Category Archives: Opinions and Rants

Danger! This subject may include religion, politics or both!

The Potemkin Suburb of the “53%”.

I’m really not sure what to make of these forelock-tugging serfs. Are they inhabitants of some Potemkin suburb? Do they have such a severe case of Stockholm Syndrome they’re incapable of thinking out of the box the wealthy elites have put them in?

Among the smug-looking posts, there’s one woman who lists a load of crappy low-paid freelance jobs, and insists she feels empowered, not exploited. And her entire income depends on the amount the super-rich have left after taxes. Another claims her poverty is entirely the fault of her own bad decisions, and is all in favour of “free markets not handouts”. Except for handouts to the rich, of course. They don’t count.

I realise of course that the entire site is a probably some sort of Astroturf job, hastily put together by a few frightened right-wingers as a reaction against the increasingly large scale demonstrations in Washington demanding that the rich pay slightly higher taxes and the financial sector needs to be regulated a bit. It actually reads so clumsily as propaganda that it’s entirely possible that it’s actually a left-wing parody of tea-party types.

Assuming it is for real, it evidently hasn’t occurred to these people that a much larger middle class who earn most of their living providing goods and services to each other will deliver far greater prosperity to a far greater number of people than their limited vision of a small middle class who survive by supplying goods and services to the elites. Certainly I know of few entrepreneurial types whose businesses depend on ordinary working people having the money to spend on the goods and services their businesses provide.

One day, the more extreme versions of supply-side economics these people have been conned into buying will be as discredited as Communism. Sure, it works for the wealthy elites, just as Communism worked for the apparatchiks. Perhaps one day, expressing an admiration for Ayn Rand will kill a career in business or politics as surely as admiring Hitler or Stalin does today.

 

Posted in Opinions and Rants | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Alan McGee admits to Trolling

A couple of years ago, I blogged about Alan McGee’s notorious column in The Guardian Music Blog, and how it had turned into self-parody.

In this column he claimed that Oasis were the greatest band of all time, Freddy Mercury was really a punk, ELO were better than The Beatles, Yes’ Tales from Topographic Oceans was an absolute classic, and most notoriously of all, kept bigging up a spectacularly talentless bunch of indie no-marks called The Grants.

The comments sections soon turned into free-fire zones. Once people started recognising the extent that many of his columns were nonsense, he employed a legion of supporters in the comments to back him up. All of whom appeared to sock puppets, alleged to be Paul Brownell, an employee of McGee’s.

Now he admits the entire column was trolling

I’ve done blogs before in the past. One I used to write was for The Guardian and for four years most of the articles, and this is for the record as nobody ever prints this bit in interviews, were complete piss takes of The Guardian readers and journalists. Well, all bar Tim Jonze and Alex Needham.

I claimed to like Phil Collins, Jon Bon Jovi and Foreigner. I actually took it so far they once put me on the phone to interview Jon Bon Jovi and I had to pretend I liked his music.

I actually feel sorry for The Grants. They were just a harmless indie band, never really destined to get beyond the toilet circuit, fronted by a lead singer whose mouth was far bigger than his talent. But the way he hyped them up as the next big thing exposed them to ridicule on a large stage, which I’m not sure they really deserved.

Posted in Music, Opinions and Rants, Thoughts and Opinions | Tagged , | 7 Comments

Trouble at Reading Station

I never had this trouble at Bristol a few weeks ago

With today’s glorious summer weather I decided it was an ideal time to document the old GWR station at Reading before the whole lot gets bulldozed to make way for the shiny new station.

When I got there I was told to find the duty manager to seek permission. She then told me I could only photograph the station infrastructure, and could not photograph trains. Given that I’ve taken thousands of photographs at UK and overseas stations over 25 years, and never before have train companies ever tried to stop me taking photographs, I really don’t understand what First Great Western are playing at.

I know some large stations tried to prevent photographers a few years back through a combination post-9/11 paranoia and corporate backside-covering, but changed their tune after the resulting PR backlash.

