Longrider

Brain Walden writes on the BBC web page on spirituality. It’s an interesting and thought-provoking piece.

Several years back a journalist called David Margolis interviewed Tony Blair for “Vanity Fair.” Naturally enough he was very interested in the relationship between the Prime Minister and President Bush.

He asked Mr Blair if his religious beliefs bonded him to the American President. At which point Tony Blair’s spin doctor Alastair Campbell stepped in sharply and famously said “We don’t do God.” Mr Campbell is a controversial figure, but on this issue public opinion was on his side.

Actually (and make the most of it, it doesn’t happen often) I agreed with Alistair Campbell on this one, too. The state; governance, if you like; should never be influenced by religious belief. Religion is a personal matter and has no place in government. So, yes, Mr Campbell was right on this occasion – mind you there’s an old adage about broken clocks being right twice a day. :devil:

Walden continues:

Most of us don’t want to see politicians dragging God into political arguments. But we go beyond that. We don’t want to hear God discussed in an extremely dogmatic way that might upset others of different faiths. So we don’t do God.

It’s not as straightforward as that, I think. I simply don’t want to hear God discussed irrespective of others’ beliefs in the room. A Golden Wedding celebration dinner that I attended recently involved the couple concerned starting the meal by saying grace. They were not aware that some of us were curling our toes in acute embarrassment. They believe; it simply didn’t occur to them that others didn’t share that belief. It wasn’t their belief that I found uncomfortable, it was the assumption that we should all partake of a religious ritual.

I don’t generally discuss my atheism in company – indeed, only my immediate family are aware of it and not all of them. I tend to take a view that people should be allowed to believe whatever they want; whether it is Christianity, Islam or Scientology – their choice, it’s not my place to be involved. Therefore, not doing God in public simply avoids unnecessary confrontation and awkwardness. It isn’t about respecting others’ beliefs, because, frankly, I don’t. I respect their right to believe whatever they want, nothing more.

Walden then goes on to bemoan the fact that our not doing God leads to a purely secular outlook:

 But unfortunately we don’t do much of anything else that isn’t strictly secular.

This leads him to the conclusion that we lose something in the process; spirituality. That is, the human spirit as opposed to a belief in diety. I don’t know, I’m not sure he’s necessarily hit the spot, there. I’m an atheist, yet not particularly materialistic. I value the world around me and have a contemplative nature. It’s the nearest I’ll get to admitting spirituality, so make the most of it. However, I keep this part of myself strictly private – I don’t discuss it in company, just as I don’t discuss my lack of belief in a deity. I suspect that I am not alone and, therefore, Walden’s concern is probably misplaced. The British are a reserved people. Not doing God in public, is simply good manners. Private belief is just that; private.

Walden then goes on to discuss humanism:

The belief that now dominates some Western societies, including Britain, is a particular kind of secular humanism. It asserts that mankind is the central fact of the universe and that our duty is to make progress ever more rapidly. We mustn’t spend much time on idleness or contemplation, but must be endlessly active, conquering new worlds and facing new challenges.

His concern is that we are rushing headlong without question; that progress is all. He has a point, I suspect. Certainly I am inclined to be suspicious of the idea that the universe exists “simply to serve the purposes of humanity” but then, that might have something to do with an innate sense of misanthropy caused by reflection on mankind’s impact on the world. :dry:

Consequently, I find myself in agreement with Walden when he says:

Our narrow view of progress leads us to be hyper-active and our imperialistic desire to dominate evermore aspects of the planet is the most serious problem we face. Personally, I believe we should contemplate more and do less.

Indeed, there’s a lot to be said for contemplation in the right circumstances. And his final paragraphs echo with me, perhaps because I have reached similar conclusions. Walden’s reference to Buddhism and its contemplative, passive and selfless nature is a philosophy with which I have empathy. Yes we are individuals – I’ve argued the case here for the recognition of individual determination, which is why I am so opposed to authoritarian politics. However, individualism does not automatically mean obsession with self, nor does it mean being selfish. Recognising the need for self determination in oneself, means that we recognise that need in others; therefore allowing others to be what they want to be. It is the effect of growing older, I suspect, but I have become more contemplative as the years pass and my need for material things diminishes. Perhaps that is why I now yearn for a simpler existence in an agrarian environment without the rushing crowds and headlong flight of “progress”.

