I Never Believed Such Thoughts Would Pass Through My Mind

"Complaining is useless. Actions...one person at a time, one column at a time, one editorial at a time are the tools I have." 'Column', as in, 'opinion column'? Doesn't that just come under the category of 'complaining'? When they complain, aren't people essentially trying to convert 'one person at a time', as you say? I'm not voting Tory, at least on what we have to go on at the moment. AB is right - Cameron is just trying to stick out, be more refreshing/controversial/alternative than Blair and Brown, so that people vote for him in the way they might roll the dice when they feel change is in the air. It's very difficult to work out what the overall 'situation' is when there are always, always doomsayers around - especially when they can be decades off and still cry, "I told you so!" when the inevitable happens - but that doesn't mean that the situation has always been the same, or that it makes no difference.

Cameron isn't the only alternative to Blair/Brown, you know.

Yeah, but in a lot of people's minds, you're going to get one or the other, and while I will be voting for the party that best represents my views, I still have to wonder which of those two most likely futures I would prefer.

I left my country of origin eleven years ago. A month or so ago I started thinking that maybe I should give it another chance, even if just for a few months or a year. Fortunately, these episodes of temporary insanity pass relatively quickly these days. I may return for a couple of weeks to buy underwear and visit a few friends, but moving back will just never happen. This business of making change from within is nonsense. It almost never works, but it will keep the person busy (and frustrated) for a lifetime. "You don't need the light of the Lord to read the handwriting on the wall." Copies of Warsaw Tales available through www.new-ink.org

"This business of making change from within is nonsense. It almost never works, but it will keep the person busy (and frustrated) for a lifetime." Hmm. Well, the classic refute, a la Spiderman 2, is that sometimes you have to give up on your dreams in order to do the right thing. You might end up busy and frustrated for a lifetime, but better that than self-serving escapism. While your response to your situation sounds reasonable, there's a lot of equally reasonable resentment felt towards people in this country who use their successfully hoarded wealth to buy their way out - get a nice patch in Europe etc. The feeling is that they help create/fuel the country's problems, and then scurry off when they don't like the consequences. Blair and co., for instance, seem to want to pander toward the rich, who'll be the first to evacuate if, as a result, British life really does go down the pan. However, I think you generally need to take more drastic action than writing a column or releasing a pop single. Those sort of actions can be a minor catalyst for positive change, but aren't usually an active part of it. Most of us just aren't going to do very much, firstly because we don't know what to do, and secondly because, most of the time, we can tolerate the situation as it is.

"The survey that ascertained this, also revealed high levels of unemployment ,poor educational standards and low home ownership amongst muslims. I'm not a sociologist but would this not suggest the possibility of an ever-growing, poor muslim population, discontent and resentful towards an ever shrinking nominally Judaeo-Christian middle class?" Whether or not the Muslim population is growing faster that all other sections of the population - something which I'm not sure is true - it's in no way inevitable that this growing population will be increasingly discontented and resentful, or that the middle class will be ever-shrinking. What's far more likely is that many of the Muslim communities in the UK - it's not really useful to look at them as one coherent block - will become richer, more educated and, in doing so, become more integrated into society. I don't recognise a clear, defined split between a specific British Muslim culture and a specific British Judeao-Christian culture. Muslims who believe in a Taliban-style sharia law favour opting out of the democratic British culture that includes both other British Muslims and the rest of the us. Most people - Muslim or otherwise - who have the choice between freedom and affluence or a violent death will choose freedom and affluence.

