Shitting Ourselves TOTAL

Four Jammie-dodgers Saved My Life Today (how to NOT kill yourself)
Chapter – ‘shitting ourselves
Shitting ourselves
01 an ill wind
“There is an ill wind blowing, Watson…” A. Conan-Doyle
In ancient Mesopotamia, Canaanites were required to offer up their children to the god Molech.
People in Thailand and other poor countries – some of them Western – are doing the same to the
god Mammon, albeit unwillingly by most accounts, and we’ve known about this for some time.
Brits and Americans would never dream of doing that. We use scented quilted tissues to wipe our
arses. And that means we’re soft, eh? Or sophisticated. We have evolved beyond primal urges by
good breading. I mean, what would you have to cauterise to do that with your own children? You’d
have to be sick, wouldn’t you?
The ill wind that’s been blowing across the UK since the eighties has intensified to the point
where we should be wearing masks. Its suffocating fumes are unabated and its fog mind-altering. It
will ultimately lead us all to sacrifice the lives of our own children, if the sickest amongst us don’t
get their paws on them first.
It is a prolonged downward trend that constitutes one of the biggest single contributors to
mental illness and it is epidemic. It is a kind of mental illness itself. This wind of change has been
sown into every corner of society and we are now reaping the whirlwind. Its whirlwind, driven by
those who have the most power, will give them everything they want in the short term – more than
they could ever possibly want or need – but it is unhealthy for them in the process and will
ultimately kill them and their future generations. Already, we’re wondering if those that are here
now will last. Or it might just ruin them or their families in a slow luxurious death, or make them an
instant target, or by some sudden twist of fortune to contemplate suicide for the first time, because
there can be no other life for them. They will not change because they see no wrong in it. They are
mentally unsound and their actions affect everyone else, which is why mental illness is on the
increase.
And what do they want all this money, these belongings, this land, this power, for? What
for? To be stronger? To be different from, better than, others? To show that they have the power to
do it, expand their friendships, gain respect? Stand out from the crowd? Gather similarly-minded
people around them to protect each other? Wear similar clothes and join clubs, go on red-carpet
marches to look down on everyone who is inferior? Have gullible unimaginative people gawk up at
them as their idols? This isn’t my indignation or sour-grapes, it’s a serious question. What are they
going to do with it all once they’ve got it? Build new schools, new hospitals? Reputation and a place
in history is everything, though, isn’t it darlings? “What was that you said? … Oh, how very
interesting, and… and who are you, exactly? … Oh, I’ve never heard of you. Anyway, as I was
saying…” Yep, we’re all for equality.
They could join the ranks of rejects at the click of a couple of fingers, simply when their
denial ceases to function. The writing is on the Wall Street billboards and they’re pretty much
desperately trying to avoid the inevitable repercussions. But not trying anywhere near hard enough.
Leaders can impose this deadly virus on their own people and other nations, then go home and face
family members over the dinner table. How does that work? Reconstituting human prejudices and
deceit inseminates government, society and commerce. It is effectively prejudice against oneself. A
form of mental illness. It is social, political and institutionalised denial.
Some who now show symptoms of, receive treatment for, or have come through a level of
mental illness could be our saviours. Why? Not that they should be running the country, but because
Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 2

they have usually (not always) seen the unreliable side of the staple principles we base our lives on.
They have experienced the appalling state it can leave us in and the counter-productive attitudes and
treatments that then strips them of the little power they have left. They may also know good
experiences that made getting through easier. And mental illness is actually quite honest. It obtusely
warns us of things that are wrong, wrong with our situation or wrong with the way we’re treating
each other, or the way we’re treating ourselves; especially things that we have ignored or that are
actually unseen. Like the dog mentioned in the opening chapter.
Acceptance of realities we have little control over is a fact of life. Acceptance of personal
realities and the consequences of how we’re treated is a matter of capacity and eventually choice.
But with issues that affect our mentality, we neglect the things we do have a measure of control over
and choice regarding until things develop beyond our control. Not that control is the only objective
and that we can control everything. But there is a difference between that and not investing in what
is needed to prepare us to deal with the most taxing issues that are more widespread, since
unconstrained selfishness became in vogue. We often acknowledge that only after superhumanly
attempting to hold on to something we couldn’t possibly hold on to, in the first place. Neglect,
denial, or fear pushes us to that point, then when the control passes to someone else, the nightmare
begins because our feelings, our wishes become secondary to carer’s and care services inhibitions.
The causes of mental illness, particularly various forms of depression, anxiety and stress, are
well documented and have a source that is common to all people. Yet, what we prefer to do in
society is brush people like that aside and label them defective, so that we can isolate ourselves from
any such prospect. If you ask anyone who has not suffered an episode of mental illness, what would
happen to them if they did, they won’t be able to tell you. Even if they’re able to research it,
contemplating their personal outcome with the restrictive options that are available and with few
positive accounts to go off, compounds that fear. Apart from expanding a range of lateral non-
intrusive approaches; what we should be doing, from school age, is educating our children using
their language and the interests they are passionate about, to dispel the stigmas and prejudices. It
isn’t enough to tackle it in history and social studies from text books and set examples. They need to
see it in operation around them, in their daily lives. They need to see how events can impact on their
mentality, how it can change for better or worse and how differences can have positive references.
They need to be taught by people who have experienced the extremes and understand them, not
from people who don’t. And we need to make it easier for them to speak about these things,
routinely, in a respectful, easy, enjoyable environment.
People who acknowledge they are mentally ill often have no choice but to learn to endure
despite their restricted capacity, or do something about it. But those who see nothing wrong with
their thinking, or justify unsound thinking, are insensitive as to its effect on themselves and to
others. It isn’t necessarily evil, or unjustified, but someone else will usually have to suffer it. So,
what?
Definitions of strength and weakness don’t always fit the stereotypical precepts we base
them on. Mature, considerate, people know this. Symptoms of any developing mental difficulty
usually go unspotted. People who are struggling with something mentally and emotionally usually
have to become skilled at covering it up. If you don’t speak up, or defend yourself, or pick people up
on things when they’re out of line, you’re seen as weak. When you can deliberately impose your
opinion without listening, because your ego won’t take no for an answer, we call it assertive and
people get training to become it. I’m all for both, but quiet people in committees and support groups
are advised, being listened to is contingent on doing a course. If you surpass at it, you can even
qualify as ‘callous’ which derives obviously from ‘callus.’
This is how calluses work – take weak spot and apply generously thick hard skin until
sensitivity is diminished. This will make you stronger.

We hold back so much, in the UK, when it’d be much healthier to let stuff out in some easy
legitimate process. You can complain if you like. You can complain until you’re blue in the face. In
some areas you get phone numbers for all sorts of complaints, but you try getting through, then
getting any sense. Just try complaining that someone has stolen your wheelie-bin, or that drunks are
keeping you awake all night. See how far you get. We all know the tactics companies use to make
themselves look responsible but deflect any attempts to hold them to it. The people who are
promoted are those that are skilled at side-stepping the amount of services that should be delivered,
not implementing them. Complaining is looked down upon in our culture, unless your on Trisha. We
see people complain legitimately in unison for things, like a speed bump on roads where there have
been numerous child fatalities, only to be ignored for years. If current trends in our economy lead to
any kind of uprising, the government will want it to be against the ‘underclass’ rather than against
them. If this was France, there’d be a general strike, at least. They beheaded their aristocracy for
less. But that isn’t the British way. We prefer martyrdom and its intrinsic oppression, hopelessness,
disbelief and increased depression. We prefer to hold it all in, because we’re strong. ‘We can do it,
we can do it. We’re not savages.’ Anything but that.
No, think how hard people have fought for the rights we have in this country and
replacement of some arcane laws. All that collective and individual effort and expense. That counts
for nothing, now. We’ve also established a network of help through people who do stuff for nothing,
simply because no official body was prepared to tackle a desperate need. That counts for little to this
government. They will laud it, sure, but New Labour has pursued a policy of letting people depend
upon it, in order to reduce their services. They also reduce their support of it, practically and
financially. It is usually people who are not motivated by commercial considerations that go that
step further, for the good of others, but the well motivated and dogged voluntary sector is so
pressured by funding and government cut-backs, many new initiatives are short-lived and long-
standing ones are struggling and downsizing. Call me a cynic, but I wonder if they receive the
congestion charge bill for participating in the Lord Mayor’s Show? It would surprise no one.
The government seem to have better things to spend their money on, like lavish arse-licking
internal awards ceremonies, than helping those who help people out of the shit. It’s like a man who
wears a tuxedo but doesn’t wipe his arse when he goes to the loo. This is why the analogy of shitting
is so profoundly fitting.
As we saw graphically in a previous chapter - if you hold crap in long enough, in the end it’ll
spill in a way you kind of don’t least expect but just hope you’re not in its way, when it happens.
We usually cannot avoid it, but the slippery characters that cause it usually do. They have no
determination to keep it in; no compulsion about letting it out for their instant self-gratification and
woe betides anyone who stands in their way. They’re unconcerned about what is actually healthy for
them and less concerned about anyone else, so ‘look out because I want it all and I want it now and
if you’ve got it, then don’t think I’m gonna let that stand in my way.’ And that’s seen as clever.
Mendelssohn accepting his award from the man he just shopped is seen as a very clever man. How
clever is that?
Most people are not like that and have no aspirations to be that way. Whether they profess to
be religious, moral, proud, or not, most people have a measure of decency. Or they just want to feed
their families. Contrast all this with the way government treats the amount of individual kindness
and dedication that goes into charitable causes, like the Royal National Lifeboat Institute, the
Citizens Advice Bureau, numerous care lines, rescue services and hospices that help people to die in
comfort and dignity. They slog away day-in day-out, year-in year-out, without Sir Bob or Bono
organising a gig. If you survive long enough you might get a slap on the back; but I wonder how
many people would become politicians if they had to do what those volunteers have to do; if they
had to go repeatedly cap-in-hand to the National Lottery and Pudsey, just to keep afloat.
The mental illness I’m talking about, in society, politics and institutions, is far more
insidious than cancer and doesn’t show itself without some subcutaneous scrutiny. Unlike any other

mental illness, it can be caught off others. What enables it to take hold and grow? Someone once
said “the only thing it takes for evil to grow is for a few good [people] to stand by and do nothing.”
Why would good people do that? Why have they done that in the past? There are a number of
common factors.
02 David or Goliath
The problem is we have substituted what we regard as strength and weakness. That’s why the world
grows weaker, not stronger.
In our long but short human history we’ve seen every form of suppression and oppression
used as the expedient way to control varying political, religious and social environments. A show of
strength. Control-freakery is what made the world and if you don’t have it, you’re prey. People are
really that mercenary and Neanderthal. Capitalism is seen as an alternative, non-violent method of
coercion. Yeah, because violence never had anything to do with money, right? As long as we can
call it mathematics, it doesn’t count. But it is turning everyone into predators or prey and if you let
yourself become a casualty of it, that means you’re weak, doesn’t it? It seems, whatever you’re
prepared to do, whoever is prepared to go the furthest will prevail. That’s what history is built on,
so, that must be strength, right? And why should politics, commerce and our social environment
work any other way? I’m hoping you’re already thinking ‘well, that’s not me, I don’t operate that
way.’
What about victims? Victims of terrorism; political kidnapping; child prostitution; human
trafficking; genocide; poverty; murder or forced imprisonment of family members who choose a
partner outside of their culture; dowry killings; entire countries held to ransom by sanctions on
matters that are not necessarily about outright oppression like AIDS in Africa and the Roman
Catholic dictat on use of birth control? Do those oppressed by these things not have any power,
something powerful within them? Look at the pathetic image of an African refugee clutching their
emaciated and bloated child, oblivious to the swarm of flies in and out of every orifice – just waiting
to die. Have they no potential for contributing something valuable in life? They wouldn’t amount to
much anyway, right? They’re only going to feed off the system. They’re not going to affect my life,
so why should I care about them?
What if that was you, or me?
Even when we care we feel powerless. And there’s so much need, where do you start? So,
we just have to get real about the world being such a cruel place and there always being someone
who’s ready to shaft us, don’t we? We just have to toughen up, then. Or do you find that insulting?
Is that what we are allowing ourselves to be reduced to?
The amazing thing is, the ideas I’m going to spout off about are only qualities that every one
of us has. Even the most heinous individual has some these qualities. It’s our human nature, not
some hocus-pocus theory or paradigm. I’m talking about getting real. Not in terms of a set single
reality, a single truth, but a fundamental existential state that we can conceive of at any moment, that
changes with the ebb and flow of countless influences and perspectives. It’s the things that affect
our energies and power, individually and collectively. The reality of our sensibilities and mentality,
beyond only what we want to make of it, and how it affects our potential to enhance life or to waste
it.
People generally appreciate stability and it challenges their comfort zone to work in flexible,
mutually supportive ways that allow for diversity. Whatever concepts enable that stability we hate to
change. How can any job, relationship or work give satisfaction and security, if its value and
existence can be transient and unpredictable? How would that support our sense of worth? So,
determination is seen as the greatest quality to form and mould reality into what a person wants.
And you can get away with that most of the time. No one is going to thrust the life you want in your
lap so you have to go out and get it. Or you can resign yourself to the fickle finger of fate, or consult

your horoscopes, like Reagan, or leave it to God’s hands to justify a life of hardship, or to win the
2008 F1 championship. God will not be someone else’s side if he’s on yours, so that’ll always work
out well for you. Or he might just teach you a valuable lesson. You can bet your life on it… each
way.
Determination is an amazing quality and has helped people reach beyond their expectations,
when everything else is seemingly against what they strive for. I’m all for it, but it can also blind
you and let you down. ‘Blind ambition.’ Is that real strength? In a way, if we all put the blinkers on
and just strove ahead with what we wanted in life, regardless, then we’d all achieve something, but
what would it be? The idea of reality being anything other than what you want (the reality for most
people), or for it to include some of your worst fears, can grind down the most ardent determination
into liquidity, seeping away your time and effort with seemingly little or nothing to show for it.
For us all to be successful in capitalist terms, at any level, it seems we all have to have the
same mind on it. The biggest problem with capitalism is that it determines a value on what people
do with their lives. It is a fundamental denial of our humanity.
It has to be said; many rich people are keenly aware of the inequities in this world and
contribute more than most towards charitable causes that tackle it. There is a lot of wonderful work
being done through their wealth and generosity. It is easy to say this in a rich capitalist society, but
think about it… when all the countries in the world aspire to and achieve the level of capitalist
development we see in New York, London, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Sydney, Shanghai and
Dubai, what is it that we’re going to be striving for? To keep it? The striving, the pursuit becomes
the thing then. At what cost, what lengths, how cut-throat? And what is the overall knock-on effect
to a society that comes to depend upon it?
Some may see it differently. Some see the capitalist system as a way to extend themselves
beyond who they thought they could ever be and the theory is that everyone should be able to take
advantage of that. There are enough Lewis Hamiltons around to prove that, but the theory isn’t
sound, since how many F1 champions can there be at any one time – two dozen? The Buttons
outnumber the Hamiltons and always will. Your decisions and dedication may only be a tiny factor
in the outcome, but what else are we going to pin our hopes on? Some simply adore the glitz and
grandeur, but that all pales into insignificance when it fails to fulfil personal emotional needs. It’s
like investing in aerodynamics at the cost of safety features. To go faster. This is an age-old problem
and you can’t completely overturn the process that has governed world development for centuries.
I’m not saying don’t develop and don’t have capitalism, or personal ambition. But it is the sickening
recent trends that threaten our existence; the lack of perspective, at the smallest level; the ignorance
and wilful disregard. We’ve come to see it as an acceptable way to operate.
The standard everyone wants in life is to be free to make personal choices and to be
respected as an individual and to be loved. Capitalism can facilitate a few of those, but those things
are not dependent upon it. If they are, then they’re usually misguided and we feel insulted by it, or
we end up with unfulfilled expectations. Being respected and admired for being rich generates as
much suspicion as it does gratification. That’s not the basis on which we form our relationships is it?
So where do we get off basing international relationships on it? And aren’t we supposed to be
progressive world citizens? Isn’t that the twenty-first century thing to be?
The degree of our stability is largely contingent on what we value in life. The rewards of
materialism and power can be taken from us in an instant. What are we left with then – especially if
we haven’t got perspective and haven’t prepared ourselves for the downside? This is the reality
governed and exploited by market forces, but we don’t invest the same effort and skill in our options
for surviving, when things go pear-shaped. Life will forever throw spanners in the works yet we
bind our stability to the market. Few of these highly intelligent world economists and leaders have
made provision for when our commercial stability is threatened. If they care little that their own
people are losing their homes and businesses and less about how people are treated in other lands,
what kind of reality is that investing in?

This is how the illness spreads. The ones who fall prey to this illness are left unable to fend
for themselves and then people suddenly start committing suicide, because they were blinded to the
reality from the beginning. Most of the sitting-pretty wealthy are hardly going to feel good about
any implementation of a more equitable model of commerce; much less giving up an inch of their
financial stability to aid those they perceive as having not worked as hard. Opposition parties were
lambasted for suggesting such a thing, then ‘quelle surprise’ the Chancellor announces that our feel-
good Xmas will be paid by those who earn over £100,000 pa in the next few years. The pendulum
swung to 45% in the opposite direction. That’ll boost the foreign property market. Dragon
entrepreneurs will boast about working sixteen-hour days, maybe even seven days a week, because
they love what they do. But they assume this can be the model for anyone. So if everyone is going to
do that, what is going to happen to their staff and where will their business be then? I worked
sixteen-hour days and more for six months without let-up. I loved doing it and had something to
show for it, but it wasn’t for a single penny. In their book, I’d be a mug. That’s just stupid, but
commercially, no one would be able to afford or budget for what I did. If it came down to financial
considerations, the effort I put into that project just wouldn’t have happened. The premise is that the
work should be worth something financially and you have to be businesslike to get it. But not all
people are like that, or good at it. It’s easy to say, get good, do a course, but that’s like saying all of
us can be good at the same thing, or anything we put our efforts into. That’s just not true and it
denies how the process itself can affect people. So, the things people do outside of capitalist
ventures is valued less or a less valid part of our political system. Practically, we do not
acknowledge this factor as part of our political set-up. It might save someone some money
somewhere. It might save the government billions, as in the case of family carers and ill people who
carefully manage their illness without support. But it doesn’t make the government money in taxes,
so it is invalid. And the government want tax-payers to be up in arms over this. This is the reality of
social denial.
We are in denial if we think human arrogance will allow us to continue against nature. When
it all goes wrong, which it will, our commercial, political and personal ambitions, the things we put
all our energies into – even our families – will count for nothing against the reality. That’s not hard
to foresee. Twenty years ago, it was. We’re outraged at the appalling abuse of Baby P and the
incredulous neglect by experts who saw the evidence of it seventy-eight times and did nothing.
Good people stood by and did nothing. The expert politicians and captains of commerce are doing
the same with us. We have to call to account those who condone practices, financial or practical,
who would carelessly sever billions of grandchildren from their futures. We have to call them what
they are. Criminals. World leaders have been in denial, for decades. They won’t believe the end of
the world, until it is upon them and they have to remove their heads from their arses and
mathematical equations.
The best thing that could happen is if it all goes and we all have to start doing stuff for
nothing. Who would be the strongest then, kind people or the looters? We have a choice. We’re
gambling with that choice. Even if we start now, the odds are heavily stacked against us keeping it.
Where does your mentality come into this and on what side of the divide might you fall?
You will be forced to choose, eventually. We will all have to face reality, one way or another. This
is about your personal mentality, your rights and your immediate future. How can we prepare for it,
now? If you’re lucky, we will have enough time and you will be able to make your own decisions.
It’s a hard bullet for any of us to bite.
03 spaghetti or lasagne
Reality obviously means different things to different people, but without considering numerous
accounts, motivations and lateral influences, determining the truth for one individual is often too

much trouble for them, when they can take a view and stick to it. That isn’t the whole reality for
them and on top of that is the potential for unexplored influences to change their reality. So, to take
one instance and make a case study runs into limitless theses and debates and detection work and
historical research that can forever be refined and the best we can hope for is for there to be some
common thread that aids understanding. Some academics expend their whole working life to study
one aspect of one subject in the hope of discovery, to shed a little more light on it. Someone else,
equally dedicated and informed will disagree unless it’s fundamental and irrefutable. Reality is
much broader and rarely quantifiable. So, getting real about ourselves can be painstaking and not
even get us there, in the end. That doesn’t diminish the value of it though. It’s a matter of choice and
belief. The consequences are more often than not, not. Or you can choose to be always right, or
ignorant, or oblivious if you have enough to help you spend the rest of your life with the blinkers on,
in sustained escapism.
Reality, then, is not always desirable. It’s a bit like buying the Cornflakes box before it’s
printed. It wouldn’t sell and perhaps we’d think the contents can’t possibly taste as good. Life would
be so boring, eh? Fact, we know, is stranger than fiction, though. If surface and marketing and
public opinion and confusion makes it easier for us to be bigoted, to follow the predominant
stereotypical thinking of others for an easier life, mistaking that for reality or forging a reality out of
it, or a belonging, or a sense of equal esteem, it works. But only to a limited degree. Many can get
by on this and it is commonplace. It is this sense of reality, a commonplace reality, actually a
generality that we depend on to some degree. Yes, reality is pretty scary but not preparing ourselves
for it, or living a life of unchallenged security, can actually be false and a kind of denial. Reality has
a massive effect on our mentality whatever we choose.
So, what if we generalise in order to compare its effect on you, on your awareness and
sensibilities and what you regard as reality? To explore how and why we stigmatise. It’s an
experiment with your responses to predominant pop-psychology and its main contributing factors,
the conflict between trends and your wider level of awareness; in order for you to compare what you
regard as reality and all the exceptions you realise make up your individual reality. Like a mean-
gauge, it might show us some inhibitions we have, what level of positive qualities are being
suppressed, oppressed, or actually reaffirmed – and how and why. It might influence changes you
want to look out for, or at least stimulate your thinking on a personal matter that bothers you. It
might not answer the problem of why a gang of youths decide to carry on kicking once they’ve
kicked a person to the ground; or why arse-holes want to throw bricks at responding emergency
services; or why a mother wants to strap explosives to herself and let rip in a busy public place
where there are other mothers and children. It might. But it will more likely alert you to some of the
pressures that you identify within you – ones that we usually don’t want to face, or didn’t know
were there – and at least blow the whistle on a number of ways we are increasingly being shafted.
Our humanity has a strong natural urge to share and achieve. That generality, or
commonplace reality, is useful and it does bind us to some degree. But it’s also good for
exploitation. The more people who share the mainstream, the greater the power of its leaders. This is
what restricts our political process, in the UK. Bigots can run the country, if there are enough of
them about. Some say that’s democracy. But is that true power? It’s a numbers game. That may be
the everyday reality for most, but it is not the reality of individual hearts and minds; so a system, a
politic, a social concept always throws up exceptions. And those exceptions can be within your own
family. It’s only the acknowledgement of those exceptions and humane treatment of them that leads
to a more mature, secure and strengthened society. (Paedophiles and seventeen year-olds who beat
pensioners are an exception to this, of course. They should be dropped off in the Antarctic). Western
democracies boast about upholding our right to conscience, lifestyle, belief and personally accepting
the consequences of those choices and we do take a lot for granted that other countries are right to
be envious of. This takes more to accomplish, for sure, and we’ve come a long way. So, what’s
wrong with it?

