Hi everyone!
Now, I said I was going to start updating this more often, and I intend to stick to that. I have two things to talk about today, and I'll start with Pussy Riot just because that was something I myself was involved with.
For the benefit of anyone who doesn't know, Pussy Riot is a feminist punk-rock band in Russia, who stage spontaneous performances in unusual locations, usually opposing President Vladimir Putin and their the Russian Orthodox Church. Back in February, Pussy Riot staged a punk prayer on the soleas of Moscow's Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, and after a video of their performance appeared online, three of their members (two of them mothers) were arrested and charged with hooliganism. They have just recently been sentenced to two years in jail, which needless to say I passionately disapprove of.
I don't care about the views of Pussy Riot, or the Russian Orthodox Church. The reason why I object to this is because everyone should have the opportunity to express themselves, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone. To jail someone because of something like this is quite, quite wrong. On Friday I went on a demonstration to object to how Pussy Riot have been treated. The demonstration took the form of an impromptu performance in the Bear Pit in Bristol, and considering it was organised in only an hour, there were quite a lot of people there.
This demonstration was filmed and put on YouTube (I have embedded the link below). When you see this video, please please please share it with lots of people. Our aim is to make the video go viral, and hopefully people in Russia will see it. A lot of people will tell me that this is naive, idealistic and just won't work - but those people would also have said that it wouldn't have been possible to organise something as large scale as what we did on Friday in such a short space of time, and we managed to do that. The bare bones of the matter is, you cannot say what will work or not until you try it. I can't imagine that our video will become the next Charlie Bit My Finger or the next My Tram Experience, but I hope it will be seen by enough people to make everyone realise how much support Pussy Riot have. If you do just one good thing today, I'd like it to be sharing this video with your friends. Come on, do your bit! If you were in the position that these women are in at the moment, you would want the rest of the world to help out.
For some reason, Blogger isn't letting me embed, so I'll just have to post a link to the video. There is a petition in the info box on the YouTube page:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Fljvk3_PoVA
(Update: For some reason, this video has been taken down by the uploader, as the people who made it felt it looked too amateur. I'm not sure if they are going to re-edit it and put it up again, or if they're just going to leave it, but I hope the video of our demo reappears in some shape or form. I guess we'll have to wait and see...)
There is one more thing I want to talk about in this blog. Obviously the Olympics are over, and many people are now looking forward to the Paralympic Games - an amazing chance for many disabled athletes. I have recently read something quite shocking about the seating arrangements for the Games, which will start on August 29. Spectators who have a physical disability (such as wheelchair users) have to sit in a certain part of the venue that has been converted to suit their needs, and are only allowed to be accompanied by one accompanying adult. This means that many wheelchair-bound parents are being told that their children need to sit in a different part of the venue to them. In addition to this being completely unfeasible in many cases (Beth Davis-Hofbauer, who is the face of the campaign against this, has a four-year-old autistic son and a 19-year-old baby), it is blatantly discriminatory against disabled people, at the very thing which should be targeted more towards opportunities for people with disabilities. I don't really have any opinion on the Olympics, because it is not really relevant to my life. The Paralympics interest me more, because they are an opportunity to do something great for disabled sport. I am really shocked that the seating arrangements discriminate against disabled people. Each and every one of us is just one step away from being disabled - anyone can have an accident - and I think that a lot of the time, the rest of us forget about that, and don't really think of disabled people as real individuals. I try not to think like that, but I reckon a lot of people do.
Anyway, there is an online petition on change.org to persuade officials to change their seating arrangements so that wheelchair-bound users can enjoy the Paralympic Games with their families. Please sign it:
http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/international-paralympic-committee-london2012-review-ticketing-policy-for-wheelchair-users?utm_source=action_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=9645&alert_id=LiKtPYoCyW_mrkBBUWLVq
As regular readers of my blog know, I always reference someone that I respect and admire. This time, it's going to be Beth Davis-Hofbauer, the woman who created this petition about the Paralympic seating arrangements. She has had to cancel her tickets because her disability will make it impossible for her to go, and it takes guts to start a campaign on this level. The world needs more people like Beth.
More updates soon. Thanks for reading!
George
Sunday, 19 August 2012
Thursday, 16 August 2012
Sunday, 8 April 2012
Is freedom of speech no longer valid?
Hello, faithful readers!
This post comes from something I read recently about a guy called Liam Stacey. I need to say straight away that I actually know absolutely nothing about this case, which is a little unusual. Normally I do lots of research into whatever I am blogging about, but on this occasion, I thought I should write about this as soon as I heard about it so that I can use my own untarnished opinion, and not be blinded by what someone else might or might not have said.