Has anyone else had problems at Reading or any other FGW stations? Is this a new policy? What exactly is going on? It’s certainly at odds with the official photography policy of Network Rail, who own the station, or the guidelines given by The British Transport Police.

I sent this complaint to First Great Western customer services

I arrived at Reading this morning with the intention of taking photographs of the Reading station prior to redevelopment. On arrival I was advised by the barrier staff to speak to the duty manager.

The duty manager then told me that while I would be permitted to photograph the physical station infrastucture, I would not be permitted to photograph any trains.

I was extremely surprised and very disappointed on being told this, and decided to leave immediately without taking any photographs at all.

Is this a specific local rule affecting Reading, or is there a blanket ban on railway photography across all FGW stations? This is very much at odds with the widely-publicised photography policy of other TOCs such as Virgin Trains. I have certainly taken many photographs of trains at FGW stations (most recently at Bristol Temple Meads a few weeks ago) without being challenged or questioned by platform staff.

I must stress that all FGW staff I encountered were unfailingly polite.

So now, rather than spending this glorious weather outside with my camera, I’m reduced to sitting at home complaining on the Internet. I wonder what sort of response that complaint will get. Given the stories of low staff morale I’m hearing from inside FGW, they seem to be suffering from serious management problems, for which I strongly suspect my troubles are another symptom.

Update

I have now received a rather bland and somewhat patronising reply.

Dear Mr Hall

Thank you for your email of 29 September 2011. I am sorry you could not take the photographs you wished to at Reading station on the same day.

We expect everyone representing our company to be as helpful as possible at all times. We do welcome rail enthusiasts at our stations who want to take photographs for private purposes. There are various guidelines designed to ensure you have a safe and enjoyable experience in the pursuit of your interest. A key priority for us is to ensure the safety of our passengers and staff. However it is the discretion of the Station Manager to set the photography limits at a particular station.

Thank you again for bringing your experience to my attention. I do hope that future journeys with us will be trouble-free.

Yours sincerely
Siddhi Minawala
Customer Services Advisor

I do not really consider this a satisfactory answer, and I’m assuming that Reading station is off-limits for railway photography for the foreseeable future. And I very much doubt that we’ll ever be given a satisfactory reason.

Update No 2

Now get a second reply, which strongly implies that someone in First Great Western has been reading either this blog or the thread I started on RMWeb with well over a hundred replies.

Dear Mr Hall

I am writing to apologise for the problems you had recently at Reading station, when you were not permitted to take photographs of trains. I understand you were unhappy with the last response we sent you on this matter and I am sorry.

We do have to work within certain guidelines when allowing customers to photograph our trains, however this is something we will permit where we can. There is no reason why you were not allowed to do this, and I am really sorry that you were misadvised at the station about only being able to photograph buildings. I have passed this feedback on to my colleagues at Reading, who I am sure will take the necessary action to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

If you wish to take pictures of the trains at Reading, you do need to approach the Station Manager first, who will go over the guidelines with you. We don’t want to stop you from pursuing your hobby and I am sorry that our response has not been particularly helpful.

I hope this now clears things up and that you will accept my apologies for the way this matter has been handled.

Please do feel free to get in touch if I can help with anything else in the future.

Yours sincerely

Jo Coverley
Customer Relations Senior Officer

Posted in Opinions and Rants, Photos, Railways | Tagged , , , | 5 Comments

The Al-Queda of the West?

Apologies to music fans for this political ranting. There will be a review of High Voltage along shortly, a superb weekend, but for me the whole thing took place under the shadow of the terrible events in Norway on Friday.

While on the surface this seems a random and inexplicable event, it’s something many have warned was coming for a long time. The only surprise for me is that it happened in Europe rather than in North America.

Some commentators are still insisting that Anders Brevik was some kind of lone nut who wasn’t part of any wider political movement. They seem to ignore the fact that his rambling “manifesto” isn’t his own words, but is almost entirely cut-and-pasted from a slew of right-wing writers ranging from a number of notorious far-right bloggers to The Daily Mail’s racist columnist Melanie Phillips. This post on the once-infamous Little Green Footballs gives a lot background, and makes it clear why so many people thought Anders Brevik and the anonymous white supremacist blogger “Fjordman” were the same person. Charles Johnson of LGF used to run with that crowd until he realised where it was all heading – so he knows what he’s talking about here.

