Europe is riddled with political and social cancers that need cutting out before they become out of control

DISCALIMER: Apologies for this post being s few days late. I did have an original post in mind for Wednesday, however I decided to scrap it because I did not think it was of good quality and since then I have been monumentally busy.

I appreciate that this is probably the boldest headline I have done so far on my blog. However, it is a statement that I every passing day I spend living on this continent that I start to think is more and more true.

Image Courtesy of Wiki Media commons

We have the swashbuckling, ciggie loving Nigel Farage in one corner who enjoys long pints down the pub after a hard day’s work shouting at the European parliament. Other hobbies the leader of the UK Independence party can put on his political dating advert. This includes slagging of those in the media when more questionable aspects of the party are being held to account. This reached fever pitch recently after the Channel 4 mockumentary “UKIP: The first hundred days” was broadcast. The show which used a combination of archive footage and scripted scenes drew over 1000 complaints from viewers for being “propaganda” rather than the only complaint that should be levelled on it which is it was “a bit rubbish”. Of course if he is still looking for things to do Farage can rely on his favourite past time of saying his party isn’t racist but then sacking members of it for being…well…racist.

Then in the other corner we have Angela Merkel who has been relishing in her current role as de facto leader of the European Union, Why? Because her country are the ones with the money. Therefore, if the EU is all about money (which at the minute it is) then that suits Mrs Merkel just fine because she is the one that has it. What effect has this had on the EU? It’s why Junker is in power at the EU now because any challenge regardless of ideology is swept aside because no small EU nation wants to take on the might of Germany. It’s also why countries such as Greece, Spain and Portugal are still in financial instability. Because whilst there was some support for an end to austerity from the A8 countries that couldn’t shift the might of the economic powerhouse that has more MEPs than any other country. Germany consistently and vocally insisted that these countries continued austerity measures despite debts rising because of them. A decision that looks like it has set the EU back years. A decision so grave that it even unites me and Mr. Farage (this does not happen often believe me). Merkel is also the one who has been representing the EU during the ongoing conflict in the Ukraine. Resulting in ceasefire continued carnage and whilst this isn’t exactly her fault the fact that some parties were so easily duped by Putin makes you wonder how some of our heads of state ever reached the pinnacle of their countries’ political systems. Merkal has been the head of German politics for a decade now and is knocking on the door of Maggie Thatcher as the longest serving female leader in Europe. Yet Thatcher knew that the clock was ticking and opinion polls tumbled for the Baroness throughout her 3rd term causing her to resign. Merkal still for the minute has the benefit of public support yet in a similar way to Thatcher in parts of the UK. Merkel’s premiership of Germany and in a sense the EU will cause polarising views depending on where you live.

And then we have us in-between; the ones effected most by the policies of our national government and the EU parliament. These effects have been political extremism seen throughout the EU. From the blight of EDL protests in the UK to the rise of parties such as the French National Front and Golden Dawn in Greece. Causing the rather non-issue of immigration before the economic crash to become such a political black hole that you cannot talk about it being a net gain without being called a communist or it being a net loss without being called a racist. The lack of sensible discussion about immigration in the 00’s has caused extremism from this topic to spread to all forms of politics and now extremism that was once extreme is now dangerously becoming the ideological battlegrounds throughout the EU and is now causing these extremes to enter the fabrics of society. We’ve seen this as recently as this week when a disgusting minority of Chelsea FC supporters who were GUESTS in Paris denied a French citizen right to use public transport. Football hasn’t had an easy relationship with society at times via violence and racism but would this honestly happen ten even 20 years ago? When the world had cash in its wallet and food on its table? Or has the cancer of political extremism that has weaved itself into the European Parliament now rewoven itself into the beautiful game? The EU has done many great things, however not dealing properly with the credit crunch and not educating its citizens about migration has been a catastrophic failure that could have put the union beyond repair.

So where does that leave us then? Well I’m very much in two minds about the EU at the minute. I’ve always been a keen fan of it yet the issues I mentioned before have made me feel rather disillusioned with its internal functions. I feel disillusioned that extremist parties have been able to enter the parliament in large numbers so easily and this has only brought the European Parliament to a standstill and no one representing the mainstream EU parties seems to mind. I feel disillusioned at the EU’s economic standing in the world since the EU for all its economic flaws would be the largest economy in the world if it was merged into one large economy. However, I feel that no politician in the EU has this attitude and constant bickering over who gives Greece it’s recovery money or who saves Ireland from economic extinction back in the day doesn’t sound like a union that has a bigger economy than the most famous union in the world. And now I also feel disillusioned at the EU’s ability to govern and educate its own people mainly thanks to the party extremism and economic mismanagement that has left people poor, angry and uneducated about key affairs.

