The Pessimistic Student

I'm a British student here to spread my own misery. I'm a grumpy bastard and I'm damn well proud of it.

[thepessimisticstudent-blog]

Silence Part 3

Mr. Trump

Over the past few weeks a petition has been circulating on our government’s website to ban a certain American businessman, currently standing for the Republican presidential nomination, from entering our country; a petition that is currently in the lead for the most signatures out of all that we’re sent in to our government. More than either side of the refugee/migrant debate. More than the one calling for a vote of no confidence in Jeremy Hunt after his hashed doctor’s contract negotiations. Over quadruple the number who signed asking the government to reconsider it’s stance on removing student university grants. Around 10 times those who want food, water and other aid to be dropped to the civilians in Syria want Donald Trump banned from our green and pleasant land.

While I can’t say I agree with, or even tolerate, some of his more inflammatory and divisive policies and comments, I really hate that our reaction as a country is to try and have him banned. It’s like an admission of defeat before a debate has even started. It’s the political equivalent of calling someone a racist or a sexist or anything-ist and expecting an argument to end with you as a victor based on that alone. If Trump is the foreigner-hating, misogynistic demon that we’re to believe he is, why can the response not be to seek to convert or prove him or his voters wrong? Banning him just gives the impression that we’ve given up, there’s no way that we can possibly change, understand or moderate the ideals of this man so instead we’ll just stop him from coming into contact with us, remove his freedom of speech, so that way the argument can’t even happen in the first place. If there’s no argument, we can’t lose, right? Right...? It reeks of desperation; and I feel like this has something to do with our political history and Trump’s political present. 

Political correctness has swept most of the Western World since the mid-1990s. It’s an omniscient scourge that sees and hears all. What’s that? You told a mildly sexist joke at work? You’re a misogynist and you should apologise, be sacked and removed from our civilised and progressive society, you barbarian. A senior Conservative MP, Ann Winterton, was removed from office in 2002 after telling a racist joke at a rugby club dinner; she is a shining example of how political correctness can destroy careers, especially those in politics, and I think it’s safe to say that Mrs Winterton hasn’t been heard from in mainstream media or society since. 

However, here we are in 2016 and Trump is offending Mexicans, Muslims and all sorts of ethnic minorities in his country. But where is the political correctness? He should have apologised and been forcefully taken from the public view by now. The lack of removal is quite simply down to Trump himself. He does not give a flying fuck who he offends and why. I think this is also part of a wider picture of differences between both the Americans and us, and also a difference in politics from the 1990s to now. People have been calling each other racist and sexist under the guise of political correctness for 20 odd years now, and I think its effect is wearing off. Since everything was racist and sexist for so long, the word doesn’t have the same punch it once did and we’ve become a bit tougher when we’re called it; and that’s sent a certain branch of political believers into a spin.

There’s an interesting tool with the government’s petition website: you can see where the signatures have come from, broken down into constituencies. I can’t say I was surprised with the results. Areas like London, Bristol, Manchester, Edinburgh and Glasgow all have a much higher signature rate than anywhere else, areas which, for the majority of recent British politics, have been occupied by the left and the liberals.

Despite a campaign carried out by, predominantly, the left and the liberals, using their favourite political correctness buzzwords, Trump still hasn’t been abducted by the PC police with a sack over his head and been beaten mercilessly. In fact the most recent polls put him at a 15% lead over his closest rival, Ted Cruz. He hasn’t gone gentle into that good night; he’s increased his lead. Without their usual ultimate weapon, the PC brigade are in a flat spin. What else can they do if they’ve called the man a racist and sexist etc., but remains unaffected? I know! Let’s ban him from entering our country!

More and more people are liking the idea of Trump’s crusade on political correctness. As of half an hour ago, Sarah Palin, John McCain’s Vice-President from the ill-fated 2008 race, has encouraged her supporters to vote for Trump. A ridiculous person she may be, there was a point when she could’ve been the second most powerful person in the world; she still holds a strong support within the Republican party, and she shouldn’t be discounted. It’ll hold more political sway than a Russel Brand endorsement anyway. 

The irony of it all is that this petition and, God forbid, potential ban will only increase Trump’s standing. He’s so politically incorrect that a country has banned him, that’s a good tagline for a Republican nominee. People have been treating Trump and his campaign as a joke for too long now, unfortunately the Republican primaries start in March and there is a very good chance that he’ll win, at which point everything becomes all too serious. The man could surge to victory on a wave of anti-political correctness and conservatism and become the next CEO President of America Inc., all the while people still convinced that this couldn’t possibly happen; no, not in our civilised progressive society. 

If stopping that from happening is really what people want, then frivolous petitions aimed at invoking laws applied to terrorists and hate preachers are not the way to go. Open debates, trying to bring his views into moderation and converting his followers are our best options, not preventing him from coming to our country to protect our delicate ears and minds from an opinion that differs to certain people; people who’re so ignorant in this case that they’d rather ignore a dramatic upcoming shift to our politics than attempt to fight it. 

