Skip to main content
Class Struggle - It's Not Cricket

Between reading the Sunday papers and watching a documentary on Mao Tse Tung, I was struck by small parallels between Mao’s own Cultural Revolution and New Labours own efforts to eliminate the middle classes and their values in Britain.

In China, Mao had the Red Guard to denounce his opponents as ‘Cow Devils’ and ‘Bourgeois Running Dogs’ but we live in gentler times, we have the BBC and unlimited apathy to depend upon. At least however, nobody has taken to eating their landlords, although such measures might spur the worst of the left-wing inner city councils to even greater achievements.

And what are these middle class values that so threaten the progress of this one party state? I suppose they involve making sacrifices, so that your child can have a decent education, of putting money aside for your pension and their future and worst of all paying huge sums (plus insurance tax) for medical insurance, because you worry that your family won’t receive the best possible care if you risk sending them to your local hospital, the cost of which chews lumps out of your salary each month.

The middle classes are certainly doomed. After all, as Tony has pronounced that , we’re all middle class like him but he can afford to be, as can his friends on huge index-linked pensions.

And when you’ve achieved the lowest common denominator society that you dream of Mr Blair, then what? If the Cultural Revolution and the Killing Fields of Cambodia failed Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot what makes you think that tomorrow’s Britain will become a classless meritocracy where everyone achieves 5 A’ Levels and an Honours Degree?

The trouble is that life is stranger than fiction and reading the Sunday papers only illustrates that we are living in the middle of a political farce in a world where hijacking is OK, as long as you feel oppressed, burglary is a misdemeanour and failing to pay a BBC license fee carries a £1000 fine.

Welcome to Britain in 2003.


Popular posts from this blog

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.

In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…