The London Olympics are already achieving the number one aim of the politicians who brought them here, which is making our politicians feel very important indeed.
The media is quite frenetic in its efforts to make us all believe we should be terrifically proud of the fact we are hosting the Olympics, as though there were something unique in this achievement. If we can’t competently do something that Greece, Spain and China have done in recent years, that would be remarkable. Of course the Games will be on the whole well delivered, sufficient for the media and politicians to declare it an ecstatic success. Some of the sporting moments will be sublime, as ever.
But did it have to be in London? We won’t know the total cost of the Games for months, but it will cost the taxpayer at least £9 billion and I suspect a lot more. I also suspect the GDP figures will, in the event, show that the massive net fall in visitor numbers has hurt the already shrinking economy further.
But to take the most optimistic figure, holding the Olympics in London has cost every person in the country an average of £150 per head in extra taxes. That is £600 for a family of four. Actually it is in the end going to be well over £2,000, as of course the money has been borrowed on the never never, and taxpayers are going to be paying it off their whole lives, along with the sum ten times higher they are already paying direct into the pockets of the bankers through their taxes.
The very rich, of course, don’t pay much tax, so they are not worried.
But to take just the figure of £600 extra taxes for a family of four, the lowest possible amount, and not including the interest. Is having the Olympics here really worth paying out £600 for? If Tony Blair had approached the head of the family and said “We are going to have the Olympics in London, but it’s going to cost you £600, would the answer have been from most ordinary people: “Yes, great idea, this is that important to us”?
People are not disconcerted because they don’t see that they have to pay. There is no special Olympics tax, and they pay their taxes in a variety of ways, and individuals are not the sole source of taxation. But this is nonetheless real money taken from the people in pursuit of the hubris of politicians.
I love sport. I hate the corruption of the International Olympic Committee, Fifa and the rest; I hate the vicious corporatism and militarisation of our capital and absurd elitism of the transport lanes; the sport itself I love. But with the economy contracting, and the NHS being farmed out for profit, is it really worth £600 for a family – and many families are really struggling in a heartbreaking way – is it worth the money to have the Olympics here rather than in Paris?
Of course it isn’t. I think many of us will feel an extra pleasure watching the Opening ceremony because it is British. Patriotic pride will surge. It is not wrong to enjoy the spectacle tonight on TV. The corporate well connected and ruling classes will enjoy it in the stadium.
But after you have watched it on TV, ask yourself this question. How much more did you enjoy it than enjoy watching the Beijing ceremony, and was that margin of extra enjoyment something that everybody in the room would have paid out £150 for?
Because they just did.
@Clark (also moderating) 8 Aug, 2012 – 4:10 am
.
The formulaic ‘no religion too’ was rather obviously filched from John Lennon’s Imagine, rather than a psychic anticipation of Guano’s post.
.
I do feel that much of the bad blood on here is between people who’ve clashed before in another place, have a history of sorts which they’ve brought along with them. Should there should be some sort of limit or quota on the number of CiF refugees from the Guardian’s tyranny? This blog’s forum can only absorb so many of ‘them’; resources – moderation, bandwidth, pixels – are all at breaking point already.
“Feel free to carry on as before. I’ll be interested to see what follows, if anything.”
.
“Maybe it’s out of place. I apologise to Suhayl for any perceived insult, and I’ll go back to lurking observing.”
.
“Let’s strip out the sarcasm and the leading questions, then. I look forward to watching how this develops.”
.
“Nevertheless, my point is that in context that’s not what you were “simply” doing: there were other rhetorical dynamics in play. I’ve given several reasons above …”
.
Nextus, do you think you could do what you said you’d do — stay quiet and watch from the sidelines? Instead of giving a running commentary on what you imagine people’s motives and “tactics” are (all subconscious of course) and what *you* would and wouldn’t like to see people do? It’s extremely annoying. Join in on the debate re immigration if you feel so inclined, but otherwise, please, please put a sock in it and let the conversation flow. Your constant ‘analysis’ is an irritating interruption.
.
——————————-
.
I see Komodo’s abuse has been deleted, as expected. I know why this is done — playing the man/woman and not the ball is not on. However, it’s a bit of a shame in one way. It’s when people become abusive that their personalities really “shine through”, I find.
.
Can anyone confirm (or deny) that Komodo is ex-military? I seem to have a vague memory that he said he was, at some stage.