[thepessimisticstudent-blog]

Silence Part 2

Short and sweet here unfortunately. The festivities of the Christmas period have caught up with me and I’ve been bugged down with some pretty serious flu over the last week and a bit, hence the silence; unfortunately blogging doesn’t become a primary concern at that point. Another downside to my mini hiatus is that the stories I wanted to talk about won’t strictly be considered “new news” or “this week” as I suggested in my previous post. Fortunately, keeping to a good schedule wasn’t one of my New Year’s resolutions. I’ll try to get the last post of this series up shortly so I can find something else to complain about. 

I will also point out now, because I forgot to in my last post, I hold no sway what so ever to any political party. Don’t read what I write and assume I have a bias one way or the other. I find myself at a bit of a middle ground in politics where none of the mainstream parties really “appeal” to me, and I have a serious distaste for articles or blogs which so clearly have a political leaning; it almost defeats the object of trying to write something if your mind is made up prior to starting. I started this blog as a way of getting things off my mind; it is extremely therapeutic to sit down, find a topic, approach it from a level headed frame of mind, research it as well as possible and form an opinion as such. Unfortunately, with politics as with online posts, minds are far too often made long before this process even starts. Rather than contributing something new to the discussion, the cesspool of the same opinion just grows deeper. Whether it’s those on the right who just insult the intelligence of the left and claim their victory, or those on the left who shout “fuck Tory scum” and walk away with their heads held high; neither of them have added anything to their cause, and can make their side of politics more and more unattractive for voters who haven’t made up their mind. As the saying goes, if you play chess with a pigeon, no matter how good you are, it will still kick over all the pieces, shit on the board and strut around like it’s won anyway.

As with these posts, I try to approach politics with an open mind and decide how I feel about something based on fact and track record, rather than what party someone belongs to; their membership should hold about as much effect on your decision as what colour tie they happen to be wearing. That is, after all, how democracy is supposed to work. But, then again, these are just my views and each to their own; a theme which will definitely recur in these posts. 

Anyway, I seem to have gone astray from my original topic; forced silences. 

Mr. Cameron

Unless there are those of you who have had your head firmly beneath a large rock for the past year or so, you will know that we, the British people, have a rather large decision on our hands sometime this year or next. This for me has been very interesting to see reactions of various politicians and their parties as to whether they will campaign to stay in the EU or not. A while back, Labour, the SNP, the Lib Dems and the Green party all announced that they would be fighting for the UK to stay in the EU, and that all their ministers and members should act as such or risk various reprimands, much like the ones discussed in my previous post. I presume I don’t need to explain UKIP’s stance in all this.

Strangely, it took Cameron until last week to announce that he would allow his party members to do as they please and campaign for whichever side they liked. I was initially a bit surprised, as it’s not often that we hear that a Conservative politician is being more open and libertarian as to how their members vote than Labour, SNP, Lib Dems or the Greens are. I find it almost a bit ironic given the constant descriptions flying from the left that this government is oppressive, draconian and systematically keeping the people’s true voices down.

I’ve also found his entire stance to the referendum a bit odd, it was a key point for him in the run up to the election that the Conservatives would back a referendum, and was mentioned at every possible opportunity. However, since then Cameron hasn’t once suggested which side he’s on, currently occupying the middle ground of “let’s wait to get the negotiations sorted and then campaign to stay in if we get what we want (whatever that may be)”. However he’s been holding his cards very close to his chest as to what his decision would be if the overlords of Europe denied his requests; would we stay or would we go?

I suspect we won’t know until the talks come to a close, and it will take patience until then to wait and see which side of the fence he falls (or when the sodding vote will actually be). Much like in the previous post, I suspect there’s definitely a whole lot going on in the background that we’re just not seeing. I personally think giving the free vote was a good move in terms of giving his ministers, and subsequently their constituents, freedom to express their views without being tied down to a dictatorially decided party line; also it meant that there wouldn’t be as much party infighting or rebellions going on if people are made to follow a sound bite that they don’t agree to, especially since this referendum will be a very emotive topic I suspect. Finally, and possibly most intelligently of Cameron, it will probably allow himself a bit of a cushion if the negotiations don’t go his way. Cameron is currently taking on the leaders of Europe, the biggest trading block and largest single purchasing power in the world, and if he comes back without having gained any leeway at all, he would need to campaign to leave or risk looking entirely spineless. By allowing his party to have a free vote, despite him currently saying we should campaign to stay in a reformed EU, he can do this a bit more quietly and a bit more inconspicuously than if he had to go and join the UKIP campaign. 

Yet more shrewd decision making from our elected officials.

N.B. As for my personal views on this referendum, I haven’t made my mind up yet. I’ll probably cover my thought processes once or twice on this blog before the referendum, whenever that may be. Regardless, stay tuned for the last post in this “silenced” series, the next one is about Donald Trump! That one could generate some complaint letters...

