Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Thursday, 17 June 2010

In reaction to the new burka prohibitions "for security reasons" in Barcelona


What a daft way to stop your spaniel eating the milkman


As we know, one man once got on one plane in a pair of exploding hiking boots and as a result everyone else in the entire world is now forced to strip naked at airports and hand over their toiletries to a man in a high-visibility jacket.

In other words, the behaviour of one man has skewed the concept of everyday life for everyone else. And we are seeing this all the time.

Last month a Birmingham couple pleaded guilty to starving their supposedly home-schooled daughter to death. Now, of course, there are calls for parents who choose to educate their children at home to be monitored on an hourly basis by people from the “care” industry, and possibly to have their toiletries confiscated.

Then we have calls to ban sexually provocative pop videos from the television until 9pm and put Loaded magazine on the top shelf. Will this prevent teenage boys from seeing girls’ breasts? Well, whoever thinks it will has plainly never heard of the internet.

We see the same sort of overreaction to paedophilia. Just because one man in your town likes to watch schoolgirls playing netball, you must apply for a licence if you wish to take a friend’s kids to school in the morning. And I now run the risk of having my camera impounded by the police if I take pictures of my children playing on the beach.

Likewise, if I decide to take a picture of St Paul’s Cathedral I will be hurled to the ground by anti-terrorist officers and possibly shot six times in the back of the head — just because one person in Bradford once made a speech about the infidel.

We seem to have lost sight of the fact that throughout history 90% of people have behaved quite normally 90% of the time. Agatha Christie, for instance, was home-schooled and at no point was she forced to eat breadcrumbs from her neighbour’s bird table.

Of course, at the extremes, you have 5% who are goodie-goodies and who become vicars, and 5% who build exploding hiking shoes and starve their children to death.

It’s this oddball 5% that is targeted by the tidal wave of legislation. But making it more difficult to teach your children at home will not stop kids being mistreated.

It just changes the pattern of everyday life for everyone else. This is what drives me mad.

We now think it’s normal behaviour to take off our clothes at an airport. But it isn’t. Nor is it normal to stand outside in the rain to have a cigarette or to do 30mph on a dual carriageway when it’s the middle of the night and everyone else is in bed. It’s stupid.

And last week the stupidity made yet another lunge into the fabric of society with the news that government ministers were considering new laws that would force everyone to take a test before they were allowed to keep a dog.

No, really. Because one dog once ate one child, some hopeless little twerp from the department of dogs had to think of something sincere to say on the steps of the coroner’s court. Inevitably, they will have argued that the current law is “not fit for purpose”, whatever that means, and that “steps must be taken to ensure this never happens again”.

The steps being considered mean that every dog owner in the land will have to fit their pet with a microchip so that its whereabouts can be determined from dog-spotting spy-in-the-sky drones, and that before being allowed to take delivery of a puppy, people will have to sit an exam similar to the driving theory test. The cost could reach £60, and on top of this you will need compulsory third-party insurance in case your spaniel eats the milkman.

So to ensure that someone in the north called Mick doesn’t shove his pit bull into a primary school playground to calm it down, I will now have to computerise my labradoodle and answer a lot of damn fool questions about when my dog should be on a lead.

In other words, the normality of dog ownership will be skewed. Instead of spending your free time with your pooches, throwing balls or tickling them under the chin, you will be forced to provide tea and biscuits for someone from the department of dogs while he inspects your cupboard under the stairs for evidence that they’ve eaten the cleaning lady.

This will achieve nothing good. It will ruin the enjoyment of dog ownership for millions, it will result in thousands of abandoned dogs, as people realise they can’t afford the insurance, and yet it will make no difference to men in the north called Mick, who will continue to tattoo their dogs with gothic symbols of hate.

What good did all the airport legislation achieve? None. It simply means that you and I now must get to the airport six years before the plane is due to leave and arrive at the other end with yellow teeth, smelly armpits and no nail file. Did it prevent a chap from getting on board with exploding underpants? No, it did not.

Happily, however, I have a solution to the problem, a way that normal human behaviour can be preserved. It’s simple. We must start to accept that 5% of the population at any given time is bonkers. There are no steps to be taken to stamp this out and no lessons to be learnt when a man with a beard boards a plane with an exploding dog.