Yet Nextus, you only seem passionate enough to criticise solely me when it is ‘race’ that is being discussed. You don’t seem to see the irony of this.
.
I think it is intellectually honest to state what one believes. I think it is entirely justifiable to ask people to be clear, to explain their various references. If the consequences of that clarity mean that they are propounding views which are seen as abhorrent or whatever, that is their issue with which to deal.
.
I could say that you, Nextus, are singling me out and bullying me. But I’m not bully-able. You insinuate that I will deliver ad hominems, when it is clear – and Clark and Jon, I’m sure, could bear me out on this – that I have delivered none on this thread and probably none since Moderators were introduced. I simply think it makes for better discourse when people are frank and honest about their views. I may or may not disagree with those views. We all are imperfect beings and I’m not here to condemn anyone.
.
You continue, Nextus, to bog down this dynamic when I have asked Komodo very politely (as I have been throughout) to consider responding to my questions wrt political matters. You continually insinuate ad hominems about me, Nextus. Why do you seem so very defensive about this issue?
.
To paraphrase Jesus:
.
I may have a plank in my eye
.
But you, I would suggest, may have a tree
.
Now, is it at all possible that Komodo will be given an opportunity to respond themselves, without the potential for discussion continually being shut down by you? Thank you.
Nuid, I’ll make my own judgements about what to post, but I’ll certainly pay heed to your frustrations. FWIW, I stopped contributing my opinions to the debates many months ago partly because I was getting fed up with Suhayl continually making baseless insinuations (albeit mostly concerning other people). I might start contributing again if that’s no longer an issue.
I’m sorry you felt bullied, Suhayl. But as for your further insinuations about my beliefs, they’re easily refuted, fwiw.
Wether someone is openly flamming or smouldering the heat can be similar.
“I was getting fed up with Suhayl continually making baseless insinuations (albeit mostly concerning other people).”
.
I’ve never seen Suhayl do that and I’ve been here since early 2005, Nextus. But it’s pretty obvious you have a laser beam on him and won’t let go.
Komodo seems very well able to slither round and avoid answering what he doesn’t want to answer, so I very much doubt if he needs your ‘protection’. And I could certainly do without your commentary which is getting sorely in the way. There’s no point in saying you’re not ‘contributing’ when you’re attacking one person, on one side, and constantly lauding the one on the other side. (All the while saying you’re going to sit back and just observe … I wish to dog you’d do it.)
I think the question for Suhayl should be why should anyone, Komodo in this case go off and partake an in in-depth study of Powell of all people, to satisfy your (or anyones) demands for someone to employ their time at your insistence, fruitlessly. It is a trap of sorts, a hostage to fortune from which anyone would be able to declare ‘A-ha, so you support x,y,z’ implicitly then, if Powell is so much as quoted or presented roundedly. I usually work just from my head and from half-remembered things read long ago, in books of all things, rather than trawl the internet for information these days. There was in the early 70s a BBC radio series presented by Robin Day, ‘Politics in the Seventies’ the first episode of which (1973-06-10) featured Powell and Micheal Foot head-to-head and I think it would surprise many how incisive, quality and good-natured debate there was and how much common ground there was and respect for each from the other, professional politicians both however, ideologues living fully in the Westminster bubble, immigration was discussed but they were united in opposition to the EEC. It does seem like distracting tactics are being employed here, by which other issues, more important than some 40-odd year old knee-jerk spat get shelved, and people turn away from this blog dis-spirited.
I wish to read more from Nexus, he always attempts to elevate his input and to my eyes does very well with references to considerable studies. Suhayl on his own could be difficult to press against because he is so intelligent and fluent, if several strong posters are standing together they can become difficult. Even just bend a little to show that you respect the principal of bending. Really keep these personalities in check, almost everyone is well meaning in practice here remember?
1,000.
.
Puerile, I know.
With respect, I was attacking a debating style used by one person, and not the person himself. Suhayl actually rides very high in my estimation, on a personal and moral level, and I back his revulsion of racism: I’m an active member of Unite Against Fascism and Love Music, Hate Racism. I’m very familiar with that political worldview. I want to learn how other people justify their prejudices. Enoch Powell cited economics and national identity, though he was interpreted as campaigning on racial grounds. Pro-Israeli fascism is a puzzle: few that I’ve spoken to support Zionism, but justify their stance on the basis of social, economic and religious issues (however misguided).
.