However, I do rather like the idea of the nations of Europe being united but I believe it’s time for us to hit the reset button. The EU in its current state cannot work. It serves the needs of the larger economies too much and cripples people who have had the misfortune of being born in a smaller economic nation in Europe. We need a rethink about how social and economic policies are created and conducted in the EU parliament in order to curb political extremism that has fuelled the fire of anger amongst citizens of the old world and with uncle Vlad still not playing ball we need to rethink our current union before a much more dangerous one rears its ugly head from Europe’s past.

Feminism: A male perspective

DISCLAIMER: Before I start this blog I do need to make one shocking admission. I am and always have been male in sex. Naturally this means I have no direct experience in being female in sex, and whilst this may eliminate some of the validity of the arguments I put before you today it should not eliminate my perspective. Anyway, lets crack on.

The topic of gender equality and feminism is always one that is hotly debated in some way shape or form. However, I feel as though some of the past week’s events have caused some feminist arguments to fall into disrepute thanks to the actions of a small minority. Minorities painting a bad image of majorities is of course not a new thing. From football hooligans to far-right extremists there is always that small collection of arseholes that ruin the majorities sensible ideals.

Firstly there was the rather bizarre story that came up in my Facebook feed from UNILAD (that bastion of modern gender equality I know). The story goes that feminist blogger Lena posted on her site that she had her future son aborted at 4 months because it was male; arguing that she “didn’t want to bring another monster into the world”. Whilst this story could be a hoax the very idea that someone could contemplate such a difficult moral decision based on their babies sex astonishes me. Then what I find even more astonishing is the defence by the author of even contemplating such actions.

Allow me to uplift some of the quotes from this: “after learning my fetus was male was something I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy”; “I beg most of you, for your own good, take a look at yourself and decide right now if you want to spend the rest of your life angry on the internet, or if you want to fight for a woman’s right to do what she wants with her body.” Allow me also to put a link to her full post (http://injusticestories.com/lana-responds-to-the-criticism-about-her-abortion/) were Lana also states that she found the decision making process rather “liberating”.

Now wrap your eyeballs around these quotes from everyone’s favourite nutty dictator Robert Mugabe: “The only man you can trust is a dead white man.”; “Only God, who appointed me, will remove me not the MDC, not the British. Only God will remove me!”. Personally I do not believe that there’s much of a difference between the quotes of Lana and a person who once described himself as “the Hitler of his time”. Mugabe of course has had a bit of trouble recently in managing the highly difficult concept of a step. However, when Mugabe wanted to totally ban the image from every corner of the world the world responded by using it so much I wouldn’t be surprised if you could get it as wall paper; proving its truth. Yet when someone equally as insane comes out and uses some mad justification of it some of us start claiming its falsehood even though we cannot absolutely say for sure whether this is actually true or not.

Fortunately most rational people came out and condemned this and I applaud that, however you do get the odd person who is now totally denying that this transpired and that it is all being reported wrong. My response to this is yes you can argue that the events transpired but you cannot argue that this wasn’t published and it’s toxic message wasn’t convey to and corrupted the mind of a single person. Hoax or not this kind of thing doesn’t exactly do much good for the rational and sensible members of the gender equality community.

Next up is the rather baffling tale of the labour campaign buses that are trying to get more women involved in politics; a very noble cause and one I approve. However, some people pointed out that these buses are pink and because of this some instantly labelled the concept “patronising”.

Lots to admire about Labour women's campaign that's reaching out to "missing" 9.1m women who didn't vote in 2010. But why is the bus pink???

— Sophy Ridge (@SophyRidgeSky) February 11, 2015

As if there wasn't enough sexual stereotyping in #UK politics #labour are using a pink bus to promote their #womantowoman campaign!

— Mark Bowman (@Mark_A_Bowman) February 10, 2015

'Are you thinking of getting a blue van?' Angry man heckles Harriet Harman over #pinkbus http://t.co/ZNddEzkiEx pic.twitter.com/A06dy7XQqJ

— The Independent (@Independent) February 11, 2015

The “blue bus” idea particularly astonishes me since if you go back in time pink was actually a male colour ; but I digress. Are we actually that fussed about the colour of a bus that we cannot see the message that is hidden (even though it should be in plain sight) behind it? Can I no longer eat Prawn cocktail crisps because it’s in a pink packet and should be forced to only eat cheese and onion because it comes in a male colour? NO of course not.