Government officials who are questioned on the steps of coroner’s courts must be reminded of this before they speak. So that instead of saying the current law is “not fit for purpose” and that something must be done, they familiarise themselves with an expression that sums up the situation rather better: “Shit happens.”

-Jeremy Clarkson

The Sunday Times 07.03.2010

Saturday, 12 June 2010

In praise of difference, (in)tolerance, the fine art of being (un-)PC, and the mysteries of a foreign language

Sometimes those who consider themselves the most open-minded and tolerant people are in fact the most intolerant ones. Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) did well in writing political pamphlets for both the Whigs and the Tories back in his day - at the end of the day, politics is a full circle where the extreme left meets the extreme right and they are exactly the same thing, exactly as good or bad as each other, with very similar political agendas.

And the same goes for tolerance and intolerance, "religion" and non-"religion" (the word "religion" in inverted commas because it is a word and concept widely ill-defined and misunderstood). What I witness time and time again is self-proclaimed tolerant people expressing intolerant ideas in the most audacious manner. By tolerance I refer to something like not interfering with or judging a person or an idea without careful consideration and respect.

Let me give you an example: a weed-smoking, apparently left-leaning woman in her late 20's with a rock n roll attitude and a passion for international relations and social justice goes on about how open-minded she is, then proceeds to slag off a small group of practicing Catholics standing in the other corner of the room. A second example: An association of self-proclaimed neo-hippies (or hippies with credit cards, a friend of mine so aptly once put it), set up a cafe where people can come and go as they please, paint, play music, sleep on the battered sofas and bring their own lunch if they want. But alas, should a person who does not fit the stereotypical hippie and who may decide to have an un-hippie bite to eat in the cafe, (s)he is asked to leave. An allegedly open-minded young professional struggling to tolerate a new acquaintance who to him/her seems completely intolerant due to his/her faith and belief system.

I recognise my own false tolerance in similar situations. To tolerate someone you think is more intolerant than you can be intolerable, but often highly necessary. I can understand intolerance. Some things simply cannot be tolerated (and by this I mean very serious things). But acceptance of and respect for even the more conservative, allegedly more intolerant people is vital. How can one be open-minded and think that their open-minded way is the only way?

Nobody wants to recognise their own intolerance.

Now, a second, related, matter that I find intriguing is political correctness. I enjoy being un-PC in certain company. You cannot make un-PC jokes around most people. I find that despite enjoying making un-PC jokes, I find it difficult to understand and - here it comes again - tolerate authentically un-PC people.

The Spanish language is full of un-PCness. It is quite refreshing. You can call your chubby friend "Fattie", your anorexic friend "Skinny", your dark friend "Blackie" and your hairy friend - well, "Hairy", or, even better, with a little twist of irony, "Baldy" (the last one I keep getting confused with as the word for hairy, peludo, and the colloquial term for bald, pelado, are different by only one vowel). And best of all, they are actually considered terms of endearment.

Now, there are elements of this example of un-PCness which I don't really appreciate. Most of it has to do with ethnic minority naming within the community. Some rather racist or at best segretationist expressions are accepted as funny expressions that form part of the language and the culture (at least in Spain).

And so now we come to the difficult part - my intolerance. I have written about the importance of tolerance. But I am actually very intolerant of some un-PC expressions and attitudes. I am intolerant of intolerance. My problem is that I struggle to tolerate intolerant behaviour, in myself and in others.

One of the things I struggle tolerating, and now we come to the culture/language part again, is a possessive, diminutive term of endearment in Spanish (to my knowledge more common in Latin American Spanish than in Spanish Spanish). For example, calling someone "my dear so-and-so" when quite clearly the person is not theirs, and possibly not that dear to them either (or vice-versa). I have had many a discussion about this topic with a very dear (and now I use the word in what I consider the true sense of the word) anthropologist I know. I can understand close friends and family calling each other "dear". Even "my" goes. I have learned to use and appreciate the "my dear so-and-so" expression to an extent, and the diminutive, "my dear little so-and-so" as well. But I don't understand why everyone calls everyone else "my dear little so-and-so". Surely if "my dear little so-and-so" applies to everyone, it applies to no-one at all! If everyone is your dear, who truly is your dear? Then again, I understand and appreciate these terms of endearment. I even know that just because someone calls another "my dear so-and-so" it often simply means that you care about the person, or that you are being patronising towards them, or, from what I have gathered (and correct me if I'm wrong), most commonly, it means absolutely nothing. But it is this what I interpret as indifference towards the spoken word that I struggle to tolerate, even though to an extent I feel I understand it as well as I possibly can as a non-native speaker. And what I struggle to tolerate is the fact that I still struggle to tolerate this. Why do I still struggle to accept the fact that ahora can mean anything from "now" to "never"? Why is it that, even if you appreciate a different way of thinking and being, do the best you can to adopt it and know that you may never truly understand, it is still so hard to tolerate such difference?