Missi, "The biggest mistake made in the last fifty years is the supposition that multi-culturalism can work. It can't and never will. All we've done is create more insoluble problems for future generations to live with." How would you define multiculturalism and what would you suggest as an alternative? Not a flip question, but a serious one. Cheers, Mark

George, didn't we manage to live with disruptive factions who had a different view of 'British laws and customs' already? We've had fascists, we've had revolutionary marxists, we've had animal rights extremists, new age travellers etc etc etc. All of these people had different cultures, and were often opposed to 'British laws and customs', yet the state didn't tip over, nor did all descend into chaos. What's the difference with the current groups of people who set themselves against the dominant culture of the UK? And what's a hard line? Isn't just a way of say you don't like something but don't have any solutions? Cheers, Mark

I can't speak for how you define "multiculturalism" as you perceive it in Great Britain. I can speak for how I see it where I live. It varies from city to city across the US, I'm not talking about Birmingham, Alabama, I have no experience living there and only suppose that it is far less dynamic than Denver. We have no specific "racial" or "ethnic" issues in this city. We have a large Hispanic population, and I suppose if there is any area of friction, it is there, but only along the fringes of our mainstream sentiments. I recon your argument in basic form is that a single society can not successfully integrate peoples of different cultures in the long run. These cultures will ultimately be at odds with one another until the dominant society prevails. I would suggest that this would never be the case though, as American society in general has integrated many facets of other cultures to create a series of unique societal structures. The very society in dominance will be changed by the existence of other social influences. It will be different from what it was and began as. Ultimately, one could argue that everything will become the same...we all look alike, we all act alike, we have the same religious belief, we eat the same food and we all drive the same car. I don't think this is true, no matter how long it takes, the ebbs and flows of humanity and human migration will prevent it from happening. The best we can hope for is to live peaceably amongst those that are different. We've yet to find a way to do that. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

As a champagne socialist (and I love that term), I'm hoping that Cameron gets in under the new mandates he is scrabbling about with, if only so the nation can call shenanigans on the whole sorry lot. And then the Fascists and the Communists can start murdering each other in the streets, with champagne. By the end, we'll have a much more streamlined raft of policies to look at, of the "for" and "against" school, rather than the "weeeellll let's see what crumbs are left by Blair's exit". It may sound radical, but our country is treading water: the water is muddy and moving back from whence it came. Chessable 9-5 at - Kurnik.org: Corruptsailor freechess.org: Ricardinio

Cameron's speech on family values today has...pretty much tipped the balance. God!! What's the victory song gonna be? I'm so excited! There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett

Missi, I'm not clear on the direct connection between religious extremism and multi-culturalism. France doesn't have multi-culturalism - they have strongly asserted French national identity - but they have plenty of religious extremists (and plenty of other problems). That said, I don't think many supporters of multi-culturalism are arguing that we should tolerate people who want to impose Sharia law by force anymore than we should tolerate people who want to impose anything else on other people by force. "Do you believe these fanatics REALLY want to integrate into our society?" No, obviously they don't but in the case of fanatics: those that plan, promote or carry out acts of violence need to be put in prisons. That's a different question to the question of whether those Muslims or others who want to have limited interraction with the British way of life - however that's defined - should be allowed to continue to do this without being forced to 'integrate'. It's quite legitimate for a democratic country to try - as France has done - to try enforce a form integration on the whole of its population based on shared on ideas of citzenship. That may or may not be a good thing but it's not going to stop fringe elements taking extreme positions.

"...opening casinos across the nation is good because it provides jobs! Burglars and murderers provide jobs. It's not jobs at all costs the nation needs, it's jobs that actually provide desirable services and products that we need...let those that want to run casinos, brothels and make bombs have what's left." Emotive comparisons, mississipi. But you must concede that burgling (breaking and entering into somebody's house and --usually-- stealing stuff) and murder (killing people who don't want to die in a premeditated way) are not the same as running a casino (providing a service to those compelled to lose money at blackjack, and making a few quid while you're at it)...brothels, on the other hand, are similar to casinos -- serving a guilty pleasure of low-lives -- but bomb-making? You can't even talk about those things in the same sentence as if there's a thread. No way. My conclusion: murder, burglary, bombing people, wrong. Casinos, brothels, not for me, but who cares?