Since 9/11 we’ve seen a cross-Atlantic alliance of right-libertarians, extreme Christian fundamentalists and white nationalists with an ugly kind of Islamophobia as the ideological glue holding them together. They have become what looks an awful lot like an exact mirror image of Al-Queda, the same abhorrence of the mixing of cultures, and the same violent intolerance to anybody who isn’t exactly like them. And now they have perpetrated something of a 9/11 of their own.

Brevik may be “mad” or “evil”, but his madness has been marinaded for years in a toxic stew of far-right ideas, and at least some of the people whose writings have inspired him now have blood on their hands. Freedom of speech is an essential principle, a cornerstone of a functioning democracy. But those who use their freedom of speech to spread hatred and incite violence need to take responsibility for the consequences when others take their words at face value.

People talk about tolerance, but it has to a two-way street. The vast majority of sects and subcultures are benign and harmless, and deserve tolerance. A small minority are not, and any right to tolerance should instantly stop the moment the bodies start to pile up.

Edit: I had thought of titling this post “The 9/11 of the right”, but thought it too provocative. But I see Charlie Stross has done precisely that:

I’m just horrified by the scale of the event.

This is in Norway, a country of 5 million souls.

92 dead in Norway is … well, multiply by 60 for the equivalent proportion of Americans and you get over 5000 dead. Playing the numbers game with such a horror is distasteful, but it suggests to me that the political impact on Scandinavian and European anti-terror politics in general is going to be non-trivial to say the least.

This is the neo-Nazi 9/11. Breivik had links to the English Defense League and other racist right-wing groups. The folks who police and intel groups all over the west have been treating with kid gloves, compared to the islamicists, due to the explosive and barely-acknowledged fact that there’s wide-scale support for anti-immigrant views all over the west, especially anti-muslim views, and semi-respectable politicians playing these prejudices for personal careerist gain.

It’s a poisoned chalice. And I have no idea what this bodes for the future, other than: nothing good.

And I really can’t disagree with any of that.

Posted in Opinions and Rants | Tagged , | 6 Comments

Norway

Like many others I’m struggling to make sense of the terrible events in Norway. What kind of twisted ideology could prompt someone to do this?

Some things I’ve read on the web this morning sent a chill down my spine and made me break out into a cold sweat.

Several years ago, I used to post reviews to the music and culture reviews site Blogcritics.org. I became disillusioned with the site after the increasing political content, and the sort of unpleasant people that content was attracting.

The last straw was when proprietor Eric Olsen gave a soap-box to very unpleasant anti-Islam hate pieces authored by a far-right Norwegian using the pseudonym “Fjordman”. I resigned from the site, because I didn’t want my own writing to be associated with what was clear to me was the writings of a neo-Nazi.

Now I see Twitter is awash with speculation that “Fjordman” and the perpetrator of the terrible massacre in Norway may be the same person. Even if they’re not, the likelihood that they both frequented the same murky corner of cyberspace is extremely high.

I feel dirty.

Posted in Opinions and Rants | 2 Comments

Quote for Today

“I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.”

This quote had been widely circulated and attributed to Martin Luther King Jr, but That Atlantic has cast doubt on the authenticity. Regardless of who originally said it, I though it was still very much in the spirit of MLK, and the speed at which it’s spread shows it’s struck a chord with a great many people.

And in fact. all by the first line is indeed by MLK - it comes from “Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?“, pp. 62–63 (1967).

The quote in full:

The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral,
begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy.
Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it.
Through violence you may murder the liar,
but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth.
Through violence you may murder the hater,
but you do not murder hate.
In fact, violence merely increases hate.
So it goes.
Returning violence for violence multiplies violence,
adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness:
only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The opening line of the viral Facebook post I quoted above that ties it to current events is by the hand of another, currently unknown author. I’m guessing it got appended to the MLK quote through an innocent cut-and-paste error rather than deliberate misattribution. Unfortunately it’s this non-MLK line that’s been widely retweeted on Twitter.