The answer to Walden’s final question:

Do we need to do progress and its grinding materialism with such intensity?

Ought to be “no” but I suspect that it is “yes”.

The French government has caved in again. This time, the cause of their discomfiture was the climbdown over their proposed smoking ban.

The tobacco-loving French will be allowed to carry on puffing their Gitanes and Gauloises in smoky bars and bistros after the government caved in on plans to ban smoking in public places.

Ministers, who had already abandoned a controversial youth employment contract after street protests and violence, were accused of “cowardice” by anti-smoking campaigners.

Maybe it is true, and they are cowards. Well, I wish our government was a bit more cowardly when faced with the ire of those who elected them.

Existing laws require cafés and restaurants to establish clearly separated smoking and non-smoking areas. Fed up with these rules being widely ignored, opponents had pinned their hopes on an outright ban.

Anyone who has travelled in France will realise that the “pas de fumer” tables are just that; tables where you may not smoke. Sometimes they are tucked away in another room along with the stores or piles of discarded broken chairs, tables and fruit machines. The French, with typical gallic indifference to rules they don’t like may well have adhered to the letter of the law yet raised a middle finger to its spirit – doubtless sucking on a Gauloises at the same time.

A photograph in the French newspaper Libération added insult to injury for anti-smoking campaigners. Taken in the corridors of the Assemblée Nationale, it showed a suited man puffing away… directly in front of a no smoking sign.

See what I mean? I knew there was a reason that I like France so much.

A short Easter roundup from Tim this week.

The Easter celebrations in the Philippines have a somewhat gruesome aspect to them. They involve young men re-enacting the crucifixion. For authenticity, this involve real nails… If you have a masochistic streak, you may like this; as, indeed, you may be inclined towards the self flagellation that passes for part of the celebrations, too.

Scottish DJ Dominik Diamond, thought it might be a spiffing idea to test his faith and have a go. Unfortunately, when tested, his faith was found wanting:

The Scottish DJ, presenter and tabloid columnist, who had travelled with a television crew in tow to the Philippines village of San Pedro Cutud to take part in the bloody annual re-enactment of Christ’s crucifixion, took fright and fled when it came to his turn to be nailed to his cross in front of a 10,000-strong crowd.

Diamond, 37, knelt and prayed before dissolving into tears, then was hastily driven away by ambulance to jeers from spectators.

Oops. I can’t help wondering whether he considered the pain aspect before embarking on his journey to the Philippines – I mean, it doesn’t take much imagination to realise that having four-inch nails hammered through ones hands and feet is going to hurt just a bit… Crucifixion was a punishment, a particularly cruel means of execution, what did he expect? Still, he clearly has a sense of humour:

Diamond said before setting off on his quest: “I’m in my mid-30s, I’ve got three kids and it’s about time I did something that didn’t involve cheap gags.”

He was being ironic, right?

Meanwhile, the pontiff has been pontificating. The usual stuff; the world is going to hell in a hand-basket:

Pope Benedict said last night that the world was in the grip of Satan and prayed for mankind to open its eyes to the “filth around us”.

At an Easter ceremony that recreated the passage of Jesus Christ to the crucifixion, Benedict XVI lashed out at man’s “decadent narcissism”.

He said “a slick campaign of propaganda is spreading an inane apologia of evil, a senseless cult of Satan”.

Yeah, right.. There are indeed things wrong in the world, but blaming it on a fictional character ain’t going to help solve them. His comments about wealth made me smile:

Accumulating wealth was “robbery” when it “prevented others from living”. He deplored “the division of our world into belts of prosperity and belts of poverty”.

Indeed, poverty is deplorable. Perhaps the pontiff would like to lead by example and disperse the wealth accumulated by the Catholic church amongst the world’s poor?