Anyway, Liam Stacey supposedly wrote racist and offensive comments on Twitter about footballer Fabrice Muamba (the guy who had the cardiac arrest on a football pitch the other week), and when challenged, went on to write more offensive posts, possibly because he was drunk. Liam has recently been jailed for 56 days by a district judge.
Now, maybe I have the wrong end of the stick, but isn't this a really extreme reaction? Sure, I'm not racist (I hope!) and I generally dislike people who say that kind of thing, but surely the whole point of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Blogger is for people to be able to express their opinions on things like this. If I was talking to someone on Facebook or Twitter and they said something really racist or homophobic, I would tell them that I find it offensive and ask them to stop, but I wouldn't report them for it, because it's just my opinion against theirs. Like it or not, personally offending someone should not be a crime - it is a horrible thing to do, certainly, but sending someone to jail for it is just wrong.
I have not read Liam's tweets and I don't intend to either, I quite frankly have better things to do with my time than read things like that. But I do think that once someone says that they are monitoring what people say on social networks, there is no telling how far it will go. How long will it be before, for example, anything that denounces the Government is illegal? Does that mean I could be jailed for writing this blog? Obviously, I'm being a little facetious, but the principle is the same - however offensive someone's opinion is, it is still their opinion and no one else has the right to tell them not to express it. That's just another form of censorship.
This post is a little shorter than normal, but I've pretty much said all I need to say really. Let me know what you think of this topic, if you like. I'll write more soon.
This post comes from something I read recently about a guy called Liam Stacey. I need to say straight away that I actually know absolutely nothing about this case, which is a little unusual. Normally I do lots of research into whatever I am blogging about, but on this occasion, I thought I should write about this as soon as I heard about it so that I can use my own untarnished opinion, and not be blinded by what someone else might or might not have said.
Anyway, Liam Stacey supposedly wrote racist and offensive comments on Twitter about footballer Fabrice Muamba (the guy who had the cardiac arrest on a football pitch the other week), and when challenged, went on to write more offensive posts, possibly because he was drunk. Liam has recently been jailed for 56 days by a district judge.
Now, maybe I have the wrong end of the stick, but isn't this a really extreme reaction? Sure, I'm not racist (I hope!) and I generally dislike people who say that kind of thing, but surely the whole point of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Blogger is for people to be able to express their opinions on things like this. If I was talking to someone on Facebook or Twitter and they said something really racist or homophobic, I would tell them that I find it offensive and ask them to stop, but I wouldn't report them for it, because it's just my opinion against theirs. Like it or not, personally offending someone should not be a crime - it is a horrible thing to do, certainly, but sending someone to jail for it is just wrong.
I have not read Liam's tweets and I don't intend to either, I quite frankly have better things to do with my time than read things like that. But I do think that once someone says that they are monitoring what people say on social networks, there is no telling how far it will go. How long will it be before, for example, anything that denounces the Government is illegal? Does that mean I could be jailed for writing this blog? Obviously, I'm being a little facetious, but the principle is the same - however offensive someone's opinion is, it is still their opinion and no one else has the right to tell them not to express it. That's just another form of censorship.
This post is a little shorter than normal, but I've pretty much said all I need to say really. Let me know what you think of this topic, if you like. I'll write more soon.
Monday, 2 April 2012
How the police should get respect
Hello!
This blog actually comes from a Facebook conversation I stumbled upon tonight. The conversation is about a YouTube video of police evicting people from a mansion in Bristol (the video is below if anyone wants a look.) We had a conversation about tactics the police use, and whether they are ever justifiable. There are so many videos out there showing police during different scenes, and there are so many points of view - some claim that the police need to be heavy-handed to enforce the law, keep people in control and gain respect, other people insist that the police are bullies who are violent for no reason, and nothing is ever done about it.
Personally I think that if the police are there to enforce the law they need to be shown respect - but you can't respect something that has nothing to be respected for. Being heavy-handed is inevitably going to be necessary sometimes when you are in that kind of job, but it goes over the limit far too much. Some people complain that the amount of physical and verbal aggression towards the police is appalling - and it may well be -, but I'm afraid that that works two ways. I don't recall having ever seen a video of physical and verbal aggression towards the police where the police haven't been physically and verbally aggressive back, and not just in self-defence either. Many times the police are confusing, unclear about the process (or don't know it themselves) and they try to make up for this by trying to intimidate people. The problem is that when they do this, this creates aggression. If you are in that kind of situation, it is psychologically very difficult to avoid losing your cool, and becoming aggressive yourself - and once that happens, the police have grounds to avoid any trouble if you try to complain - they can just claim it was self-defence. I think that people need to be trained in how to stay calm if that situation occurs, so the police have no reason to get violent - and the police need to show people that they are someone to be trusted by being the better person, not getting involved in shouting matches, and being clear what the situation is. You don't get respect by shouting loudly or by wearing a uniform with all your achievements on it, you earn respect by being a good person, and that's how it's done.