To govern such diversity by humane values means relinquishing some level of control and
that takes greater strength and ingenuity. You have to be bigger, think bigger, to do that. But there is
an inherent problem with that degree of separation. If governments relinquish control, plenty of
unscrupulous people are lined up and just waiting to inflict some chaos and abuse of freedom, so
you need something else to maintain order and control. The reason I’m talking like this, in a free
country, is symptomatic of recent changes and erosions into the personal freedoms it has taken us
the last half-century to establish.
If it is amoral and unpopular to browbeat people and deprive them of their rights, or to throw
everybody in jail for not voting and paying their ever increasing bills and taxes, then you need
another form of subjugation. The idea is not to hamstring the populace entirely, but to funnel all
their efforts into an altogether more conforming energy that keeps the stumbling beast on its feet.
And if you don’t like that, you can go find another place that suits you.
Admittedly there is no-one knocking down my front door to press-gang me into servitude, so
what am I banging on about. I’m talking about mental health, more specifically, mental
manipulation – the psychological process that governs the direction the whole nation (including its
drop-outs) is travelling in and where it ultimately leaves us. I’m not the first to comment directly
about the mental state of government and my rant will be the flimsiest, most facetious of analogies;
political analysis is not my job (but who doesn’t do it?) and it calls for more respect and
appreciation of historical facts and pressures, as I have stated. So, no in depth analysis – the
objective is to mirror how we generalise and why. This is healthy, if we take on the process and we
generally do, in pubs, restaurants, markets, factories and launderettes all over the land. It constitutes
the overall body-politic that we measure our society by. But it is not reality.
We know reality is layered. The apparent reality that we face everyday; a consciousness of
the reality behind, or around, how everyday events turn out; and our personal and internal reality.
For the more honest, it’s more spaghetti than lasagne. So, the way we acclimatise to everyday
events, continuously compromising, or sacrificing what we know is other than that, or what we
know is us. That is what I mean by social denial, usually based on some inflexibility, or intolerance
of the composite reality. In a way, the trend towards selfishness has helped us open up to our own
rights more, but it shouldn’t be left to individual efforts to attain them. Yet, no one can face our
individual reality for us; they can help, but the thought of facing it alone still shits us up. Hence,
denial. Some say reality is not allowing yourself to do that.
I have my moments and I could be as polemic as Mailer for a more sensationalistic read and
to write my name larger. But I haven’t got God and the whole weight of Moses legacy on my side,
as familiar as I am with both. It’s the ideas in my statements that I want you to focus on, whether
you see them as fair or not, real or not; contrast and compare, because the realities are different for
you than they are for me. This suggests that there is no common ground, no common language and
understanding, but tap into your sense of humour, your knowledge, even your outrage and
disagreement and why you disagree… and how you would convince me of valid reasons for your
views. And hopefully accept some inkling of truth in mine. This is hopefully where the fun starts.
Try and be more honest than purely your logical, political or philosophical conclusions. What you
differ with will probably reveal the most, but try and think outside the reasons why you agree with
some of them, too.
04 down on blondes
OK. What if we take the evolution of some pre-eminent prejudices in society; starting with the age-
old sexism: are men and women equal? When you think of the heartbreaking history of this
argument in relation to the reality of personal relationships the conclusions are not difficult to arrive
at. The interdependency and cohabiting seem to amount to nothing in the sexism argument, yet

models of submission and dominance, dependents and independents can be found on both sides
throughout history. And for every perspective a man might contain, you could find a woman with
the same perspectives and qualities and vice-versa (admittedly it is easier to be more open about this
now). The measures taken by some women to exhibit this stretched to pipe-smoking and sitting with
their legs wide open; though, you wouldn’t consider that feminism in Dickensian times if Nancy is
anything to go by, (seems to work for some twenty-first century lesbians on Canal Street, who
oppose bi-sexuality). That was all way before woman realised she didn’t have to become a man,
look like one, sound like one, dress like one, or even wish to equal one; and man no longer had to
suffer the all-pervasive acknowledgement that he was effectively shit if there wasn’t a good one
behind him. I’m not disregarding the oppression that really needed tackling in the Victorian era and
we’re pretty much there now, on that topic – but doesn’t it make my point about denial? What a
colossal waste of energy, since man has forever to live down or up to the fact he came from one and
was dependent on one from birth – he has yet a long way to go towards equality. I mean, surely no
woman or man nowadays looks back through history and contends that all that was actually male
superiority or strength, do they? Sad that some still haven’t moved on but a stimulating, fascinating
struggle and debate that says much about all of us, so, fair play.
I believe the mainstream perceptions have evolved in this way: Caveman (who sympathy
was always lost on, anyway) naturally had more calluses before woman (never pre-fixed by cave),
developed kind detergents, arose earlier than the man, nicked his hunting tools and left him to the
confines of the cave to do the dishes and try on her skins in secret. Of course New Caveman will
never have her skin as he has much less natural burdens and hormones to justify any mental illness
on his account. Hence woman, no matter how callous her actions, cannot be mentally ill; it just isn’t
part of her make-up. Shhh… it is prejudicial to mention that. Gay man is more emotional, uses
moisturiser and is thus closer to woman even if he has no feminine trait (that’s not patronising, it’s
matronising and that’s perfectly fine) and its ok for him to put on her clothes. Gay woman – who
sometimes wears man’s clothes all the time and can by choice, with some reductions and additions,
make herself look slightly more butch – may appeal to some feminine gay women, but mostly
appeals to butch feminists who want a male-oriented female race without sperm-dependent
conception. Feminine gay women tend to be the best looking women around; women men can only
be intimidated and humiliated by, or be secretly lusting friends with, which they can chat about
openly because there is absolutely no hope of any romance. They can have a family together, if they
get on well enough and the woman wants sperm-dependent conception through the most ‘natural’
process; but being lovers or a couple is always totally out of the question. Bisexual women are
everywhere enlightened, the stuff every man is obliged to dream of and they, by nature, are fighting
the good fight for equality. Bisexual men are doubly untrustworthy. Straight man is just sad,
inhibited and in denial, but becomes disingenuous and a little creepy if he moisturises. Unless he is a
body-builder hunk, or he is naturally or unnaturally bald. Even that kind of ruins women’s
perceptions of just what a man is supposed to be. Why can’t man just make up his mind? The
resulting equality is quite disturbing for feminists. Gay man is in another world, since he no longer
needs women except for make-up tips, to share bitchy gossip, or to be his mother, but at least he has
tapped into his feminine side, even if he doesn’t have one, and he is stereotypically obliged to be as
insecure as his narcissism can allow (both of which are big), which makes him at least in equal need
of hugs as women, without any suspicion of ulterior motive. He can cover this up with bitchiness.
And women can accept that as more honest because it’s more like them. For the more traditional
alpha amoeba of the species, for and by whom the laws, including those of nature, were made – and
those who like a good wild fuck – this is also upsetting because why should they change the laws of
a lifetime? Accepting that these are now prejudicial precepts is universally mandatory, unless your
religion says you have to pretend to be righteous alpha males and dominate your own flesh and
blood women, even if you want to bugger other men and women behind closed doors. Of course,
women can be anything and everything and can get fifty successive orgasms a day using a vibrator

down their jeans; but a heterosexual male who likes dick but doesn’t want to be buggered or to be a
woman, only to wear her clothes for sheer pleasure every now and then, is totally invalid. He is a
fake who plays at life without trying. This is true, even if he prefers that she wears the dress – (she
will wear things that make her feel sexy, for herself, but will take offence if it does something for
him because he should be interested in her for herself, not what she’s wearing) – but he feels that
isn’t quite the same as putting them on, somehow. She knows this, but she never has to contend with
getting lambasted in the street for looking like a clown in his jeans and jumper. For him to wear
women’s clothes in secret drops somewhere between sad and perverted; this is magnified in public,
unless he pretends to be gay, or doing it for a bet, for a charity, or with his mates in a stag party.
And the odd woman might like him to be her sister. But he generally doesn’t fit in anywhere.
Someone might pity that… or he could become a celebrity comedian. Apparently, Eddie Izzard’s
fans have complained about his lack of transvestitism, lately. Even they don’t get the point. Other
than the foregoing applications, no one can know exactly where they are with that kind of
behaviour. If it’s genuine, it is worthy only of suspicion. What he would really do if he was serious
is have gender re-assignment. Gender reassignment is very acceptable to us, we watch
documentaries about it and we’re very curious when we see someone in the street or a club. We will
link them and take them dancing down Canal Street, through all the cheers and hypocritical jeers
and sneers, (because they’re bound to hang out there, aren’t they? And let’s face it, they need as
many friends as they can get, so anyone will do, eh?) They’re very brave and deserve our respect
and public applause, unless of course they happen to be your relative or spouse. Women would be
delighted, surely, to have another convert on their side. That is unless they are a genuine blonde.
Genuine blondes are an affront to their own kind and often get castigated for letting the side down,
by being liked, distracting, somehow attracting more attention even when they’re not as perfectly
beautiful as women with other hair colour have to be, having more fun, driving badly, being clumsy
and airheads, being a natural threat to anyone’s husband or partner. And what’s worse, they don’t
have to try to be anything else to get away with all that. Some women join them to have all those
advantages by dying their hair, but they run the risk of double castigation for selling out their roots.
So… equality… we’re getting there.
Except, curiously, in statutory and voluntary mental health services, where staffing scales tip
in favour of women about eighty-twenty, at a liberal guess. How healthy is that? It’s a serious
question.
Are you getting there? Are you outraged yet? Do you at least disagree with some of this?
Good, well, at least we’re tapping into something… we’re working at the stigma. If you agree with
all this, then we really have something to worry about.
05 what was that Sooty?
If you are afraid of all this non-conformity and it’s not good for your politics, or business, what you
can do is corner a commercial empire to conform people to your will, or herd them into hospitals
and prisons if they don’t. Much better keep them out of prisons if you can, because you have to pay
them for stealing from you. And you have to pay them more than you pay those who you make ill
and dysfunctional. If you make them ill they can get by on much less and are unable to kick up as
much fuss. If you can keep them out of hospital and sedate them in their own homes, they will be
even less of a drain on your resources. You might have to come to terms with paying some of their
bills but believe me, that’s much better than having to educate, train, equip and pay professionals to
care for them and pay their bills.
Lets focus on the UK, because it’s the relatively recent trends within my lifetime that are
having an increased impact on mental health here. We all know the UK government currently has a
more collective-mental-state than it has ever had before, a club-card, a language, a disagreement to

agree but god forbid work together for the common good. You can often hear it in the ‘Mansion of
Uncommons’ and sometimes in the ‘Palace of Lordy-Lords.’ Well, let it all out, it’s healthy isn’t it?
I’m targeting government first because we rightly look to it for protection; for it to implement the
things we feel are fair for society and the things that support our lives. That’s what we pay it for.
They’re supposed to be more responsible than those who have no moral imperative to protect us and
would fleece the populace.
I know I am biting off far more than I can chew, here, because I know these are complex
problems, but don’t tell me that, because what that really means, in spin, is you have as much a clue
as I do, but I have obviously not wasted a fraction of the life energy, or money, you’ve invested in it,
so I don’t have the right to be anywhere near as frustrated by it and I don’t have the job of sifting the
bare facts piling up on my desk day after day. (It’s taken me five months to write this bloody
chapter, without an advance, if you don’t mind). But it is obvious to any observer, something is
drastically wrong and we are being duped into thinking there are no alternative solutions.
If Mugabe, for example, had accepted the reality of relinquishing power earlier (while I pen
this, he is signing the power-sharing agreement), thousands of people would not be facing the
protracted reality of their loss and he wouldn’t be facing more imbedded hatred towards him. He
generated that when he chose to cling on like an old myopic bigot, instead of taking his retirement,
while he could. Mind you, his face is his misfortune, how could you retire, even in exile, with a face
like that? Ok, he couldn’t give less of a shit about the people he’s killed or the living but it didn’t
even boost his economic status. How stupid. What a stupid man. (As I pen this final draft, he is
usurping the power-sharing agreement).
At least we’re not in Zimbabwe, eh? People make this kind of comparison, as if we should
be grateful and count ourselves lucky we haven’t got such blatantly callous oppression in the UK.
Yeah, we should be very proud. A comparison like that is like getting out of your seat over a 7–0
victory in an England v East Timor friendly. When you look at the hard-fought freedoms we have at
our disposal in the West; what has turned our society and particularly politics and commerce so
callous, so inflexible and inhumane is even more tragic.
Those who are in positions of wealth and power have the greatest challenge on their hands,
because they are told by all and sundry they are successful. They are told mainly by other people
who are as sick as they are. Some wealthy entrepreneurs may well have humane working practices;
that’s up for scrutiny; but what about highly paid executives? Those official terms and positions
allow for the same degree of separation from the consequences of their decisions and those affected
by them. What are their tactics and the knock-on effect? We know we need a change and better
regulations from government, but look at the example politicians set. Mugabe makes no qualms
about his position and people know he’s a sicko and the weakest excuse of a man that has ever
existed and they know where they stand with him. It’s easier in a way if you know your enemy. I
find the more insidious hoodwinking tactics of some ‘democratically elected’ politicians more
reprehensible. They start off by representing us and sometimes even fight a few of our individual
battles, but the worm turns the moment their career becomes less dependent on doing so. The
proverbial idealism cannot possibly survive the hostility of higher office. Why is that? So, how do
we expect them to talk?
You’ve got to be tougher, not just to stand up to competing countries and be prepared to go
to war to ‘defend’ Her Magesty’s Sovereignty (it is Her Magesty’s Government, not ours) but
against your own people, if what you think is best for them is what you think is worse for you. Men
can get away with this because they’re all stupid and bastards and never gave birth to a child. They
cannot ever possibly have the same degree of love and hate. As much as I think mothers should have
more of a say in wartime, to do this when you’re a woman, you have to become an Iron Lady, which
is admirable. And, of course, because you are a universal woman, you’re able to approve Gorbachev
his conversion from communism to capitalism and Reagan his doing business with this former
“empire of evil” – ending their tittle-tattling Cold War; silly boys, playing with their TMDs (Toys of

Mass destruction) “put them away, or share.” Well, the walls came tumbling down and she was the
tea lady, so, got to give her that one. Ooh, the redemptive qualities of the humble British afternoon
tea. How refreshed and indebted Gorby and Reagan must have felt. Then you might, as mother
superior, even be able to realise for every human being what is their ultimate hope and purpose in
life and develop endless varieties of television programs showing them how to do it, (themselves) –
buy a house. Then society will forever be indebted to you and you have carte-blanche to do with it
whatever you like. Even destroy it and deny it. ‘Yes, my children, you are free from the constraints
of society; go forth and multiply and buy your own home, that’s the way to liberation from poverty.
Yes all you poor piggies…’ (not all house-buyers are piggies, just run with the analogy) “…I will
liberate you and if you cannot afford it, then go see the wolves, they’ll give you all the bricks you
need and they won’t blow them down. They’ll just buy them back for less or confiscate them in a
temporary credit crunch. And your banker will huff and puff on my door saying – ‘you sent us these
people who had no money in the first place, can you ask their neighbours for it, because we have to
go to court to get blood from a stone and you don’t.’ So, buy buy buy, little piggies, you’ll be richer
and we’ll all be richer. At least until you have to pay for your polystyrened meals-on-wheels and
having your incontinence pad changed by total strangers with it. And remember, there is no longer
any such thing as society, so stop complaining.’ “…Hayek's powerful Road to Serfdom, dedicated to
‘the socialists of all parties’” Thatcher’s claimed inspiration. “Such books not only provided crisp,
clear analytical arguments against socialism… …they also gave us the feeling that the other side
simply could not win in the end. That is a vital feeling in politics; it eradicates past defeats and
builds future victories. It left a permanent mark on my own political character…”1 (Italics ours).
Yeah, fuck the whole picture. Delusion, a process intrinsic to politics. I don’t know much about
Hayek, but other admirers tell us his perspective looked way beyond any political partisan’s nose;
much less advocate the spuriousness of society as a foundation for human interaction. That was
Thatcher’s personal Pinocchio projection, for political agenda; from which she emerged as Skarfe’s
Frankenstein portrait, repugnant even to her own.
But fear not, the thing to do when you’re politically losing it and you don’t have a society or
a party is, of course, rally them behind a war. But it is a punt with your reputation. (Blaire didn’t
learn that painful lesson). So, you have to fight tooth and even precious nail to sacrifice lives of
people you don’t know and care less about, to maintain the sovereignty of a couple of barren rocks
off Argentina, even though a bigger deterrent would be to buy our British Bully Beef elsewhere.
Even if it means first ignoring then badgering the sulking “second most important man” in your life
out of his slippers against his will and his own continent. Life is far too cheap to play footy for them.
What’s it to be - an excruciating penalty shoot-out or kill some people? Let’s see, “people of The
Falklands – how many brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, mothers and fathers shall we lose for this,
or do you want to move? We could be rolling in bully beef for years.” Well, I’m sure they had little
say in it. Then you have to justify the loss, over-compensate the loss of pride with a charade of racist
pomp and ceremony that will infiltrate every footy match the Argy-bargies and England
subsequently have to play together. Just as it does with the ‘Krouts.’ Oh yeah, sorry, that’s just the
louts. You have also got to assuage the outrage of the families that paid for it, or just let the footy
fans of peacetime generations do this for you with peacetime generation footy fans of other
countries after every match. They’ll do this for free because they overheard something in a history
lesson or at a pub, that something bad happened, once. Even though we won 225 goals to 652. I kind
of admire Maradonna’s ‘hand of god,’ now. ‘The foot of god’ – Beckham’s bender – legitimately
stuck the boot in the cheating trouble-causers later, so… done and dusted. Falkland war? What was
that? Oh, we don’t talk about that now. And don’t for pity’s sake compensate soldiers families in
your profit and loss account; they’re paid to live by the sword, not die by it. No… leave the footy for
peacetime; we cannot possibly be seen playing footy with enemies. True, men played their part in all
this, but thank fuck we’ve got a woman to pin it on. Women didn’t understand footy in those days,
1
(Margaret Thatcher, The Downing Street Years, New York: Harper Collins, 1993, pp. 12-13).

poor things, but Maggie understood the offside rule, and that’s all you need to know about defence.
Obviously taught by Roy Keane, or did he learn from her? Home or away, any enemy just “could
not win” against Maggie “in the end. That is a vital feeling in politics.”
So, equality. Don’t fuck with Maggie even if you’re Arthur Scargill and his band of big
brawny mucky miners – she’s mad and there’s nothing like a woman scorned. Maggie Dismay.
What a legacy you left the world. Wow. Unimaginative, unloved women the world over will do well
by you, but they’ll never get what they want. WAKE UP MAGGIE I think I’ve got something to say
to you. There’s some debate about your death and a lasting memorial, but don’t worry; Hitler and
Saddam won’t get memorial statues, but we’ll never forget them. You had a responsibility to care
for children and the poor who couldn’t afford to buy houses, but you made money the only
consideration in what makes the world turn, you unfit mother.
Carol might be her only saving grace. She might be the saving grace for millions who feel
doomed to turn into their parents, (great as many parents are). I wonder if that stems more from her
dad or from rebelling against her mum to some extent. Nice one, though. Your daughter is a credit
Maggie, but I suspect not to you.
No wonder Gordon Brown wanted to meet Maggie – no greater endorsement could she have
than that of the Labour Party Premier. No greater admirer could she have than the man who fucked
Britain up the arse like no one else, repeatedly and unrepentantly. As I write this, the government
have just bailed out the fat-cat banks and financial sector with five-hundred-billion pounds of non-
existent money, borrowed from who knows where, presumably abroad, on the tax-payers’ behalf.
This is to ensure that the fat-cat bankers don’t collapse from the way they’ve shafted the public over
the past decade and to ensure there is still enough money to pay those who got us into this mess
further bonuses to get us out of it, otherwise they’ll take their money and expertise abroad, if they
haven’t done so already. If you were fortunate enough to have more than fifty-thousand in any
number of UK banks, you could lose some of it, just like that! So, let’s say you have three-hundred-
thousand in savings that took you all your life to acquire. The government will say it is ok for those
fat-cats to take 5/6ths of that for nothing – well, to keep their off shore balances secure and to pay
them their bonuses for doing such a sterling job. Quite right, too. We can’t have bankers speculating
with other people’s money, now, can we? And now they’ve part-nationalised the banks, which they
don’t want to control naturally, they can earn even bigger bonuses for the tax-payer. We should all
be in for a hefty dividend, eh? No one is asking detailed pertinent questions and no one is answering
even the ones that make it on the news. Possibly because all those people depend on the banks for
their massive savings and debts and mortgages, so no one wants to rock the boat further than ticking
the boxes for the pacifying replies they’d be remiss to omit. It would not surprise me if we find
down the line that it’s the very same fat cats that are lending the government this money form
abroad, so they can earn the interest from it. No one has mentioned the IMF, in direct connection
with this. The taxpayer has no choice in it; not even parliament is consulted until after the fact. If
this rip-off government have anything to do with it, they’ll conveniently forget about it when the
rates and stealth taxes go up; there will be no mention of what use that money has been put to, or
what profit has been made and where it has gone, much less reduce the cost to the public. “We, the
public…” says one reporter “…could actually make a profit from this recession!” Ooh, goody. But
people are advised, “if you’re planning to move, don’t; if you’re planning to expand your business,
hold back until things improve.” One report showed a whole street of empty upper-middle-class,
repossessed and unsold residences – empty houses – but not one specific interview with a person
who has lost their work, home and savings. The financiers and government have taken their cocks
out of each other’s arses and shoved them down our throats. And they’ll make us swallow it. They
are psychopathic rapists and they will never be satiated. They are the sickest mentally diseased scum
and they want to inseminate us with their sickness so we support their agendas.
We are increasingly dependent on imports for everything because what we used to be able to
export has moved abroad where it’s valued. And now we’re economically shitting ourselves over

the Chinese. The most valuable thing we export now is spin. And the Chinese want to learn this spin
as their populace stretches out to capitalise on their intelligence. How else is the biggest capitalist
economy going to get away without implementing genuine reforms? So psychopathy and spin are in
demand. Everything has to keep going up and up and up before the bang culture of the capitalism
goes bust. Oops. The clever-clogs obviously saw it coming but they’re professionals in greed and
professionals push it to the max if they can, but how can you tell where the max is unless you break
it? Then if you manage to find it, don’t lose it entirely, do everything you can to keep hold of it;
even if the mugs you ripped off in the first place can’t pay there’s plenty more fools that are easily
parted from their money. That’s what you sleep with government for isn’t it? So, being mildly
successful might not keep you off your knees, better be cut-throat to avoid that.
This is the kind of country Great Britain is turning into, because the only thing that talks is
money and peoples’ lives, work, families, health and futures don’t figure. Ask anyone who has
worked all their life to achieve a decent life-style and legacy only to lose it in an instant by a hostile
take over, or being crowded out, or simply by the current market instability. Where does that leave
us? Make no bones about it, this is the mentality and sole aim of ardent capitalists. They do not even
have the savvy to keep alive the ones who feed the beast; if the fodder dries up in the UK there’s a
whole world to feed off. Politicians cannot afford to do that so if their policies are unpopular you
have to take the Blears Witch approach. Tell the public what they have told you they want, even
when they didn’t, marginalise all those that won’t conform to make them look like a minority,
because those who think outside the box will only ever be a niche voting market. Market all those
who don’t want to think anymore and tell them not to think, they don’t have to; that’s what you’re
for. Then you can conform popular opinion into whatever you think will work for you. Those who
think for themselves will be less likely to go to war for you or put up with you. They want a broader
market, a wider range of aspirations that are more challenging for you to provide. Why should you
do that? Pop-psychology is essential to politics, like mass retail; everyone has to have a minimum
thirty-inch inside leg or you’re an inconvenience and don’t deserve food shelter and clothing. You’ll
have to fend for yourself. You’re surplus to requirement. Yes, we apparently told Hazel Blears we
want identification cards (she insisted on Question Time, looking into mid-air as if that was a given
and not to have to tell us how stupid we really are). She doesn’t credit us the intelligence to
determine between hard-nosed and hard-faced. Or she doesn’t have the intelligence. What a pitiable
excuse of humanity, if that attitude is an example of whom we seek to care for us. She obviously
sees herself as the next Tempered-Steel Lady. So watch out Mrs Brown, your Thatcherite hubby
will be in bed with her like a shot, where he can keep his beady eye on her, or smother her with a
pillow. It’s symptomatic. She’s just a product of the seeds that have been sown since government
officials became celebrities and sailed off with capitalist dictators, Russian oligarchs and Hull PCT,
in their pea-green super-yacht, using some of the underclass as crew and leaving the rest in their
wake, to die on trolleys in corridors. Government targets. The vulnerable have become the
government targets. New Labour? What a rotten diseased-to-the-core Thatcherite dinosaur.
It will degenerate into sink or swim with the most desperate invading each others’ homes for
scraps, in total dog-eat-dog anarchy. That’s what our government has been teaching us to do, for the
past twenty years, and now we know only too painfully how close we are to that possible outcome.
Frankly, we’d rather die than do that. Keep an eye on the suicide rates. Exaggerated? That’s just
apocalyptic sensationalism, though, we’re cleverer than that. So, the disease takes hold and we
either catch this disease or settle for depression. We delude ourselves into thinking we have a choice
in the matter. Or, you can just ignore all this, deny it and just get on with your job until it doesn’t
exist or keep the roof over your head anymore. The strongest swimmers are already feeling that
sinking sensation and when they’re exhausted trying to swim, the drowning sensation of depression
will be a welcome relief. Problem is they’ll start attacking their own perceived failure then, instead
of the failure of the establishment, so what chance do paddlers have? Some considered to be
mentally ill have learned how to survive attacking themselves.