Then again, maybe I am being tolerant in this matter. After all, I want to understand. Or, better yet, I want to not care about not understanding this aspect that I get hung up on time and time again.

Perhaps I am being too hard on myself and on other tolerant wannabes out there. Perhaps I am being too hard on those who don't even want to be tolerant.
Perhaps tolerance is simply a matter of will, understanding and time combined.

Perhaps tolerance isn't the word I'm looking for.

Monday, 3 November 2008

The Chosen One

The fate of the world for the next 4 years will officially be decided tomorrow as Americans go (or not) to the polls. 4 years - if the Chosen One doesn´t make a big mess of it all and end it before his 4 years are up.

The prospect of good ol´ Johnny descending to the throne of the Empire of the United States of America doesn´t exactly thrill me. Nor am I convinced by the cult of Saint Barack or its worshippers, simply because, being a pessimist at heart, I don´t believe that the nature of politics can permit someone as seemingly promising as B.O to prevail for long...

Friday, 28 December 2007

Khuda-hafiz, Benazir

There is a photograph of me taken in the summer of 1990, my first full summer in Pakistan. I'm 9, a blonde, skin-and-bones girl, standing erect with a big smile, my two big front teeth gleaming. I'm wearing my mother's red-framed sunglasses and a pink dupatta wrapped around my head. I'm dressed up as Benazir Bhutto, Pakistan's prime minister at the time.

Benazir Bhutto became the first female prime minister of a Muslim country in 1988, a year before my family moved to Pakistan. She seemed a breath of fresh air in the political spheres of Pakistan, if only for being a woman, and quite charismatic at that. She was prime minister from 1988 to 1990 and again from 1993 to 1996, and was going to lead her Pakistan People's Party in the elections of January 2008. She spent years in prison in solitary confinement and in exile. The footage of her stepping down from the airplane to her homecountry after a 9-year absence shows a more human side to her as she wipes tears from her face, overcome by emotion.

When the news announced her death yesterday, it wasn't so much a feeling of disbelief and shock that overpowered me but a sick feeling in my stomach of yet another disappointment, another violent act to continue the cancerous legacy of Pakistani politics. "The unrest", an overused expression in the English-speaking media that I have grown to strongly dislike, has continued to grow in that weary artificial nation since the day a group of Oxford-educated gentlemen - who had never set foot in their colonial relic - forced a border halfway down the Indian subcontinent and created The Land of the Pure.

Ah, Pakistan. You break your people's hearts. What will become of you?

Monday, 19 March 2007

4 years

Another landmark in time. It´s been 4 years since the Iraq war started. I was in California then. I remember dressing in black that day as a protest. Didn´t do much good. Neither did the protest I had gone to two months earlier in San Francisco. But at least we protested. And we still do, 4 years on.
4 years is a long time.