Agree with David. "So sadly, to answer your parting question, I believe the only alternative is to take a hard line and tell every one in the country that they either integrate with 'British law and customs' or don't stay here." No one has proposed that they don't have to integrate with British law. It's not as if, in the name of multiculturalism, anyone has put forward the idea that Muslims be allowed to get away with crimes the rest of us don't. As for customs... well, they do. Muslims seem quite happy to join in with the blank-faced, polite-nod, nice-weather-we're-having behaviour that constitutes the only real constant in British culture. They integrate fine in most areas. Sure, the vocal minority are unreasonable. But come on - we go on enough about the Daily Mail at this site. The vocal minority when it comes to the white population are unreasonable too, from people who still insist that this is/should be a Christian country, to BNP members hoarding weaponry in their houses.

"...providing a service to those compelled to lose money at blackjack..." But gambling isn't just about "losing money"... the "losing money" leads to addiction and insatiable desire, which leads to needing to have that desire fulfilled at all costs, which leads to burglary, murder, etc, etc, etc - is the running of casinos really so different from these more obvious, direct and definable crimes? pe ps oid ... What is "The Art of Tea"? ... (www.pepsoid.wordpress.com)

"But gambling isn't just about "losing money"... the "losing money" leads to addiction and insatiable desire, which leads to needing to have that desire fulfilled at all costs, which leads to burglary, murder, etc, etc, etc" You could argue that such possible corollaries are inherent in a capitalist/consumerist system anyway. Society and its values exert a definite pressure upon some people to be non-conforming rather than conforming. In this way of looking at it, deviant or criminal behaviour can be seen as a symptom of the gap between the aspirations that society encourages and socially-acceptable ways of realising them. Many individuals, in response to pressures or frustrations, or because of discrepancies between their ambitions and the possibilities open to them, commit crime. It also accounts for a huge number of personal bankruptcies - especially when the means are so easily available (credit cards with credit limits that bear no relation to the user's income and ability to pay) to allow people - weak-willed, reckless, immoral, foolish, irresponsible, ill, desperate, or however else one wants to categorise them (and I certainly make no judgments, having worked with people in awful straits) - to lose control of their debts. Not an argument to everyone's taste - but surely not an invalid one. "brothels, on the other hand, are similar to casinos -- serving a guilty pleasure of low-lives" Oooo... I wonder how many politicians, businessmen, civil servants and other more 'respectable' users of these establishments would like to think of themselves as 'low-lives'! But I know what you mean!

If you believe in that cause and effect, I doubt I'll talk you out of it. I don't think there's a big connection between bombs and casinos/brothels. Burglary is often fuelled by addiction (though usually drink and drugs at a guess). Casinos only create gambling problems in the same way pubs create drinking problems...more often than not the problem is already there, which is why the casino (and the pub) is setting up: demand, a market. As for the connection between brothels and murder: legalised brothels will negate the need for murderous pimps (who may very well find other work in the murder field) and will give women the protection the streets couldn't give the girls in Ipswich. Illegal brothels and streetwalking: that's where all the murder is.

"legalised brothels will negate the need for murderous pimps " We could talk about drugs in the same way.

"You could argue that such possible corollaries are inherent in a capitalist/consumerist system anyway." Indeed, Comrade Benefit! :-) ... Care to join me on starting the long-overdue revolution to bring down the evil Capitalist system? ... I'm only half-joking! As to the whole "Casinos are providing a service/supply and demand" argument... that is exactly what's wrong with Capitalism (or at least it's 21st century, Western manifestation)! It's okay to provide a "service" and anything is excusable as long as it serves the "supply and demand" ethos. Morality not come into it then? Besides which, as the whole point of gambling is to extract as much money from the "customers" as possible, in as short a space of time as possible, and actually relying on and promoting addiction, I don't think it's quite comparable to, say, your average English pub, which, although obviously a business which needs to make money to survive, is not primarily about the intense extraction of money from the punters. pe ps oid ... What is "The Art of Tea"? ... (www.pepsoid.wordpress.com)

"Certain 'other' cultures have a very strong religious extremism element. I don't need to draw pictures here, everyone knows what I'm referring to, I believe the previous two sentences provide the link that seems to evade you." Not really. What policy towards other cultures are you suggesting to change this?