The issues that Komodo, Clark and other raised earlier about genetic instincts, cultural hostility and attachment to familiar lifestyles might help to explain why some people act against common humanity. (I’m sorry for drowning out that discussion: my aim was to enable it.)
.
Can we see inside the mind of this average Joe (the c*nt) down the pub? Why is he so suspicious of foreigners? Selfishness? Fear? Evil intent? What skewed his moral outlook, and how can we prevent it happening to others?
“I was getting fed up with Suhayl continually making baseless insinuations (albeit mostly concerning other people).” Nextus.
.
Nextus, that accusation has no basis. Apart from Alfred around 2 years ago (I think), who else? Larry/Yugostiglitz? You? The troll gang who attempted to destroy the blog?
.
I did not feel bullied, Nextus. I was suggesting that your behaviour here wrt me might be construed as an attempt to bully.
.
Look, if Komodo had the elan to suggest that Enoch Powell had something worth discussing, then what’s the problem in presenting these things, as Cryptonym just did? In any case, only some of my questions referred to Komodo’s mention of Powell. I’m not sure why so many people seem so worried about the possibility of there being a response to my questions. I won’t go on and on about them, but Nextus has helped to build this up into something it never was/has been. I don’t know how much more ‘bendy’ I can be, Crab. It seems to me I’ve bent over backwards. I’m offering Komodo a relaxed opportunity to expound. If s/he doesn’t want to, well that’s that then. But I cannot pretend that s/he didn’t allude to the things which s/he alluded to. And I cannot pretend that clarity has not yet been forthcoming.
£260,000 into Boris’s coffers.
.
The Olympic Games Lanes came into operation on 25 July and motorists face £130 fines
.
More than 2,000 fines of £130 each have been issued to drivers using the Olympic Games Lanes, Transport for London (TfL) has revealed.
.
Transport Commissioner Peter Hendy said in the first six days of the system being introduced on 25 July only warnings were issued.
It will be a miracle if Craig ever posts here again.
Incidentally, my “insinuations” about Alfred were far from baseless. I do not think – I do not sense – that Komodo is the same type of person at all. I’ve always got on well with Komodo in the past and I wish them well. I was more saddened and bewildered, actually, by some of their initial comments in this thematic area. But really, I’m only interested in discussing the issues which Komodo raised in their various posts to which I alluded in my list of questions.
Okay, thanks, Nextus (6:32pm). Let’s draw a line, shall we?
Ay Suhayl now i see how provocative Komodo was in the beginning i understand the responses, i went for an imaginary middle ground. It is still useful to see what can made of a rather provocative (cud be worse) expression, other than mince meat.
Ive a post in the queue with my small conclusion, anyway heres to multiculturalism and diversity and the best of tradition and loyalties.
Crab, good on you (6:16pm). You’re right. Mellow…OM… and so on.
average Joe (the c*nt) down the pub? Why is he so suspicious of foreigners? Selfishness? Fear? Evil intent? What skewed his moral outlook, and how can we prevent it happening to others?
,
Yeah, very easy, start reading DM, Express, Sun, and keep an eye out for the beeb, and Channel 4 newscasts, and don’t forget the quarterly refresher, and drip feed of hate on comments sections of various hate sites busy hatemongering, that brings the whole story back to start at the beginning.
,
The sad fact is the anti racists, getting busy defending certain interests of particular demographies of the “immigrants” (their own patch so to speak), by the way of “addressing” common misconceptions, without taking any note of the elephant in the room, the causes of divisions and hate.
,
Hence, as seen on TV the great degrees of success in the improvement of race relations and spread of the “multi kulti” which itself now is under threat and on the way of becoming a new taboo, such as “socialism”, “humanity”, “truth”, and “justice”.
,
This thread if anything has highlighted the prejudices of the anti racists, and their own inner demons.
,
Finally the elegant consequence of misanthropy translates into all manner of factionalism, with all factions agreeing upon one certain fact: The others are shit. Alas none ever note the circular paths, and the arguments, after all they all are certain the others are shit and incapable of reasoning.
,
This culminating in hollow pedantry, as is the fate of all circular debates.
Line duly drawn, Suhayl. Nuid will be (justifiably) heartened. I’m looking forward to the next post from a dissenter on the issue of immigration.
Nextis “I was getting fed up with Suhayl continually making baseless insinuations (albeit mostly concerning other people)”
No, never seen it either and I’ve been here since my social life broke down.
Nextus, the person who seems to be issuing baseless accusations, though in this case, against one person, and who seems entirely reluctant to drop it, is, actually –
“I might start contributing again if that’s no longer an issue2
er, you have.
