The confected outrage of the likes of Starmer and Streeting, and others who want the BBC to be prosecuted for broadcasting a segment of the Glastonbury festival wherein a singer of no significance (in my opinion) got the crowd chanting ‘death to the IDF’ is in stark contrast to the lack of real outrage at what the IDF is responsible for. A very benign interpretation of the chant might suggest the crowd wanted the IDF disbanded, not that its members should be slaughtered. On the other hand it may not have been so benign. Either way the crowd clearly would like to see the IDF stop carrying out Israel’s genocidal attacks on Palestinians. Isn’t that something we’d all like to see? Well no, the UK government has just won legal approval to continue selling arms to Israel and continues to support Israel’s genocide in other ways. Meanwhile the Beeb is getting it in the neck from the usual sources who would like to chant (no doubt about it) ‘Death to the BBC!’ And if they did would we have to assume that they literally wanted all who work in the BBC dead? Of course not.

 I am pleased to report that everything is being co-ordinated as the UK prepares for war, and it’s not just Winston Starmer who’s setting the tone. At this stage though I will have to dismiss the Daily Express story about what age we might all have to be conscripted, except to say GenZ (whatever that is) may have a surprise coming. No, it is not just our bodies being readied for WW3 but our souls too. This in The Telegraph provides a clue:  "The Church of England is preparing for the possibility of the UK going to war, according to the Bishop to the Armed Forces. The Rt Rev Hugh Nelson said the church was looking at the Second World War for inspiration on “what it might mean for us to be a Church in a time of conflict”.

Yes, let’s reflect on that. What does it mean to be the (established) church in time of conflict? Well it certainly meant in the past blessing the troops before they were to be killed. Weirdly of course that Christian blessing was given on both sides of the trenches in WW1. Now in these post-modernist times, should we expect an update? I don’t see why not. It’s long been said that the Bible is little more than poetry, and in the wake of Baudrillard and indeed the technology of virtual reality (which is like war wearing virtual reality goggles navigating drones to their kill) how does the concept of the Almighty work here? It will not, I suspect be the resurrection of evil, although of course Putin is a very bad person—and it’s all Putin—but where does that leave the Rt Rev Hugh Nelson, Bishop to the Armed Forces, whispering sweet nothings into the ears of maimed and dying combatants? I feel a bit sorry for Hugh. His task is as impossible as telling a 95 year old relative that they will ’get better’ when their destiny is surely to pop their clogs PDQ. Personally I think members of the armed forces would be a lot happier if they didn’t have to endure the pious crap preached at them prior to their assignments at the behest of politicians who strut their stuff in their well protected bunkers. I’m not just thinking of Starmer of course. The ‘Supreme’ Leader of Iran also seems to know a thing or two about reinforced concrete. He too, like Bishop Hugh must be very pious and will know his scriptures back to front. The trouble is, that lies at the bottom of much of this utterly senseless conflict.

It kind of sums up the state of the British economy. And we’re expected not to notice. I bought a bottle of Tanqueray gin today. It is has a ‘special edition’ new label, which I think like a government soundbite is meant to distract us. What’s really changed is that the alcohol content which used to be a satisfactory 47% has dropped to 41% It’s the same price of course. Like so many things, shrinkflation has set in with perhaps England’s most iconic drink, but it pretends to be the same thing. A similar story pertains to wine, which thanks to Jeremy Hunt’s time as Chancellor has become weaker, in order to avoid higher duties. There is an Australian wine which used to be called ‘The Full Fifteen.’ Somehow, ‘The Full Fourteen and Half’ doesn’t have the same ring to it. Of course, much of this will be attributed to the government’s deep concern for the nation’s livers, nothing to do with raising revenues. But as people get used to weaker drinks, I wonder if they will get happier with the state of the economy, which apart from anything else seems to be run by a crew of philistines telling us how bad things are and how we should get ready for war. 

Keir Starmer said on Tuesday after the G7 that Trump had no plans for military engagement against Iran, although at that time it would have been obvious to him from his intelligence briefings that the UK would have been doing everything possible behind the scenes to facilitate whatever the US wished. His denials are about as hollow as those of past Labour ministers who claimed to have no knowledge of UK assistance in the matter of rendition a few years ago. But lo! A mere five days later Trump launches an attack on Iran and all our mealy-mouthed PM can say is that Iran should return to the negotiating table: “The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis.” (Daily Mirror) It doesn’t seem as if Israel has to do anything to end the crisis. Whatever you think of the Iranian regime (and I deplore it) it was Trump who originally pulled the plug on the Iranian nuclear deal and toughened sanctions. Why would Iranians trust this President to honour an agreement—indeed who can? Now Starmer’s solution is to acquiesce in Trump’s escalation and bring the Iranians to the table by bombing them.

The photo of Starmer picking up Trump’s spilt papers last week reminds me of a scene from the film Tin Men, where one of the aluminium cladding salesmen ‘accidentally’ drops a $10 dollar note on the floor in a potential customer’s living room. If the customer picks it up and hands it back to him, the salesman knows he has established his psychological advantage. It wouldn’t surprise me if Trump dropped his papers on purpose. I feel sure as a property developer he will have seen Tin Men.