I have to agree with George on most of the issues that have been discussed. My mother came to this country in her teens, she grew up in a middle-class suburban town with few other immigrants, married a white Englishman. There is no trace of an accent left, she cooks English food, and there is nothing remaining of her country of origin in her life other than photos and memory. That isn't intergration, it's absorption but it works. My best friend's parents a Phillipino and as there is a small community of hospital workers in the area from the Phillipines they have retained much more of their culture. But even so there is an adaptation to English ways, including a learning of the Language. I get a bee in my bonnet about this language issue. If I went to live in Barcelona, I wouldn't expect nor demand my bills and council documents to be translated into English - I would understand that I would have to learn Spanish. Yet when I have been to Southwark Council services, they offer interpreting services (at huge expense no doubt) in a variety of languages and yet couldn't even speak to me in English...the staff's English was so poor, I couldn't understand what they were saying much of the time. Back to integration and absorption, this worked in the two cases I cited possibly because the people in question were Christians and therefore there were no major clashes. And there are clashes between Islam and Democracy. Not just between 'Us' and a small minority of fundamentalists. An Islamic friend of mine (who I wouldn't call a fundamentalist) explained that she believes that any law or social system created by man is imperfect (as man is)or 'Democracy is hypocrisy' and cannot work . Shariah law being divine in origin is perfect and immutable and will always provide a legal framework in a social context that will work. Currently, muslims comprise of 2.3% of the UK population but a third are under 16, the highest proportion in any group. Christians and Jews have a birthrate of 1.8 children per couple below the 2.1 which is necessary to sustain a population. Amongst muslims the rate is far higher and so the 2.3% will continue to grow. The survey that ascertained this, also revealed high levels of unemployment ,poor educational standards and low home ownership amongst muslims. I'm not a sociologist but would this not suggest the possibility of an ever-growing, poor muslim population, discontent and resentful towards an ever shrinking nominally Judaeo-Christian middle class? jude "Cacoethes scribendi" http://www.judesworld.net

Jude, this issue of Sharia law is slightly more complex than your explanation or your friend would seem to allow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia I'm in a bit of hurry, hence the link. Cheers, mark

That is indeed a most lengthy Wikipedia article, Mark! Having read a bit, though, I have to say that I find this idea of Sharia being a legal system which is "divinely inspired" and therefore above, for example, "British" law... well... somewhat arrogant. Doesn't "British" law have its origins in religious principles? Anyway, that aside... all this talk of "preserving British Culture" and the like... I have to ask... What is British Culture? And why is it so in need of preservation? I'm not saying we should suddenly all become moslems or whatever, but isn't British "culture," and hasn't it always been, an evolved and evolving mish-mash of various races, religous views, political leanings, etc, etc, etc? pe ps oid ... What is "The Art of Tea"? ... (www.pepsoid.wordpress.com)

For me its a case of working out when and where to escape...and the best survival strategy meanwhile.

May I remind you George that Cameron is the guy who wants us to love a lout and hug a hoodie. Somehow I can't see that fitting in with your value system. The truth is I too, as a long time Labour supporter, have been seriously tempted to vote for Cameron except that his views on Iraq are utter crap.