Alton Towers is using RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) tags to track its visitors according to the Financial Times:

Visitors will be given an RFID-enabled wristband on entry to the Staffordshire amusement park. It will allow them to be identified and videoed by cameras as they go on rides and attractions.

On the face of it, this is nothing to worry about. After all, once leaving the park, visitors are divested of the tags. And, ostensibly, the reason given is that it adds to the day’s entertainment:

The technology will help with park security - allowing parents to locate lost children, for example - but its chief publicised purpose will be to create a unique personalised DVD of the visitors’ day at the park, which can be purchased on leaving.

I’m reminded of a trip a decade or so back when travelling around Almeria. When visiting mini Hollywood Mrs Longrider and I were greeted at the entrance and a photograph taken so that we would have a souvenir of our visit. As I hate being photographed and hate even more being pressured into buying things I don’t want, I declined. This scheme is simply a high tech version of the same ploy. So on its own, I’m less than worried; not least, because theme parks such as Alton Towers are probably the last place on Earth I would choose to visit anyway… :devil:

However, the trend is disturbing. The idea that we should be tracked, even when visiting a theme park; that the ubiquitous cameras are watching our every move (and as it’s for the kiddies’ safety, that’s all okay, then) sends a shiver down my spine. I don’t like being tracked and watched. The panopticon was used in penal reform for a reason; the sense of being observed, yet unable to see ones watcher was designed to cause unease and obedience. So, it is a natural human reaction to feel unsettled by this practice.

As the article mentions there are other uses being applied to the RFID chip that are deeply disturbing. Although the news is not new, one use mentioned is the tracking of employees:

Earlier this year it emerged that CityWatcher.com, an Ohio company, had implanted chips in two of its employees with tags as a way of identifying them.

Similar implants had been tried on 18 employees at the Mexican attorney-general’s office in 2004.

One wonders what goes through the minds of employees who are prepared to submit to such practices. My response to an employer attempting to tag me in the same way as I have tagged one our cats would be to tell them firmly where they can insert their chip.  But, then, I have a tendency towards independent belligerence, so they probably wouldn’t ask in the first instance.

Going back to Alton Towers, I guess it would be possible to deposit the chip-enabled bracelets somewhere near to the entrance where one could find them again later and leave them there for the duration of the visit; collecting them immediately before leaving. I wonder what the photographs of the day out would look like? :devil:

[Edit] Aha, an update. It seems that the bracelets will be optional, so no need to “accidentally lose” them.

The Times has more on Mr Bushby’s woes.

They were detained by the Federal Security Service, the KGB’s successor, on April 1, shortly after reaching Russian soil. Both had business visas, but no permits to enter Chukotka, a restricted border area, and no passport entry stamps.

They aroused further suspicion because they were carrying satellite telephones, GPS navigation systems and a Colt Magnum .44 pistol. “We do not understand why they crossed the state border of the Russian Federation in the wrong place and armed,” General Vladimir Pronichev said.

How would someone crossing into this country, unauthorised and armed be treated, I wonder? I’m inclined to agree with General Pronichev here. One of the basic principles of travel it that one acquaints oneself with local customs and laws – not least, the entry requirements. Karl Bushby, for whatever reason, disobeyed those laws. Complaining about it afterwards doesn’t impress, I’m afraid – even if the media is tripping over itself to present him as a hard done by eccentric; a hangover from Britain’s quaint past where explorers trampled about the world, immune from local laws and customs (if not entirely immune from the spear, the club and the blow-pipe).

Mr Bushby’s father, Keith, said that he was disappointed, but not surprised by the verdict. “It brought the expedition to a halt and it reinforced the stereotype about that part of the world,”

Um, actually, it reinforces a somewhat different stereotype…

Karl Bushby is to be kicked out of Russia after entering the country illegally. This follows a seven and a half year walk through the Americas as part of his attempt to walk around the world.

A British explorer who has spent the last seven-and-a-half years on a quest to walk around the world is to be expelled from Russia.

Ex-paratrooper Karl Bushby, 36, from Hull, was fined by a Russian court for entering the country without paperwork.