It's not just police that I think this about, and it wouldn't be fair just to mention the police. I did actually have a conversation about teachers with some friends a few weeks ago, after I made the controversial statement that it is never acceptable for a teacher to raise their voice at a pupil. We argued about it for a while, and we still don't agree. I know it's controversial, but I think that if a student - of any age - is being uncooperative, difficult, or even just plain wreaking havoc, you can move them, you can have a conversation with them and you can make them realise themselves, but the moment you raise your voice, that immediately lets your personal emotions take over, and I firmly believe that that never improves a situation. It is really unprofessional to let your emotions take over at work, and it stops you from being objective. In my life, I have lost respect for anyone who has ever raised their voice at me, because there are far, far better ways to sort the situation out. I'm not going to be really self-righteous and say I never raise my voice, because we all do occasionally - but on those occasions, I generally apologise to the person afterwards, and make it clear that I shouldn't have talked to them in that way.
So anyway, let me know what your thoughts are on this...
There is one more thing I want to talk about... Does anyone remember Bradley Manning? I've talked about him a few times on here... anyway, in case anyone doesn't know, he's the man who released the Collateral Murder video to WikiLeaks, and he was held in solitary confinement for a long time. He still hasn't been tried, but something great has happened... he has won the People's Choice Human Rights Award! Here is the statement released:
'We are proud to announce PFC Bradley Manning as this year’s People’s Choice Honoree. He received over 2900 votes.
It takes great courage to stand for what you know is right. Bradley Manning, a 24-year-old Army intelligence analyst, joined the Army at age 19. Bradley is accused of leaking a video showing the killing of civilians, including two Reuters journalists, by a U.S. Apache helicopter crew in Iraq. He’s also charged with sharing the documents known as the Afghan War Diary, the Iraq War Logs, and embarrassing U.S. diplomatic cables, with the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks. Journalists have credited the release of these documents with helping to motivate the democratic revolution in Tunisia as well as the final withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Although Bradley has not yet been tried, he was held in solitary confinement for the first 10 months of his incarceration. If the military continues refusing to acknowledge Bradley as a whistleblower, he may become the first person in U.S. history to be convicted of “Aiding the enemy through indirect means,” a crime punishable by life in prison or the death penalty, for telling the public the truth. Learn more about how to support Bradley at www.bradleymanning.org.'
I think that this is fantastic really! He's a world hero, at least in my opinion, and this will hopefully help him achieve the outcome he deserves!
This blog actually comes from a Facebook conversation I stumbled upon tonight. The conversation is about a YouTube video of police evicting people from a mansion in Bristol (the video is below if anyone wants a look.) We had a conversation about tactics the police use, and whether they are ever justifiable. There are so many videos out there showing police during different scenes, and there are so many points of view - some claim that the police need to be heavy-handed to enforce the law, keep people in control and gain respect, other people insist that the police are bullies who are violent for no reason, and nothing is ever done about it.
Personally I think that if the police are there to enforce the law they need to be shown respect - but you can't respect something that has nothing to be respected for. Being heavy-handed is inevitably going to be necessary sometimes when you are in that kind of job, but it goes over the limit far too much. Some people complain that the amount of physical and verbal aggression towards the police is appalling - and it may well be -, but I'm afraid that that works two ways. I don't recall having ever seen a video of physical and verbal aggression towards the police where the police haven't been physically and verbally aggressive back, and not just in self-defence either. Many times the police are confusing, unclear about the process (or don't know it themselves) and they try to make up for this by trying to intimidate people. The problem is that when they do this, this creates aggression. If you are in that kind of situation, it is psychologically very difficult to avoid losing your cool, and becoming aggressive yourself - and once that happens, the police have grounds to avoid any trouble if you try to complain - they can just claim it was self-defence. I think that people need to be trained in how to stay calm if that situation occurs, so the police have no reason to get violent - and the police need to show people that they are someone to be trusted by being the better person, not getting involved in shouting matches, and being clear what the situation is. You don't get respect by shouting loudly or by wearing a uniform with all your achievements on it, you earn respect by being a good person, and that's how it's done.