It is amazing that the whole history of human relationships has been largely based on trust –
even the financial system is based on trusting reliable forecasters and promises on pieces of paper.
Trust, honesty, consideration and respect used to be what made us want to do business with each
other and get to know one another – make each other feel on top of the world. Is that denial? When
trust is betrayed we all hate it. But the current level of lack of trust of the electorate towards
politicians, businesses and the nigh-on police/nanny state is at an unprecedented low and diving
deeper by the day, with their bank balances, prospects, motivation and sheer energy. That level of
mistrust is quite healthy, so what does that tell us? In fact, it’s unsophisticated, boring and down
right naïve to be honest nowadays. The welfare rights system works on this assumption. It’s the
prerogative of the maligned to scrape together some proof of their innocence, after being hung out to
dry on the flimsiest pretexts by some mini-megalomaniac, whose promotion is based on the single
agenda of reducing dependency on their system. In many personal relationships, those with the best
intentions and determination to cling on to their honesty and integrity are often treated with
suspicion and disbelieved, as a matter of course, by a partner who feels less secure, or lacks the
imagination to extend beyond their own preconceptions. Our expedient culture encourages funnel
vision. All of us have known this feeling. It’s insulting and infuriating and the biggest incentive to
become dishonest or openly callous – somehow that’s easier to trust. Classic abuse symptom but
there’s no excuse.
Fear not; very soon, now, trust will be eradicated. Nothing will be left to trust. Our guardians
of good health are spending over a million to make it compulsory for chip shop owners to use
specially manufactured salt shakers; because the thick obese public eat chips everyday and are
having far too much salt on them. So the shakers will have less holes! What a marvel! Who came up
with that idea? I’d like to clean their toilet for them for a year in gratitude. Wow! To have someone
with such initiative working in our food standards agency and in the government. And, presumably,
they will be accompanied with detailed instructions on how many shakes are to be used at what
optimum angle. And if someone asks for more, the flashing lights will start, armed police will
suddenly spring on the scene with bellows of “STEP AWAY FROM THE SALT SHAKER” And
Mr Bumble will tower over the ungrateful self-indulgent rebel and cart him off to the workhouse by
his ear. Their homes will be searched, all salt derivatives confiscated and their windows marked
‘SALINATOR.’ Salt use will go underground into speak-easy salt cellars and all the confiscated
stock will go to Social Services latest splurge to treat all people with learning difficulties like slugs.
They don’t want them to choke on their macaroni cheese, so take their forty-year parent-carers to
court, to make them de-hydrate the fuckers and have done with it. That’s after chippie queues get
too long and chippie workers seek damages for RSI. There will be a proliferation of non-
professional chip-makers, the drains will be clogged and because we all used to go to the chippie
everyday; the home-chip-making revolution will spark blitzes no amount of wet tea towels can
quell. Cities will resemble London and Liverpool during the war. Melting ice-caps will make it
impossible to get chips crispy, which will make us turn the heat up even more. But more bureaucrats
and inspectors will make the government look better on paper.
Of all the coffee outlets in the UK, only one (arguably the most popular and successful
enough to represent the American Dream) uses a particular machine that they contend requires them
to keep a tap running constantly. The waste runs into millions of litres per day. The solution to this,
according to the water management company executive (not supplier, the water does not belong to
them), is not to fine the coffee company and get them to change their practice, no – “we are
obviously not charging enough; we need to increase the [generic] rate we charge for water to deter
such wastage.” The man who gets the job isn’t the one who thinks they’re not as cut-throat as the
energy companies, it’s the man who thinks they’re lagging behind. Well, my water company pro-
actively helped me through my time of destitution and illness. Bless them for not jumping on the
band-wagon. Those officiators have no idea who I am, but I literally cry in appreciation for what

they did. What a credit they are to the capitalist model, unlike some rich bankers I can mention, who
I’d like to shoot. Watch out as soon as someone works out how to charge for air…
Not content to spy into peoples’ emails and listen to their telephone calls on a whim (because
we’re all potential terrorists), local councils have now been given permission to employ ‘accredited
people’ since the police said it’s not their job to walk the streets. It’s a legitimised vigilantism with
swing-ball bats. These accredited people have the power to confiscate things from you, in the street,
ask for your personal details and fine you. These accredited people may be security firms who have
once run nightclub door services or even car-park and clamping services. Evidence of this kind of
little-Hitlerism was seen when a grandmother was walking her grandchild in a buggy. The child
dropped a crisp packet and two crisps fell out. The grandmother returned the packet to the child and
nudged the two crisps to the wall, so people wouldn’t tread them in. The next passing dog or bird
would make quick work of those biodegradable morsels. But in full view of two newly ‘accredited
people’ she was liable for intimidation, public humiliation and a fine for littering. These accredited
people were only doing their jobs, they had no choice in the matter, they are being employed as
‘accredited’ little-Hitlers; it’s not the power they get their kicks from, honest. And the most popular
response they’ll use though Gordon Brown type smiles is ‘it’s better than hanging around on street
corners’ but it’ll never occur to them that all they have to do to make the council a killing is hang
around the public ashtray that is every pub and office-block doorway.
This doesn’t stop at uneducated, poorly trained power-hungry pedestrians. A teacher –
shock, horror, have you ever heard of this, in your life? – kissed a seventeen year-old adult by
mutual consent. The seventeen-year-old probably skipped home and, for the first un-cool time in his
life, downloaded an Abba track and danced around in his bedroom. But that is not the way he
reacted when his parents dragged him out of court to the awaiting press. No, he was soooooo thick,
he didn’t realise that was abuse!!! And, yes, you guessed it, it has ruined, ruined his life ever since.
You can tell by the way he whimpers it out to camera, fighting back the crocodile tears as is now
obligatory on telly. No, did he not know? It just isn’t on for teachers to fall for any one of the
thousands of consenting adults that they spend three quarters of every waking day with, not unless
they move to somewhere they’re not known first. It’s abuse to be so open in front of people you
know. You know what abuse is, don’t you? It’s Fred West; it’s being held in a cellar or cupboard for
years; it’s being passed around your parents and their friends to be used like a rag doll. Get with the
program lad – get on to ‘Abuse Victims R Us.’
But the courts are well used to this and we can rely on judges for a balanced appraisal. Yes,
the repulsive teacher is now officially a sex offender and will never ever work with children again.
Aren’t we relieved? Aren’t we so glad? Aren’t we so proud to have educated people and critical due
process to ascertain where to draw the line? Doesn’t that really show deference to everyone who has
been sexually abused? Whoever was allowed to get away with making that judgment is a disgrace
and betrayer of everyone who has ever suffered abuse. They dilute the real emotional and
psychological consequences real abuse victims suffer and our outrage towards it. They increase the
opportunity for people to be dismissive of real abusers and for real victims to be ignored ‘well,
everything is abuse nowadays, isn’t it?’ Irresponsible, self-righteous, career-grabbing, limelight-
seeking arse-holes. They are the abusers.
So, honesty, judgment, moral decency; these have no place in a capitalist democracy. It’s an
insidious disease, fostered in the clammy clutch or crutch of those who will shaft us no matter how
much we complain. I tend to switch off to anyone who doesn’t believe I’m being honest with them,
now. They’re welcome to their opinions but it takes a little more imagination than they’re willing to
stretch to, to contemplate reality, or more than what’s expedient for them and they can take that
elsewhere. Isolation becomes very appealing. Or you can be quarantined.
It’s a wonder spin actually still works. Brazen as Mugabe - people no longer even bother
trying to cling to any moral high-ground. That’s the job of political rhetoric and publicity. Ever
since the Tate Gallery walls were splurged with elephant dung, bullshit became an accepted art

form. It’s cool and anyone who hasn’t got it, like a straight-talking no bull-shitting mayor or royal
who happens to have a mind - like anyone else - is ridiculed for it. Our saving grace is that we all
recognize the disease and hate it with equal passion when it’s directed at us; so a cure is not out of
the question – just how we tackle it, how real people really want to get and how valuable it is, is.
The world turned long before humans exchanged money (some over-inflated egotist will
speculate for us, now, how far back currency goes) and may have to again, soon. We still think of
our universe expanding and progressing in a linear direction when it has been proved to be swings
and roundabouts. Horror of horrors, though, that would mean the world’s banks would have to
actually let go of a penny here and there in mutual transactions or spend some of their own money!
The government are hoping we’ll forget about it and trying to find ways to avoid absorbing it in ever
increasing forthcoming tax budgets. It will never be the electorate that gets it back, it’ll be Iraq and
Afghanistan. So, in times of crisis – I know, sell off the public parks; take everyone’s houses off
them, leave them empty and build cheaper ones on greenbelt sites; they can fill the council coffers
instead. ‘Return to go. Go directly to go. Do not pass go. Do not pick up £200.’ Bastard Galileo
should have been hung drawn and quartered.
It has all become some macabre reality TV. And we love that. We no longer have to listen to
the monotonous lobotomising drone of Big Brother. We know it is a puppet show and we are no
longer in any doubt as to who has got their hand up who’s jacksy? The Mansion of Uncommons is
the theatre of ventriloquism, complete with behind the scenes arm-bending tactics, bribes for greater
screen-time and more prominent roles, or the inclusion of a line, or a side-episode, prima-donna
demands and career sabotage, upstaging the lead role. And the critique terminology targets not
achievement but “performance.” The electorate remain as mute as a hushed live audience, only free
to respond when prompted then canned for editing. Or circumvented by lazy script-writers like
Sooty and Sweep, with only the creative licence of the craftiest story-tellers to interpret what they
choose to hear and share, which can have absolutely no correlation to the pip-squeek-puppets’
views. Whose in charge here anyway? So… “What was that Sooty? You want to pay more for fuel,
power and amenities and another forty pounds a week out of your wages on top of taxes, just to
enter the city in your vehicle… Yeeeeesss? ... And can I raise the cost of not putting on more trains
and buses, because you’re earning far too much and don’t know what to spend it on? Well, I think
that’s a very good idea, Sooty! Yes, the boys and girls would like that very much – wouldn’t you
boys and girls?”
What a colossal abuse of brains and money. Take note – the poor have already learned how
to get by on nothing and the mentally ill have learned the value of it. The surreal economic
aspirations of our society has led to little awareness of that, rather a disregarding wastefulness and
lust for selfish abandon. The current average spent on a wedding ceremony and reception stands at
twenty grand. And if you can’t keep up, sell your souls to the wolves then pay them back with your
marriage over time. That amount could set me up in business for life, even in the UK. They keep
sending me leaflets for loans, in the same statements that show I won’t qualify for one. I haven’t got
a penny to pay them back, but that never stopped anyone. So, are they trying to tell me something?
Good job I’m single and childless, eh? Oh, no… no… I really have no excuse, no excuse for letting
the side down. I mustn’t have the slightest clue, what could I possibly have to say about your life?
Mine must be like some sort of pantomime, shouting “He’s behind you” when you knew full well,
since the music changed. Well, with marriages set to diminish and divorces set to increase further,
we’ll all be focusing more on our individual entity, which we set aside for family. That I’m good
for.
It’s good for society, to empower that spirit, within families too. This is actually reality, as is
gradually being realised, even in very conservative religious societies like the Arab states. It doesn’t
have to conflict with traditional and familial standards. It’s great for the most conservative Arab to
promote their realisation of this as progressive and he’s right to think broader than the western
materialistic model. It is progress but long overdue. Like western racism. It is politically mature to

assimilate freedom of choice into any society but you have to be prepared to let go and that is seen
as compromise, when really it isn’t, it’s being fair and considerate. The Almighty, who could
presumably have wiped us out and started all over again, didn’t make us automatons and doesn’t
need to force anyone to worship him the way some people say. If they have to personally choose to
be devoted to him and those who do are superior to those who don’t, shouldn’t that be enough for
those who do? Depending how things work out, it would be interesting to compare how black
Americans feel about their country, pre and post Obama. It will be even more fascinating to see how
red-necks feel, but that will become less and less important unless they go on a campaign of mass
breeding and they end up with over-population and have to start new civil wars for culling. Or the
red-necks can get real. When you project how Hitler or the Stasi would have got on, once they
conquered the world, it would have become unmanageable, or filled with resentment and rebellion,
anyway. So why draw the line at your country, county or family? Why draw the line at all, when
you’re gonna have to face it anyway? Look at the devotion and efforts of all those parents who work
to afford their children the opportunities to do better than they were able to. That’s why people say
their children are their life and few things can be as important. But should it be that way, to the
exclusion of parents personal ambitions? Is that really strengthening society? Certainly strength of
sacrifice; but it’s a lame way to operate our society, when we judge its strength purely on its level of
sacrifice. That’s WWI battle strategy. If this is the legacy for each successive generation, what is
being sacrificed, when it could have been empowered?
You might think you’re doing that as a leader, in the name of fairness and love. Yeah. But
our political systems are too restrictively geared for that. We haven’t got all the time in the world,
now, so we’ll push for more expedient political solutions, the way a psychiatrist might only have
twenty minutes to assess a new patient to decide what will govern the next few years of his life –
maybe the rest of it. They don’t seem to be so quick to turn around causes of global warming or
invest in non-fossil fuels. Why don’t they ring a daytime television magazine show, they’re usually
good at giving solutions to problems you might have suffered all your life in a ten-second sound
bite? When you’ve been so desperate for so long, you’ll be amazed just what a difference a little
reassuring word will make. We’re gonna have to make do with that, the way things are going.
I do not believe all politicians and all commerce executives are psychopaths. I just believe
most of them are. To handle the things they are expected to handle pushes them towards the same
end, since the processes they have to employ to apply such control are psychopathic. Their work
requires them to be psychopaths in the sense that they have to deal with ‘demographics,’ ‘consumer
markets’ and ‘public opinion’ in a de-sensitized (dehumanised) way. How else are you supposed to
justify untenable positions? And when they actually have to face some of the negative impact of
their policies they have to de-sensitise even more, otherwise they’d actually have to answer for their
actions, or lose control and go literally mad. They cannot do that, so, “must be able to handle
pressure” and the more pressure the general public can process, the maximum they can process, even
if it kills them, is the optimum working strategy. Time, they say, waits for no man, so we cannot
slow down. And if the industrial and technical revolutions are anything to go by – if that is what
we’re pinning all our success on – we’ve got to go faster and faster and faster! And we’ll never keep
up with the Chinese. Well, what’s so bad about that? At least they get out to the local parks during
lunch to watch their grandparents doing Thai Chi. So, to be successful… de-sensitise, de-humanise.
This is mentally sound. It isn’t about empowering the working class, as Prescott would have us
believe; it’s about empowering government to stay in business class, even if that means returning
most of the working class to the underclass they’re so up in arms about. Prescott, one Sun reporter
and a BBC politics show, advocate a witch hunt of all the people who have such an easy life on
benefits. It is sickening how many want to jump on the bandwagon, just as self-righteously as they
did in attacking Jade Baddy, for being what she was paid good money to be. At least Jade pays her
way, huh? ‘Lump em all in together; get the white gowns out everyone, lets have a bonfire.’ Let
those millionaire pundit wankers, who get paid for sitting on their arses and thinking and speaking

though them, queue up in the job-centre and see what underpaid work they’d be willing to take on.
Let them encounter the patronising, belittling process and compete with illegal immigrants’ agencies
and the over-qualified students repaying their loans. If Prescott is right about 7% of the privileged
publicly educated ending up with 70% of the best paid jobs; what’s wrong with letting their earnings
subsidise the economy more, on behalf of those less fortunate? No; return more people, even the
middle-class, to the underclass, to compete for fewer jobs whilst popping them all off the welfare
state. Brilliant! “We’ve got to get intolerant of them” said Murdock’s socialist-tabloid puppeteer and
nodded the pundits’ heads… “What’s that Sooty? … Yes, they have been very naughty, thieving,
lazy-arsed, sponging, little life-of-Riley bastards; haven’t you boys and girls?” The sharks smell
blood.
I’ve searched my soul on the subject of capitalism and can’t say I can totally condemn it,
looking at some of the benefits we have through it. Many people are still very happy to run
businesses in a modest way, to earn a decent living and a little more, a few luxuries. But the
mentality behind capitalism has changed since the eighties and so has the political map. Now,
anyone can become a millionaire and there are more of them than ever before. It’s almost seen, in
some quarters of society, that you’re not that successful if you’re only a millionaire. You’re the poor
relatives in the club. We don’t have the luxury of a political empire anymore, so we have to work on
our individual business empires. That’s good isn’t it? So, more millionaires please. Everybody
wants to be one now and everybody should get off their lazy idealistic arses and be one (everyone,
that is, except those who work for my company, ahem). That summarizes the mentality of pure
capitalism. That the Lewis Hamiltons and Beckhams exist enriches our world but not everyone
wants to be them. What about those who don’t, who are not as ambitious? Do they have to be, for
money to be spread more equitably? Of course, otherwise we end up with a spongers’ society, don’t
we? The funnel-thinkers believe this is the reality when patently, it is not. If everyone has to have
that level of ambition to succeed, what about those who fall victim to the process and burn out? As
powerful as these role-models are – especially as refreshingly sound, down to earth and modest
Lewis and his family have remained – what kind of potential for failure are we setting the bar at?
Possibly the greatest precedent set by Lewis is not his professional achievement but,
hopefully, his unerring love towards his half-brother and his public demonstration of that. Thanks
for that Lewis. It’s obvious, his father’s humility and his whole family are to credit for that. See the
power of humility and modesty. There is an awful lot more than that going on for sure but what an
endorsement of our intrinsic human qualities and values, when they’re kept in perspective and
prioritised?
There are many benefits that come from having riches and powerful companies, but they
now exist to feed themselves at every expense. When they’re fully bloated and the monster becomes
too big for a small body of executives to sustain, or they’d rather be on a Barbados beach sunning on
their shares, or their skill base has flown the coop, or more likely they’ve stripped it for all it is
worth, they’ll sell it off abroad. A clever executive will already have shares in any creditable
competitor. But when all the UK’s power and services belong to France, we’d better avoid upsetting
them at all cost or we’re fucked. There is a difference between good commerce and pure capitalistic
values.
What do they do with all this wealth? Well, that’s an individual choice. There are many
benefactors and goodness knows enough people knock on the doors of the wealthy. But how much
is achieved in comparison with if there was amore equitable share? And what does the process of
amassing wealth involve? For the fortunate not much, but the majority will have to adopt amoral
predatory tactics. Morals are so old-hat, there’s no room for them in good business, unless you can
pin a badge or slogan on them. It has become acceptable to treat human beings as prey and
dispensable commodities. Let’s see… yep, history is built on corpses. Where would the great
empires be without them? I mean, we wouldn’t have the Taj Mahal or the Pyramids or the Twin

Towers. And Charles Darwin said it’s alright, so, it must be ok. And that’s something to celebrate?
Penises in urinals. The consumer will actually pay you to piss on their chips.
Previous generations worked together to benefit society as a whole and achieved some great
and wonderful things like the NHS system and the welfare state etc. These are still the envy of the
world. Nye Bevan will be spinning in his grave now. All that struggle, sweat and toil. But to say
such a wealthy country has done well to get old people out of working and dying in workhouses
without any possessions, where they eat gruel in the mornings – is that something to be proud of?
We are a long way down the road from that now and a good job, although the rate given to
pensioners doesn’t compare favourably to previous times and their pensions have been squandered
away. Who knows where we’re heading? Soon, non-tax payers will be publicly burned on stakes.
The NHS certainly is an exhibit of dedication and amazing advancement. What a wonderful thing to
be proud of and what wonderful devoted and caring people, on the whole. Yet, this scourge of
mental derangement inseminating politics, capitalism and bureaucracy is disintegrating even
something as monumental and enviable as this. The incredulous thing is, these decision-makers have
a sense of history and they’re generally intelligent people. It has taken the virtual collapse of
financial empires for politicians to even talk about reeling them in. They’d have to get out of bed
with them to do that, so don’t hold your breath Sooty. Unfortunately, the governments and oil
moguls are more fond of fist-fucking and gang-raping the consumer, to build bigger cities in which
to educate all those who presumably disagree with them. It might work, if we’ve got time and it isn’t
just the latest exercise in funnel-vision. It sounds healthy; but don’t we have far more than enough
education in the world to sort our current problems? The consequences of this process on the heath
of our global community is already apparent. If oil moguls are that sincere about being a part of it,
shouldn’t they rethink their priorities?
06 the PCPCTs
Health services in the UK are free for all and they may be some of the best in the world, but they are
infected by the sickening application of capitalistic values and the Blears Witch model. This
bureaucratic system is the most wasteful scourge in this country. It is so sick that many skilled
clinicians have left due to lack of basic standards. So, a significant part of the NHS is now operated
by people moving in from other countries where conditions were sometimes worse, sometimes not.
They are no less skilled, it seems, but they are dispensable and less likely to balk against the
prevailing trends of PCT (primary care trust) bureaucratic bludgeoning. That’s hardly going to be a
problem, since the PC PCTs are all about compromise compromise compromise, to fit in with them.
If you’re less than PC and differ with the PCT, you’ll find yourself out, or resigned to shutting up
and putting up care trust services. So, eastern doctors training in psychiatry and working as SHOs in
A&E departments, (some of them in the most racist areas of Lancashire), when helping an English
person not to commit suicide, don’t need to worry about whether their dialect is actually intelligible;
or whether their beliefs, traditional values and judgments will conflict with psychological processes
inherent with a more permissive society. But by all indicators, except the delivery point, they fit the
bill, tick the box and make the PCT look inclusive. Anyone who would object to explaining to a
Pakistani or Indian doctor why they have an abusive but compulsive sexual relationship with their
step-father or step-mother, or that they might be gay, or may want to cut themselves, or cannot stop
compulsively gambling, or stealing, or shopping, or eating… or complains that they just cannot
decipher the psychiatrist’s whispering responses… is racist. Health care has become the worst kind
of political institute. It is a political process, a political hierarchal organisation as opposed to an
experienced care-led hierarchal organisation. And worse, a capitalist-led political organisation.
This is mainly the auspice of the PCTs. So, the individual PCT has to justify its existence.
So, they push their pens to produce as much full-gloss-pamphleted and plasma-screened justification

for their existence as possible… more quantifiable justification than practitioners can produce of the
results of their patient care. This is not on. So, now the PCT needs to use more money to justify
collating the evidence (that is evidence-based practice, incalculable in practice) to justify that the
practitioners jobs are as justifiable as theirs. It creates more work, more jobs for the boys, more
money, more readable results; so that’s good isn’t it? That’s the theory. Because they can look good
and the government can look good at spending public money, even though people are dying of
MRSA for lack of basic-wage earning cleaners. Every PCT will duplicate this with their
independent in-house evaluations. Or triple it, since every correspondence I receive from them
comes in triplicate – envelopes and all, same delivery. That’s two totally unnecessary hectares of
forest for every hectare they need to strip. They have become the ‘art critics’ of public health; no
longer content with enhancing our appreciation of health care, supporting and informing us of
developments and innovations to expand our choices. Health care just could not exist without them
because they and the reports say so. Clinicians skills have to be harnessed to fit what is good for the
public. They have to be told how, why and when to fit in, by the PCTs, because they’re too busy to
be politicians, so they can conform their efforts to what is critically credible and what the
government, in their infinite cabinet wisdom, dictates to the public is good for them and what they
tell us we told them we want, in all the consultations they railroaded. Meanwhile, back in NHS city,
it’s new jobs for the boys, yes, but tasks have to be integrated into already overtaxed positions, to
save on wages and expenses. And where does the budget go? If there is one, it goes on new sub-
administrations; whichever department decides to go independent and pile more work and training
on their existing staff, with its individual bureaucracy, equipment, overheads and contract tender.
(See chapter – Take the biscuit).
“I do not believe all politicians and all commerce executives are