A minority have forgotten this but feminism was (not so long ago) about standing for something meaningful like giving women the vote, the criminalisation of marital rape and getting equal pay for men and women. These things are objective rights that should be given to all regardless of gender and I don’t think anyone could make a logically sound argument that these campaigns have given universal good for us all. What feminism doesn’t stand for is that slashing of subjective perspectives. Yes the colour pink is associated with girls rather than boys now thanks to the Barbie doll (another great example of sending women a “positive” message) but that doesn’t mean that this is enshrined in objectivity and to convey the idea that it is and that patronising would be going against one of the key pillars of gender equality; the freedom to express oneself in a way different to the perceived norm.

The final topic in what is already a behemoth of a blog post is 50 shades of gray. Oh yes the film that started as a book that started as a fanfic for the twilight saga. However, my problems do not lie with the release of the film itself or it’s “kinky” contents. Rather it has been some of the commentary on it with this YouTube by The Telegraphs Claire Cohen video sparking my curiosity.

Claire Cohen is actually a journalist I have a lot of time for and thought her commentary on the recent decision by The Sun to drop not drop page three was excellent as this Sky News debate shows.

Pleasure meeting @NicolaMcLean at @SkyNewsTonight http://t.co/GfmJvGvVKg

— Claire Cohen (@clairecohen1) January 20, 2015

However, there does seem to be a have your cake and eat it argument going on. You see it’s ok saying that page three is reducing women to their looks rather than their achievements which I wouldn’t necessarily disagree with (until I see a naked guy on page four). However, when only a couple of weeks later your publically arguing that women should see 50 shades on the grounds that it might be arousing for them I can’t help but feel a little uncomfortable.

I cannot argue that there is a difference in censorship since anyone can pick up a copy of The Sun and she a naked women, however not everyone can go into the cinema and see the film in question. Yet if you’re going to watch a publicly displayed film in a public environment for the purposes of arousal then I actually do not see a difference between that and a person picking up a newspaper for the purposes of arousal; the medium may be different but the purpose is the same.

So to wrap up my absolute marathon of a blog post; has feminism done an objective good for society? Without question. Are all the battles in terms of gender equality won? No. But is feminism in as good of a health as it was 20 or even 10 years ago? I honestly cannot say yes to that. Feminism used to mean fighting for woman to have a point and purpose in society; now I feel it’s for mere point scoring and until it’s loudest, most myreing minorities learn what it truly was to be a feminist merely a century ago I do not believe the social movement will escape its current dogma that a minority still hold deer to.

Greek election 2015 reaction: The ballot heard around the world

The Greek election was always going to be interesting but it’s outcome has resulted in one of the most radical left-wing parties to every be democratically elected.

Is Syriza A brave new party for a brave new world? (Image courtesy of wikimedia commons)

Before the 2008 financial crash that brought the world to its economic knees Syriza was a middling party with a seat count in the teens. However, two things have acted to bring this party from relative obscurity to almost complete control of the Hellenic government.

First the crisis in the Euro that saw Greece forced to undertake massive austerity measures to not default on its debt and stay in the Euro. These were at the order of the bigger Eurozone economies with Germany being particularly adamant that Greece must “tighten its belt”. Unfortunately for PASOK the ruling party at the time the austerity measures were about as popular with the electorate as a 20 foot Margaret Thatcher statue at a TUC conference. Resulting in the Greek people having no confidence in PASOK. The absolute low point for the party was a Skai tv poll taken in October 2011 stating that only 5% of the public believed that PASOK was the best party to be in government. The 2012 elections were predictably a total disaster for PASOK who lost over 100 seats and were bumped to 3rd by Syriza. However, PASOK managed to stay in power after losing even more seats in the second election of 2012 thanks to being the minor partners in a coalition government with New Democracy and the Democratic Left. Yet the cuts remained; and weren’t working. Despite massively cutting government spending the three party coalition oversaw government debt to GDP rise to its highest level in Greek history at 174.9%.

Meanwhile, Syriza had grown to be just eight seats short of being the largest party. Under the leadership of Alexis Tsipras the party had grown by 58 seats in three short years. In 2013 Syriza became the most popular party according to opinion polls and didn’t look back. The message was clear from the people; “we do not want austerity!”. This message became louder as youth unemployment hit the 50% mark. When Greeks went to the polls last week it soon became clear that Syriza were either going to be the largest party. However, Whether they would be a majority government or senior partners in a coalition was yet to be seen. In the end Syriza came just two seats short of the first Greek majority since 2007 and bringing some stability to Greek politics in the process. However, it has seen an unlikely alliance emerge as a coalition was struck with the Independent Greek party. This coalition may seem strange at first; an awkward marriage between Nigel Farage and John Prescott. But what this coalition means is that the Greek parliament is going to go no hold bared against its European counterparts and the IMF in order to end the austerity that has crippled the Greek economy.