It's not just police that I think this about, and it wouldn't be fair just to mention the police. I did actually have a conversation about teachers with some friends a few weeks ago, after I made the controversial statement that it is never acceptable for a teacher to raise their voice at a pupil. We argued about it for a while, and we still don't agree. I know it's controversial, but I think that if a student - of any age - is being uncooperative, difficult, or even just plain wreaking havoc, you can move them, you can have a conversation with them and you can make them realise themselves, but the moment you raise your voice, that immediately lets your personal emotions take over, and I firmly believe that that never improves a situation. It is really unprofessional to let your emotions take over at work, and it stops you from being objective. In my life, I have lost respect for anyone who has ever raised their voice at me, because there are far, far better ways to sort the situation out. I'm not going to be really self-righteous and say I never raise my voice, because we all do occasionally - but on those occasions, I generally apologise to the person afterwards, and make it clear that I shouldn't have talked to them in that way.
So anyway, let me know what your thoughts are on this...
There is one more thing I want to talk about... Does anyone remember Bradley Manning? I've talked about him a few times on here... anyway, in case anyone doesn't know, he's the man who released the Collateral Murder video to WikiLeaks, and he was held in solitary confinement for a long time. He still hasn't been tried, but something great has happened... he has won the People's Choice Human Rights Award! Here is the statement released:
'We are proud to announce PFC Bradley Manning as this year’s People’s Choice Honoree. He received over 2900 votes.
It takes great courage to stand for what you know is right. Bradley Manning, a 24-year-old Army intelligence analyst, joined the Army at age 19. Bradley is accused of leaking a video showing the killing of civilians, including two Reuters journalists, by a U.S. Apache helicopter crew in Iraq. He’s also charged with sharing the documents known as the Afghan War Diary, the Iraq War Logs, and embarrassing U.S. diplomatic cables, with the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks. Journalists have credited the release of these documents with helping to motivate the democratic revolution in Tunisia as well as the final withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
Although Bradley has not yet been tried, he was held in solitary confinement for the first 10 months of his incarceration. If the military continues refusing to acknowledge Bradley as a whistleblower, he may become the first person in U.S. history to be convicted of “Aiding the enemy through indirect means,” a crime punishable by life in prison or the death penalty, for telling the public the truth. Learn more about how to support Bradley at www.bradleymanning.org.'
I think that this is fantastic really! He's a world hero, at least in my opinion, and this will hopefully help him achieve the outcome he deserves!
Wednesday, 14 March 2012
Am I middle-class? I don't think I am
"Just because I'm from working-class backgrounds doesn't mean I don't have higher-class ambitions. You know, it's not where I'm from, it's where I'm going that matters." Lizzie Magee, Young Apprentice semi-finallist 2011
This blog post isn't really political as such, but I'm writing it because I had a conversation recently with a couple of friends about whether or not I am middle-class. There is a bit of a backstory behind this. The school I went to until I was nearly nine was a private school, so was plainly and simply extremely middle-class. The school I went to for the next three years was in quite a working class part of Bristol, so by the time I had finished there I had had experiences of both kinds of lifestyle. The secondary school I went to for five years had everything really - people from every background and culture that you could think of. You were never surprised by anyone you met there, and that was why I loved it. And this is really why I do not feel that I am middle-class.
I grew up in a household without a huge amount of money, my mum has been a single parent for most of my life, she is a professional person but the only reason we have more money than some people is because we take in lodgers. The college I am at at the moment actually is in a more middle-class part of Bristol. I know why people think that I am middle-class, it's because on the surface I appear to be everything that middle-class people stand for. I want to show people that just because I have a nice accent, a passion for good theatre and an olive fetish, does not make me middle-class, it just makes me George Millman. I suppose because of my upbringing I've learned to not think about different social classes at all when I talk to people. In fact, the time that I have thought about it the most in my life is on the coach trip when this conversation arose, and then I just couldn't get it out of my head.
What is more, I don't think that upper-class really exists any more, in the UK at least. Middle-class has become a very broad term to make upper-class sound more acceptable. If upper-class did exist I would probably be more likely to call myself middle-class, but the term 'middle-class' has so much stigma attached to it that I simply do not feel right calling myself by it. I would not say that I was working-class by any means, but I don't feel that I am at all part of society's hierarchies. Class is not just about money and profession, it is about values and frame of mind - and my values are about everyone being equal in society, and not being part of a caste system. We need to wake up and realise that we're not in India, or in the 1950s - we should show the rest of the world that these systems are not necessary for everyone to live together and be happy with one another.
One more reason that I don't think I'm middle-class... I don't want to make a sweeping generalisation, but I don't think middle-class people challenge the status quo very much. The way things are seems all right for them, so they are happy to live with it. I'm not like that. If I think something is unfair, I challenge it. That is what this blog is for in the first place, and I think that everyone should have an equal place in society.