psychopaths. I just believe that to handle the things they are expected to
handle pushes them towards the same end, since the processes they have to
employ to apply such control are psychopathic.”
07 Bin Laden can retire
With most people working in commerce this number-crunching mentality is unintentional; they are
just doing a job, following orders, maintaining company policy, or trying to stay ahead of the next
person who wants their job. This is the generic administrative model. If that means using cattle-
prods instead of dogs to herd the sheep into the pen, then so be it. Just as Nazi soldiers and Zonder
Commanders were manipulated. Function and result is the primary objective, not how we treat each
other as human beings. Less is more – less functionality, more results. We are not merely a number
to them but the business and political strategists force them to treat us as such. Most people don’t
want to be that way and it’s not popular to treat workers that way either. When that’s the case we
buy from companies in places where they couldn’t give less of a shit about people, so it’s not us
doing it. The government will deny to the hilt the sending of prisoners accused of endangering the
public to Abu Grave or Guantanamo Bay for torture. But it is good business to buy all our goods
from companies that beat workers, rob them of their wages, feed their newborns melamine, cause
millions of premature deaths, as well as contaminate the atmosphere and water sources and strip the
forests. I personally want to hug every rural Chinese parent who has lost their son or daughter on the
altar of the Chinese capitalist machine. But someone will say “yes, but they have a better life than
they would stuck in the country growing rice” as if there is no other comparison to make. Would
they? The Chinese populace are far more sophisticated than we give them credit for. In 1999 I met a
twenty-three year-old Chinese student from Manchester University. Her day job was designing

aircraft wings for British Aerospace. She was on release being sponsored to do that for the company,
but also sponsored by her country, so she could take her experience back there and teach them how
to do it. Crafty these Chinese. The only reason the Chinese have not taken over the world already is
that they don’t need to. They have everything right there in China. Let the world come to them. And
it has. The sad thing is that if they aspire only to assimilate life as we know it in the west they’re in
for as rude an awakening.
OK, why shouldn’t they have all the conveniences western societies have and be able to
support their families? But that isn’t what I take issue with. It’s easy to seize on that as a principle
and totally ignore the injustices and poor practices that are being employed by those with financial
clout. Then you have the same determination towards greed and the same delusion of superiority.
This is the extent to which current capitalistic practice impacts on human endeavour and
imagination. Everything is far too big to deal with, when all we have to do is be human. Be humane.
Those who are seem to be in the minority and it begs the question, how many are actually I positions
of authority and power? I wonder what is the actual human toll in acquiring so many rich
benefactors? The Chinese publicly espouse the words of Confucius, Lao Tsi and Siddhartha
Gautama, for the moral ideologies backing their exploitation, without a single reflection or concern
about whether or not it washes. That is not the important thing. The commercial outcome is the be-
all and end-all.
In the UK, they will now be extolling the success we had at the China Olympics, rather than
what a hypocritical colossal failure and compromise it entailed to compete in those games. I
wouldn’t deny the athletes their medals or achievements but if they really wanted to have an impact
on what the Olympics is supposed to represent, they’d have pulled out en masse. But it’s now
success at almost any cost (as much as if the athletes were all on drugs). In fact they calculated the
amount of investment made into sports support and facilities related to the Olympic effort and how
many medals were achieved. I don’t recall the exact figure but each medal ran at over one million
pounds sterling. Those athletes became millionaires in minutes! Taking that standard and projecting
the potential for more medals and increased success, year on year, gold medals will actually de-
value. That calculation, of course, does not include the value of the houses, the livelihoods and the
lives that the beaten, ransacked and uncompensated Chinese neighbours lost in the building of the
‘Bird’s Nest’ car parks. Of course, that’s not the athletes’ fault. No, they didn’t have a choice. I
wonder if any did decline; presumably they’re traitors, not heroes. Integrity – is the cost of looking
good in a sham. But no… blame the Chinese for suppression of protests for human liberty and
cheating us out of a real fireworks display. And keep flashing the brass. If our Olympic committee
had known about this credit crunch, they’d not have gone for 2012, they say. Since the initial bid,
their administrative budget of over five-mill only increased by 1000%, so what are they worrying
about? It isn’t the criticism that the facilities they’re building will not meet the original stipulation,
that they should be suitable for reuse by the community and be able to pay for themselves in the
long-term. So, the primary consideration for continuing with this new outcrop of Millennium Domes
is the temporary employment; the feel-good factor we so need during this recession. And saving
face. Who else will want it, now? At least we can minimise the financial burden employing students
and illegal immigrants, eh? How cosmopolitan and inclusive.
The role of the Trade Unions, occupational therapy and employment-based social initiatives
used to give employees confidence that their employer was interested in the welfare of the people
who made them rich. Loyalty towards firms like that was fiercely defended by those workers. Their
quality of family life was directly related to the success of their firm or industry. Now, that’s not
good for the budgets, for business, for healthy bank balances, for the investors and shareholders who
sit on their cosy arses watching the exploitation and colossal injustices their company executives
connive to inflict. They are not a sponging underclass. Fear is the prime employment motivator,
now. But don’t blame them whatever you do. They’ll fuck off elsewhere with their investments. We
are being done the greatest favour to slave for them, since without them we’d all be poor and

unproductive. We can’t all grow our own tomatoes can we? For a start, they’ll be the wrong shape
and colour. The idea is as preposterous as a Prince growing GM crops. Without them we wouldn’t
be able to keep the underclass in the life to which they’ve become accustomed. Two-Jags thinks
they shouldn’t live. Yes, you can do something with a bad back, but how about making the working
environment and the incentives conducive to it first? Don’t feed us that hog-wash about the new
deal and working tax credits and helping working mothers because you know all the failures of that
system. You just refuse to publish them. Woe-betide if you make share-holders, investors and multi-
national executives in charge of making the money for them and ‘The Company,’ whatever that
actually is, responsible for the knock on effect to consumers. It would just put prices and costs up
further wouldn’t it? They can ALWAYS do that. There is no such thing as over-trading. So, we all
end up minced into this conforming mass. But that is good for powerful people who run the world. It
is subjugation by the pen instead of the sword. And they are nothing short of psychopathic about it.
Funnel funnel funnel.
We alienated the terrorists when we watched people throwing themselves out of the World
Trade Centre hundreds of feet up. They left them no choice. But some people felt the same way
during the 1930s Wall Street Crash. Why is it we do not hold to account the type of people who
have caused this recent global devastation? Where the defrauder, where the embezzler? We have yet
to see people pushed to those lengths here, but current mentality towards sustaining capitalist fat-
cats is far more predatory and widespread than suicide bombs and terrorists crashing aeroplanes.
The lack of transparency and lack of consultation with the tax-payer says, ‘we can take any amount
of your money off you at any time without asking or explaining. What are you going to do about it?’
And the question they will ask across the Cabinet table is not, ‘how can we best represent the
interests of the electorate?’ but ‘how can we make the most out of this and make it sound like it’s in
the interests of the electorate?’ A cunning capitalist never offers, or asks, a fair price. The world’s
big-wigs will be drooling over the potential spoils. Bin-Laden can retire.
This is one reason why I hate money; can’t stand the stuff and all those electronic numbers,
as gratifying as they look on a balance sheet. But for an entire planet to be run by bits of paper and
electronic numbers and those papers and electronic figures to preclude someone from the right to
food, clothing and shelter is such an indictment of our humanity. It is so much worse an indictment
in countries that effectively have everything. That’s what makes it sicker. It is nothing short of
delusional mental illness.
Because, no matter what regime we are in, or situation we’re forced into, we have choice.
We fight for that freedom of choice whenever it comes under attack. We uphold it. So, an American
President can choose if he wants to do something (that countless married American men are doing
week-in, week-out) to risk impeachment. An African dictator can choose to relinquish control later,
rather than sooner, just to take a few hundred thousand lives with him before he goes. Then change
his mind so he can oppress for a bit longer. A person undergoing torture can choose whether or not
to divulge information or be killed or commit suicide or to endure twenty-six years confinement
until hope comes out of the blue. You can’t always be moral about the decisions that are made when
people are pushed to extremes. But we run our governments that way. It may not feel that way in the
UK when our economy is on the brink of the biggest recession since the eighties and the governor of
the Bank of England only has to announce his detailed crisis analysis to the television-watching
public as – “It’s going to get a bit grim.” And we settle for that and the news reporters repeat it in
triplicate, very very very slowly – “according the Governor of the Bank of England, today; it’s
going to get a bit grim; our financial correspondent is here with us now.” “Yes Sophie, in the words
… of … the … GOVERNOR … of the Bank of England; ‘It’s … going … to get … a … bit …
grim.” – in case we missed it the first and second time; or to drive the nail home – ‘you’re ignorant
and stupid, here’s your next feed, now remember to chew thirty times before you swallow.’ The
cows will keep chewing the cud, as one fine friend put it to me. And Tracy, who doesn’t want to
look like shit when she goes out, daily injects herself with an untested drug she doesn’t know the

constituents of, because it turns her whole body brown. “Oh, I can’t go out without my tan!” Even if
her kisses taste like a mixture of nicotine and carotene. Nicarotine, on the label. She confirms, for
the tabloid media-news, our funnel-fed prejudice about bottle-blondes. Cows don’t eat their own
shit.
But what is actually happening is an abuse. It is an abuse of some really good qualities that
should be respected, supported and rewarded instead of exploited. The almost indefatigable
patience, long-suffering trust and restraint of people in the UK, who want the best for their families
and the wider world in general, is often seen as passivity. Because the exploitation of this has been
legitimised, guns are no longer needed for us; we’ve evolved beyond that stage. As stated at the
outset, when people are pushed beyond reason, eventually a snap is in the offing, so… to subdue any
potential for rebellion, the best tactic is to bulldoze every bastion of justice, sap them of any hope,
fight and money and drive everyone into depression. Then change your mental health act (that most
of them campaigned against) to marginalise them further so you can strip them of their remaining
rights and legally drug them.
I’m going to be accused of naivety here but sod it. Does the monetary system work? I
suspect by the end we’ll all end up blockbuster caricatures and even Will Smith will be bellowing
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! That’s the reality. We’re forced to believe it does, like there’s
no alternative; but most have debts, even the privileged few who probably don’t need to earn money
any more. Third world countries, who have nothing, owe us more than they can ever earn to pay us
back, so we have no alternative than to wipe the slate clean to help them. The First World has
mountainous debts even though we have every advantage and we are regarded as the richest nations.
Money doesn’t make the world go round, debt does. So, who are the creditors? And why should we
allow them to hold our humanity to ransom with electronic numbers and paper. How sick is that?
And what will you expect the government to do for you, when it doesn’t want to invest in treating
your resulting depression? Mince mince mince.
The most despicable thing is; the richer countries led by people voted in by us to use public
money to care for our interests have “bought into” (sold out to) and exported this mentality. The
developed western countries plug democracy and capitalism as the panacea for global and economic
cohesion and hold up Europe, the division of the USSR, post-war Germany and Japan and
developing China, as prime evidence. But is it really curing the ills of the populace, making for
better lives? Did it stop war and imbedded bigotry?
Of course, the democratic countries are paragons of virtue aren’t they? Leading the way in
peace and prosperity for all; they’re the humblest, eh? They’d never have anything to do with divide
and conquer policy. They’d never support the likes of Mugabe, surely? It’s just not Cricket!
Unthinkable, but some political capitalist based decisions have the same effect of starving the most
vulnerable, robbing people of their homes and relationships, literally making them susceptible to
depression and siege mentality, isolation and self-preservation. In a crisis, don’t expect those who
have the most to budge on one penny, let those worst off pay for them to keep their wealth. ‘Yeah,
here’s my shirt… what? How much to shag my wife and daughter without a condom? And would
you like an award with that? And let us pay for it? No, you’d rather have my newborn twins as
gloves? – “What was that Sooty? I’m better looking than Gordon Brown and you’d like to vote for
me? Well, I think that’s a very good idea, don’t you boys and girls?” Fiddling while Rome burns?
They’re having the fist-fuck orgy of their lives. Whose arse are they actually up, though?
I have tried to ignore the positives, in writing this, but I can’t. Money seems to be the key
gelling factor in people’s interactions; it is a leveller to some artificial degree. But is that the only
basis on which we can interact? When you think of its influence in getting people who hate each
other to think seriously about cooperating for gain, it’s powerful. But fercryinoutloud is there not
enough evidence that people are happier when they interact without financial constraints and
incentives, simply because they care about each other? We still applaud that don’t we? So why do
politicians deny it?

“You can’t always be moral about the decisions that are made when
people are pushed to extremes. But we run our governments that way.”
08 a Titian, a Titian, we all fall down
Art is the safest investment, they say, so when the bottom has fallen out of the economy, trade in art
will perversely increase. The sale of Damian Hurst’s stuffed shark for eight and a half million,
during the credit crunch when the government cannot even help struggling people to heat their
homes, says – “fuck you lot, fuck the poor – you have no life anyway, miserable minnows, you’re
all beneath me because I have the balls and I have the power and I can do this.” Penises in urinals.
And of course, people like Hurst laugh all the way to the bank and are deluded into thinking their
work is genius by virtue of the figures they can demand. So, Hurst’s work is far more successful
than some unknown painting that lies in some drawer or dark cellar. This is what art has become. If
you’re not business-minded you cannot possibly be a legitimate artist, nowadays, the Arts Council
bulletins read. Don’t get me wrong, art is priceless; our world is richer for it and it is potent for
influencing our perceptions. You cannot buy the creative process, (although Hurst does). I
appreciate the value in preserving even modern history and rarities. But no art is actually that
esoteric, that elitist in nature that it deserves that value, as rare or historic as it might be. So, you get
into an argument then about how much art should fetch – is it worth more than the most expensive
mansion or a jumbo jet? Are two Titians worth more to the country than the cost of making two
Hollywood blockbusters, or a fifth of the 2012 Olympic admin bill? Of course they are and some
people will campaign vigorously for it. And how many lives could that money save? Well, you can’t
think that way. There’s no return in that.
The problem lies not in what value we give it, but that we do so in monetary terms as if
money ever had anything to do with the value of art. You don’t need to be an artist to know that. I
wonder what treasure still lies buried in some Nazi hidden vault or sodden trench. I wonder how
many lives it would buy now, in comparison with how many it cost to acquire. How much money
was fed back into the German war effort from the art they confiscated and who bought it? Did it buy
any lives and how many did it sell? What price obscenity? What indeed, is the threshold for
obscenity? Obscenity is by definition outrageously exorbitant, its value enhanced when it costs
human lives. We’re back to what constitutes real strength and weakness.
There is a place for art at all levels but there is an equally insidious disease infiltrating art
and media, that threatens to undermine our values in life and value of life, apart from the devaluing
of it commercially. It is all subjective and there is a great diversity of art at all levels in this country,
but I maintain that most crafted and natural artists will subscribe to the view that the prevalence of
mediocrity in art and the running of the arts contributes to a general watering down of critical social
awareness and quality. Art that doesn’t encourage out-of-the-box thinking, but concentrates on the
box itself. Partly to blame is the process of turning art into business, to the point where the business
becomes the object. There’s nothing wrong with selling art as a business. Warhol and Emin used art
to balk against snobbery in art, only to end up snobs. It makes no difference if it’s a rough sketch or
a cast bird on a pole that anyone could have done; it doesn’t have to have any identifiable
characteristics of the artist’s hand; as long as it’s got their name on it, its worth will be exaggerated.
(See the chapter – ‘Art for arse-ache’). I’m not against Emin or Warhol; I’m all for a widely varied
and stimulating world with some natural inequality. But elitism, in any form, is delusional. Anyone
could have done what Warhol or Emin did… but they didn’t. (Actually, someone probably did).
That’s fine. Other people will always make more money with art, doing nothing, than the artist did
in making it. You know there are people who will cast your penis in bronze for you? What I’d like
to do is get a hundred made and plant them on some beach. Thank fuck Banksy doesn’t work
primarily for commission, but one of his walls just tripled a house’s market value. I have a far more

controversial, provocative installation that would illustrate the commercial, Kings Clothes aspect of
art, if the Tate was interested. One every artist would equally despise and envy. One that would
become the most renown piece of art ever. One that would outrage everyone with its audacity. It is
especially designed for the Turner and would only work as the prime exhibit at Tate Modern. You’ll
have to take my word for that.
But every person has some form or appreciation of art in them. All expressions of art are
universal in that way. Art can be uninhibited and transcend all human boundaries, so, why do we
have this awareness and appreciation for art, but not for life? If art is worth more when it keeps up
with the Dow Joneses and art mirrors life, just as the virtual market is a fictional as the price
mounted upon art, but it dictates the real market, thus our real lives are held hostage to keeping up.
So, whatever we do, our priority has to be, ignore real life and prop up the flailing market
confidence, hoist an artificial value on it and keep an eye on the trends we’re told via the media and
bold headliners.
09 valium of the masses
If religion was the “Opium of the masses,” then media news is definitely turning into the Valium.
The entire critical analysis of this book will be ‘sexed up’ under the banners – “ALL POLITICIANS
AND COMMERCIAL EXECUTIVES ARE PSYCHOPATHS!!!!!” and “FALKLANDERS
SHOULD HAVE MOVED OR PLAYED FOOTBALL!” I will be lambasted as an ill-informed
scare-monger, but no one would flinch a muscle at those headlines. Tell us something we don’t
already know’ would be the unuttered response. The press used to hold honour and credibility for
being able not just to bring us hidden details behind events, but to influence and even change those
events. The press used to be the prime tool for holding people in government and commerce
accountable. Now, the culture of spin and use of the media is so widespread, the press undermines
its own credibility by becoming a mere mouthpiece for trendsetters.
Even the elder-statesmen programmes of the BBC, including some documentaries, have
bought into this culture to a degree that’s alarming, so that the news is no longer the priority but the
creative language, the targeted responses, the idiosyncrasies and celebrity of individual presenters.
All of this de-sensitises, in the long-run, so that we also become passive to the realities behind the
dialogue, bludgeoned by yet another pile of dead bodies and yet another air disaster and yet another
patronisingly infantile point-scoring skirmish – ‘The IRA are dead you know, dead!’ without a
single consideration for the embedded potential of another uprising and the litter of family
members’ corpses a glib cajoling brouhaha like that could generate. Fucking leech. But, oh… for the
heady days of outrage and drama.
Important documents affecting those who would put their lives on the line for us are not
inaccurate and scare-mongering but “sexed-up.” Wow! Isn’t that trendy, isn’t that cool? The
wanker who introduced it into the English language will be quick to tell anyone who is ordering
drinks at the bar, no doubt expecting a free drink in celebration. It will be the pinnacle of his career
– “hey, you remember ‘sexed-up’? that was me, yeah.” Children are no longer enticed or
manipulated into sickeningly dreadful and spirit-breaking, ultimately suicidal sexual abuse. No,
we’re saved the affront of that because they’re now “groomed,” presumably with an ornate
horsehair brush, so isn’t that nice? A North Korean dictator and Iranian premier will now share the
same fate as our first-name-terms Saddam even if they only develop the capacity to make “WMD”s
which are presumably the same pointy multi-Hiroshima/Nagasaki WMDs that democracies are
allowed. Exceptions will be made for China and Russia because they already had them and China
will take over the world soon, so best be bezzies with them now, however they treat their own
populace and people who disagree with them, eh? WMDs don’t cost us the earth and never will;
they’ll never be used, not even by the Americans, it’s all just comparing penises in the urinals.

They trip off the tongue as easy as lollipops. Just as the “Credit Crunch” is actually a candy bar that
you can pay for on tic. And you will have to soon, with all the businesses that have hit the wall and
livelihoods ruined and people reduced to begging off the state or resorting to shooting their family
and then torching their remaining belongings. Anything than let anyone else get their hands on
them. I mean, what other life is there? What a let-down to society for them to get into that state.
What were they thinking of? I mean, it was embarrassing enough, at the Bank of Shafters’ annual
general meeting, to tell shareholders they had made a million less this year, after the rolling
multibillion profits for the preceding ten years. But no worries, it is only a crunch time and it will
presumably pass as quickly as munching that unchewy bar. Reality is not currency. The world turns
on confidence and confidence relies on image and the oral tradition of speculation. Image is
everything, so even ‘Global Warming’ ruins our short-term expectations and investment in the next
season’s bikini-wear more than it ruins the earth. Summers are even more disappointing. Entire
countries have gone bust, but keep on erecting buildings and playing golf and who wants to be a
millionaire – “ooh, you must be the only one who hasn’t seen Mama-Mia. It’s just the feel good
antidote we need, in these depressing times.” Ditch the green - we now need another coal industry.
Yeah, black is the new black.
The media would have us believe there is hope. Yes, it is not science that has proved the
potential saviour of the planet, or carbonless hydrogen-fuel development, or any results from
countless arguments at any one of the famed summits. No, it is media-coverage of Obama’s
showboating rhetoric to the Berlin populace. Yes, according to the new messiah, we have half a
chance to redress this illness. I don’t share his optimism as much as his conviction that we must take
collective decisive action. Any politician would look foolish not to acknowledge the problems we
face, but the press prefer to concentrate more on his highlighting of the US shortcomings more than
the US shortcomings, so that’s ok then. Yes, the idea of saving the planet might be bullshit, but you
better believe that is NO way for the world President to get sufficient votes to occupy the post. I
mean look at his predecessor. Jesus. Presumably, the bunkered gun-toting variety of Americans –
who believe that the second coming (amendment) of Obama upon Bin-Laden will lead to salvation
from all terrorism – will succeed in “brokering” peace for the entire planet. Or else. So, they either
need him to be a president that wants to appease them and considers them more convivial than the
peace-keepers serving in Iraq, or he just has to like guns. When commerce hits the fan what other
currency do you have? How could we possibly be expected to exist without guns? How do you deal
with megalomaniacs? Of, course there never was any other way to broker the Iraqi peace that exists
now, just as taking Mugabe out of the picture will naturally necessitate American invasion.
Militants and military people, the world over, glorify their profession. Although many who
have served on a front line see the futility and stupidity of war, the brutality of it and the innocent
human toll; it also fosters a false sense of pride amongst those who revel in their expertise to take
life, to hold the power and control. The hunter’s instinct. As if that’s what makes them a man and if
you’re gonna have anything to do with them and their family, your respect will depend on how hard
you can punch. They’re bullies, legitimised by the armed services even in non-combatant roles.
When you can bark your orders and people jump, you can have all your own way. It’s easy to be
respected, when you can do that after passing an exam, or you’re in line for automatic seniority,
within such a closed institution. And then you can automatically expect it when you get out and into
the community. The British MOD have been in the news for prejudice against homosexuality and
bullying people into suicide (just the weak ones) and as long as they can issue PC statements they’ll
get away with it. It’s all part of the training – if you can’t hack it in the barracks, how will you go on
under torture? So, we need to turn people into Pit-bulls as long as they can drop it when they get
back into their civvies, or cover it with Pit-bull shit when they get criticised. I wonder if they are the
ones who just get away with not being traumatised, or if the process makes them psychotic? Anyone
would have to stretch their mentality to get friends and brothers out of panic situations. It takes
something else, to deal with situations you have little control over, especially where peoples’ lives

