomic stability and deregulation, leaves us, here in 2005, free of international loans, worries over price and wage rises, and the very viability of our government and our economy. What an unaccustomed luxury it has been to be able to throw billions at our favourite causes, seeing many gains (and some notable failures), reduce unemployment while offering so many new benefits, without this capitalist economy of ours crashing and burning. All that, without price and incomes policies, credit control, "Buy British", Imperial Preference, and without closing our economy to the world.

Of course it's impossible to say what would have happened if Thatcher hadn't been elected in 1979. 18 years is a ridiculously long time in economics and politics. She may well not have had the chance to fight another election. No doubt by then a "modernising" generation would already be active within the Labour party and, perhaps, the Conservatives could have persuaded Britain to swallow a more neo-liberal programme in 1983?

Today, I suspect, many in the Labour Party would reluctantly describe the Thatcher period as a "necessary purgative", despite fighting to prevent it, and many of us would still like to dance on Thatcher's grave in hobnailed boots.

Worst memes ever - 3 comments

A number of decent people have tried to breathe life into it, but Inveresk's Fifth (originally from Norm) has got to be one of the most inane memes ever, and I'm glad nobody's tagged me to get involved. Still, rather than be a killjoy, here's my 23rd post, and sentence number 5 is the immortal:

OK, I give up. Word verification is now on.

Actually, there were only 4, so that'll have to do. I'm sure it'll resound through the ages, silver-suited toddlers sat, enthralled, as fcuk-clad great grandfathers tell the tale (for the eighth time that week) of how, one day - when mankind didn't live in nuclear-powered cities under the sea - someone once breathed the words:

OK, I give up. Word verification is now on.

Another corking meme, via Antonia, is this: "What does Andrew need?". The answers?

• social skills training
• a belt (I'm showing my undies, it seems)
• an iPod (I so do)
• sleep, badly (again, bang on)
• a railway (thanks for calling me a Saint, though!)
• to 'touch that bar' (shouldn't be a problem)

And to think I turned down that home-taped "London's Burning: Greatest Hits" video, wooden mallet, and bottle of chloroform!

Politics-free zone / iPod - no comments

Sorry for the lack of politics-related posts, or indeed any at all. It's not "blogger's block", it's just hard to summon up the energy and mental resources when you've got a lot of other things on and haven't been following the conversations at other people's blogs as closely as normal. There's always the weekend, I suppose.

My three-year-old iPod (my second; the first drowned in a toilet) finally gave up the ghost on Friday afternoon, and despite a few false dawns, now makes nothing but sickening grinding noises when reading from its ill hard disk.

Its inevitable demise couldn't have come at a better time, however, as Apple unveiled (or perhaps, unleashed) new iPods today. I suggest you have a look and buy at least twelve.

My money's on one of the video iPods with the new, big, flashy screen. The only thing stopping me shelling out is: do I go for white or black? If somebody could make me a good case, one way or the other, I might just order it tonight...

Votes for prisoners - 8 comments

The BBC announce:

Banning convicted prisoners from voting in elections breaches their human rights, a European court has ruled.

Excellent. Naturally, Conservative spokespeople are already putting the boot in. Shadow attorney general Dominic Grieve said:

"Giving prisoners the vote would be ludicrous...

"If convicted rapists and murderers are given the vote it will bring the law into disrepute and many people will see it as making a mockery of justice."

People who regard democracy as Government's gift to the people, perhaps. People who don't see a problem in taking away an adult's right to hold accountable the Government, European Parliament, and local Councils that set so many of the rules within which we all work.

As much as anything, why should one's mere presence in prison deprive one of the vote, irrespective of the seriousness of the offence? Plenty of people break society's rules, serve their sentence in the community, and retain their right to vote. Perhaps judges really take this sort of thing into consideration when sentencing, but it's hard to believe. If considering depriving people of the vote, judges ought at least to have been explicit about why a particular prisoner should or should not have lost their right.

Hopefully, this will all become academic, and hopefully the Labour Party will see the principles involved and be prepared to brave a few days of hysterical headlines.

Outage / Church / Fall / Conservatives - no comments

Sorry for the outage earlier - we're now finally showing this morning's posts.

Some amusement for your Friday Thursday afternoon: via bowblog, knock yourself out at the Church Sign Generator.

And, via Hak, the Fall Quote generator (she isn't a fan). Here are some charming ones from the warped mind of Mark E. Smith:

Eyes extending invisible tendrils of contempt, the bastard offspring of Natassia Kinski and an irate squid

The difference between you and us is that we have brains

I've got no fascination with rough boys, I put one on crutches last week

The issue is that for every snotnosed pissant like Noel Gallagher, there is only one bonafide social misfit like Mark E. Smith

Someone claimed their dog had been molested by a textile chemist

There's a DHSS Volvo estate/ Right outside my door/ With a Moody Blues cassette on the dashboard

I wish I had something intelligent to say about the Conservatives as their conference comes to a close, but I really haven't seen anything worth talking about. As James put it today:

Overall, though, my abiding feeling is that the Conservatives have let down their intelligent blogging supporters this week. For their sake, I almost hope they make it up to them in the next few years, but I doubt they will somehow. The whole thing has the atmosphere of a steam preservation railway - a prosperous one, planning an extension to Kidderminster, perhaps, but no further east than that.

Update: Kerron Cross has a review of the websites of the various leadership candidates.

Some defunct economist - no comments

Owen quotes Keynes:

... the ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back...

Developing economic and political theories that fit your view of the world isn't easy without help, and seeing your assumptions crumble in the face of new arguments is painful and personal, so little wonder that loyalty is strong and that, when the time comes to change, we look for a safe haven: something that plugs the holes blown in our last theory, but which offers 'safety' for another few years.