My nomination for someone to love and admire in this blog is Lizzie Magee, who made the statement I've quoted at the top of the page. I admire Lizzie because she comes from what some would call a working-class background, but from the statement she doesn't see herself as being working-class. I think that is wonderful, because so many people are pushed into this box their whole lives, and they accept that and never come out and open their minds to new experiences and new ways of life. I felt an affinity with Lizzie earlier this week when someone told me I was middle-class - my situation was the other way around to hers, but the principle is the same. I was being told that I was someone who I didn't feel I was, and I felt that needed to be addressed. So I've done that here on this post, which I am proud of.
So anyway... feel free to leave any comments if you'd like to agree on any points, or to vent your frustration about anything I've said... always happy to listen!
Take care, rabid readers
George
Update: Someone pointed out that Lizzie didn't actually say she doesn't see herself as working class, she said that just because she comes from a certain background doesn't mean she should be a confined to a certain lifestyle, and that she may well identify herself as working class. That is a really good point - which is why I am writing it down - but the overall meaning is the same as what I was saying. The whole point of social classes is to confine people to a certain lifestyle, and I'm trying to break away from that. Apologies to Lizzie if she reads it and doesn't agree with what I've said about her statement. I think you're great, honest!
This blog post isn't really political as such, but I'm writing it because I had a conversation recently with a couple of friends about whether or not I am middle-class. There is a bit of a backstory behind this. The school I went to until I was nearly nine was a private school, so was plainly and simply extremely middle-class. The school I went to for the next three years was in quite a working class part of Bristol, so by the time I had finished there I had had experiences of both kinds of lifestyle. The secondary school I went to for five years had everything really - people from every background and culture that you could think of. You were never surprised by anyone you met there, and that was why I loved it. And this is really why I do not feel that I am middle-class.
I grew up in a household without a huge amount of money, my mum has been a single parent for most of my life, she is a professional person but the only reason we have more money than some people is because we take in lodgers. The college I am at at the moment actually is in a more middle-class part of Bristol. I know why people think that I am middle-class, it's because on the surface I appear to be everything that middle-class people stand for. I want to show people that just because I have a nice accent, a passion for good theatre and an olive fetish, does not make me middle-class, it just makes me George Millman. I suppose because of my upbringing I've learned to not think about different social classes at all when I talk to people. In fact, the time that I have thought about it the most in my life is on the coach trip when this conversation arose, and then I just couldn't get it out of my head.
What is more, I don't think that upper-class really exists any more, in the UK at least. Middle-class has become a very broad term to make upper-class sound more acceptable. If upper-class did exist I would probably be more likely to call myself middle-class, but the term 'middle-class' has so much stigma attached to it that I simply do not feel right calling myself by it. I would not say that I was working-class by any means, but I don't feel that I am at all part of society's hierarchies. Class is not just about money and profession, it is about values and frame of mind - and my values are about everyone being equal in society, and not being part of a caste system. We need to wake up and realise that we're not in India, or in the 1950s - we should show the rest of the world that these systems are not necessary for everyone to live together and be happy with one another.
One more reason that I don't think I'm middle-class... I don't want to make a sweeping generalisation, but I don't think middle-class people challenge the status quo very much. The way things are seems all right for them, so they are happy to live with it. I'm not like that. If I think something is unfair, I challenge it. That is what this blog is for in the first place, and I think that everyone should have an equal place in society.
My nomination for someone to love and admire in this blog is Lizzie Magee, who made the statement I've quoted at the top of the page. I admire Lizzie because she comes from what some would call a working-class background, but from the statement she doesn't see herself as being working-class. I think that is wonderful, because so many people are pushed into this box their whole lives, and they accept that and never come out and open their minds to new experiences and new ways of life. I felt an affinity with Lizzie earlier this week when someone told me I was middle-class - my situation was the other way around to hers, but the principle is the same. I was being told that I was someone who I didn't feel I was, and I felt that needed to be addressed. So I've done that here on this post, which I am proud of.
So anyway... feel free to leave any comments if you'd like to agree on any points, or to vent your frustration about anything I've said... always happy to listen!
Take care, rabid readers
George
Update: Someone pointed out that Lizzie didn't actually say she doesn't see herself as working class, she said that just because she comes from a certain background doesn't mean she should be a confined to a certain lifestyle, and that she may well identify herself as working class. That is a really good point - which is why I am writing it down - but the overall meaning is the same as what I was saying. The whole point of social classes is to confine people to a certain lifestyle, and I'm trying to break away from that. Apologies to Lizzie if she reads it and doesn't agree with what I've said about her statement. I think you're great, honest!