His father was not happy with the news:

His father Keith said the court had “knocked his legs away from under him”.

He said his son was bitterly disappointed by the court’s decision.

He said entering Russia at an unauthorised point had been the explorers’ only option given their route.

Listening to Karl whine on the BBC lunchtime news one would almost be inclined to blame the bureaucratic Russian immigration services for his plight. Well, you might, my stony heart wasn’t moved one iota.

He [Mr Bushby senior] said the pair had tried to speak to the relevant authorities to no avail ahead of the “window” to cross the frozen strait.

He had been walking for seven and a half years (not to mention time spent pre-planning) during which, one would assume, he had time to nip into the Russian embassy and get his papers in order – or at the very least, allow for this contingency. Even Russian bureaucracy can’t be that bad…:dry:

We fought a civil war (actually a series of small civil wars) between 1639 and 1651 that culminated in the execution of the monarch and the embryo of our parliamentary democracy – although the short dictatorship that followed bore no resemblance to our current legislature. The Financial Times refers to these events when it reflects on the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill (otherwise known as the abolition of parliament bill)  currently passing through parliament:

The British constitutional balance - including the interaction of the legislature, the judiciary and the executive - is revered and imitated around the world. That may not be so for much longer if the parliament of 2006 enacts the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, shortly to pass the House of Commons and go to the House of Lords.

If this bill passes, everything parliament fought for during the 1600s will be thrown away and the divine right of kings will be restored – only it won’t be the monarch who will benefit, it will be our lord and master, saint Tone of Blair – who, despite promising to go, can’t quite manage to break the ties with power. Perhaps we will get to enjoy Enoch Powell’s prophecy that “all political careers end in failure” come to pass. If I get the popcorn, you get the beers.

Despite the relatively low key media coverage, it would seem; according to the Financial Times; that the government has been stung sufficiently by accusations of totalitarianism (rightly so) to backtrack.

Jim Murphy, the cabinet office minister, said the government would back down from the highly contentious plans to cut the bureaucracy burden on business and amend the proposed law, which has been dubbed a shortcut to dictatorship.

Well, there’s a turn up – I didn’t expect that. Given the obstinacy in the face of opposition to the ID Cards Bill (now the egregious ID Cards Act 2006), I expected them to dig in for the long haul. An about face, I didn’t expect. Or is this just some cunning trick to unsettle their opponents?

The government is “still discussing the shape” of the amendments, which could take some months to finalise, Mr Murphy said. He denied that the move was a U-turn, saying: “It’s the same policy but with reassurance being given to those who have concerns.”

You see? They are not engaging in a U-turn, that would be an embarrassing climb-down and unless you are Jacques Chirac, that just wouldn’t do… All of which, roughly translated, means that we should keep a close eye on these mendacious rapscallions, watching closely for any sleight of hand.

Spyblog asks the following pertinent question while discussing this same article:

Who were the idiots who introduced the “2001 Regulatory Reform Act” which is apparently working so badly ? That would be the same NuLabour government which has failed to allow proper detailed Public Consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny on so many of its Bills.

Indeed. Why is it that politicians can make such a horrendous incompetent mess of their jobs and just carry on as if nothing has happened? The rest of us have to face the consequences of our errors. :dry:

And, Spyblog is similarly sceptical about the U-Turn “discussion of the shape of the amendments”

 There has been so much spin and media manipulation from this Government, that we will believe it only when we see the text of the safeguards written into the text of the Bill.

It says something about the state of our legislature and politicians generally that even when they apparently listen and respond, we still remain suspicious of their words and motives.

In summation, Spyblog’s article ponders the effect of the blogosphere on all of this. I have to say, I didn’t think we were that influential as a medium, but if the vociferous mauling in the blogosphere really has caused this volte-face, then it has served a useful purpose. I prefer to reserve judgement at this stage, though.

Now playing: Queen - 12 - She Makes Me (Stormtrooper In Stilettos)

[Update] More discussion on this over at Chicken Yogurt.