As for the moral of this story, shall we just let the combined words of MLK and that other unknown author speak for themselves?

Updated 3rd May 20:17

Posted in Memes, Opinions and Rants | 3 Comments

I’m Not Paying For Any Royal Wedding!

Warning. This is a rant. If you’re here for the prog-rock reviews, move along, there’s nothing to see.

I never thought I’d start thinking like a republican (in the British sense, not the American or Irish sense!), but I wish the royal couple would just elope to Greta Green, and save the rest of us some hassle!

When Princess Diana died vast swathes of the country wore their emotional incontinence on their sleeves, indulging in recreational grief over someone they never met. It left the other half of the country wondering if they were last sane person left in Britain. The way I felt browbeaten into compulsory mass weeping left me profoundly alienated, at least until I realised many others felt the same way. It did make me realise that the monarchy no longer represents the whole nation any more in any meaningful way.

The only people who care about the royal family now are tabloid-readers who see them as the ultimate reality TV soap opera, and a few old-school high Tories. And since I’m neither of those things, I’m beginning to object to being asked to pay for it all as a taxpayer, especially in these times of austerity and spending cuts.

But there’s a simple solution. If the royal’s fans are those who worship at the altar of celebrity, let the High Priest of celebrity culture pay for the bloody thing. I’m sure Simon Cowell can afford it

Posted in Opinions and Rants | 6 Comments

Hold on to the good

For the past eight years Fred Clark’s blog Slacktivist has been essential reading if you want to know what’s wrong with the world view of large parts of the religious right. He blogs a lot about the excesses of rightwing fundamentalism from an evangelical Christian perspective. Among other things he’s been dissecting the appalling but hugely popular “Left Behind” series of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, pointing out not only how bad they are theologically, but why the utterly fail as literature. A constant theme is how a mindset based on fear and anger is completely at odds with what the central message of Christianity is supposed to be.

And he’s on form today:

Your aunt, unfortunately, didn’t mention either your name or hers when she drunk-dialed me Thursday to let me know I was at the top of the list of Bad People she’s praying against due to my supposedly contributing to your doubts about the inerrancy and infallibility of the footnotes in the Scofield Reference Bible.

Your aunt was too intoxicated — three sheets to the wind on self-righteous indignation — for me to make a great deal of sense of your situation or hers. She is, I think, your father’s sister, and she used to live in California, but now has an area code that Google tells me is in the really lovely part of Washington State. She seems to really enjoy telling people that if they believe in evolution then they don’t believe in the Bible. And by “the Bible” she’s apparently referring to some set of scriptures that includes the Complete Works of Hal Lindsey.

Read the whole thing.

Posted in Opinions and Rants | Tagged | Leave a comment

UK Election: The Aftermath.

Welcome to the election which everyone lost. The voters have returned with a verdict of “none of the above”.

  • Labour have done as badly as they did in 1983, so they’re kidding themselves to say it’s anything other than a massive defeat. No way can Gordon Brown expect to stay in office.
  • The Tories have also lost. They were up against the most unpopular prime minister people can remember, in the middle of a recession, and 37% of the popular vote is the best they can manage. The verdict of the British people on them was “we don’t trust you guys with a majority, so we’re not going to give you one”.
  • The Liberal Democrats never expecting to form a majority government, but their goal was to get a big enough wedge of MPs to be able to form a majority with either of the other two parties. That hasn’t happened, which is why they have also lost.