Monday, 12 March 2012
They will never take my freedom from me
Hello!
I've been meaning to write another blog for a while, but I haven't really got around to it... and then today I saw that I last blogged over a month ago, and that was about something fairly minor, so I thought I really should do it now.
Richard O'Dwyer still hasn't been extradited, and I'm beginning to wonder whether it will actually happen. At the moment, my hopes are pinned on the theory that everyone has more important things to worry about than some guy who made a website, and this case will just fizzle out. This would obviously be a victory in many ways - it would be far better if our Government actually showed some backbone and said no, but as far as Richard is concerned, if he isn't extradited it will be far better for everyone, regardless of the way that it happens. After all, Gary McKinnon happened back in 2008, and he hasn't been extradited yet. I may be proved wrong, but I very much doubt it will happen in practice.
Unfortunately the same cannot be said for 65-year-old businessman Christopher Tappin, who has already been extradited on charges of providing arms to the Iraqis. Apparently the arms he was providing to Iran were actually batteries that supposedly could possibly be used in missile systems. He also did not export them to Iran, but to the Netherlands, from where they could possibly have been re-exported to Iran. (I confess that I actually obtained this information from something that somebody said on a Facebook comment so it may not be completely accurate - but I think that it is likely to be, as in my experience Facebook comments are often a lot more accurate than widely sourced media sources.) Anyway, he's being held in some American jail somewhere, and our Government are doing jack all for him. I think he should just have refused to go. If I was in his position, I would chain myself to the railings outside my house, and when they came for me I would stand calmly and say, 'I have made my decision, and my decision is no. I will not be coming with you today.' (That is actually a cool line from a 2006 episode of Doctor Who, but it sums up what I would want to say.) Some people would gasp at this and be like, 'But the international Governments require you to go! Whether you agree with them or not you have to go along with them!' Yes, that's all very well and good, but if you stop and think about it - I am a human, and the Governments are comprised of humans, and the only power that they have over me has been given to them by other humans. Therefore, they actually are not any better than me, and they have no power that they have not just given themselves. I firmly believe that everyone else in the world is my equal, and that is why, as I have said in my title, no one can take away my freedom.
There is one more thing I want to discuss here, and that is the UK's stance on making us more British and giving us a more British identity. What on earth does that even mean? I am British, and I would not be any more British if the Government decided that everyone had to look, dress and talk the same as everyone else. I think that the Government are distracting people from the real issues like the NHS by ironing out problems that are not really there. I'm lucky enough to have been to a really multicultural secondary school which contained students and teachers from every background, and I am so happy to have had that experience. It made me realise that being British can in fact be summed up in a sentence, and that sentence goes as follows: We can be proud to be British because we are open-minded enough to have allowed our culture to integrate itself with lots of different cultures, and we have become a really fair and balanced society because of it. There is one thing that I agree on, and that is that not enough of our immigrants are fluent in the English language, but there are two immediate counter-arguments to that:
a) If that is such a problem (and it is), we should be encouraging courses on English as a second language, not cutting the funding for said courses.
b) Lots of British people who go to live abroad never bother to learn the language, so that is very hypocritical.
My person to love, respect and admire this time is the poet Benjamin Zephaniah. I confess to not actually having read very many of his poems, but I have always thought that from what I know of him he is a really fantastic guy, and I saw him on TV recently saying the things that I have just said about this 'British identity' rubbish, and the way he made his points was one of the main things that aspired me to write this blog.
I have recently thought of a few more things I would like to blog about, so it hopefully won't be too long until the next one.
Cheerio, everybody!
I've been meaning to write another blog for a while, but I haven't really got around to it... and then today I saw that I last blogged over a month ago, and that was about something fairly minor, so I thought I really should do it now.
Richard O'Dwyer still hasn't been extradited, and I'm beginning to wonder whether it will actually happen. At the moment, my hopes are pinned on the theory that everyone has more important things to worry about than some guy who made a website, and this case will just fizzle out. This would obviously be a victory in many ways - it would be far better if our Government actually showed some backbone and said no, but as far as Richard is concerned, if he isn't extradited it will be far better for everyone, regardless of the way that it happens. After all, Gary McKinnon happened back in 2008, and he hasn't been extradited yet. I may be proved wrong, but I very much doubt it will happen in practice.