Embed from Getty Images

Secondly much credit should go to Alexis Tsipras. When he was sworn in today he became the youngest prime minister in Europe. The man has humble beginnings as a engineering student at The University of Athens. It was here that he became active in politics when he joined the left-wing movement whilst also serving on the Universities senate. In 2006 he stood for Syriza for the first time gaining 10.51% of the popular vote for Athens; two years later he was leader of his party; six years later he is leader of his country. He is rather unique for a politician. There isn’t a tie nor is there gray hairs; he chooses a motorbike over a limo, he has a strong admiration of Che Gurvara and creates a feeling that for the first time in a post credit crunch world the Greek people have a prime minister who genuinely connects with their electorate.

What effects this has on the European Union won’t be seen until months or years from now. But this election victory could be the first signs of a shift in political thinking in Europe towards the left that will potentially change the way the EU operates. We’ve had our own little taste of this with the “Green surge” which although wasn’t much of a surge rather a bump it does show that the desire for conventional centre-right parties is decreasing. Indeed it was not just Syriza that saw a swing in their favour during this election. All left wing parties experienced some form of swing in their favour with the exception of PASOK and the Democratic Left.

Karl Marx theorised that capitalism would lead eventually to socialism which would lead to communism as the final stage of human political development. Maybe this is the first steps on a long road towards this?

Question time 04/12/14 the verdict

Doncaster proved to be one of the more divided question time crowds this week. Considering that the 3 constituencies that Doncaster is made up of have not sent a non-labour MP to parliament since the end of the first world war, I was impressed to find that the BBC had found the Tory skeletons lurking in the Doncaster closet. With no presence from the UK independence party (who have never polled well in this part of the world) or the Greens there were two non party guests. Policy analyst Jill Kirby and comedian Omid Dajili to battle it out with the “traditional” big three parties.

The Winner: Omid Dajili

Hard to bring down the govt having done up wrong button on my shirt and needing a bottle of gin on #bbcqt pic.twitter.com/8CCVYOVtOD

— Omid Djalili (@omid9) December 5, 2014

It’s not that often I say a non political guest comes out on top on question time but  Mr.Dajili did exactly that last night. There was humor of course from the funny-man but what impressed the most was his humour was always strikingly satirical and allowed him to connect with the audience much more than the political members of the panel. On austerity Dajili always held the line that the people should decide on what should be cut as they’re the ones who it will effect; a point no one even dared to contest him on. But it was the question of British values were Omid shined. Accusing the Daily Mail of being politically divisive was welcomed by the crowed and his satirical Saudi “football commentary” exposed just how silly the study and the idea that because Muhammad is the most popular name in one part of the UK it means British values are affected.

The Loser: Jill Kirby

Started out strongly with some fast lines about the government’s spending cut promises and making the relevant highlight of the interest on borrowing being higher than the education budget. However, after trying to argue that America has cut its deficit massively; (it’s actually set to increase this year http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm) proceeded to drop a massive clanger on zero hours contacts being better than unemployment (in the same way a medically induced coma is better than death I suppose) and then blamed Gordon Brown for everything short of the Black Death, the rise of Hitler and Justin Bieber. Afterwards she then decided she wanted to target overweight people which according to public health England is seven in ten of us; so she’s the minority on that front too (maybe she should pick on someone her own size) The less said the better.

If Question Time stayed on longer, Jill Kirby would eventually say "Let them eat cake". #bbcqt

— Will Black (@WillBlackWriter) December 4, 2014

The Others

Apart from the regular sparing between messes Cooper and Javid it was all a little flat from the big 3 this week. Baroness Williams only seemed to come to life after Kirby’s attack on Gordon Brown; A lacklustre showing from the big parties.

Farage is right: We need our grammar schools back

Image Courtesy of Wiki Media commons

Do you see this man; I’m not that keen on him. I think as a political figure him and his party are as terrifying as they are backward and it all looks like UKIP wants to pretend we live in 1945. But from an educational standpoint would that be such a bad thing?