So now we’re in the post-election period while the parties investigate coalitions, and try to make deals. Commentators from countries with proportional voting (i.e. most countries) are bemused that so many people in Britain find this strange. We seem to have three options:

  • A coalition (or some agreement short of a coalition) between the Tories and the Liberal Democrats. While the parties are right to enter discussions, I doubt that they’ll be able to hammer out a deal that both parties will be able to accept. The ‘Orange Book’ faction of the Liberals and David Cameron’s moderates may have something in common, but there are a sizeable section of both parties who’d consider such a deal to be anathema.
  • A minority Tory government, perhaps doing ad-hoc deals to get certain legislation through. At the moment I think this is most likely option, although it’s likely to end in a second election within a year.
  • A Lib/Lab coalition. Sadly I think this is a non-starter; the numbers simply do not add up. They’ll be well short of a working majority, and nobody really wants to cut shady pork-barrel deals with the Scottish Nationalists or Democratic Unionists.
  • A grand coalition of all three parties as government of national unity, with David Cameron as Prime Minister. Possibly the least likely of all, and only justified if the problems with the economy are really as serious as some of the more apocalyptic commentators are suggesting.

Whatever happens next, we’re going to be living in interesting times. There’s been a lot of talk about electoral reform during and after this election. Whether or not parties can work together successfully when no one party has a majority will be one test of whether or not both the British people and their politicians can deal with the results of an electoral system which would never give an overwhelming majority to a single party.

Posted in Opinions and Rants | 5 Comments

The Digital Economy Bill

So the government has railroaded through the deeply-flawed Digital Economy Bill in the dying days of a Parliament with completely inadequate discussion or consultation. It’s being sold as an urgently-needed measure to tackle widespread internet piracy, but I see it as a massive power-grab by old-media giants who want to destroy those parts of the Internet they don’t like.

Nobody apart from the major media cartels and a bunch of corrupt and/or technically-illiterate politicans are actually in favour of this thing as it stands. Even the strongly anti-filesharing Featured Artists Coalition opposes the bill.

I have always maintained that the major labels overstate the losses caused by file-sharing for largely self-serving reasons, and their real agenda has always been about maintaining market share. There are still people who claim that every illicit download represents a lost sale, which is so transparently ridiculous that they deserve to be slapped repeatedly with the proverbial Very Large Haddock until they see sense. They ignore the multiple studies concluding that file-sharers actually spend more money on music and other media than average, and frequently use file-sharing to guide their legitimate purchases.

Even if you believe illicit filesharing is a terrible thing, the whole collective punishment aspect sticks in the throat. This bill targets households, not individuals. I know I’m going to risk Godwin’s law saying this, but from occupied France in World War Two downwards, collective punishment has always been the last resort of the authoritarian thug with no moral authority. So we will see parents losing internet access due to the actitivies of their teenage children, or similar things in shared houses. That lodger you kicked out last month because he didn’t pay the rent? Turns out he’s cost you your internet as well. And that’s before we get into how cafes and libraries providing free wi-fi are now going to be expected to police their customer’s activity. No, small businesses are certainly not exempt, and many people are predicting a sharp decline in free wi-fi facilities.

Then there’s the whole ‘guilty unless proved innocent’ thing. How are they going to determine what’s a legal and what’s an illegal download? What guarantees are there that whatever data-mining or traffic analysis they propose to use isn’t going to generate significant numbers of false positives? What happens if you listen to an Internet radio station or download free songs from a band’s own website, and those sites don’t appear in some major-label approved whitelist? I’ve asked the bill’s apologists about this, and all I get is bland assurances that “it’s only going to be used against a hard core of persistant file sharers”. But there is nothing in the bill that states this.

The bits in the bill about site blocking are just as bad - again the wording is so vague that it can end up being used against virtually anything that the big media companies don’t like - much like Britains hopelessly broken libel laws.

But perhaps the most toxic thing about the entire bill is the way it undermines public support for the notion that creative artists deserve to be paid for their efforts. From the sleazy way it emerged from a meeting between the unelected twice-sacked-for-corruption Peter Mandelson and label boss David Geffen while being wined and dined on Philip Rothschild’s yacht in the Med, to the cynical way the government rammed it through Parliament without proper discussion, the whole thing has the effect of making file-sharing look like a righteous act of civil disobedience. And that will persist even if the DEB fails.

There’s still an outside chance that the House of Lords will see sense and kick the bill out, but I wouldn’t bet on it. In the meantime, if your MP voted in favour of this travesty, be sure not to vote for them in the election.

Posted in Music, Opinions and Rants | Tagged | 1 Comment