Unfortunately the same cannot be said for 65-year-old businessman Christopher Tappin, who has already been extradited on charges of providing arms to the Iraqis. Apparently the arms he was providing to Iran were actually batteries that supposedly could possibly be used in missile systems. He also did not export them to Iran, but to the Netherlands, from where they could possibly have been re-exported to Iran. (I confess that I actually obtained this information from something that somebody said on a Facebook comment so it may not be completely accurate - but I think that it is likely to be, as in my experience Facebook comments are often a lot more accurate than widely sourced media sources.) Anyway, he's being held in some American jail somewhere, and our Government are doing jack all for him. I think he should just have refused to go. If I was in his position, I would chain myself to the railings outside my house, and when they came for me I would stand calmly and say, 'I have made my decision, and my decision is no. I will not be coming with you today.' (That is actually a cool line from a 2006 episode of Doctor Who, but it sums up what I would want to say.) Some people would gasp at this and be like, 'But the international Governments require you to go! Whether you agree with them or not you have to go along with them!' Yes, that's all very well and good, but if you stop and think about it - I am a human, and the Governments are comprised of humans, and the only power that they have over me has been given to them by other humans. Therefore, they actually are not any better than me, and they have no power that they have not just given themselves. I firmly believe that everyone else in the world is my equal, and that is why, as I have said in my title, no one can take away my freedom.
There is one more thing I want to discuss here, and that is the UK's stance on making us more British and giving us a more British identity. What on earth does that even mean? I am British, and I would not be any more British if the Government decided that everyone had to look, dress and talk the same as everyone else. I think that the Government are distracting people from the real issues like the NHS by ironing out problems that are not really there. I'm lucky enough to have been to a really multicultural secondary school which contained students and teachers from every background, and I am so happy to have had that experience. It made me realise that being British can in fact be summed up in a sentence, and that sentence goes as follows: We can be proud to be British because we are open-minded enough to have allowed our culture to integrate itself with lots of different cultures, and we have become a really fair and balanced society because of it. There is one thing that I agree on, and that is that not enough of our immigrants are fluent in the English language, but there are two immediate counter-arguments to that:
a) If that is such a problem (and it is), we should be encouraging courses on English as a second language, not cutting the funding for said courses.
b) Lots of British people who go to live abroad never bother to learn the language, so that is very hypocritical.
My person to love, respect and admire this time is the poet Benjamin Zephaniah. I confess to not actually having read very many of his poems, but I have always thought that from what I know of him he is a really fantastic guy, and I saw him on TV recently saying the things that I have just said about this 'British identity' rubbish, and the way he made his points was one of the main things that aspired me to write this blog.
I have recently thought of a few more things I would like to blog about, so it hopefully won't be too long until the next one.
Cheerio, everybody!
Thursday, 9 February 2012
My struggle for independence at college
Hello!
Now, I'm sorry that I haven't blogged in a little while. The reason for this is that apart from my A-levels, there hasn't actually been that much going on in my life at the moment - except that a couple of weeks ago I went to a workshop on non-violent protest, which I should have blogged about and didn't... anyway, in a few weeks time we're blockading a nuclear power station, so I will probably blog about that!
Anyway, today's blog is actually about something really minor, but it means a lot to me, so I decided to talk a bit about it. I am an A-level drama student in Bristol, and recently we have all been excited about a trip to the National Theatre, which is a compulsory part of our course because we have to write about the play that we are going to see. We have all been given letters about it, and we are supposed to get our parents to sign our permission slips - which is a little odd, as the trip is compulsory. Anyway, I have been challenging this, because I am 18 - legally an adult - and I don't think that it is fair that I should be expected to rely on someone else to agree to let me go. So I did some digging, and compiled a list of all my rights, and then declared that to my drama teacher, along with the form that I had signed - he wasn't too happy about it...
I know that it seems like a really petty thing to complain about, but as followers of my blog will know, I am a keen supporter of independence and taking responsibility for oneself. I feel that if I got my parents to sign it, I would be conceding to the idea that I am not psychologically capable of taking responsibility for myself on this trip. I can legally sign forms for medical procedures, which carry a lot more risk than this trip will. I can legally leave home without my parents consent, and if I had left home, I don't honestly believe that my college would make such a big deal out of it - so why should the building I live in make so much of a difference? It's just bricks and mortar. My drama teacher says that the reason is that this is a trip where I will not be thought of as the independent man that I am - but if I were to run amok at National Theatre and vandalise it, I would be held criminally responsible and at that point I'm pretty sure that they would think that I was capable of making my own decisions - so why do they not think that way in a situation when I can achieve something?