are in the balance. You cannot disrespect that. But it is glorified to everyone under the banner of
nationalism, no matter what state your government is in, or the reasons they put people in that
situation, to start with.
If anyone is in doubt, show primary school kids repeating in their cute little voices how
grateful they are our country was saved by these people. What’s sickening is what we are teaching
them. The total absence of critical awareness. On Armistice Day, remember all the heroes who
fought, but not the innocent civilians who didn’t and lost their family members, or got raped and
robbed. See what the little impressionable blighters have to say then, you might get a shock. We all
know that war is sheer unadulterated madness. Propaganda is manipulative delusion adding insult to
injury. This is the reality. We should use this education to motivate how we can avoid war, but why
should war ever cease to exist, when it is always a last resort for settling differences? Are you going
to have a war every time you have a difference with someone? So how come we’ve found other
ways to deal with domestic problems, peacefully, but not internationally? Nationalism, that’s how.
‘United Nations,’ is a pseudonym. It is the war-mongers that should be the ones to lose their
rights and it will take more than The Hague, after the horse has bolted, to enforce it. So, in the
meantime, forget nuclear, it’s a lame deterrent; build up your ground, air and sea forces, (that means
groom your children for it), you’re going to need them again and again and again. Babylon stokes its
furnaces. Funnel funnel funnel.
Beware: if people reluctantly went to war for the two Bs who they hated, how many will
offer their lives to Obama to rout the Taliban from their caves, or is he going to carpet bomb again?
He’s a good talker. I wonder if he’s gonna talk himself out of this one by a power-share deal with a
reformed democratic Taliban party, in exchange for handing over all terrorists? I wish he would.
Just because someone chooses a political stance, they don’t have the right to exist? I don’t see
anyone having a go at the neo-Nazi movement in France, or lynching Gerry Adams, do you? We’re
grateful they wised up and so many innocent lives are spared, aren’t we? Obama was refreshingly
measured in his victory address, but according to all the critical, objective, experienced news-
readers… No! “America has changed overnight!”
Just a word of appreciation. All credit to those forging those peaceful relationships, in the
crucible of Iraq. The human qualities displayed by those trained killers are a daily testament to
restraint under the severest pressure and antagonism. Army-life has obviously had to get more
sophisticated taking on the role of liberators of enemies, where uniforms have been done away with
and identification of friend or foe and shifting positions comes down to the initiative of a nineteen-
year-old carrying instant death in his arms. We’re being asked to put our hope for humanity in the
hands of those who employ this tactic. Any such hope is as precarious as the position those soldiers
are placed in – one civilian getting a little too close with something a little too bulky under their
garments and those who have got used to smiling and shaking hands could all be dead in seconds.
By friend or foe.
Dumb-down and sensationalise media holds large accountability for our lax perspectives,
prejudices and apathy; particularly through ‘Reality’ TV and news reporting. It is a major
contributor to our mental subjugation and illness. Substance is not important. Even in legal circles,
an obvious innocent can be convicted and blatant criminal acquitted on mere rhetoric, or trial by
media. Some documentaries get away with more scare-monger than objective research, as long as
the presenter’s eyes have that star-lens twinkle, an open collar, a conservative jersey we can trust
and that authoritative bold headline tone. Slave labour, genocide, ethnic cleansing, mass starvation
and invasion are the elixir of media rhetoric. Anything just short of it, like reality, isn’t good telly.
Crucial follow up will get a cursory glance until the next action-packed, quick-draw mobile phone
footage comes in. And we drop everything for Ross and Brand dropping their balls, then taking
them in again. We do see through it, yet we hold our hands and eyebrows up then go and check if
there’s more about it on the net, or switch over to see how long they can pan it out before we see
that it was Bradders that ran over his dad, all along. Tania’s not nearly innocent enough. No, surely

a red-herring, or the scriptwriters dropped another ball, there. Art mirrors life. Not a word anyone
says in that soap washes. Similarly, the media keeps us informed as to who is who and doing what,
before they do it. And we’ll keep up, to stay one up on our sad mates, before we watch it. We want
to be told the ending, now. And we want the media to tell us who is the most successful, so we can
follow them. Let’s see, it’s not The Beatles, Dylan or Faithless – it’s a toss-up between Girls Aloud,
Sugar Babes and the reformed Spice Girls. Love is soooooo all you need… NOT! You’ve got to
really really really want a zig-a-zig, ahhhh.
An arc-light shines, occasionally, in this day-for-night: we’re treated to a glimpse of the
hopeful faces of impressionable children gathered in Liverpool centre, all gazing at La Princess in
excitement and wonder; all those intelligent little faces reminding us what present and future, if any,
our predatory, self-seeking culture is leaving them.
What’s such a shame is that the arts and media sectors have set the best examples of how
richly our lives are enhanced by diversity. They are always at the forefront of this. How grateful we
should be for this awareness they give us. And yes, it’s easy to say that is due to capitalistic
progression, but if you researched how much effort, determination and time goes into art and media
projects, it is a wonder anyone makes any money from it. For all the box-office smashes and famed
arts sales there are millions of projects that make losses. But we still get to see so many people of
different cultures interacting and have so many global influences in our society. Our fascination
with other cultures and history is so easily accommodated and widely researched, nowadays. And
we’re blessed for it.
10 down with the hood
As a direct result, racism is rightly on the political downslide. In the UK, positive discrimination
and political correctness gone overboard is making for a more inclusive society by force, but is it
doing a lot to integrate? Yes it is creating opportunities for all across the UK, but a lot of community
initiatives seem to add up to individual or ethnic justification and very little mutual appreciation, or
cross-over. It’s not enough to get the odd Sheikh, Muslim, Christian and Atheist around the same
table on a daytime television magazine show, gleefully expounding what a wonderful country to
have such freedoms. Nice though that is to see. We’re still congratulating Nitin Sawney in being the
latest multi-cultural exponent in music. Fair play to him. But music has not been constrained by
tight cultural definition for decades, while it always benefits from musicians’ and listeners’ immense
respect for all its varied traditional roots. It speaks to us all and we take a lot from that.
Because of political correctness, many ethnic promotional events in the UK seem to be
exclusive rather than multi-ethnic, much less involve any of the traditional indigenous population.
That’s ‘white’ to laymen but we’re scared to say that, it’s prejudicial but ‘black’ is fine for all non-
whites. If you’re so precious about it, we could do away with the chessboard and call everyone grey,
but we’ll then be back to lights, darks and shades. We could use the graphite scale – “didn’t you
hear? She’s a 3H and he’s a 4B!” Michael Jackson will be a Typex. The nearest thing you’ll get to
an English cultural event is a farmers’ market, May Day with Morris dancers (they’re such a
quintessential part of our heritage), or Saint Georges Day when English people who are not BNPs,
(and BNPs), are brave enough to fly the flag when there’s no international footy match being
played.
Growing ethnic groups need self-contained communities where they can be at ease with their
prevailing ethos and lifestyles and I think that’s enriching, if we all get on while respecting the laws
of whatever country we happen to be in. But it so often seems to lead to exclusivity and we regularly
see people up in arms with the cry of ‘prejudice’ or ‘discrimination’ when the smallest thing doesn’t
go their way. Not always regarding injustice. There is also massive disregard for UK law, by
immigrants and ‘foreign nationals.’ We need a level playing field for all and that means no

discrimination. The term ‘positive discrimination’ is positively discriminatory and indicates a

substructure of discrimination in whatever institution employs it. Doesn’t it? Just as ‘foreign
national’ is a discriminatory term. Have we not got sufficient diversity in this country to stop calling
people by their cultural identity? Make your mind up; are they nationals, citizens, or what?
All campaigning to bring about acknowledgement and cultural respect goes through the
same pendulum-swing and rarely does the momentum settle half-way. You get what you want, then
you push it as far as you can, not to join the mainstream with everyone else on an equal footing… to
become the mainstream and marginalise those who marginalised you. I was really impressed
listening to an Afro-Caribbean rapper, at a Greenroom Theatre event called ‘Speakeasy.’ His stuff
was powerful and poetic, inspiring and above the norm – (sullied by the eighteen year-old female
poet who got up afterwards, spouting venom and outrage at the slave-labour trade, we the audience
were apparently perpetuating; she must have been studying it at six-form college. She, certainly, has
never seen it in this country and probably none of her parents have, either. She didn’t say anything a
fifteen year old Icelandic couldn’t have thrown together, looking at a sketch of a slave boat, head to
toe with bodies, in a text book. But she’s hailed amongst Manchester’s finest anti-racism poets. She
was told she was good, too early, by box-tickers too busy chatting though her performance. She
should do us all a favour and write something she knows) – at least it was refreshing, listening to
this crafted young rapper, addressing racism; he actually made a good case, aiming his arrows at our
common human sensibilities and hypocrisies. It’s difficult to be thought-provoking on a subject
that’s been flogged to death (and should keep on being expounded, lest we forget, which we have)
but his aim was sharp and intuitive, until he shot himself in the foot by asserting that all whites
originated from the pitch-black tribes of deepest Africa. (Not ‘Black’ as in non-whites, which is
true, of course). Genetics, geographical history and archaeology might have something to say about
that. If he’s right, Michael Jackson has been regressing all these years (more than culturally, it
seems). Well, I’d go along with that. But, by his reckoning, it should be pallid Caucasians and Goths
being pulled up by the police, protesting – ‘is it because I is black, innit?’ That still wouldn’t stop
people jumping on the racism trump card, when it suits. It is an inverted racism.
I get on great with many members of the Indian and Pakistani communities in my area,
they’ve lived here longer than I have and most of them are British, which makes no difference to
me. But I have had four British-Pakistani dudes and their Pit-bull at my door, threatening to burn my
house down with me in it, because I asked a lanky fifteen year old why he kept staring at me every
time he passed. He told them I had threatened him with violence - lying little six-foot shit-stirrer -
but they’re canny at using this ploy; the first thing out of their mouths is that I must be racist! Now
that’s racism. Young Muslims speed past my house in their Subaru Imprezzas, or suped-up,
florescent under-bellied, Honda Civics and Corsas, with their boom-boxes rattling the walls. I see
younger ones eyeing and chatting up white girls, hiding their alcohol and drugs in a corner of
secluded wasteland in case their parents find out. I know some will feel driven to those measures by
restrictive religious and familial standards and, to be honest, who hasn’t done that kind of thing? But
these young dudes assume the arrogance of racial and religious superiority and racist attitudes
backed by the racism card, while secretly envying the western life-styles they’re ‘deprived’ of. Get
into scrapes that fly in the face of their principles and laws, or perceive the slightest level of
grievance and they’re up in arms en masse, spouting murder and burning effigies.
Since I was threatened, I’ve had no further trouble. We pass each other in the street and I get
looks like they’ve marked my card. I know how to get to them through their parents or local Imam;
or I could go to press and cause a stink. I also know (but do not associate with) racists and extremely
violent people who beat up people of a different colour, just for the fun of it. I’ve known criminals
who would do me a favour, if I asked them to. There are easy ways to start a tit-for-tat race-war.
Why don’t I do it? Because I choose not to be a weak-willed petty-minded racist git. The rights I
campaign for are human rights. They assume I haven’t got friends of different ethnologies? They
assume their experience is disassociated from that of other communities and western culture.

Pakistani women are bound to be in two minds regarding freedom of choice, but they would
be the best candidates to debate it. They endure much more than we give them credit for but they’re
not all oppressed, in the West. Some choose tradition and some independence, but they usually have
to move to where they’re not known for an independent life. Their men don’t. We’ve all heard
stories of alienation and sometimes victimisation from family. Many of them are naturally beautiful
and I’d love a Pakistani partner, but I no longer believe in marriage and I imagine we’d get stick
from all quarters, where I live. If I moved ten miles down the road, no-one would bat an eyelid. The
more traditional older generations really have a struggle on their hands with younger ones adopting
western standards and it must be heart-wrenching for them. Fundamentalists can obviously
manipulate this fear and the fear of not obeying their god. So, get the tools out, religion, racism,
nationalism and patriotism are great for that. But western families and youths get through life pretty
well, whatever personal choices they make. Independent views, by definition, fly in the face of
tradition but it doesn’t necessarily mean disrespect for it. It will always unearth intolerance in any
culture, though, and people who are forced into doing something are more likely to hate it, than
those who choose to. The best anyone can hope for is to be given sufficient knowledge and
experience for it to be an informed one. People always exercise their personal choice as soon as it is
free from oppression.
Campaigning for the right to be different is good for all of us. Whilst positive discrimination
discriminates in someone’s favour, though, someone else is being positively discriminated against.
That isn’t equality. “So what?” you say “shouldn’t it be our turn, for a change?” Yeah, that’s
moving forward. I genuinely hope Obama’s presidency doesn’t turn out to be merely a poke in the
eye for racists and that they’ll join the rest of the real world, in celebrating getting that long held
handicap out of the way. Manchester’s finest anti-racism poet, at this very moment, will be penning
her tribute to how Lewis Hamilton and Barak Obama revolutionised our world in just two days.
What’s the betting? As Mailer tried to tell feminists in 1971, it takes a lot more than gaining the high
ground in a debate to bring equality. The struggle has been fought for centuries and just look what
happened with the end of Apartheid. It takes getting real. Well, something really had to be done
about it, sure, and the guidelines we have now in the UK are pretty good, over all. But positive
discrimination positively engrains this black and white mentality and encourages all colours and
ethnic communities to think in those terms. Many countries are way behind in this respect but
racism was our heritage and we still have this chessboard mentality. People of all colours cling to it
with pride. Sadly, it is still debatable whether or not the UK could handle a black PM. Some people
won’t be satisfied until Austria has one. It matters not a jot what race your football team player is, as
long as he’s tackling the opposition and scoring goals you’ll be out of your seat, carrying him on
your shoulders. Without a significant, interactive multicultural commitment to demonstrating
equality and inclusion in real terms, with significant rewards, the only result is disintegration.
We are not the stupid nation that we dumb ourselves down as. Just look at the evolution of
our tastes in music and who that depended upon. Stupidity is fashionable and cool though and some
blame recent music influences. It’s been marginalised for so long, leading to self-harming, fights,
robberies and stabbings. Foremost authorities on this are Rap and Hip-Hop artists who became the
most vociferous of the ‘underclass’ and stuck to their guns and language to gain respect and show
there’s more bling in turning to music. And all power to them. The BBC showed they were prepared
to get ‘down with the hood’ when Jeremy Paxman (with a stiff-upper lip, what’s-it-coming-to
smirk) interviewed a hip-hop artist on Obama’s victory. Problem in sharing their experiences is that
they had to make the stabbings and gangs and shootings cool in their lyrics and videos not to look
stupid. As long as some wear their stab and shot wounds as medals of honour they’ll never extricate
themselves from the problem of youth violence. Did they learn nothing from West-Side Story? I’ve
had enough contact with criminals to know they’re much, much more than all that and kids
generally see through that, so what is it that we have to indulge stupidity? The music isn’t stupid.
Watch teen-age Korean body-poppers and break dancers and tell me they’re stupid. They’re

breaking boundaries. Wonder what they’d say about carrying weapons. It’s like some of the kids in
this country have seen footage on Cambodia and some African civil wars, or some romanticised
documentary on gangland New York, and think they’re missing out. Or is that now the way to
bling? Kids who have little hope and less developed ability, but who aspire to being the next Fitty
Cents, or Amy Winehouse, have to resort to knives and they have to be cool about it – make them a
fashion accessory. They think Winehouse and Doherty just fell out of bed into that talent and
lifestyle. We all like stupidity in its place but these young dudes in the UK, who can calculate just
how far they can manipulate services and the police; who can’t add up but can quote the law and
their rights… no, they’re just thick or stupid or both. Everyone knows you can only earn respect, the
minute you demand it, you lost it and you’re sad, but hey – penises in urinals – earning respect is far
too hard for some, so, knife it. Wonder where they learned that from? It didn’t start with rappers and
hip-hoppers. I blame Trisha, but then Trisha is a soft target. Thank goodness a lot just settle for sex
and babies and hang around street corners going “nt nt nt nt nt nt nt nt.” What? Come on…
Yeah, we can laugh at ourselves and we even dumb-down our education system. But can’t
we at least drop the racism crap? Lots of the younger generation have. So, who is perpetuating this?
If it isn’t the government and it isn’t the schools and newer generations, who is it? “Well, they’re
coming over here and taking our jobs!” Are they? Or is it greedy company executives, who want
people that will work for next to nothing, giving them your jobs? Capitalism is such a supporter of
society, see? Such a level playing field; such a respecter of law and community. And that’s not
foreign companies. People naturally want to feed their families and any threat to that has profound
effects. But you won’t find companies like Tesco and Sainsbury’s being heavily penalised by the
government, for franchising unscrupulous slave labour traffickers. No, they’re an equal-
opportunities employer competing with China and Walmart; what do we expect?
Surely wherever we are, we are just human beings with more in common than that which
divides us and we should be respected for the contribution we make to the WHOLE society that
surrounds us?
11 murder mystery tour
Nationalism and patriotism are related divisive cancers; tools for mental subjugation. Patriotism is
easy for Americans who stand and do their mandatory salute and pledge allegiance at every kind of
public assembly; as it is for a Roman Catholic Priest to stand in full regalia – robes, sceptre, sash
and fishy hat – and conduct morning worship and communion in Latin, before an assembly of four
to ten year old children at a primary school on a poor council estate in Manchester. How any parent
can stand by and watch that kind of invasion of their child’s mind and spirit is beyond me. It is a
little more difficult for a stranded, wounded American soldier who gets nursed and fed by a poor
Vietnamese family, while all their neighbours and relatives are getting napalmed by his mates a mile
up the jungle path. As long as Tom Cruise and his mates do it justice in a film, then that one’s done
and dusted, eh? Can you be a patriot and nationalistic without being racist? It seems it is contingent
on how good you feel about your country and leaders or your fear of being vilified by bigots. If your
country doesn’t attack any ethnic minorities, that helps. You can still be patriotic and nationalistic if
they do; really, the question is, can you if they don’t? Which way round should that be?
The majority of people, I think, would view it as an insult to their intelligence to assume that
just because a person was born in one part of the earth, they automatically owe allegiance to that
community and have to be identified with it; or they have some assumed ownership of its
environment and community. We consider that a human right because that is our home and if we
cannot depend on our home, or defend it, or belong there, where can we belong? Yes, I can
understand a sense of community, belonging, family, land-ownership and benefiting from some

supervision of services and law etc. It’s fundamental and should be strived for, but the reality is that
lands change and so do civilisations. So, is that a reliable way of thinking? Does it actually pan out?
How about those whose parents are from a different land to theirs? We call it ‘duel-nationality’
(even when both parents were from different countries). It is useless when there is a War in Bosnia
and Rwanda, but great if you want to play football for a different national team than where you were
born.
The ‘United States’ of America has been setting trends for us for a while now, but it can
hardly be called united or a single community or a pure indigenous population. Few nations have a
broader, more diverse population and some people who live there view the States as their home.
Other nationals, who have never lived where their parents lived, don’t. But just take the indigenous
population (whatever ethnic heritage) or ‘pure Americans,’ whatever they are; how does that
nationality thing pan-out from state to state? It’s fine to cheer on ‘good old boys’ (of any ethnicity)
away at war, they’re probably saving each others’ lives and hence mothers’ sons and daughters of
every persuasion; or people who saved lives during the twin towers disaster; or emergency services
and hospital workers; or musicians; or heroes in film. But where was that cheer and unison when the
levees broke in Louisiana? Maybe Obama wouldn’t be as indifferent as Bush, to another Katrina,
but it was a completely different electorate that gave him the opportunity to show it. It could be
argued that he achieved much more by sinking his millions into broadcasting his half-hour television
program, than the still untouched lower ninth quarter. Or it could be argued otherwise.
British culture could learn much from the general way Muslims and other eastern and
European cultures care for each other. I think some of their values and traditions or their
commitment to each other, socially, are stronger. Apart from the obvious intolerances. Contrasting
this, British broadmindedness (when we allow ourselves to be) without the constraints of similar
ideologies speaks volumes for our backbone and acceptance of diversity and personal freedom.
Nationalism is just a thin lie that feeds fear, mistrust and delusion. It is the prime tool governments
use in manipulating people to be racist when it suits them.
Until there’s a war, do you think people of the same race or nationality automatically and
genuinely feel the same empathy and camaraderie for each other? It rears its ugly head at football
matches, or when we go on holiday to some strange land and meet someone from the other end of
‘our’ country, or in my case someone Welsh, Scottish or Irish. We’re neighbours then. But it is such
a shallow façade. One of my friends who lived in a wealthy area in a large detached house was lying
on a beach in the Seychelles when a shadow covered his face; the conversation went something like
this: “Em… can I help you?” “Do you not recognize me?” “I’m terribly sorry, should I?” “Well,
we’ve been living next door to each other for the past eight years, Bob!” All that came from it is this
anecdote.
We all fall for this idea of brotherhood and feel a false sense of security from it; as if our
particular town depends on our personal identity and notoriety for its existence. Well, there is some
argument for that, in that towns do get shaped by individual personalities. And people do come
running to funerals. But it isn’t ‘our town’ and never will be, just as your country will never be your
country. You may possess rights and build walls around it and exploit it as you will, but the soil in
Britain will never belong to the Royal Family or the National Trust, try as you might, you won’t be
able to keep it, or take it with you, even when you’re alive. You can become part of the ground, but
you cannot defend it against fall-out from Chernobyl or freak floods or bee parasites or foot and
mouth or other invasion. We are temporary managers and now, we’re having to help each other do
that in places we never thought we’d ever set foot, just to try and reverse the knock-on damage of
deluded commercial policies and practices.
No one minimises the human cost of war and freedom, or decries the devotion and sacrifice
of all those who died in its name. The price is far too high. But we glorify the heroics and justify the
outcomes more than we question the decisions that place those lives at risk, in the first place. It isn’t
a soldier’s place, or ours, to question. And what does it say about America’s first amendment, when

people were in fear of reprisals for criticising Bush. The nature of war and patriotism makes it so
easy to whip up some sense of arrogant national pride, as if our heroes are somehow better than
heroes of other countries when actually, it’s multinational forces that have paid for our freedom. The
concept of country may turn out to count for very little if we don’t turn around global warming and
capitalist greed.
If you get into trouble abroad you may appeal to the relevant Embassy that represents your
homeland. Whether or not they will help you will likely have to fit in around international relations
and political considerations, but at least you won’t be alone in court, eh? Your town exists to feed
off you, not to feed you. It will shit on you and shaft you as soon as blink. But… if you manage to do
something to bring notoriety to it, like write a book, oooooh… just watch them come running and
bandy your name around in publicity, when they’ve never met you and care even less. Or just
murder someone, that’ll get them a mention. And someone will include it in a tour.
This shallow assertion should work contrary to social harmony and symbiosis, but the
positive thing about human nature is that there is a universal internal language amongst those who
have experienced similar situations. This operates even between total strangers from the most
disparate and divided communities. We readily acknowledge this in everyday life. People of similar
skills, soldiers, botanists, people who have lost children, people who sail boats, prisoners, people
who have had children – think how many that is; why isn’t that the biggest influence in how we treat
each other? You cannot ignore the global euphoria surrounding Obama’s appointment. Think of all
that positive collective motivation. Nationalism and patriotism forces us to disengage from this,
thinking it is in our interest, our self-preservation. It isn’t.
Instead of communities living together, we polarise pockets of bigotry, because we campaign
and legislate for people’s rights to differ, but do not seem to attach sufficient reward and
responsibilities to positive accomplishments in integration, contingent upon regard for personal
choice. Culturally, we concentrate on differences, rather than similarities. We sustain this
chessboard mentality while white British nationals don’t get to use ‘prejudice’ or ‘discrimination’
cards. We are all fruits of assimilation to some degree. I do resent the racist attitude though, from
any quarter, whenever certain groups have little regard for their neighbours, and I can see why
people get so upset by it. I detest violence and I detest racism – wherever it is. I hate fascism,
fanaticism and patriotism. It is weak-willed, narrow-minded, unimaginative and just plain dishonest
to believe owning an area of earth results in superiority. Having more or less, how does that make
someone superior to another? How does that strengthen society?
As long as the American Dream is going to be evangelised and imposed on the four corners
of the globe (incidentally, it is two British sportsmen that are held aloft as ‘the way, the truth and the
life’) including North Korea, Afghanistan, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Darfur, Iran, Israel, Palestine and
Jordan – then a radical alternative to the historical American mentality will be called for. As
different as their ambitions may be, all countries employ the same methods. I certainly hope Obama
justifies the fear that was evident in Bush’s and Brown’s eyes when they spat out their
congratulations to him. It will depend upon how much we can tap into and reward our common
humanity and interdependency; how willing we are to back every initiative in achieving a global
community. What need of nationalism and patriotism, then?
12 the underclass don’t count
The discriminatory British class system has seen many good developments through the success (and
partially through celebrity) of so-called working class people. It still exists because we still use those
terms. There is a pride to it. It is said we love a tryer and the ‘underdog’ in the UK. But we hate
losers. There is no place for losers in the class system. Being physically disabled but mentally sound

