Hove Lib Dems saving the world - 1 comment

Brighton and Hove's powerful, 3-strong Liberal Democrat group (from a total of 54) took time out from assembling yet another leading questionnaire on the subject of rubbish and graffiti (distributed by the thousand to already-saturated residents) to issue a chilling warning to the electorate.

Though residents are already aware that any happiness they enjoy was only won through the tireless actions of Cllrs Elgood (no hat) and Watkins (hat), in the teeth of opposition from the stone-hearted Council, it was revealed that they were, ultimately, responsible for all life in the Brunswick and Adelaide ward. Tireless Liberal Democrat campaigning had won concessions from The Almighty, sparing the lives of all flora and fauna in the ward, and allowing the Sun to continue to rise in the morning and set in the evening. A highly suspicious-looking bar chart was then revealed, purporting to demonstrate the terrible toll that would result from Labour regaining the ward, as well as the "cataclysmic" effect this would have on the local litter situation, and the maintenance of the floral clock at Brunswick Square.

Anonymous commenters are believed to be already poised to ridicule the story on local Labour blogs, as part of an "inconsequential, unfunny spoof, designed solely to distract us from our mission to distribute enough bright yellow flyers on the subject of litter to make local landfill sites look like great big Suns."

For some local sanity, here's Brighton and Hove Labour's also-brightly-coloured, but rather more sensible and realistic web-site.

Politics for Grown-ups - 2 comments

There hasn't been a great deal of coverage across the Labour blogosphere of the controversial "blacked-up" Cameron spoof, involving Councillor Bob, Ministry of Truth, and certain (mostly opportunistic Conservative) bloggers.

That's a shame, because even if Cameron is apparently implicated in scandals over "cash-for-access", and evading penalty fares on the Underground, I don't know if that tells us much we didn't know about the trappings of power (or the loving attention he's been receiving in the MSM). The row over this spoof, though, is much more interesting.

The original post at MoT, containing the so-called offending image and "Yo Niggahs!" caption (now since moved to another post, and also featured at Bob's), attracted - in blog terms - a storm of protest from bloggers, who no doubt expected some kind of Labour scalp. This was followed in turn by coverage at the BBC, in the local press, the Daily Mail, and (apparently) Sky News. Not at all suspicious, that. What are we to make of the spoof being: "Offensive", "Nasty", "Distasteful", and "Overstepping the mark"?

What all of this boils down to is other people trying to force their own particular moral codes upon you, as a blogger. That isn't a healthy place to be. If the accusers happen to be people from your own peer group, blogging community, or social circle, you might be wise to reflect on your actions. You may be looking at an orchestrated campaign of political bullying - the use of hostile comments, media intrusion, stress, and inconvenience, to force a concession or an apology, when no law has been broken. Even if you accept that offence was genuinely taken (which I'm not sure I do accept, in this particular case) - you may find yourself up against people and groups whose offence-threshold is so low that you cannot debate with them on equal terms, and your right to free speech has been nullified.

The giving and taking of offence is not a zero-sum game: once "taken" by a politically-/racially-/religiously-/nationalistically-motivated individual, it can be appropriated on behalf of an entire community, nation, or religion. It can also be projected by a self-appointed group of citizens on behalf of another group. That can be justified when there is real public sympathy for genuinely victimised groups without a strong public voice, but the interest can be self-serving too. The Ministry of Truth's follow-up is essential reading here.

As much as anything, though, offence is not an argument. The right approach to being accused of causing offence is surely to invite the accuser to discuss the basis upon which they claim to have been offended, and how that can be resolved. They might have a point - but if no answer is forthcoming, one should proceed with a level of energy that is in direct proportion to the level of power and influence of the individual making the original suggestion. Offence without argument is just humbug, and those attempting to make political capital - or apply political pressure - sanctimonious prigs. God help Cameron if that's the state of the blogosphere he (heaven forfend) - someday - presides over.

The irony is that however visually silly the original spoof image, and how clumsily rendered (not that I could do any better), the debate that grew up once people's knees had jerked a few times - and once those who can only work that way had vacated the area - was all the more interesting and constructive. Politics is for grown-ups, however old they are.

Finally: perhaps the most inane contribution to the debate I've encountered has been this comment at Tim Worstall's (ninth one down):

It's taken more than 40 years to take the word n***** out of circulation. So for these two clowns to use it to make a political point against a shambolic Tory party that has one foot in the political grave is shameful.

Of course one sort of racism has been enshrined in - and manifested by - the saying of that word, but to conflate that word and racism is ridiculous. People who obsess over mere words are not people that the genuinely downtrodden deserve on their case: a particular word falling out of favour may make public discourse sound nicer, but it's no substitute for action, and language develops so quickly that new words always appear to take the place of others.

Racism is manifested by crimes and injustices, through callousness and contempt, and through exploitation and ignorance. It's solved when people learn to (or rather, remember how to) treat others as equals, and it's helped by punishing those who abuse; rejecting those who seek to reinforce these artificial barriers to free human interaction; those who try to take down one, only to replace it with another; as well as those who try to bully long-standing anti-racists for the crime of not playing by their rules.

Update (13/12): As it's my habit to take about 2 days to write each post, I've been overtaken by events already. Bob has said he's to take a break from blogging:

I have decided to take a break from blogging. The intention of this site in the first place, influenced by Tom Watson and Bloggerheads, was to entertain, inform, and yes, provoke a bit too. I’ve had some good banter with folks over the last couple of years, some of it on both sides getting a bit tetchy and even abusive from time to time.

I never took it personally, and if others did, perhaps I’m now in a better position to understand that... but throughout it all, I quite enjoyed it… until this last week. Some people decided I had gone too far and said so. We had some banter, but then it got totally out of control and I have had a weekend of the most vile abuse, partially provoked by a Conservative who accused me of being sympathetic to the BNP on his blog site.

For someone of my political views, that and the abuse that followed, much of it from far right organisations, has been unacceptable, so, for the time being at least… count me out of your games.

That's very disappointing news, but hopefully Bob will be able to make a comeback in the New Year.

Update 2 (13/12): Another good post about the Tory MP trying to profit from this...
Update 3 (13/12): More offence? The original seemed quite mild to me.