I don't know why any of these things are to be honest, it's just a bureaucratic policy that probably hasn't been thought through very carefully. But I will continue to fight for my independence, because my independence is very important to me. In my last blog, I used the example of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus, and I will use that example again here. Like me, she was fighting an establishment that didn't view her as an equal, or in high esteem at all, and she stood up for what she believed in, like I am doing. I know that it is a little bit rich to compare my situation to that of Rosa Parks, but the only reason it is rich is because racism has become such a hot topic around the world. At the time, she was just standing up (or sitting down) for what she believed in, and I believe that this is as important to me individually as her protest was to her. Obviously I don't want to miss out on this trip and fail my A-level, but I am willing to do it if that is what it takes, because someone needs to stand up, and there is no reason why that person shouldn't be me. What happens next is up to my drama department, isn't it?
I'm going to finish with People to Love and Admire. Now, I haven't done one of these in a while, but today I did hear of a man who definitely deserves recognition on here. His name is Alki David. As you know if you are a frequent viewer, I have been very interested in the case of Richard O'Dwyer, who faces extradition for setting up a website called TV Shack. Alki is a very kind man who has offered to pay Richard's legal fees if he is extradited! I was so chuffed to find that out, I thought I simply must mention him on my blog. What a kind man! I'm sure that we all can do something like that for someone at some point in our lives.
Anyway, I'll blog again soon when something happens! Ta ta for now!
Update: I sorted this out today, and they were lovely! I got exactly what I was asking for, and I suppose it goes to show that it is really worth putting in the effort if there is something that you really want. Thank you, drama teacher!
Now, I'm sorry that I haven't blogged in a little while. The reason for this is that apart from my A-levels, there hasn't actually been that much going on in my life at the moment - except that a couple of weeks ago I went to a workshop on non-violent protest, which I should have blogged about and didn't... anyway, in a few weeks time we're blockading a nuclear power station, so I will probably blog about that!
Anyway, today's blog is actually about something really minor, but it means a lot to me, so I decided to talk a bit about it. I am an A-level drama student in Bristol, and recently we have all been excited about a trip to the National Theatre, which is a compulsory part of our course because we have to write about the play that we are going to see. We have all been given letters about it, and we are supposed to get our parents to sign our permission slips - which is a little odd, as the trip is compulsory. Anyway, I have been challenging this, because I am 18 - legally an adult - and I don't think that it is fair that I should be expected to rely on someone else to agree to let me go. So I did some digging, and compiled a list of all my rights, and then declared that to my drama teacher, along with the form that I had signed - he wasn't too happy about it...
I know that it seems like a really petty thing to complain about, but as followers of my blog will know, I am a keen supporter of independence and taking responsibility for oneself. I feel that if I got my parents to sign it, I would be conceding to the idea that I am not psychologically capable of taking responsibility for myself on this trip. I can legally sign forms for medical procedures, which carry a lot more risk than this trip will. I can legally leave home without my parents consent, and if I had left home, I don't honestly believe that my college would make such a big deal out of it - so why should the building I live in make so much of a difference? It's just bricks and mortar. My drama teacher says that the reason is that this is a trip where I will not be thought of as the independent man that I am - but if I were to run amok at National Theatre and vandalise it, I would be held criminally responsible and at that point I'm pretty sure that they would think that I was capable of making my own decisions - so why do they not think that way in a situation when I can achieve something?
I don't know why any of these things are to be honest, it's just a bureaucratic policy that probably hasn't been thought through very carefully. But I will continue to fight for my independence, because my independence is very important to me. In my last blog, I used the example of Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat on the bus, and I will use that example again here. Like me, she was fighting an establishment that didn't view her as an equal, or in high esteem at all, and she stood up for what she believed in, like I am doing. I know that it is a little bit rich to compare my situation to that of Rosa Parks, but the only reason it is rich is because racism has become such a hot topic around the world. At the time, she was just standing up (or sitting down) for what she believed in, and I believe that this is as important to me individually as her protest was to her. Obviously I don't want to miss out on this trip and fail my A-level, but I am willing to do it if that is what it takes, because someone needs to stand up, and there is no reason why that person shouldn't be me. What happens next is up to my drama department, isn't it?
I'm going to finish with People to Love and Admire. Now, I haven't done one of these in a while, but today I did hear of a man who definitely deserves recognition on here. His name is Alki David. As you know if you are a frequent viewer, I have been very interested in the case of Richard O'Dwyer, who faces extradition for setting up a website called TV Shack. Alki is a very kind man who has offered to pay Richard's legal fees if he is extradited! I was so chuffed to find that out, I thought I simply must mention him on my blog. What a kind man! I'm sure that we all can do something like that for someone at some point in our lives.
Anyway, I'll blog again soon when something happens! Ta ta for now!
Update: I sorted this out today, and they were lovely! I got exactly what I was asking for, and I suppose it goes to show that it is really worth putting in the effort if there is something that you really want. Thank you, drama teacher!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)