Since Tony Blair came to power in 1997 we have seen education in this country experience it’s finest and darkest hours. The Blair government performed one of the biggest public sector modernizations in the 20th century when it made state schools fit for purpose. Class sizes were cut, standards rose and it allowed for the 00’s to be a golden age of education an age that I proudly say “I am a product of”. But after revolution came stagnation exam results begin to take precedence over education and the question “is what we are teaching the next generation truly relevant?”. Then the coalition and the stagnation turned to disaster. Academies have been more like factory farms than schools. Constantly churning out kids and adopting a cut throat approach to bad behavior not because they wanted to take a tough stance; but because they needed to look good so Mr Gove kept his job (which he didn’t).

So why Grammar schools? Because they have the ability to put children like a younger version of myself; cleaver students who might not necessarily need or want to learn metalwork or food tech in an academic environment where they have the ability to thrive. The grammar school stood as one of the great levelers in society. It had the ability to take cleaver kids from poor environments who if they had a good surname or a dad who was lord of the manor would have gone to private school anyway the ability to actually feel ambitious about the future and give them an opportunity to be on a level playing field with the toffs.

But wait “Oh Foul!” I hear you cry. We can’t go back to a time of academic selection because it’s unfair on the students? Well I would argue it’s more unfair to sit a student who might not be as academically capable as those around him/her and spend hours teaching him Pythagorean theorem and “surds”; things that he/she is never going to use in real life and doesn’t really want to learn either. Instead of teaching them skills that will help them be competitive in a working environment. The idea that schools can be all things to all students is dead. We now need to give every student the best chance to succeed in whatever sector they are capable of achieving in; and if that means giving our brightest students the best means and resources to do well then is there anything wrong with that?

Four hours of my life I will never get back: My thoughts on the European Arrest warrant debate.

Yesterday afternoons debate could and perhaps should have been a simple 90 minute discussion on the reinstatement of 35 of the 110 EU police and criminal justice measures that the government opted-out of last year. What actually happened was a four hour omnishambles filled with widespread confuzzlement from both sides; dark games being played and a total disregard for the electorate that are these peoples employers. Despite the wishes of the House only ten of the 35 measures were up for debate and the question of what happens with the others is up in the air. What is even more baffling is that despite the European Arrest Warrant not being up for debate Teresa May mentioned this more than any other measure. Much to the annoyance of Yvette Cooper, John Bercow and some Tory backbenchers. John Bercow sums it up better than I ever will.
“I think I have given a fairly clear indication that this has been a sorry saga. And the House should not be put in this position. Most of us think that a commitment made is a commitment that should be honoured, and we should try to operate according to sensible standards, rather than try to slip things through some sort of artifice. It may be the sort of thing that some people think is very clever, but people outside of the House expect straightforward dealing. And they are frankly contemptuous, and I use the word advisably, contemptuous of what is not straight dealing. Let’s try to learn from this experience and do better.”
Yvette Cooper was equally appalled in her statement afterwards.
“Labour proposed to the government to have a vote on the European Arrest Warrant and the remaining EU measures tomorrow, which there is time for and which we would support. It was within the government’s power to put right the chaos and deception they have created, but they chose not to do so.
The House of Commons should be able to vote to endorse the European Arrest Warrant, putting it beyond legal challenge – which we know Eurosceptics have been planning. Despite being promised this vote, the Commons has been denied the chance to give overwhelming backing to this crucial crime fighting measure. The government must put that right at the earliest opportunity.
Theresa May was very foolish not to listen to the strong support across the House both for the European Arrest Warrant and for the opportunity of a comprehensive vote. She has handled this dreadfully. It’s a complete mess.”

Even Tory ministers were complaining about the bill and there were even attempted filibusters in order to make sure that the bill could be debated in full tomorrow. The idea of a full debate either tomorrow or at a later date seemed to make so much sense that it formed the unlikely alliance of Yvette Cooper and notable backbench Tories such as Sir William Cash MP, Chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee and Sir Alan Beith MP, Chair of the Justice Committee. Tonight showed that what started as a minor revolt over UKIPs surge in popularity 18 months ago has now descended into total revolt over any bill that affects the UKs stance in the EU. No doubt the blame game will begin between the Home Office and the Whips Office thus giving the PM another Teresa May vs. Michael Gove shaped headache to deal with; but that appears to be the least of his problems. The back-bench rebellion is now choking the Coalition government into submission which could see the final 12 months of this government be the least active in the history of the Commons. The problem now facing the PM is that not since the days of Harold Wilson has a plot been carried out on such a large scale to challenge a cabinet. A challenge, the Prime Minister might not be able to effectively address for five more months never mind five more years.