doesn’t make anyone a loser but, somehow, suffering ongoing mental difficulties of any kind is
equitable with being a thieving druggie shit-bag. And if their illness doesn’t show, except for in
subtle ways, they’re now regarded as a drain on the community. Tax payers are being badgered into
believing that no-one has legitimate reason not to work. But what incentive is there for employers to
consider employing someone with an illness? What reassurance is there, that the work they want to
do will accommodate their illness and not exacerbate it, or that they won’t be placed under more
pressure? None. There are reports on good practice and you can have a tribunal for discrimination.
But the broader issues are not thoroughly worked through, as long as the government can cut public
dependency on welfare. It doesn’t matter if a person is fighting their mind and emotions daily with
all their might; it will count for shit, especially if they’re the type who don’t hit the bottle, or drugs,
or kick off in public. They can’t be that ill and the government expects them to just snap out of it, so
they can bail out more bankers. If they get their way, tax payers will be forced to follow their
callous disregard whether they agree with it or not. They showcase a few cases of proven benefit
fraud to promote the idea that everyone is shafting the system. They won’t show legitimate cases of
severely disabled people who have been totally undermined and victimised by government and
institutional policy. People who suffer with progressive illnesses are being denied benefits and
dragged through the mire of appeal tribunals. Some are even penalised on the current level of help
they barely get by on. But in the glossy pamphlets, this will appear as periodic reviews to ‘assure
that a person receives all their entitlements’ not to see where they can make cuts. The poverty line,
before the energy bills soared, was set at a hundred and fifty pounds per week. I want to see a
documentary featuring Maggie Thatcher in disguise, attempting to exist on this and having to attend
the humiliating medicals and work interviews and dealing with creditors and rent offices and doing
her shopping etc. The most vulnerable people who cannot work and maybe do not have the level of
awareness and spirit left to fight any injustice, will be expected to subsist on less than half that. I
suggest that if this happens, all those worse off should invite themselves to politicians’ lunch and
dinner engagements, or enter any town hall canteen at lunchtime. That’s the easiest trade off for
keeping them off the streets with their machetes, since it became compulsory for someone with
depression to carry one with them at all times. It isn’t the amount spent on methadone for heron
addicts, or social services transport and facilities overheads, or the wages and expenses of benefit
fraud investigators (what’s that – four or five investigators to one fraudster over maybe three
years?), costing the tax-payer twelve billion per year. No… it’s those sponging ill people who don’t
want to get out of bed. Don’t show us any ill people that actually spend their time industriously in
support of their families, as carers, or volunteers; don’t show the consequences to them physically,
from exerting themselves to the degree they can, in work they’d never be paid to do. Don’t tell us
the actual percentage of fraudsters and the amount investigations have saved the purse – no, just
pick out a couple of obvious cases and tar everyone with the same brush. That’ll get the vote.
Yet many ill and vulnerable people contribute invaluable support to society. So, we call
someone a loser based on a shallow cursory glance at a particular state they find themselves in, or a
propensity for uncalculated comments to attempt to feel included where they are not wanted, or their
dependency on a particular thing, or worse – their financial status, or their lack of contribution to
society. We might look down on a road sweeper, but we’ll applaud Anthony Hamilton, or that
Chinese CEO that Prescott was so fond of, for cleaning toilets. A road sweeper can be the biggest
shit-stirring half-hearted skiver, but he’s contributing to society so he can hold his head up. A road
sweeper in a crisis may be a life-saver, but at a party he’s only a road-sweeper – even in the
mythological east-end square, where equality is the subtext and every entity has to claw tooth and
nail (A-list celebrities included) through the morass of life’s extremes (save violence and
intimidation – substitute plot and theatrics) to perpetuate their artificially cheeky, ballsy working
class status. It takes successful millionaire actors to convey the spunky struggling downtrodden. One
or two of them may have started life in that suburb and made their current success courtesy of the
role. That’s called ‘authenticity.’ But whatever the road-sweeper is (even if an A-list celebrity at a

party), whatever class, however genuine or not, he may be a dad and he certainly is a son, a
neighbour and a passer-by, but so what, anyone can be that, right?
Some who consider themselves winners say, ‘I don’t suffer fools gladly.’ And we all know if
you want to do something well, you get skilled and informed people around you. But who isn’t a
fool at some point? Who doesn’t do foolish things? They don’t, obviously. How many people do we
respect for a particular expertise, yet dismiss their petty immaturity, rudeness or downright
ignorance? Being at the pinnacle of some career or achievement never stopped someone being a
fool. Some are revered as leaders. On the other hand, imagine all the fools that have enhanced our
lives, in entertainment, in relationships, in youth and old age. How many idiots make us laugh and
we love it, even if they do not amount to much else in our estimations. Even narcissistic, alcoholic
misanthropes can be amusing and even loved, but they’re usually actorrrrrs, even if they’re like that
in real life, so they’ve made it. Not that they’ve been lucky; they’ve turned it into an art form or they
must have bloody good reasons for being the shit-heads they are and good on them for putting two
fingers up to the establishment. You have to be on telly to do that. So… how do you want to be
treated when you’re a fool?
Someone who says ‘I don’t suffer fools gladly’ just hasn’t woken up to life, for me. Or it
translates into, ‘I prefer to surround myself with people who fit my evaluations.’ It’s intended as a
self-recommendation and we all know how valuable that is, but it betrays a lack of humanity and
deluded self-importance. Plenty of people have lightened up on this score – until they get picked for
Big Brother. Self-importance is valuable but using this philosophy to sustain exclusive self-
importance comes before a fall. Your evaluations would soon change after one of them. And maybe
even your associations. When it’s an illegal French-Algerian road sweeper that picks you up out of
the gutter and does something none of your friends and family did, where’s your class distinction,
racist, nationalistic, patriotic, moral, religious high ground, all of a sudden?
13 self preservation society
Traditions and cultural standards have a major impact on our sensibilities in life. We’re all
dependent on our community from birth and many people are content to go with the flow and fit in;
but what if the predominant common way of thinking and standards are just not the reality they feel
within? That goes for people of any culture. Rarely do we acknowledge those disparities and
anomalies in their social context. This is compounded when a person’s individual choice, or simply
their good nature, exposes insecurity or hypocrisy in others, or questions something that they pledge
their loyalty to politically or as a matter of faith. But, it’s a quirk of fate where a person ends up
being born and the predominant culture they are surrounded by, not a given, so why do we insist that
the system of our origin has to be the right one?
We all need identity, true. But what we base that on is an unreality of us. Being brought up
and conditioned by our surroundings makes part of what we end up as, but not necessarily the real
us, the whole of us. That other part of us we’re usually shocked by or delighted by when we
discover it, whether other people celebrate or castigate us for it. We can be a true honest person
without finding it, but not the full potential we have inside us. It is this ability to expand and develop
that gets tamped down and breeds dissolution and fear, unless it is supported for a pre-determined
cause. Even then you run the risk of potential dissidence. We tend, instead, to marginalise people
with wider perspectives or even deny our own instincts, if that is the cost of belonging. Again, we
chess-board because grey areas can be difficult and painful. You can be equally isolated even when
you do belong. Many partners and siblings can attest to this, because even people who love us may
not want us to be ourselves. We like to think we’re so accommodating in the west and some view
that as degradation instead of maturity. It’s almost a badge of honour to some families, that they’ve
hardly seen each other, but will meet every Christmas, to shout and bawl their differences and bitter

resentments at each other. It isn’t true unity, as much as clinging onto something that they feel they
fundamentally should be able to rely on, an automatic right. If their flesh and blood don’t care, then
what have they got?
The best example of this kind of clinging on, within a family, and coming to terms with
reality, was in a documentary about three brothers. One had an inner battle with his physiology and
later became transgender; another later realised he was gay; and the last one, who was adopted, had
part of his brain removed as a child and suffered a constant mental battle with himself and his
resulting dependency on medication. The latter decided to search for his birth mother and found her
just in time to see her, laid out at her funeral. He discovered he was the grandson of Orson Wells
and Rita Hayworth. A fascinating insight into genuine love and a desire to belong and the role
family plays in that, despite being tested almost to destruction.
There are many examples too that show the power of love to unite former enemies. That’s all
well and good but we need to equally acknowledge and legitimise the fact that for some, none of
this works. This is not uncommon and they need a broader sense of belonging within our society,
rather than alienation to it. We’ve had to address the issues of prejudice in the UK, but we need to
look at the mentality that alienates people in general, as well as the symptoms.
Well, it could be said that this is common and that the views being expressed here are from
someone who feels quite happy not to belong and has very little appreciation of the role of family in
a person’s life. True, but my happiness is more a necessary construct, than a preference, genuine as
it is. What is a person suppose to do, feel, when those natural instincts and feelings have been
shredded by those who are supposed to be closest? And what about those whose family have
absolutely no interest in them, simply because they have drifted? It is one thing to uphold a
fundamental cultural precept, but it is another thing altogether, to inflexibly maintain it as the only
acceptable standard. Hence “for a balanced upbringing all children need a father and a mother.” Do
they really? So what does that turn those who didn’t and couldn’t into and what neglect does that
highlight in us? How about all those adopted kids and those who were orphaned or evacuated in
wartime, or refugees? Look at all those pitiful emaciated babies on Blue Peter, or the state of
children’s homes in Rumania and Turkey (the European Union has ignored for years now) and tell
me you don’t want a welfare state.
I am aware of family roles (and envy them to a degree) and there are inherent dangers to
non-conformity too. Not that those dangers are precedent to the point of losing personal choice. I
think most people will be able to see some measure of liberation in my mental and emotional self-
sufficiency, if that is what I have gained. It feels like that is what it is and I don’t see myself as
someone who doesn’t need affirmation or emotional ties. I have friends who have proved closer and
more honest than family. I am not a natural loaner but I rarely feel loneliness now. I have all but
exhausted three of the four Greek loves and I have been in love. It sometimes feels, though, that
single heterosexual Caucasian males are the most discriminated demographic in this country.
Especially if they like walking in parks. They dare not even respond to children in distress, let alone
engage them in conversation, for fear of raising suspicion and panic. Some women’s rights still need
addressing and familial law is quite sexist. Ginger hair is the latest prejudice to be tackled, thanks to
a sly, philanderer from that fictitious London suburb of no football, where new freaks are told at
birth, hating Milwall is definitely NOT in the subtext. So, that’s progress.
Greyness comes to us all, in time, but usually far too late. It’s only too late because we are
way too slow on the up-take and we see youth as the future. Maybe that’s why we make it too hard
on ourselves – it has taken us so long to acquire any amount of self-sufficiency and understanding,
we want to hang on to it for as long as possible, it’ll be gone all too soon, so why should we pass it
on. Lao Tsi is quoted as saying “Ruling a nation is power…” and many wise ancient Chinese
proverbs we see as genteel are actually quite aggressive on this subject. Well, that’s good if you
want power. But I’d guess most grey-heads would disagree with this tenet. I think the aspiration to
rule a nation is actually weakness, unless your intention is the relinquishing of power in favour of

empowering others. Greyness is actually the only reality and there has always been more than
enough of that around. Passing that on in pro-active ways should influence our youth to treat older
ones with more respect. We’re only just seeing the development of this after long years of sickening
ageism in the UK. We’ve woken up to the potential in older people to continue working, only as
recourse to the burden of tax money spent on care and welfare services. They’ve been stripped of
pensions and have little to show for their dedication over the years. If we’re intent to strip our
welfare state, too, instead of reinforcing it, what motivation will that inculcate into our youth?
Greyness kind of relaxes over some of the things we get out of our tree about, when it’s cared for
and before we lose it and return to the womb. That’s another thing we deny at our peril, along with
our bodily functions.
All families have had to face crises of personal choice and difference; feuding national
factions have ultimately had to accept their differences, so it’s not an alien concept. The question
really is how much more time and energy we waste on not doing so. We cannot afford to be
polarised or self-indulgently complacent if we are to achieve a climate of mutual respect. This has to
start with world leaders, instead of seeking to capitalise on others’ misfortune to amass power. We
have to think bigger, broader than traditional and historical perspectives and our personal beliefs.
“…there is a universal internal language amongst those who have

experienced similar situations. This operates even between total strangers
from the most disparate and divided communities. Nationalism and
patriotism forces us to disengage from this, thinking it is in our interest,
our self-preservation. It isn’t.”
14 do as I say or I’ll kill you
But religion often comes before everything. This desire to transcend beyond the human condition
and think the thoughts of something, or someone, above us, leads as much to inhumane treatment of
each other as it does the more amenable qualities, like true humility, kindness and respect.
One fictional world saviour penned, “I can’t get behind the gods who are more vengeful,
angry and dangerous if you don’t believe in them… if all these gods are omniscient and omni-
present, what’s the problem… why can’t they all just get along? And what a bout the men who say
‘do what I do; believe in what I say for your own good… or I’LL KILL YOU!’”
The most progressive religions seem hostile to the idea of live and let live, or they’re seen as
diluted, wishy-washy, adulterated and disingenuous. But our choice of religion is as much a lottery,
based on how moral or traditional our parents were, where we happened to have been born and into
which community. More accurately, it will depend upon the level of tolerance of its leaders. The
majority of people have access to the history of religion in all its varied and complex paradigms, its
bloody oppression and political developments. I am respectful of genuine devotion to humane
principles when they do not impose bigotry upon others for self-righteous reasons. But those
principles sure disappear quickly when we scratch beneath the surface of any community into
privately-held beliefs and the views of people who cannot accept some aspects of what they’re
expected to follow. Of course, hypocrisy and ignorance abound when lazy-minded people decide
it’s better to let someone tell them what to believe, or search for knowledge is actively discouraged.
But what about those who genuinely inform themselves yet find some ideas incompatible with their
feelings?
The reality is, whatever your religious views or personal loyalties or depth of integrity, even
people you know and trust will differ. More than this, even those you share your faith with will not
always be there for you. And don’t we all face god alone, ultimately? Isn’t that how it works? I

don’t know any religion where we’ll be judged en-mass. That goes for Christians, too. And if
Christians don’t believe they will be let down by God or Jesus at some point, then they need to take
a much closer look at that good book. I am no longer religious and yes, I might shit myself if I face
my creator because I’m a rogue; but I can do so with integrity, as my complete self, in all honesty
and as a good person. And if I choose to be condemned to eternal damnation… that’s my choice
isn’t it, as long as I’m not harming anyone else? Maybe God is bigger than that. (See chapter –
‘Hole in the heart’).
Maybe intolerance is reinforced by some religions, but so-called moderate ‘Christians’ all
over the world, who believe all mankind everywhere owe their salvation to Jesus, are even intolerant
of each other, in international and civil wars and their everyday judgments.
The problems that are faced by other cultures are generally similar, if not compounded by
our ‘progressive’ society. I respect how difficult the down-sides can be to cope with – the struggle
between moderates, traditionalists and fundamentalists – and I respect their culture because I see
many wonderful qualities to it. I don’t want to become an expert and immerse myself in it by living
in Pakistan, Marrakech or Oldham. But I am delighted I have such diversity on my doorstep and I’d
like there to be more of an exchange. It was edifying to hear that the first Mosque in the UK existed
as long ago as the nineteenth century. And that it was built by a Jew. In the summer, I hate being
woken at all hours of the night, by drunks and kids in the street, bawling their conversations with no
consideration even for their own privacy. And why not, if their parents don’t give a shit where they
are? When I visit a Muslim country, I actually look forward to being woken at all hours by the
ascending Tannoyed prayers from near and distant minarets. They rise in small increments of pitch,
increasing as they breach the stratosphere into the threshold of the third heaven. There is something
equally re-affirming, beautiful and dreadful about that sound. It is awesome and fearsome as if Allah
is peering down and about to engulf us, but to Muslims he already is. It doesn’t fill me with dread of
almighty god, angels, demons, or the power of this earth to swallow us up in an instant. It fills me
with dread of the capabilities man has adopted to become god. And even if I don’t believe as they do
(and they can never make me believe, that is another power we have), I can appreciate the history
and traditions and collective power of all that individual devotion and reverence. The same
principles they have for their devotion will be similar principles Japanese people had in worshipping
Hirohito; or why pagans believe in the dark and light of Mother Earth. My landlord is Pakistani
Muslim and one of the nicest, honest blokes I’ve ever known. If we didn’t have a tenant landlord
relationship, I’d be proud to be his friend and spend more time getting to know each other and doing
stuff together. But to hear those calls ascending in my neighbourhood would seem oppressive,
somehow, unless I chose to live in a Muslim area. I have no idea how they feel, hearing the local
church bells. I can appreciate, some Muslims living in the same town as me (and there’s a lot of
them) must long to hear those reassuring and empowering sounds ascending to the clouds. So, I
acknowledge some sufferance on their behalf; I’d prefer to think of it as sensitivity that comes from
knowledge, balance, respect, inner confidence and strength. It is these aspects of respect that I think
bond people in understanding, without us having to invest the same energy into each other’s chosen
way of life. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to be able to hear those prayers ascend publicly, at least once
in the year though? People need to experience these things in small measure to appreciate them. It is
a small thing that we can do for each other, when we live and let live. It is the small kindnesses and
considerations that people remember and appreciate in life.
15 heading for a crash
That’s why we should never underestimate the power of multi-facetted influences. There are plenty
of examples of integration that should get more publicity and we should exploit all their potential. It

should constitute a major strategy and investment as a model of how the most disparate people can
positively interact.
Freedom of speech and choice has contributed considerably to this, but I despise the
spineless racist and class distinction heritage of our British self-righteous, stiff-upper-lip, politically
‘correct’ society and the way it surreptitiously seeps into our psyche through the media. Whatever
happened to objective and insightful journalism? I listened to an interview between a respected
political broadcaster for BBC radio and a prominent Muslim leader. The leader said with such
insistent nonchalance, as if we’re all accepting and pre-disposed to this ‘truth,’ that “Muslims are
oppressed in this country.” Well, he has his right to that view but I challenge him to show me all
these oppressed and marginalised Muslims. Anywhere in the UK - show me just how oppressed they
are. Come on, please, I’d love to meet them. Yet this claim remained completely unchallenged by
the BBC broadcaster, since it was a politically sensitive time to be controversial towards the Muslim
community. And his interviewee didn’t know that?
So, was that a true expression of what faces Muslims in this country? Was that constructive?
Was it a valid point that helped us to get real about interaction and integration? Was that conducive
to acknowledging the true opportunities facing all UK communities? Or was it likely to reinforce
polarised factions? I thought we had a law against that now. I’m not against him saying it. I’m
against him getting away with it, unchallenged. I’m getting at the broadcaster more than the Muslim
speaker. His complacent, cosseting air of superiority was just as crass as the crude propaganda.
There seems to be a strong Eastern European contingency where I live, too. You only have
to think of the wars, organised crime, trafficking and prostitution etc. These people have astonishing
empowering experiences to share on these issues. But look at the difference between say young
Russian women and British. The stereotypes of poor little oppressed women, living in hovels with
their parents and grand parents, drinking litres of Vodka at a time fly out of the window. They’re
highly intelligent, well educated and qualified, have amazing work ethics and experience. They’re
often stunningly beautiful without a titanic ego to boost a shallow personality and can hold down a
serious philosophical conversation, in a club on a Saturday night, without being compelled to show
their tits and arse, throw up, or kick holes out of their abusive boyfriend’s attacker in the middle of
Peter Street, Manchester at three am in the morning. Russian woman are well wise to chauvinists.
I kind of resent the term integration, in a way, as if we are incapable of accepting different
perspectives than ours that don’t conflict with human rights. Those who can’t accept differences,
from any background, need to see how lazy-minded and weak that is. How detrimental that is. How
unrealistic that is. Schools have tried to address diversity, more than in previous generations, but
there is still a drive for separate schools. Raise the racism card folks. How can we blame them when
someone drunk leaving a city centre club at three am on a Sunday morning will give someone of a
different race a good kicking for fun, go and buy a kebab from someone of the same nationality,
won’t give a shit what race the taxi driver is so long as they can get home, (though, the driver has to
endure a load of verbal for their fare) and no matter what the origin of his drug supplier, he’ll sit
watching telly with him? It takes much more than business transactions to respect diversity, but it
has to be mutual. Seems we’re all up for those, though, no matter what colour your skin, what
country your parents came from, or how much we hate each other, your money’s always good.
I’m not against owning land and property or against someone loving the land where they
were born. But what is it that you love? Why is it that most people love the country they were born
and raised in? Is it the geographical country? Your government? Your religion? Or is it the way
people treat you and the lovely things or environment you enjoy? Is it comfort? Is it lazy-
mindedness? I don’t know. Even where things are bad people tend to do that and wish they could
change things. And many people with parents of foreign descent will feel that about the UK, when
comparing it to the land of their parents. I can wax lyrical over all the things I adore about the UK.
The majestic mountains, refreshing green hills and valleys, streams, moors, nooks and crannies; all
the dah-de-dah about the varied landscapes and nature of Scotland, all of Ireland, Wales and

England; the rich diversity and advancement of culture, education, history and art; its progressive
media taking us to every corner of the world. If I started, I’d never stop, so I won’t. We take so
much for granted, but how amazing that people got off their arses and gave us this. And it does feel
like home, when I return from abroad. It is more than my familiarity with the language and the
environment. It has nothing to do with my history; maybe a little to do with my relationships,
though I don’t need to be here permanently to sustain them. Look how many people are living over
here, far away from people they love.
But recently, almost everywhere I go, in conversations with all my friends and contacts, even
with people I don’t know, they are quick to say how much they hate this country at the moment.
How sick of being ripped off they are. And that’s people who were previously ok living in rip-off
Britain. It doesn’t matter where you’re from or where you are – nobody but nobody likes being
ripped off. Unprecedented numbers have emigrated or are contemplating it as soon as they can get
their act together. Many who have moved say they’d never return even if things improved. There
have been numerous media assertions that the credit crunch has persuaded many Britons to holiday
at home in the UK, where it’s cheaper! They’ve obviously never holidayed in the UK and don’t
even bother to research their news. They’re either being paid to boost the ailing economy, or they
like spending twice as much as they would to go abroad. This is a beautiful country but tourism is
part of the same rip-off culture. They must think ‘put everything up so no one can afford it except
the rich, then the rich will be the only ones that can stick it here in the end and we’ll be a country
full of rich people (who all live abroad anyway). And we’ll import the poor people to run the menial
tasks. Nah, that’d never work. Far too Mugabe, that.
Well, there are some things we could still rightly be proud of, if we preserve what we have
left. If we rewarded and promoted the good and common aspirations of all cultures and positive
exchanges here and abroad, couldn’t we feel better about our entire planet without leaving it to
David Attenborough, Michael Palin and Bruce Parry to fly the flag? That’s just naïve, some will
say, but positive interactions happen in small ways everyday, everywhere.
Our society is heading for a crash because it fails to have a level and solid substructure to
work from. The major inner cities seem to cope better with diversity; you cannot walk any street
without seeing it, which is great. There’s a whole history of it. But you don’t have to travel many
miles outside of any city to find strong excluding ethnic communities, or ingrained in-bred
homophobic attitudes. This is what we seem to be clinging on to as if it’s the only kind of stability
and identity we have left. But it isn’t stability, it is inverted anarchy. It’s survival. We’re all under
siege. Why do we prefer this to the prospect of a cohesive multi-ethnic community? Because we’re
convinced that our identity depends upon national and patriotic exclusivity. Fascism with another
face. White or black, fascism is still alive and kicking today in the UK. Despite all the documented
knowledge we have of the Nazi era, we have learned nothing. It is selective ignorance, though.
Danger and suspicion is on the increase, sure. Personal and national security is at a premium but
when I travel on a train or bus or plane, I think, ‘we’re all total strangers here and no-one speaks to
each other,’ then, I look at them individually and think, ‘…if this vehicle crashed, you might save
my life, or I might save yours, and when it’s all over we may feel better about each other and be
glad we were there for each other.’ My point is this: we shouldn’t be ‘accommodating’ other ethnic
groups; we should be one global community, but as long as we’ve decided that is unrealistic and we
glorify things that prevent it, how can we ever aim for it? People are naturally afraid of chaos but
that’s what we have already.
We are well capable of letting people be who they want to be and live together without
losing our identity; if that identity is a matter of personal choice in a climate of mutual respect, then
it was never in danger. That would be a stronger society. It’s only self-seeking liars and cheats,
power-hungry fear-mongers, that don’t want it. So how come oppressors get to have their way at
everyone else’s expense? If it’s so easy to let bigots have their way, why don’t we have a stab at
giving ourselves a chance? We surely outnumber them. We vote for them (well, a third of the

population does). Why can’t we get this right? Ok. I haven’t just been hit with the reality stick and
woke up to the fact this world is a cruel and aggressive place. And I haven’t just emerged from a pot
den wearing flowers in my hair with the ‘Ban The Bomb’ and ‘Om’ logos tattooed on my eyelids.
There is very little reasonable action that can be taken with ardent megalomaniacs, but why do we
employ mentally unsound predators in our ‘civilised’ society to make us ill for their gain? Why do
we give them the power? Well, it’s simply down to this simple dynamic:
Those who care more will always be at the mercy of those who care less.
In all areas of social, political and institutionalised denial, we have to overturn this
fundamental principle. The only way to achieve this is to reassess what we regard and reward as
strength and weakness.
16 stem cell of a stag
That’s a natural dynamic, but it is one that is governed by education and personal choice. It becomes
more acute when we relate it to any recognized form of abuse and especially when that abuse
becomes legitimised by social institutions.
Most abusers do it simply because they can. Just that. And because they can, they push it and
push it and push it to breaking point. So, as a society, we tolerate the most abysmal bullying, either
in the deluded self-confident idea that we’re pulling our weight and upping our game, or martyring
ourselves for our children, or holding some moral high ground, or we determinedly join the abusers
and see how far we can push our own interests. Because “…you can’t beat em...” It takes far more
strength to endure abuse than it does to inflict it. Those who fall victim to abuse can gain confidence
from this principle, but what does it say about abusers? Most people who endure abuse don’t want to
have to be that strong. We make it difficult for them to be anything but superhumanly strong, to
endure, because the constraints upon our services and staffing doesn’t allow for easier, gentler,
interactive options that show them how they can understand and appreciate the power they have
within. Many services actually exploit that lack of power.
Strength, true strength, actually turns this dynamic on its head. True strength wants the
empowerment of those who are deemed weaker or more vulnerable. True strength has the power and
determination and patience to find the best way to do that. Every parent knows that. Every criminal
knows the legal prerogative is tipped in their favour rather than for victims. Why is it taking so long
to tackle this? Well, all you have to do is ask people if they want capital punishment and hanging
brought back and you have your answer. Strength / weakness? Ignorant people must keep the
pendulum swinging, it seems. And we don’t have the time to educate them because we just cannot
stop; we cannot interrupt holidays, or Coronation Street, or the Olympics, or wars. We cannot
possibly take money away from any of our normal routines, to deal with a crisis. We know this, on a
national and international scale. True strength doesn’t have to impose itself. True strength isn’t
dictatorship and it doesn’t have to hide itself behind a guise, as western democracy does. We can
turn the tables; but to do so, we have to stop employing and rewarding liars, cheats and psychopaths.
As long as politicians keep telling us this type of person is our best hope, the best example of how
we can preserve our self-interests, by this façade of market confidence (we’re not even in denial
about, anymore), we don’t have to contemplate any other way.
Next time you’re in a bustling city, take a look at each individual. How tiny we are in reality.
Yet each one is forging their way in life, trying to make their life a little easier for themselves or
their family. We all have this power. We all have immense individual power, to endure, to love, to
support, to influence, to survive, to care, to take initiative, responsibility, create, design, contribute.
We all do it and we enjoy doing it. Even the most ardent criminal will do that in measure (even