Also, I’m fairly sure I said somewhere that this would be short and sweet - whoops.

[thepessimisticstudent-blog]

Silence Part 1

It’s a bit hard knowing where to start with this blog; do I start a bit of a series of rants, do I talk about something that happened to me today or this week, do I share some heavily filtered and tilt shifted pictures of my breakfast?

None of the above is my answer. I’ve decided to talk about three politically focused news stories that have come out this week with a bit of a recurring theme - forced silences.

Mr. Corbyn

Starting on Sunday, we were treated to Jeremy Corbyn’s first reshuffle of his cabinet since becoming party leader in September of last year. My issue I take with this reshuffle is that Corbyn ran his leadership campaign under the guise of democracy and free speech; of ending the rule of the tyrannical elite in favour of a down to earth bloke from Wiltshire who’d spent most of his adult life representing the good people of North London. Yet, in a disparity to his campaign, a pattern is emerging where silence is imposed on individuals, within his own party, who disagree with him. There is a particularly ugly side of the political liberal and left (and the socially liberal and left, but that’s for another day) that has started to come out of this new Labour party; one that says “we are in favour of everyone having their own opinion, unless it’s not our opinion in which case either the dissenter's opinion or the dissenter’s place in government shall change”. Pat MacFadden was dropped after not agreeing with Corbyn’s views on terrorism and how we monitor suspects; Maria Eagle demoted from Shadow Defense following her clash with Corbyn’s opposition of Trident, replaced by Emily Thornberry, an outspoken critic of Trident; Michael Dugher was sacked after voicing his concerns about these very issues, of Labour members being forced, coerced and effectively bullied into either agreeing with Corbyn’s views or being silenced for their discord. 

It gives the impression of if you’re not with us, you’re against us. They make no attempts to convert or find a middle ground. Now, some might praise Corbyn for getting a hold of the party firmly by the scruff of its neck and bringing them round to his viewpoint; I personally admire him for his morality and his unwavering sense of what he feels is politically and ethically right in the presence of adversity. His path remains as strong and true as he wants it. Unfortunately, I also feel like this gung ho approach to politics will alienate more than it will please; and his, and Labour’s, unwillingness to falter from their set ways will not only amplify that effect, but also cost the party some sound politicians. Ed Miliband was put a lot to blame for Labour’s dismal performance in the election just gone, however his greatest weakness turned out to be, for many, his greatest asset. The man had not an original thought of his own; nor the backbone to enforce any of his ideas, in the unlikely event that one should come to him. However this meant that his manifesto was a true representation of his party, his front bench and, ultimately, his voters. 

Following a result which left many scratching their heads, it became apparent that Miliband failed to win the support of “middle Britain”, with migrations from this core voter group going mainly to the SNP, the Conservatives and UKIP (not the poor Lib Dems though, we don’t talk about them much anymore). As a result, the Conservatives can have their sway over the country with no political partners to keep them in check, nor a strong enough unilateral opposition to make them think twice. Unfortunately, with Corbyn on the war path against “dissenters” and those who would second guess him; totally blind to the middle ground of politics, I can’t see this changing come 2020. In their eagerness to never again see the same kind of numbers on the Swingometer as produced by Scotland in 2015, I feel as though they tried to compensate for a weak willed, gaffe prone leader for one who would pull the party back into the fray; with strength and vision; unshakable resolve; and unwavering morals and politics. Regrettably, they overshot the mark big time.

N.B. The more eagle eyed of you might have noticed I missed a fairly key name while discussing the reshuffle. I would not at all be surprised if the only thing keeping Hilary Benn in his current position is his popularity with the core Labour voters. His affront to Corbyn in the form of that impassioned speech in favour of the Syrian Air Strikes; one which drew several, not unwarranted comparisons to Winston Churchill; left many wondering how many days Benn had left. I dare say a reshuffle there too could have caused a bit too much political upset a bit too early in Corbyn’s leadership, and I suspect he was well aware of that.

I said Corbyn was currently being brash, but certainly not stupid.

[thepessimisticstudent-blog]

“New Year New Me”

I’ve been toying with the idea of a blog for a while, and when better to publicly display faux-personal change than at the start of a new year. This is more for me than any of you who manage to stumble upon this in the depths of the website. None the less, if you stick around then expect the rants and semi-lucid ramblings of a British student, with some niceties interspersed. (Spoilers - I have no idea how to use this platform, I could be talking to my toaster right now for all I know).

The first post of the year, my header image - The Curiosity Rover Selfie. One of the finest juxtapositions known to man. At a cost of $2.5 billion, we proud humans have worked together to send a robot the size of a car to our nearest extra-terrestrial neighbour, some 350,000,000 miles away. It’s provided invaluable knowledge of Mars, including atmosphere data, soil analysis samples and several blurry pictures for conspiracy theorists to sweat over. Truly one of the greatest human accomplishments. And then they made it take a selfie.

Welcome to 2016 folks.