Sunday, 11 March 2007

Important dates and learning experiences





It´s been three years today since 11-M, the bomb attacks on the commuter trains in Madrid. It was all over the news today, obviously. They´ve also put up a monument para no olvidar. I probably would have forgotten all about it had I not bought the Sunday paper. But I do remember seeing it all over the news when it happened. I was still in Scotland and at that point toying with the possibility of going to Spain.
It was also International Women´s Day on Thursday. I completely forgot about it until the evening when my friend Katja reminded me.
Another less significant day on the grand scale of things was on Saturday - Barcelona and Real Madrid played in Camp Nou here in Barcelona. The last time they played was in the autumn sometime, and I went to see it at a little bar near Arc de Triomf with Leandro and Federico. This time Leandro, Valeria and I watched it on Leandro´s TV. 3-3. I´ve noticed myself becoming less of a Barcelona supporter living here. If you read the papers you´d think Barça and Madrid were the only two football teams in Spain. When I was still in school, I used to watch the Champions League with Kata and support both Barça and Madrid - the unthinkable, ignorant as I was. Now if I had to choose a team, I´d go for Villareal. Let´s face it - they have the best uniform. And they have some nice-looking players. If Raisa ever reads this she´ll roll her eyes and say that there´s more to football than the men. And she´s right. There´s the game. And the money. And the politics. And the money. And...did I mention money? Still, I enjoy watching a good game of football. In December I was lucky enough to get tickets to see Barça play. It was nice, and our seats were quite good. But the passion that I´d expected to feel and the chanting and singing crowds were almost non-existent. Silly me - we weren´t in England. Or in a Barça-Real Madrid game. Is that what it takes to heat up the crowds - an ancient rivalry? Of course there is the fact that Franco was a Real Madrid "supporter" while doing all sorts of horrible things to the Catalans. And the two biggest cities-rivalry is evident just about everywhere in the world.
I have been trying to educate myself in more than just Spanish football. I´ve been in Barcelona for a bit over six months now and it hasn´t been the easiest six months of my life. I don´t know why I thought it would be easier. After all, I´d lived in Spain before. Something that has helped me articulate my confusion and clarify a few things, as well as give me a better understanding of the history and culture of Spain is a book called The Ghosts of Spain: Travels Through a Country´s Hidden Past. It´s a book by a British journalist, Giles Tremlett, who has lived in Spain a good wee while. I´m usually a bit sceptical when it comes to books like that, "history made accessible and somewhat entertaining with personal anecdotes". I don´t know why. This book, though, I´ve enjoyed.
Maybe little by little I´m accepting some of the more infuriating things about Barcelona (and Catalonia, Spain, whatever suits your idea of being politically correct). There are a lot of things I like about Barcelona. The weather. The coffee and croissant you can get for under 2 euros. Reading El País outside (although I confess I´m not always very patient with myself when reading the paper in Spanish). There are various lovely, interesting parts in the city. There are lots of little boutiques for the times you´re feeling rich. The "Chinese shops" that sell everything are open till late. Actually, a lot of things are...but the Chinese shops have a special something. There are a great deal of other things that I appreciate about the city. But the things that drive me mad are people pushing, not queuing, shouting...maybe living in quieter places for too long has made me forget that it´s actually not a crime to sit next to a stranger at the metro stop when there´s plenty of room on the bench, but I´m still not used to it. Still, there are things that I´m learning to accept and appreciate little by little. And I quite like Julio Iglesias now, so that´s definitely something!
Back to learning - a couple of weeks ago Leandro and I had the opportunity to delve into European history when we visited Berlin. Well, we didn´t quite delve, but it was another learning experience even during the brief 4 days we spent there. The city has so much history it´s overwhelming. The Wall, The Holocaust Memorial...On a lighter note, though, another overwhelming fact was the tranquility of the city. After Barcelona, Berlin felt almost eery with it peaceful streets. It was refreshing. The sovietic feel of East Berlin still lingered, and I would have liked to have seen even more. Maybe I´ll go there again one day, but in the summer, as it´s bound to be even more interesting then.

Wednesday, 24 January 2007

Other useful constructions

In my dream last night a man left a black briefcase in the middle of the metro I was in. I knew it had a bomb in it, the way you know in dreams. The briefcase was right next to me. I started to panic. The dream ended. This morning I thought back to my dream and decided I had probably been too absorbed in either the news or a book I´ve been reading for who knows how long, Year 905 by Noam Chomsky. In it he talks about "International terrorists, Hispanic narcotraffickers...crazed Arabs and other useful constructions" that are used in the media and by various governments to control "Americans" or other "Westerners". And it just made me wonder how often people actually start to panic when they see the "crazed Arab" with a big bag on public transport...? In a city like Barcelona, which is full of people from various ethnic and religious backgrounds, or in London, do people immediately think of the "construction" shown in the media...? Because if they do...it´s a hard life.
And what "construction" am I?
I don´t think I actually quite said what I wanted to say, at least not in the way I intended. But oh well.