Mugabe and Hussain, whilst having to constantly watch their backs, of course). But what about
people who have suffered the ultimate loss and still do it? Shouldn’t they be our inspiration? When
you look at a little girl who chooses not to have treatment for her Leukaemia, (I suspect her parents
are being vilified as we speak) and the time she has left to make of her life what she can; it is tragic
and shocks us to our core. And the teenage soldier who, rather than be forced into combat – because
“they’re asking me to kill women and children, mum, and I just can’t do it,” – committed suicide.
Shouldn’t he be our hero? Well? Yet, we glorify those who make decisions to take the lives of
younger children than these.
The point is all our lives are that precarious. Most of us don’t ask for much out of life, so,
why is it so bloody hard for us to get it, in a country that abounds in luxuries? I’m not advocating
socialism or communism, but come on… someone somewhere is taking the piss. All we ask for is
reasonableness, a little perspective. That’s all.
I watched ‘Pride of Britain’ and saw Brown sitting next to Kevin Spacey and Michael Caine.
Of course it’s a staged environment down to the music and choreography, though they keep it
straight forward. And I think it’s good to get all the screen icons in there as the audience. Believe it
or not, they have real lives behind all the privilege and celebrity and the most genuine and crafted
artists have their feet planted firmly on terra-firma. But as each heroic individual came up to collect
their award you could see the envy in the eyes of every audience member, save Trisha Goddard, in
awe of the bravery of ordinary little girls and boys and some of them feeling just a little fake, I
suspect, save Trisha Goddard. We call these heroes extra-ordinary to distinguish them from the rest
of everyday people when they’ve found themselves in extraordinary situations. But they don’t claim
to be any different to others and the tragedy is I don’t think they are. I say tragedy because there are
millions of people who equally sacrifice their lives. We have to wait for some extraordinary
situation to call people heroes then we falsely attach ourselves to this sense of pride, as if these
previously unknowns are part of us, one of ours, like we were involved in their rearing, associated
with their success because we have the same nationality. Like if we’re in Jaipur and someone
discovers we are English – “Oh, yes… Michael Caine, very fine man – ‘you are only to be blowing
the bloody doors off!’” Yes, it is great that we have such heroic people in our country. But there are
people like this all over the world and the people who keep their country going doing menial tasks
day-in day-out and getting no thanks, no acclaim, no notoriety, are never singled out; also dealing
with all sorts of difficulties that are direct results of poor government and injustice. They make our
nation great because they don’t let cut-backs and lack of support stop them tapping into their
humanity for no reward. Then I watch Brown get up and I ask myself – how the fuck can you have
the nerve to stand up and speak, when you’re the one that exploits and pressures and extracts all that
resilience and makes it necessary for these people to find alternative means to support people they
care about. Leech – what would you ever do for nothing? (See chapter – ‘Take the biscuit’).
I mean – imagine how much government and health officials spend on offices, equipment
and stationery to make themselves look good, in comparison to how much they’d actually need if it
was simply what was practical for fulfilling a task. Take the highly inflated costs of office,
stationery and business supplies in general! Compare this with, say, the supplies a soldier needs in
the field, like a decent armoured vehicle, or what a Matron needs to run a clean ward, or the level of
patient care that would be at least adequate. I suspect you’d find it an interesting contrast. Look at
the privileges at the disposal of a member of parliament to say the limits imposed on police budgets
or the wages of any emergency services personnel. Dustbin men have had to take a pay cut in order
for school dinner ladies to get their no doubt deserved pay rise. Isn’t something cock-eyed? It’s the
do-more-for-less culture, as long as it’s not MPs’ and company executives’ budgets. I can give you
numerous examples of this but you probably have plenty of your own. The government has a prime
role in establishing the values we think are fair and to create a fair working practice and moral
environment for all, but they have abused that authority and privilege. They should have some
privileges for doing a tough job, but their egos and celebrity outgrow the interests of the electorate.

The ship may be sinking, but keep the band playing. They turn the process of politics from objective
debate into personal pursuit of ego and career above all. It’s cock-eyed and been getting more and
more cock-eyed, year on year, to the point where they now talk about a compete overhaul of the
political process to regain the trust of the electorate. They don’t talk about it for very long, I noticed.
The panicky rhetoric will turn out to be more crow. We’ve never had greater cause or motivation for
a revolution, but the people in real power, the bank moguls and multi-national execs are not keen for
things to change that much. They had it too good and too cushy manipulating the weak for years, so
don’t for fuck’s sake strengthen them now.
I’m watching David Cameron change, in front of my eyes, from a friendly new face who
rides his bike to work (good on yer mate, balk the congestion charge, like to see you do that when
you’re PM), to a popular and seemingly singularly sellable leader of the opposition, to a pretender to
the throne of PM, to a potential PM in waiting. Now this is a well trodden course and no doubt
anyone’s confidence would grow, naturally (even if he has no different policies to offer). But
immediately the polls suggest he is a credible successor to Brown, his body-language is different
(you get a better picture with the sound off), visibly strutting like the cock of the roost, puffing his
chest out and cock-a-doodle-dooing in front of everyone, like as if we’re all in awe of him. He
shares poll position in the media and that’s no mean feat next to Brown, Bush, Obama and
Hamilton. I watch him crowing to his pen at the party conference with the reincarnated William
Hague (glad to just be in the job) propping one shoulder and the aspiring George Osborne enviously
biding his time, soaking up the atmosphere and thinking how it should be him stood up there, how
differently he’ll put things when it’s his keynote speech, after he ousts Cameron, once they’re in.
And the whole stage setting of conference with all his cronies around him, like the messiah telling
parables to a crowd gathered on a hillside, and I look at all the faces with their collective
compromise and individual back and tongue-bitten scepticisms, all set to fulfil one goal, not policy,
not overturning corruption or transparency and reducing waste of resources, not one of their
hypocritically stated objectives, just one… that of office. Office at any cost, any rhetoric that can
persuade voters. Fuck content and real concerns, just talk the talk, crow it with the sternest face you
can muster, like old leaders used to, show you’re made of the same stuff. Fuck the fact you’re a
product of the same process and problems and have the same solutions - show you’re a fighter, a
fighter for justice, for the British way. Show that you’re prepared to go the whole hog, to occupy the
place above your peers, to lead them. To the exception of them, knowing that this is the moment,
your moment, that they’re all gathered in that one space to do one thing. Your bidding. Because if
they don’t do that right now, they don’t stand a hope in fucking hell. Then I thought of Hitler.
We have soooo moved on from Hitler, eh? The only saving grace of a democratic
dictatorship is that the leader may not last as long. A society that has to spy on each other so much
as is done in Britain really cannot proudly call itself enlightened, or fulfilling its duty of care, or a
land of freedom, or a rich nation. We are so progressive (it is only twenty years ago the Stasi were
tapping peoples phones and following them in East Berlin) but the disease of British politics is that
they’re all far too busy comparing each others’ dicks in the urinals and crowing about it.
It is “Rip-off Britain,” “Take the piss Britain” where a rise in oil prices and recession
actually means – ‘quick, we can rip people off more while we have an excuse to pin it on, because
we can’t let the share-holders suffer or be a failing business.’ This is a land that will not pay
compensation and apologise for taking people’s lives through neglect, or change practices, even
after expensive legal battles. It is a country where a company can continue repeatedly risking
people’s lives using the same equipment in full knowledge of uncovered design flaws. It’s a land
that will house its soldiers’ families in damp mouldy homes. It’s a land that will not pay for life-
saving treatment that actually prevents critical illness for millions, but will pay highly to blanket-
cover most of the population with a low-risk drug that most of them will never need, except those
who have a very rare case of a non-life-threatening disease. It’s a land where you can be slapped on
the wrist for deliberately riding your bicycle on a pavement, shouting to unsuspecting pedestrians

“GET OUT OF THE WAY, I’M NOT MOVING!” and killing someone’s daughter who didn’t react
quickly enough. It’s a land where your basic human rights can be totally ignored if you happen to be
suffering some extreme mental difficulty. It’s a land that will see it’s elderly unable to turn on their
heating (I’m only forty-six and sat here in thick socks with a hot water bottle to save on fuel; my
hands are fuckin freezing and I don’t feel the cold easily, thank goodness), or penniless and sitting
in their own shit, freezing under multiple layers while Fat-Cats line their offshore bank accounts
with more zeros than they’ll ever need, made by over-billing people who are far too trusting and
have good morals about paying their way. At the same time as OPEC’s leader decides to build his
brand new high-rise Arab City from the proceeds of hoisting the oil prices; British Petroleum
announces 160 Billion shared between its shareholders during the same quarter that saw energy
prices rise over 45% in the UK.
Psychopaths now abound but it isn’t schizophrenics wielding machetes in the street. More
people will turn to greater crimes but who started the trend? It is already apparent within legal
organisations like the power and oil companies. The press will apprise us of the increasing danger of
mentally ill people, since everyone who gets caught committing a crime will plead diminished
responsibility and a history of depression, or psychiatric treatment, as a matter of course. But there
will be no justification for this increase in mentally ill spongers and thieves. It has become a
legitimate route to fame and fortune, for some, you only have to watch ‘Britain’s toughest village.’
Forthcoming documentaries will include, ‘We created our own town, though incest,’ and ‘I head-
butt and rob pensioners because I had stem-cell treatment from a Stag.’ But what we really want to
see is him being drowned in saliva and piss, being battered with walking sticks by a gang of
incontinent pensioners. Or being strapped to a chair in a care home lounge for his six year sentence.
Something’s got to give. People want it to change and many work for this change in any way
they can, usually for nothing and often against the popular avenues for what is regarded as success
in their field. They actually fight the bureaucratic disease that hinders them and some succeed for a
while, until the system and everyone who ‘buys into’ it kicks or burns them out. Many skilled
professionals have given up on trying to reform the system from within. Government officials won’t
do things for nothing. They won’t even contemplate a reduction in their budgets, privileges or
expenses and they’ll waste as much as they can to make sure the next year’s budget increases. This,
while they sit on millions that they’ve invested abroad. One council authority’s homelessness
department let slip to me that, it built up three million in its own account, over a five-year period.
Bravo. This, while they dithered over what they should do for those who were sleeping in doorways,
every day of that five years, without knowing where their next meal was coming from. Give the
accountant a rise, I say. Sterling job.
Lives just do not figure in the reported accounts. Capitalist democracies have even bought
into militant and criminal expediency and are exporting it just as much as its supposed enlightened
and superior methods of governing, (which is worse than people who are pushed into such desperate
measures due to having little to subsist on). We should be way past comparing our system with that
of dictatorships around the globe. But there is no democracy in this country. It is a dictatorship. It is
a hierarchy. There is no political choice because no one has the guts to be different. It is not
prepared to put its money where its mouth is and that is why it can only project this façade of being
a rich country. A brave face is all it’s good at. Because that’s the only thing you can do when you
know it’s all slipping away from you.
I’m not saying do without commerce or capitalism, it has its use and I think we should
celebrate the good things it achieves, the things it contributes to; yes, promote those things and give
businesses incentives to benefit the community. But those kind of incentives need to be monitored
with common sense. I’m not at odds with people becoming rich; there will always be disparity but
anyone who sits on millions while someone cannot feed, clothe and shelter themselves – especially
those who make their millions imposing such situations – is inhuman, to me. They should be

culpable, but the government don’t just allow that to happen, they have the same mentality of
penalising the most vulnerable.
“Those who care more will always be at the mercy of those who care less.
In all areas of social, political and institutionalised denial, we have to
overturn this fundamental principle. The only way to achieve this is to
reassess what we regard and reward as strength and weakness.”
17 survival of the unfittest
The vast majority of people around the world are kind and inspirational. People in general want to
inspire each other, even if that is only by being the best mother or father they can be, even when
they think that is beyond them. Everyone aspires to being good at something, doing something
valuable. I was heartened by the man who lives next to a meadow and collects moths, breeding them
to repopulate their habitat; such delicate work taken on simply because he had noticed they were
dangerously near extinction. And the woman who decided to have a sheep sanctuary where they
could be rescued from slaughter and live out their lives in peace while supplying her wool for a new
weaving and knitting fashion business. Wonderful people. Thank you. The least ambitious people
generally want to get along and do something that others will respect and appreciate. Why is that?
Why is that so intrinsic and yet so far away from how capitalism works? Well, the world will never
be a meritocracy, but that’s a bit of a cop-out when we are more acutely educated and aware of the
lives of the humblest people around the globe and their importance to the ecology of our planet.
Instead of actively supporting ambitions and expanding people’s capabilities, capitalism is a meat
market with the rich feeding off the poor. Use em up for as little as possible and get rid.
Consumerism.
There’s no excuse for ignorance, even if we never leave the comfort of our armchair, like the
fictitious Keith who the directors drafted in to give the east-end of suburban Brigadoon something
beyond gossip to worry about. A hint of culture and its accessibility. The earth has suddenly shrunk
to the size of his lounge, but it allows us to see easily where people have roamed and places that
man has hitherto never encountered, where blue birds (rare hummingbirds) do hover on his
shoulders. Those places, in the real world, are even harder to find, now. All of this entertainment
enriches our lives and has much more far-reaching influence. So, when we hear about someone like
Nelson Mandela who has been rotting in dark dismal isolation for fifteen years, the recognition and
respect is instantaneous. He emerges justifiably into the lime-light and becomes an inspiration to all,
but the world is full of insignificant little old ladies, arched over with pain and grief that are easily
equal to Nelson Mandela in achievement. It is the value we place on them that prevents them hitting
the headlines. Even Nelson Mandela would readily acknowledge this and I suspect, wonders at all
the things he might have achieved if he wasn’t incarcerated, notwithstanding the things he learned
and what resulted from that experience. That shows exactly the amount of energy we waste, the
potential that exists if we didn’t have to indulge all the takers that seek to abuse our patience and sap
our potential. Of course, capitalism is supposed to facilitate this potential but just look what happens
to it when people contemplate joining the work force. You apply for the job of stacking trolleys at
ASDA and the application form wants to know all the previous jobs you’ve held, any qualifications,
have you ever had a CRB check, been arrested (not have you committed a crime), do you know the
rudimentary difference between quantum and meta-physics, ever worn mismatched socks, a
cardboard Trilby with illuminated daisy stuck out the top, or planned global domination by chemical
warfare?

Most people don’t want to be a Nelson Mandela, naturally, but I’m sure many of today’s
youths would be shocked at some of the positions their grannies and great grannies held in our
recent history. When people have confidence, they achieve more. The apathy we have around us is
somewhat a construct of oppression, hopelessness and powerlessness. It makes no difference if it’s
still part of growing debt – good enough for the government is good enough for me – if people are
still playing golf, having restaurant meals, having lavish weddings, smoking, drinking, clubbing,
doing drugs… well they’re obviously not being squeezed enough, are they? And everything that
someone has is fair game to capitalists and the government. So, people turn to false hopes, guns,
money, alcohol, drugs, bullying, defined relationships. And so we first set ourselves up for hurt,
then increasingly isolate ourselves from each other not to be hurt, or usurped, or let down, or
betrayed and shut our doors on each other. Rip-off Britain makes it difficult, without a recession, to
work for your basics, a roof over your head, food, clothing and transport. I suspect no other rich
country makes this so tough and while our energies are absorbed in doing this, how are we ever
supposed to achieve our potential? Those who have talent usually take them elsewhere, where
they’re appreciated and where they are able to exploit their potential.
If Western Europe wants to capitalise on the disadvantages of poorer countries joining the
EU, without investing money into their countries’ infrastructures and economies… why should we
complain about the mass influx of immigrants? If it’s all supposed to be so egalitarian, why aren’t
we making it easier for them to stay where they are and benefiting from inclusive trade exchanges.
Isn’t that the theory? Sorry, I must just be thick. The way it’s going, the leaning of the economy and
the effects of immigration will plunge Britain and France below sea level without waiting for the
effects of global warming. Gordon Brown to the rescue! In his lycra and underpants, Super GB
(wow, look everybody, his initials are the initials of our nation!) will be credited with ‘saviour of the
global economy’ not the one who saved all those who shafted the world. He can blame the
Americans and bully the rest of Europe as much as he likes now; its time for the shafters of the
world to unite. Yes four bank moguls in the UK will have to let their heads be hunted for other
shaft-work, relenting as innocents within law, how they’re going miss the people they worked with.
Boohoo. They were only doing their jobs and pretty good jobs at that. At least they’ll have other
jobs to go to. Presumably in China, if not in Europe where they’ve probably sent the money. Well,
don’t worry; if Mendelssohn can make it back, anyone can – he’s a fighter, not a quitter and
everyone knows he punches below the belt. ‘That’s the way to do it!’
You don’t have to be such a big-hitter. This delusional mentality filters down through the
system right to the shop floor that we are forced to encounter daily. If you cannot balance your
budgets, fine people for the slightest inconvenience. Take their taxes, simplify your services then
fine them for creating the exceptions that expose your incompetence. Yes, if Vatman and Robbing
(Brown & Mendelssohn) can’t make the pubic a profit from this loss, no-on can. They can make us
a profit by robbing us, you see. Oh, yeah, did you not know this? Get with the program, you nitwits.
We think we’re being shafted now? The dynamic duo are still upping the ante – feathering their own
nests, covering their own arses and leaving us in the shit. Takers will always take and take and take
and givers will always give and give and give in. (see ‘Take the biscuit’)
As a consequence, the government have to be as suspicious of their tax payers as they are of
illegal immigrants. So, rather than reward initiatives for ethnic workers to share their experiences
with us through comprehensive government backed exchanges, here and abroad, the only security
they divert resources into is surveillance. Big brother policing and political vote-mongering, abuse
of the data protection act, where middle management council workers and benefits personnel get
carte-blanche permission to monitor emails and telephone calls of anyone they choose without
having to go to court for it, (mine will tapped after this – fuck em, sad bastards), all under the guise
of protecting national security, is making everyone paranoid. And the abusing civil ‘servants’ say
“fuck the law, let’s do it to them, then let them complain and take us to court if they’ve got the guts
or the money.” So… tell me again, what was all that kafuffle in Europe over, last century?

It isn’t immoral for one fat cat, who has more than anything he could ever need, to get a raise
that would keep a hundred needy people in food and shelter and a little bit of charity shop clothing
for a year (not the modern designer-charity shop variety), or for a Member of Parliament to have a
Chelsea penthouse and daily restaurant meals on the tax payer. But it is immoral for pensioners and
ill people to lose their homes and to be sponging ‘millions’ off the tax-payer for their daily best-buy
beans on toast (if they’re prepared to cook with more than one gas ring). Have you checked recently
how much of your tax is spent on what? It would be an interesting comparison between the annual
total of ministers and councillors privileges and expenses and the total output of the welfare state?
And if you don’t agree with the welfare state, then what are you going to do when the recession
leaves you penniless over night, or the government decide not to guarantee your hard earned
savings, without consulting you? No wonder we feel under siege when this government winks at the
hard-fought-for laws that have protected us from such fascist mentality.
Am I fixated by this fascism analogy? Consider this: the Nazi’s catalogued and profited from
everything they stripped from the Jews – they numbered it, down to the last hair of their head and
shirt off their back. They tattooed their number on their skin. They were not people but numbers.
Mere numbers. Capitalism and consumerism does exactly that to every individual now living.
Adoption and promotion of capitalist values as the only reliable stabilising factor to international
interaction has damaged the substructure of our society in the most fundamental way.
New Labour increases it’s rhetoric on responsibility of care to address mental health
concerns along with extolling the rights of patients, (‘clients’ and ‘service-users’), without properly
informing the general public of those rights. If they do, service-providers are at an immediate
disadvantage. So, you will only hear about them at seminars for health and support services
professionals. It will be up to you to research your rights, or they may tell you if you apply pressure,
or it may come out during an inquest over some injustice. They do condescend to have
‘consultations’ and invite a handful of carers and service users over for tea, only after they have
already ratified their decisions. At one such meeting in 2007 we were told the decision to deny
people a human liberty – the choice to smoke in a designated area – had already been made. If you
behave in an unsociable way because you are having a temporary mental episode you’re unable to
understand or convey, you will likely be locked in a mental institution for a minimum one-month
period – locked away – and the first thing that will be confiscated will be your cigarettes and you
cannot have them back on the premises or even in the grounds. It doesn’t take a smoker to realise
that will get the sanest people climbing the walls. “Oh yes, it’s going ahead…” (without the slightest
professional medical or scientific concern for the mental stress, humiliation, physical and
psychological consequences that would put patients through), we were told, “…but they’ve had to
postpone its implementation for six months because they forgot to do a public consultation.” The
results from all quarters, professional and non-professional, a resounding “No. don’t do it, it is the
most ludicrous thing we have ever heard and medically negligent.” All I can say is, criminals are
better off not claiming diminished responsibility to avoid prison and the mentally ill will have to
plead perfectly healthy premeditated guilt to get better treatment.
Health officials have legitimised the ignoring of the consultation process by getting a few
people to attend and vote, then spend thousands to get universities to evaluate and report with a
document they can file and forget. It would be more respectful of the public and waste less of their
money to not bother in the first place, to actually just be open about their dictatorship. But they love
the rhetoric and gloss, it’s a pre-eminent job requirement, not a paper-thin skin underwritten by
egotists in governing roles pontificating big new career-enhancing ideas beyond their experience;
not a clamour for identity and status in a competitive, corner-cutting, personnel-cropping survival-
of-the-unfittest contest, overshadowed by threats of NHS privatisation - (‘Foundation Status,’ which
amounts to the same, all but by name; some departments metamorphosing into self-sustained
services to be purchased by the PCTs). And this model can now be applied across the board.