I’ve written once or twice before about the annoying behaviour of people who think that everybody else on the bus or railway coach wants to listen to their jingles. Asking them to wear headphones risks being accused of being ‘impolite’ - or worse. What’s sparked today’s blog is two things: first, this morning being nearly run down by a youth on a bike travelling at speed the wrong way down a one way street. These days there is little likelihood of him being apprehended for such an offence, there’s nobody around to enforce it. The second item is my own gross error going away for more than a week and coming back to a parking ticket. I may well have to pay, but I challenged it and three weeks later I received a letter saying my appeal was not upheld—and this is the thing—my grounds for appeal were basically ignored. Here again the discourse of respect has been eliminated. What difference is there between a youth on a bike showing carelessness or a bureaucracy that cannot adjust its template sufficiently to adequately explain itself? These are trivial matters compared to the sufferings of people whose lives are being decimated by people who don’t care, Trump, Putin, Netanyahu to name but three. There is of course a massive difference—but ultimately, the concept of respect, which is to say having regard to the dignity of others is an increasingly rare phenomenon. Social media has its part to play, but when the average person sees how those in authority perform they can take a hint. Being nearly run over by a youth on a bike, being patronised by bureaucracy or being bombed out of your house—all these things, some trivial some not display an arrogance which one might have hoped would have wilted as we humans grow in numbers and have to live in a globalised society. And, just to rub my point in, if you think I’m overegging my molehill moans (forgive the mixed metaphor) consider Trump’s attitude to the concept of ‘respect.’ He takes us all back to the playground.

*Just to be absolutely clear, I am not equating my little complaints with the travails of those in the line of Putin's or Netanyahu's fire - I am talking about a sliding scale that goes from zero to one thousand (or maybe a million).

+Here's some words I doubt Trump would disagree with, five principles it seems which need no debate:
 
"We do not question God and virtue; We do not question our Homeland and its History; We do not question authority and its prestige; We do not question family and its morality; We do not question the glory of work and its duty."
 
In the last regard, 'work' means working in the interests of capitalism, which means as one consequence the evisceration of independent trade unions and the establishment of officially recognized patsy TUs. A bit like China today, but not yet in the US.
 
These were the words of António de Oliveira Salazar, the long-term fascist dictator of Portugal. I came across them in an exhibition in Lisbon's Aljube Museum of Resistance and Freedom. There aren't that many museums of this sort in the world. The place was relatively quiet on my visit, not full of American tourists decamping off the huge cruise ships moored in the Tagus River. Would this museum ever be on their itinerary? All the countries the U.S. has liberated! In Portugal's case, the CIA were happy to work with the Portuguese secret police, PIDE, e.g. training them in interrogation techniques. It would not be a good idea for Trump to visit this museum, should he ever visit Portugal (does he know where it is?). He might pick up a few tips about how to run a police state.
 
+Lisbon's airport is named after General Humberto Delgado, who stood against Salazar in the fixed election of 1958. Delgado, head of the air force at the time was tipped to get a top job at NATO but was apparently not appointed because he upset some British admiral with his sense of humour. He was assassinated a few years later by the regime, which saw him as a continuing threat at a time when the opposition was growing in strength. The regime was toppled in 1974. Delgado's fate reminded me that any talk of NATO defending freedom and democracy must be taken (ahem) with a pinch of salt. Even in Europe.
 
+I paid a visit to Coimbra, a city north of Lisbon, no, not to visit the old HQ of the dreaded PIDE political police which was based there, but to see the Santa Clara-a-Nova monastery, which contains possibly one of the world's most over the top altars (pictured), made in honour of Saint Queen Elizabeth (d.1336). It took a lot of tithes or taxes (same thing) to pay for this. Part of the monastery is now a museum, and the rest of its extensive site is vacant and falling into decrepitude. It would take another enormous pot of gold to do this place up. The buildings reminded me of an abandoned factory, although in this case one turning women into a faithful breed of nuns - it was a convent. Where do they go now, if there are any women left who want to follow this path? Their absence here speaks for itself.

I attended a Zoom meeting (organised by Jewish Voice For Labour, of which I am a supporter) asking whether socialists should join the Green Party. The speaker was Zack Polanski, who so far as I can gather wants to be the single leader of the Greens, rather than a co-leader. Polanski is a gay Jewish member of the London Assembly but not an MP. Some may argue that not being an MP is a disadvantage, but there is a simple two word riposte to that—Nigel Fartage. In fact, you could add Mark Carney’s name to the roster of non MPs who made it to the top, and indeed Trump became US president without any previous record of political service. Polanski struck me as very confident, but spent a lot of time mentioning his media appearances. Perhaps that’s a good thing. Perhaps if he was given as many opportunities to appear on the Beeb’s Question Time as Fartage has had over the years, his public profile would similarly improve. In an increasingly presidential system of electoral identification maybe he has the right idea as opposed to the Greens’ co-leadership model which leaves no-one very clear about the leadership at all.
 
Polanski referred to a couple of things which are worth considering as the Greens seek greater visibility. The first is that as he pointed out, their 2 million votes and parliamentary representation now mean they qualify for something like £1.5million in ‘Short Money’ (public money for opposition parties’ parliamentary work) which is probably more money than they’ve ever had. How they spend that money, e.g. on policy development will reveal much about their new found status, with four new MPs. Secondly, Polanski was keen to remind us that the Green Party does not exercise a whip over its MPs, and its grassroots democratic practice means that any 15 members of the party can make proposals for its party conference, and this is a measure of its bottom-up democratic principles. If the party continues to grow, I wonder how long that may last.
 
The Green Party will get more airtime. Like Reform it will get more scrutiny, and unpleasant realities will no doubt emerge. I wonder how many former Labour members it will attract. Some of them will surely be thinking (yet again) we need a new party of the left. Perhaps one or two Labour MPs will take this challenge on board, now that more questions are being asked about Starmer’s leadership which all but diehard loyalists think is dire. But the leader isn't everything. As somebody once said, it's not the personalities, it's the 'ishues.'