Desmond Tutu Is Right – We Cannot be Selective about Justice

Archbishop Desmond Tutu is a good man who has won the Nobel peace prize (one of the Nobel Committee’s better decisions) and who is not afraid to speak his mind. There are many offensive things to the good, as well as many pleasant and happy things. One of the most offensive things is hypocrisy. Mr Tutu, who last month refused to share a speaking platform with Tony Blair, has now suggested that Mr Blair and Mr Bush should stand trial at the International Criminal Court for starting the war against Iraq. Continue reading

The Reduction in the Feed In Tariff for Household Renewable Electricity

It is good to see that governments incentivise renewable energy, particularly microgeneration. Whatever your views on anthropogenic climate change clean renewable energy is healthier and gives a better degree of energy security for nations, businesses and individuals and enables our fossil fuels, which are finite and are being gobbled up with increasing appetite by a world in which the human population is rapidly expanded. Continue reading

Seven Great Unsolved Mysteries of Modern History

For nearly three weeks protestors inNew York Cityhave campaigned against the banks and corporate control of American politics. The key issue about the bankers and corporate investors for those that protest (and for the millions of us that do not protest) is a simple question. If the bankers brought an end to our prosperity by recklessness why were they rewarded instead of being punished? Continue reading

The Inconvenience of Democracy

The United Kingdom is not very united and not much of a kingdom. There is one Parliament which makes laws for the whole country and separate elected parliaments which administer and make laws for Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. The monarch has very little to do with the making of these laws, but signs off on them as a matter of formality.  Continue reading

“by their friends you shall know them”

Politicians are supposed to have private lives. They should have friends, relations families and even in some cases lovers and mistresses. Having a private life enables them to understand the people whom they are elected to govern. As such they are entitled to keep their lives private, unless their private life prevents them from doing their job properly. This would be easy for politicians to achieve were it not for democracy, which gets in the way of their privacy. Continue reading

The Great Deliverers

Governments, whether elected or not, begin their work with great ambitions and good intentions. Governing people requires both the adjustment of laws and the supervision and direction of administration. You can only make significant adjustments in laws using principles – or a political philosophy. New governments usually want to change the political philosophy of the old government.

Mr Obama wanted to adopt a more liberal philosophy and so did Mr Blair. Their liberalism is founded in community liberalism, like weak socialism. The opponents of this philosophy want to adopt more individualistic policies. The argument is between caring community liberalism (such as socialism, communism and theocracies) on the one hand and individual freedom (such as conservatism, and democratic movements) on the other hand. One side can call the other uncaring and be answered with the epithet of being against freedom. Those two differing political philosophies seem to me to be the fundamental political arguments that have prevailed since the beginning of recorded time.

A new young government is full of hope and desire. It has held itself out as being capable of changing the present order, of being a great deliverer from the sins and injustices that afflict the lives of people. Their leaders have acquired their position on the basis of a promise of delivering the people from evil.

After years of office the adjustment of laws becomes no longer a matter of principle and the supervision and direction of administration is no longer conducted justly. Although modern leaders, those great deliverers from evil, now have the opportunity, of which they partake, to surfeit, of making a great deal of money from their having simply been leaders, they all end up morally and philosophically, like Samson, and so when their office ends where are they?

“Ask for this great Deliverer now, and find him

Eyeless in Gaza at the Mill with slaves”


Motives of politicians

It is interesting to speculate on the reasons that people have for becoming politicians. I think most politicians would say that they went into politics because they wanted to improve the lot of people and to put something back into society. They believe that their ideology or political party was the way to do this and so put themselves up for politics. Continue reading

Blair’s Mein Kampf

Mr Blair has written a biography. I have no intention of buying it. Mr Blair is publicising his book under strict conditions. He will not write a dedication for a reader; I am sure that he does not want to talk or associate with mere mortals. I do not know what the rules are about shaking hand with some of his adoring public. Continue reading

A modern mask of anarchy

I like poetry, but I am not particularly fond of the Romantic Poets or of one of their most famous people Percy Bysshe Shelley. Shelly lived for only thirty years, dying fashionably young. He wrote one poem called the Mask of Anarchy about the Peterloo Massacre, in Manchester. The poem speaks against those that Shelly thought were responsible for the deaths of people in a very fledging trade union movement, who were mistakenly and unnecessarily killed by soldiers.

These days we have progressed; we can kill far more people than we could two hundred years ago, more efficiently and with greater carelessness. That set me wondering whether I could adapt Shelley’s work for the modern era. Continue reading

Mr Blair’s Charitable Gift

Mr Blair has, through a spokesman, announced that he will donate the profits and advance payments that arise from his memoirs to the British Legion, who will use the money towards a rehabilitation centre for badly wounded and damaged soldiers. The gift is stated to be £4 million but, I believe after taking into account the tax that Mr Blair would have paid had he not made the gift, the loss to Mr Blair is £2 million, still an immense sum. Continue reading