Things change, which is either a good thing or a bad thing, it depends. An apocalypse for one generation is the springboard for the next. I reckon there can't be a time where people haven't felt that it was all going to the dogs. Even in the highest golden age, where the rivers ran with honey and the animals frolicked in the fields unfettered, there'd still be someone standing there shaking their head and complaining it was all on the slide. Cheers, mark

I understand your thinking George, I've been there myself in recent years. The problem is when I search for answers internally, I can't bring myself to want to give up on the country I live in. I don't like George Bush, I don't like my government officials (for the most part) and what they have done in recent years and what they represent. They do not represent me nor my belief system. On a local level, I'm seeing changes for the better. At a national level, we're about 1/2 way there. We (American citizens) have finally got through to some of the politicians, but the wind blows in different directions and I know full well, most of what is occuring is nothing more than pandering to public sentiment in preparation for another round of elections. Finding the policital courage to do the things that are honest and respectful is a distant and fleeting concept to politicians in the face of money and publicity. You can stuff everything in a sack and move somewhere else, but you're only trading one set of problems for another. There is no place free from the bullshit and if there was, it would be very lonely there. I prefer to stay and fight within my system, using the tools at my disposal, as best I can, to make the changes I feel need to be made. Complaining is useless. Actions...one person at a time, one column at a time, one editorial at a time are the tools I have. Those things and my vote. I'll avoid the casinos and the commercialism of our society. I won't participate in that swill brewing. I'll treat my neighbor well and I won't live off the gains of others. It's about all I can do. Visit me http://www.radiodenver.org/

I too am having problems with where to place my vote. The fact I was part of a single parent family in Thatcher's Britain I can't believe it myself that I'm considering backing the Tories. Cameron's Hug A Hoodie etc was a media distortion, I believe he was talking along the lines of Blair's Tough On Crime, Tough On The Causes Of Crime. The decision's not made any easier by New Labour hurtling to the right and Cameron being unpopular with the old Tory guard. The Tories have also undertaken the Social Justice Challenge, which despite the media coverage of the outcome was a bit deeper than, 'It's all down to single mothers'. There were some very heavy non Tory affiliated hitters from idealist charities involved who are now trying to advise on policies. Whether the Tories will listen or not is another matter. Maybe they've realised that the old ways don't work, ie banging everyone up etc and it really is time to try to tackle the problems at the root for the good of society. If that's the case that'll be a good thing, at least it will mean Labour will no longer have to pander to the tabloids and can actually get tough on the causes. The other thing is can we believe the Tories, is it the wolf in sheep's clothing. Both parties are pretty much the same now. It seems The Daily Mail and Rupert Murdoch run the country. I would also agree with both Mark's and RadioDenver's comments. The country's always been going to the dogs mentality and that everywhere has it's problems. On another note apparently John Bird might be running for Mayor Of London and he's being wooed by Cameron. http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/dave_hill/2007/02/post_1039.html I don't personally know Mr Bird so don't know if he's just selling out and gunning for a title, but I'd like to think he wasn't. Craig

Does anyone seriously think that Cameron is an acceptable alternative to what we've currently got? Isn't he doing precisely what Blair did as party leader prior to 1997 - showing himself to be the big, shiny, friendly face of change? Trying to be all things to as broad a spectrum of the electorate as possible in order to win? Does anyone think that a Tory government under Cameron will be any different from a Labour government under Blair: good for a bit... and then off into another round of the same old thing under a different name? Isn't it just another case of 'I've had enough of this lot, let's give the other lot another try?' Maybe I've just become too cynical about politics. When Blair came in, I was dancing for joy. Sure, there have been changes. But the bottom line is, any government's main priority is staying in office - so no government is ever going to introduce measures that will alienate the voters. I don't know about the Daily Mail running the country - but Daily Mail politics are extremely popular. That's why I think - and I'm sorry to say it - that Cameron's green cloak will soon slip from his shoulders.. before it gets torn off. Providing he gets in, of course. It's always a darn sight easier to be a populist when you're in opposition. I feel lost, too. But the day I vote Tory is the day you can put a bullet in my head. My principles are closest to those of the Lib Dems and the Greens now - neither of which stand the slightest chance under 'first past the post'. Maybe the time is riper than ever now for electoral reform - rather than just another round of 'more of the same, only different.'

ee..it aint like it were in t'olden days. Thank fuck. There's nothing more mind-teasing than the incomprehensible eagerly avowed - Dennett