Benefits Agency policies actively exclude the most vulnerable from getting the support they
deserve, unless they have the strength to appeal. And to pay for their benefits, people are going to be
spending all the time they’re supposed to be available to look for employment, working alongside
petty criminals serving ASBOs, in menial jobs farmed out to them by whatever little Hitler sits at
the end of the line they happen to be queuing in. In Hull, they’ll have to fit that between their
yachting trips funded by the NHS (1.5M just for the boat).
A Mental Health Act condones the sectioning of people on the flimsiest pretext. Social
Services have their own laws and will do that to you even if your diagnosis doesn’t qualify as a
mental illness, just as long as someone else can shoulder the budget and take the responsibility. It
has been suggested that anti-social monitoring will find new ways to take the government’s ‘Big
Brother’ obsession well beyond the range of cameras and satellites right into our bloodstream (apart
from imposed sedation), in the form of identity chips. Good idea for unrepentant paedophiles,
though, and teachers who like to kiss adults they’ve taught.
18 a true story: to D a 21st century 1st world Nelson Mandela
With kind permission – a testament to the spirit of D.
Lets say you have an accident and lose half your body functions; you sustain severe brain damage
(but not enough for you to be oblivious to what’s going on) and have to relearn how to talk, shave,
walk (if you can) and discover who the hell you are. Well, the health service’s “responsibility of
care” might fork out for a short while for you to recoup enough to do some of those things. Then,
when you’re just about progressing from nightmare to a semi-functional, semi-stable reality, in this
strange place full of strangers, nowhere near your home and family, the health budget will be
rescinded and they will find that their responsibility of care has been fulfilled. You have brain
damage, not a mental illness. The ball is now batted to social services. You are the ball. So, off to a
residential home you go because that is all social services can afford. No physiotherapy, no nursing
or intensive support, but you can smoke outside, if you can get out there and you can have a
television and radio. Resources don’t stretch to you having any privacy, so, you have to share all
your ablutions and indignities in a room with a complete stranger, amongst all these new complete
strangers, in a place even farther away from your family and your local authority, which can now
wash its hands of you. Nobody wants to wash your hands or cut your nails and who are they
anyway? Your long-term memory recovers sufficiently to remind you, you used to be a different
person, so what the fuck happened to you? Naturally, you can’t stand this prison cell, but you
overhear someone say they have no legal responsibility to lock you in, so in the middle of the night,
(when there’s no one around that can drag you back), you trash the crap you’ve been lumbered with
and make your bid for freedom. Of course, since the physiotherapy stopped helping you on your feet
you have to piss in the street, from your chair, using your one good hand. And so the cycle of
escape, recapture, sectioning, being banged up in a police cell, eventual release and becoming an
increasingly ungrateful burden on your hosts ensues.
Eventually, because you are regularly exposing yourself, so you’re now considered a danger
to yourself and others, they lock you away in a secure mental ward and take your cigarettes off you.
If you behave yourself like an unquestioning child, after a few months, maybe years, they might let
you out into the twenty-four by twenty-four foot high-walled uncultivated courtyard, for a little
fresh air and to walk around in circles, since you are a circular peg in a square hole. You cannot
smoke. It’s in the hospital grounds. By now, this whole process has stretched over five years and
you live to stare up at a piece of sky between blinded windows. You can self-harm but you mustn’t
be suicidal. That’s why you cannot have a lethal weapon like a radio, television, tie or shoelaces, but
don’t despair because they will let your nails grow to three inches and your hair grow long enough

for you to hang yourself, if gouging your throat and wrists doesn’t work. You have no right to be
angry against all these professionals and experts who are prepared to hold you illegally to fulfil their
‘duty of care’ for you, or your new neighbours, who want a piece of you. So, you fight silently with
yourself, decaying tooth and curly nail, to not vent this to anyone, because you know you don’t
belong there. You’d rather disappear and live in a tent in the middle of nowhere than be such a
burden.
Don’t give up though, because they have consulted all parties and done psychiatric
assessments and they agree you don’t belong there. Your reactions are circumstantial, not mental,
but if you kick off you’ll never get out. The only policy of resentment, integrity and protest you can
adopt is silence. At last… everybody else can relax.
Relief of all relief – an angel of mercy! One of your siblings, with experience in caring, is
willing to uproot from a different part of the same country to care for you at home, if the council
will supply a suitable accommodation near your family. Sorry… computer says no. The council
cannot provide a home because your relative comes from outside their jurisdiction.
Ah! No matter! The place you originally woke up in and became accustomed to and got to
know the staff and progressed rapidly at tells the present regime, they never had a problem with you
and would have you back immediately. And there’s a limited place available! What’s more… it’s
cheaper than the care you’ve been receiving since the ball was ping-ponged from the PCT to social
services to another PCT! Woopeeee!
Sorry… computer says no. Local social services still don’t have to cough up the budget for
that, so they won’t. The ball will have to be batted to the PCT who cut the funding in the first place.
Robinson Crusoe confined to a wheelchair in a dangerous imposing unsanitary environment without
cigarettes, television or even a radio – you will stay until one of the PCTs drops the ball and the
other picks it up.
D - an unseen twenty-first century First-World Nelson Mandela.
___
Yes, its national paranoia everyone. Every man for himself because we’re all just numbers.
Better play the numbers game than end up a splinter in a splinter-group. Better discriminate, be
prejudicial, or where will you end up? Are we progressing? We make big noises about equality but
we encourage discriminatory mentality through issues surrounding gender, race, ethnicity, class
distinction and financial status. Now, if we feel that way about things we can all see around us,
something so obvious, what about the way we stigmatise people with problems that are not so
visible, such as mental-health?
“The Nazi’s catalogued and profited from everything they stripped from
the Jews – they numbered it, down to the last hair of their head and shirt
off their back. They tattooed their number on their skin. They were not
people but numbers. Mere numbers. Capitalism and consumerism does
exactly that to every individual now living.”
19 superiority complex
We mentally segregate people determined by their health. How disgusting is that? There is currently
no equality amongst those regarded as ‘mentally ill’ and people who are undiagnosed (normal
people), or even with those caring for them. Yes, there have been some improvements in treatment

and care of people with chronic mental illness etc; (those people who usually have very visible
symptoms, so they get help because they cannot be left the way they are; more so if they are a
danger to themselves or to others), but it is more than simply neglect and stigma that leads people
from manageable distress to crisis and extreme trauma. It is an irresponsible and arrogant approach.
Depressed people, though, are the most common, yet most isolated and regarded as a waste product
amongst our society.
If an assumption of superiority and disassociation is evident in treating mentally ill people,
how will they ever get the care they need or a place in society where they are accepted? How can
you build the self-esteem in someone you see as inferior? And where does that place you, if
something hits you badly?
After the second world war when no-one had money or homes or food, when society came
first and people were inter-dependent and worked together from necessity, amazing things were
achieved on very little. Some media programs have been suggesting similar tactics for survival. But
it’s not the government’s fault. Blame the economy. Far be it for governments to stand in the way of
people using waste land to grow food for each other and other beneficial initiatives like that. Greed
in commerce and politics is destroying all that the post-war generations fought for. Keep it up! Mad
Maggie will at last be convinced of her children’s love supreme before she croaks. She must be so
proud.
If dog-eat-dog, is the equality we’ve settled for, how will you get on once you cannot cope,
you lose your bite and appetite?
Due to the proliferation of depression the debate is getting louder than it used to be. There is
an arena for change and research into new ways to support people in crisis, but it is being
squandered because it means spending more money. Not that it has been neglected for decades.
Current regimes are restrictive, wasteful, self-serving, unimaginative and even some who are
charged with policing the application of new recommendations are politically manipulative. So, very
little happens apart from co opting and ignoring the comments of service-users and carers –
especially those that are not of the compliant variety. Carers are generally more corroborative and
hence, critical service-users are dispensable to the decision-making process. Priorities of carers is
seen as the priority of service-users when it blatantly isn’t, but it still ticks the box. Clinicians who
genuinely see the need for rapid and radical changes feel there are far too many constraints upon
them. Even they get discriminated against and marginalised within the institution unless they zip it
and cooperate. By discriminating on a health basis and not prioritising the development and support
of the mental-health system, effectively turning a blind eye to our own social stigmas in this
country, we are diluting the intrinsic potential in every individual, for a strong functioning society.
‘But read the glossy pamphlets, read them, look we’ve gone all this trouble for you…’ Social,
political and institutionalised denial.
Good parents help their children to make informed choices. That happens in most health
practice now – why not in mental health? We’re back to that challenge: like with care of the elderly,
the mental health system lends itself to that dynamic of abuse – the vulnerable at the mercy of the
less vulnerable – it’s the challenge of what we regard as strength and weakness. For authorities to
loosen their parental grip and seek ways to bolster the ailing power that the more vulnerable have is
labour intensive. Less control is uncomfortable for service providers; it means an element of
uncertainty, of flexibility, of fear, of risk. They have to respect your choice and move out of their
comfort zone to provide what you choose; that’s if they’re up for it within the current bureaucratic
constraints and targets. But that would mean experimenting with all the options that are open to you
and how many people can they afford to do that with? And what if you get it wrong? Any parent
knows only too well, they cannot control all the choices their children make. At some time, part of
growing and maturing, for parents and children, means making our own mistakes and learning, even
if it’s the hard way. It really shouldn’t have to be that hard on us when it comes to our mental health.

And sometimes parents are wrong, but good parents are still there for their children. Even when they
smoke or they’re obese.
Obviously, there have been improvements through political and social struggles in the west.
Many of the attitudes I’ve mentioned, previously, such as racism and class distinction are at least
acknowledged as detrimental, instead of being the prevailing ones in this country, but corruption
and exploitation of privilege in government and commerce only encourages the opposite. We are
rich in diversity, intelligence and experience though, more than enough to make life easier on us,
rather than harder, but we need to start valuing that intelligence and experience in real terms. That
takes long-term commitment and re-evaluation of what we hold precious in life. It means looking at
how we value ourselves and on what basis.
Some people don’t want that. They love putting their selfish ambition first, to live life
pressured and stressed. It might be the only way to boost or supplement their ego, or relationship
problems, or to feed their craving for money and success. It could be they see it as the only
legitimate and reliable way to get the life-quality they want later, or the legacy they want to leave
the children they see precious little of. So, what will they do when it fails them. Well, it can’t fail
them, they’ll fight tooth and nail and never give in; self-determination to the exclusion of all others
and all morals will see them through. Delusion. As if Jean Paul Getty had no clue what he was
talking about when he said “Money has absolutely nothing to do with happiness – perhaps
unhappiness.” If living humanely and empowering each other is considered detrimental to
commerce, in contrast to pursuing predatory strategies, it is delusional. It should be made criminal.
I like to be busy, a workaholic when my brain and body will allow me. I am ambitious about
my work. But the idea of making life easier is foreign to commercial business practice in this
country. It is viewed as a weakness to a business and a waste of resources. “Must be able to work
under pressure” (that goes for creative and artistic jobs too, now) makes me run a mile, because I
just cannot hack it. That’s what makes me a reject, unemployable, defective. Not that I have a
legitimate illness which throws my mind into psychosomatic close-down and self-protection. I’m
not even sure I could take the pressure of stacking trolleys at ASDA. “What!. You fucking whimp!
You need your arse kicking into gear.” I can hear the majority crowd pressing in on me. “Well, I‘d
stack trolleys at ASDA for my children!” Yeah, so would I. Would you do it for yourself? Would
politicians do it? Would they sacrifice their second homes, to save the tax-payer, to supplement their
income, or stop the people-trafficking and illegal immigration they’re so worried about? Or would
they make multi-million/billion profit-making companies and their shareholders carry some
culpability and responsibility to support the taxpayer more from their surplus, when the going gets
tough? Not on your Nelly. ‘It never hurt Anthony Hamilton’ they’ll say. I applaud the people who
have to stack supermarket trolleys, no doubt about it, but this government insists that ill people
should be reduced to that now, so as not to be a burden on the tax-payer. So, that’s good for you
isn’t it?
It’s only the tough that get going then. But what if you’re not tough, what if you’re all out of
tough, your tough has all been used up and your get up and go has got up and gone? What if
stacking trolleys just doesn’t assuage the toss-up you have about why you’re living at all? What if it
compounds your psychosomatic neurosis that you’re actually worthless? “Well, you just can’t be
like that in life.” No … Now we’re getting to the crux of the matter. No-one can be like that. No one
wants to contemplate that the life of one person can be so cheap because then we can all be treated
like that. Too late. So, what we do is say that the person whose life is ebbing away in such drudgery
is valuable. Doing what? Wasting it stacking trolleys? It isn’t stacking trolleys that makes them
worthwhile, it’s the reasons why they’re reduced to doing it. Look at the kind of people who are
forced into having to do these menial jobs. Some of them are highly skilled and highly qualified for
other professions. Some are paying off their student loans. More power to them, then, but who is
causing this situation?

Truth is; we are all capable of so much more. We are often unaware of our potential when
circumstances push us down. I know I am capable of so much more but only within my mental and
physical restrictions. If the government is so bloody-minded to value everything in monetary terms,
why don’t we have a review of the voluntary services, publish a statement of accounts and show
some monetary value to society, for all the work that is undertaken? Let people who are ill and
prefer to work in this sector do so and reflect that effort as an offset to the amount the welfare state
is costing the country. No way. This is already a reality, but the government is prepared to deny and
destroy all that, for quick-fix vote-mongering. They will push and push and push and grind and
grind and grind us all into compost for profit. And that’ll make us stronger. That’ll solve it, won’t it?
Fuck your Post-Traumatic-Stress and what caused it. You’re defective. Fuck the reasons you have
for surviving and enduring. Fuck having something to live for, that’s a luxury for beast fodder. But
no, this work will give you self-esteem and help cure you, help you move on and stop you being
stuck in the past. Will it? Fat Cats set the trend for current obesity levels. And everything we have in
life, the smallest thing to everything we hold dear, everything permanent transient substantial and
ethereal, everything worth anything is what they want us to pay for it with.
“If an assumption of superiority and disassociation is evident in treating

mentally ill people, how will they ever get the care they need or a place in
society where they are accepted? How can you build the self-esteem in
someone you see as inferior?”
20 deny this
Well, I won’t be frightening you out of your skin with tales of fleeing the family home after
watching my relatives being battered to death or raped or shot; I won’t be climbing out of a shell
crater with one leg and half my face blown off; I won’t be talking about having my teeth kicked in
by a couple of bouncers or by coppers in a police cell; I won’t be talking about having to subsist on
crickets and scorpions while I take weeks to find water or a place to camp where the same military
and political atrocities won’t happen again; showing you the extended stomach of my disease ridden
starving child; climbing the anchor chain of a merchant ship or stowing away in a container among
dying bodies, just to escape a war zone; surviving with a new identity in a strange land, knowing I’ll
never be able to see my family again, because I will either be hunted by criminals, shot, tortured or
imprisoned; I won’t be telling you about fleeing from being murdered by my own parent because I
didn’t marry a good Muslim man who’d been arranged for me; or telling you the mounting debt that
I’m in because my arranged Pakistani wife used the British divorce laws to fleece me, once she got
her citizenship. Nothing quite as dramatic but just as insidious, invasive and… frighteningly…
closer to home.
So, what’s the solution? Well, you should have a grasp of the symptoms I have already
outlined (and I think you know only too well) - deny our natural instincts; deny the value of people’s
everyday experience and making it readily available as part of our everyday social awareness and
education; deny that this pressured socio-political climate is hostile to positive mental well-being
and panders to prejudicial popularised rhetoric and glossy spin; deny that we are all being minced
down the funnel of least resistance, against our better judgments and our human nature, just so that
budget and target reports and individual Curriculum Vitae and the bank balances of callous people
look more impressive; deny that we see it as plain as if they were Max Headroom when they lie to
us; deny that we can moan about it and just hang our heads and carry on trudging the long line of
fettered, swollen ankles; deny we have the antidote right here in our hands and hearts and just carry
on staring at each other to see who withers first and whose bowels will give way next, or who will

run out of shit to spew, if the universe doesn’t spew us out first. Just carry on the best way we
individually can and watch it happen.
Don’t revolt en masse. The governments have seen to that by minimising every legitimate
form we have to do so. No… the revolution will not be televised because there will be no revolution.
Even if we descend on Parliament and Downing Street and fill the capital’s streets like they did
watching the Beatles on Abbey Road rooftop; the strategy of divide and conquer will prevail when
we all return home and gape at how insignificant our collective outcry really is. Just what a brief slot
it had in the national news and we didn’t even see our own face. Then we’ll shut our doors, turn
over to Big Brother and grind our machetes in preparation for the ASDA shopping trolley job queue.
Deny this crime against humanity.
Suicide. Homicide. Global Genocide. The propagators of this crime will never be tried in
The Hague. The grim reaper is sharpening his blade and the Global warming whirlwind may still
turn out to be his cloak. Capitalism sewed it, ignored it and continues to fly in the face of it. That’s
what you get when you employ psychopaths? They are prepared to take us down with them but what
a way to go, eh? No wonder we are shitting ourselves.
Obama says it’s time for change. The world has changed. Britain and the United States have
led the way. It has become acceptable to shaft your own country and give even less of a shit about
any other, and we’ve all seen how quickly people are ready to attack when they lose some money. If
the financial market legitimises that hostility under the banner of self-preservation, are we prepared
to change our values? Obama’s people say “yes, we can” and when people tell them they can’t
they’ll say “yes, we can.” If they do that only under the banner of nationalism and patriotism, how
much can it really change? How far-reaching is Obama’s positive influence and imagination? Far
enough to reach and affect other world leaders and business magnates?
I believe it is realistic to accept there is more to humanity. It is a testament to our spirit that
we have endured. We have to practically restore and reaffirm our belief in that spirit, our common
humanity, our mutual dependency and responsibility and value. We have to reward it, make it easier
for us all to tap into, especially in extreme situations, and give more incentives to people to develop
and share those qualities.
21 I sphincter, therefore I am
Look at me, then. I’m a broken man with a mind that attacks me as much as it support me; a wretch,
a no-one who has contributed little to this world, not martyr, nor antagonist nor navel-gazer. Just a
simple insignificant human being, as hypocritical and imperfect as anyone, who cannot get
everything right and is not willing to give my soul for a cause, who compulsively put myself down
and repeatedly wanted to snuff myself out. This is the point.
But I have a sense, as we all do, of the nobility of human nature. In its most limited selfish
state. In its most humiliated state. A nobility. It is in every human being, without exception. Even in
those betraying it for power, fame and domination. Shitting on their integrity. Shitting on each other
– shitting on every corner of our beautiful planet and denying it, defying it, though the stench reeks
in our nostrils and the stains are plain for all to see. What did the privileged squanderers ever do to
deserve this position? That’s what we are doing to nobility. That is what we have done to dignity. If
that is what I’ve been able to diagnose from merely scratching the surface, what is the real extent of
denial?
Oh, shit! Just look at this… I’ve just seen an on-line advertisement for a special edition of
the complete series of ‘Man From Uncle.’ I’m not a particular fan of MFU but look at the
marketing. How could anyone resist? The shiny sturdy chrome case oozes quality. FORTY-ONE
DVDs with the MFU logo on! Each three-disc set in radioactive, health and safety yellow, danger
and classified red, trustworthy eye-spy blue and reassuring global green. Each set of three DVDs

with its matching fold-out DVD case, with the MFU logo on. Not just the series but extra material.
Secret documents and campaigns. Directors commentaries. And behind behind the scenes scenes.
Deleted scenes that were too cover-up to air. Even a Woman from Uncle, episode! Four matching
bound outer cases to protect the discs secluded in the DVD cases. An operator’s manual includes
you in the team. And just look at the size of that matching glossy, two-inch thick volume on
everything, everything, that went into the series. All with the MFU logo on. The craftsmanship. It’s
really a work of art. And the nostalgia. Over two hundred hours of viewing and reading. Sweet sheer
delusion. It’s guaranteed to make you feel eight again every time you look at it and show it to
anyone. Your MFU identity card has a guilt globe on it to prove you’re a world citizen. And I can
get all this for just two pieces of paper with the queen’s miserable mug on.
But how can I have it without capitalism? That’s the question. Oh, well… I’ll have to deny
myself that, while I chew on my 29p hotdogs that have been reformed from goodness knows what,
made by illegal immigrants living fifteen to a room and employed by the biggest retailer in the
world to work sixty-hour weeks for the price of this set. Or should I deny my poverty and just go for
it?
Brown wants us to deny that we have spent more than we could ever pay back and he says
we should continue to borrow and spend more than any of us could ever want or need in a lifetime.
Apparently, you can blow out an oil fire using dynamite. He obviously wants the biggest balls and
the biggest penis in the urinals. Any confident, contented man around the world knows, the size and
shape argument is totally out of his hands. It is completely dependent upon the one he wishes to
satisfy. His sole ambition is to be the world’s greatest lover. Fuck frugality and modesty, that’s no
fun. When you want to fuck the whole world, you’ve got to be a genuine nymphomaniac and we
know, they’re never satisfied. “Liquidity or demand, liquidity or demand; funnel funnel funnel, push
push push, mince mince mince, grind grind grind,” is the only language these rapists know, because
they just cannot get out of bed. More consumerism, more deforestation, more demand on fossil fuels
– more floods, more extinct species, but it’ll keep the wheels of commerce turning and as we have
seen, that’s what makes the world go round. We might just as well have Jeremy Clarkson at the
wheel. I detected his customary air of sardonic distain when he said, after being asked if he was for
conservation, “The planet is more than capable of taking care of itself.” And I agree. But Jeremy has
to live up to his TV persona as one who would rather crash, spectacularly, into a wall, strapped in a
Recaro bucket, than live to be a drivelling ninety-year old, trundling his way through longevity in
his little Rascal scooter. There’s something to be said for it. Yeah… maybe that’s the right
thinking… to reverse the current trends the thing to do is… er… push on…? “Do you wanna go
faster? … I CAN’T HEAR YOU…” Even Jeremy might be a more responsible dad than his persona
allows. It might dispel the myth, but contrary to all rumours, he does occasionally use mirrors and
reverse. But, in capitalistic terms, forwards is definitely the new backwards.
I could claw a little money back for myself with some dignity and ‘success,’ by publishing
this for all to see. But I could end up with egg on my face. At least I won’t be alone. And I have less
dignity than my invective suggests, so no loss there. Some might dismiss my proscenium
denouncements because of it and miss the point that this auto-biography is not about me, but so
what? Or I could succumb to the very appealing prospect of psychopathy. Join the line of arse-holes,
because you’re either dishing it or in it.
According to George Burns shitting it’s the only thing you have to look forward to when
you’re grey, but I suspect he meant if you still retain any self-determination over it. Since when did
affluence inhibit effluence? It can wipe it away with smear campaigns, send it underground and
make a room smell better, make us smell and feel better afterwards, with velvety soft tissue, as if it
never happened. But whether we cover it up or not, deny it to the hilt, we will not be able to ignore
it when it hits the fan. Those who have already been in it will cope better. Deny that, at your peril.

One thing I will never be able to do is deny the actions of my sphincter. I sphincter, therefore
I am.
Now… how’s that diagnosis of ‘mental illness’ coming along?

Shitting Ourselves TOTAL

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Shitting Ourselves TOTAL

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Four Jammie-dodgers Saved My Life Today (how to NOT kill yourself)

Chapter – ‘shitting ourselves

“There is an ill wind blowing, Watson…” A. Conan-Doyle

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 2

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 3

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 4

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 5

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 6

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 7

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 8

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 9

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 10

05 what was that Sooty?

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 11

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 12

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 13

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 14

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 15

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 16

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 17

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 18

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 19

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 20

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 21

“I do not believe all politicians and all commerce executives are

07 Bin Laden can retire

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 22

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 23

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 24

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 25

08 a Titian, a Titian, we all fall down

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 26

09 valium of the masses

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 27

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 28

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 29

10 down with the hood

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 30

discrimination. The term ‘positive discrimination’ is positively discriminatory and indicates a

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 31

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 32

11 murder mystery tour

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 33

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 34

12 the underclass don’t count

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 35

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 36

13 self preservation society

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 37

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 38

“…there is a universal internal language amongst those who have

14 do as I say or I’ll kill you

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 39

15 heading for a crash

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 40

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 41

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 42

16 stem cell of a stag

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 43

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 44

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 45

Copyright Adrian Kenton 2008. All rights reserved. 46