“Can we see inside the mind of this average Joe (the c*nt) down the pub? Why is he so suspicious of foreigners? Selfishness? Fear? Evil intent? What skewed his moral outlook, and how can we prevent it happening to others?”
Quite good questions. Lots of answers. In the meantime, I’d suggest that being described as a ‘bit of a cunt’ and an ‘average Joe, (c*nt or not)’ would certainly skew my outlook, moral or not. I might think I was being insulted, and patronised, you know.
“I might think I was being insulted, and patronised, you know.”
There are some ok people who do that with friendliness, it can be riling if you arent used to/accepting of it, but it can also be grounding and fair preparation for rough ground.
Racism is just ignorance and a lack of intellectual curiosity to discover more we have in common-rather than differences-with other cultures.
‘
Just my 0.2p worth.
I have just found a two year old nostril hair and guess what?
I managed to split it. Further it will be the major part of a dissertation on ‘nostril hairs I pulled and the importance to nasal tones’.
One only need to look at one splitting process to digress about others, they are all the same.
bon noit, have had ein harten Tag.
Here’s an engaging article by Robin Ramsay – editor of ‘Lobster’ magazine and academic at Hull University. His material is always interesting to read and digest. Lots of historical nooks and crannies, some of which may well have been crucial in setting the course for decades thereafter. Ramsay also has a particular view of migrant labour with which I do not entirely agree because, as I said before, though it might seem a ‘commonsensical’ view, the research that has been done – and there has ben a lot of reasearch done – does not bear it out. Nonetheless, in relation to the manner in which the machinations of the Establishment (for want of a better word – maybe plutocracy would be better) influence which govt gets in and mould government policy (1931, 1976 and 2010) vis a vis the IMF, the USA and so on, it’s a fascinating read. Usual prefixes.
.
lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster64/lob64-running-britain.pdf
Very nearly almost on topic. Watching the battles (and in the grand Scottish tradition, taking taking no side, or both) reminded me of this very short piobaireachd (classical music of the highland bagpipe). Of course no-one plays it as beautifully as I do, but this chap’s attempt isn’t bad.
.
Lament for Red Hector of the Battles.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyH9L8CSDG8&feature=related
.
The tunes of the Ceol Mor (Great Music), whatever you might think of them musically, have wonderful names:
.
The fishers of Geogh Brodinn
The old men of the shells
Mary’s praise for her gift
Lament for the little supper
The king’s taxes
Too long in this condition
Scarce of fishing
The sound of the waves against the castle of Duntroon
.
–and (deo volente, insha’Allah, whatever) soon to be topical–
.
Lament for the Union.
.
Hope you can sort out your worries about immigration. I think Suhayl and I and around four million other aliens are about to make an excuse and leave.
Mary, to return to the original topic (what was it again?);
“I have just found out that an ex mayor and a long standing tory boy councillor was cast as …yes you’ve guessed it… one of the industrialists.”
Brilliant.
Here’s an article that nicely complements Craig’s initial posting:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/08/where-hate-rises-and-hope-dies/
Good one, Vronsky! Aliens, all. ETs. Onward and upward! To Mars, with Curiosity!
.
A wonderfully evocative Lament.
.
Here’s an interesting side-track down the story of the Beatles song, ‘Get Back’, which originally was a satire on Enoch Powell’s infamous speeches. Oddly, it’s from a site which deals with matters relating to Richard Nixon, who was of course President of the USA in early 1969, when the song was written:
.
http://thenewnixon.org/2009/06/28/the-soundtrack-of-our-lives-49/
Suhayl Saadi wrote: “I think it is intellectually honest to state what one believes. I think it is entirely justifiable to ask people to be clear”
.
.Great news. Taking this statement in to account, as well as the fact that a broad consensus has been agreed that ‘yes,racism is bad but we can have a debate about it anyway’,i think it would be constructive to get down to brass tacks:
.
Suhayl Saadi,Nuid and Technicolour(and anyone else interested obviously)- taking an average number of 150,000 people emigrating from Britain every year, how many new people do you think should be admitted in to the island of Britain every year, taking in to account asylum seekers as well?;
.
1.250,000
2.100,000
3.50,000
4.10,000
5.Some other number
6.None
.
Constructive straightforward answers in the form of figures if at all possible, would be greatly appreciated – by myself at least. Thanks for your consideration