Fallacies - 1 comment

A treasury of logical fallacies, as seen at Norm's, today. Read, learn, and practice!

Check out, in particular, the Poisoned Well, the Straw Man, and, our favourite, the Slippery Slope.

Feed Validator - 3 comments

All sorts of Labour bloggers are happily doing their stuff but having their posts ignored by Bloggers4Labour due to problems with their RSS/Atom feeds. I can think of at least three, and it's a hell of a waste.

A great way to check everything's on the straight and narrow is to stick your blog's Feed URL into Feed Validator. I'd encourage everyone to give it a try just to make sure. If you're getting problems you don't know how to fix, drop us a line.

Feed Validator isn't itself perfect. You should be able to simply give it your blog's URL and it pick out the feed URL itself, but it can't always achieve that feat. So, if you get an error the first time, try again with the feed URL. Alternatively, try FeedBurner.

Do we have a preference for feed formats? Yes. RSS 2.0 is our fave (as it supports categories), Atom 0.3 comes second, with RSS 0.9.x in third. Don't lose any sleep over it though.

Blogging the Beeb / Political Balance - no comments

A new blog about the BBC, from someone who ought to know:

What does the word 'British' mean for the BBC today? How does the BBC reflect contemporary Britishness? What does Britishness mean after devolution, the enlargement of the European Union, the challenges of globalisation, 7/7, the current debates on multiculturalism? ...

I am writing from the perspective of someone who believes strongly in public service broadcasting, and the BBC being at the heart of that. I believe in an independent BBC, supported by the licence fee. However, I don't believe that the BBC is perfect. I think the BBC itself needs to avoid defensiveness, and engage with its critics. It needs to be alert to the dangers of its own internal culture dominating the way in which it covers the external world.

Meanwhile, here's a thread at Neil's about 'political balance' in the media, freedom of expression, and monopoly media ownership.

Weekend ending - 4 comments

Let the weekend not pass without a belated link to James Hamilton's tribute to the politics of instinct, of fraternity, and of progress:

That was that. One news broadcast. Just like one FA Cup Final, or one playing of a certain record. Thus the decision was made. I was then, all of a sudden but remain now, a Labour man. And, just like my football team, Labour men and women look different to me. They look more like normal people. They sound more sensible. They come across as people whose company you might enjoy in the pub, not Glenda Jackson of course, but you know what I mean. To other relatives of mine, they look like obsessive, pinch-faced envy-addicts. But not to me.

Harry's Place has also linked to the article, but I can't see what they're saying as I'm still blocked :-(

I must confess to having spent most of the weekend rapt to AFX's 11-EP Analord collection. It's only available on 12" vinyl, so those who wish to avoid punishments in this world and the next can head on down to their local dance/independent record shop (such as our local), and pick up a record player on the way. Others can grab the whole lot (42 tracks and 203 extraordinary minutes) as a single BitTorrent. The Village Voice have this to say:

The analog-only concept underpinning Analord seems like a tacit admission that, like so many of his peers, during the late '90s James had gotten lost in the mire of options offered by state-of-art technology. Riddled with detail and addled by effects, Drukqs's delirium tremens of twitchy-glitchy beats and fruitless fruit-loopery suggested it was time for a drastic rethink. In the Dogme-like spirit of Holger Czukay's maxim "restriction is the mother of invention," on Analord James stages a strategic retreat to the sort of setup he used at the very start of his career some 15 years ago [20, surely]. He shuns digital signal processing, plug-ins, and "virtual studio technology" programs in favor of analog synths and sequencers, plus house music's favorite tools, the Roland 909 drum machine and the Roland 303 acid bass generator.

I wouldn't say it was traditional coffee-table electronica, but if cold, dark, moody, electronic music appeals at all, this is an extraordinary collection.

Paragraph of the day - 1 comment

Beat this - from James Burns:

The social makeup of Britain couldn't be further from that myth. In truth Britain is a land of workers who's main agenda is to have a meal on the table for their family. It is almost like a Maoist cultural denial of the class war around us. Most people are low wage earners. Below 15k. Below 10k even. They have a vested interest in a left wing government. Thats our main job here in Glasgow North. Lying to these people that they need New Labour. The despeartely sad truth is that for its loyalty to the Labour Party for nearly half a century, my city has seen very little reward. The rich are still atrociusly rich in their leafy west-end, and the poor are still dirt poor in their council scheme ghettos. It is a stark reality.

The Nation's Health - 4 comments

Via Tom Watson, here's a brief (but much needed) article by Patricia Hewitt, Secretary of State for Health, on the principles that underpin government health policy, published through that wonderful body, the Socialist Health Association. Some highlights:

My starting point is a fundamental belief that every individual is of equal worth and should therefore have the fullest possible opportunities to fulfil their potential. Ill-health, or healthcare that is unaffordable or inadequate, can blight people's lives. The best possible healthcare, universally available and free at the point of care, is fundamental to a civilised society. But even that is not enough. We want a society that enables all our citizens, as far as possible, to enjoy the best possible health. We know that one of the biggest influences on our health are the decisions we make as individuals and families; but we know, too, that individual decisions are shaped and constrained by broader social and economic conditions...

No matter how heated and passionate the debate about health service reform, payment by results, patient choice, or diversity of supplier becomes, we must never lose sight of our fundamental aims: to ensure that a long healthy life is the norm for the majority of people, irrespective of class, income or job. The struggle for social justice and the struggle for a healthy population are synonymous. In this sense, the values that encouraged me to join the Labour Party and engage in democratic politics over 30 years ago burn as bright as ever.