Skip to content

Darrin // Nightingale

Writing's a fight and this boy needs a battle

  • // Home
  • // Scrapbook
    • Art & Artists
    • Climate & Environment
    • Film & Television
    • Media & Social
    • Music & Musicians
    • Photographs & Photographers
    • Politics & Opinion
    • Science & Technology
    • Thoughts & Stories
    • Writers & Writing
  • // Writing
    • Carr-10-n
    • The Singularity
    • The Benevolent Gangster
    • Exquisite Corpses…
    • Culturers
    • Diggers
  • // Directing
    • Brass Eye – Campaigns
    • Dreamweaver
    • Blunt
    • Dial-a-date
  • // Photographing
    • Streets
    • Portraits
  • // Creating
    • Analogue collages
    • Code objects
    • Digital collages
    • Found objects
    • Print collages
    • Physical objects
    • Rotoreliefs
    • Sketches

Tag: Byline Times

Posted on 21 September 20242 October 2024

Criminals are just the ones who get caught

Zemblanity, the antonym of serendipity, conspired recently to map a pattern, a kaleidoscopic reflection of reality, that’s as glaringly obvious as it is vehemently denied. Criminality in its many forms, so often denounced as aberrations, are in fact the default settings, the modus operandi, of the institutions that organise our lives.

The foundational image, around which this idea formed, settled when some thoughts on Doug Limanโ€™s heist gone bad movie The Instigators (2024), cut across an interview with former city trader Gary Stevenson. Slicing through what shouldโ€™ve felt like revelations but didnโ€™t, was a transcript of Carol Vordermanโ€˜s Alternative MacTaggart lecture. The final sliver of zemblanity was the publication of Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s inquest report into the Grenfell disaster.

The first image turned to face me while I was considering the internal logic, the organising principle, driving the behaviour of everyone in The Instigators (2024). The filmmakers ask us to think of the titular instigators, the criminals doing the heist, as revolutionaries. Itโ€™s a romantic vision of transgression that obscures a sinister truth, the criminals in the film are the least dishonest players, and it’s the “legitimate” society that’s corrupt to the core. Once youโ€™ve internalised that reality, itโ€™s half a turn more to the realisation, criminals are just the ones who get caught.

The Instigators (2024)

This view of society, as seen through the lens of a fiction, solidified into fact when I heard the personal experiences of former city trader Gary Stevenson.

Insider

In 2011 Stevenson became Citibank’s most profitable trader, in the world. He achieved his position by betting “society would collapse” and “the economy was never going to get better”.

It wonโ€™t surprise anyone to know most traders come from privilege. A private education, followed by an elite university, all cushioned by the advantages of wealth. This path inevitably creates myopic individuals “dehumanised in a way” who don’t care about the real-world consequences of what they do. At the time “I never really stopped to think” confesses Stevenson “because my job was to bet on these things”. But he came from a “very poor background” outside of these elitist pathways, and eventually realised “ordinary people would get poorer” their “living standards would collapse” and nothing was being done about it.

When Stevenson finally made the decision to leave Citibank, his manager took him to dinner and told him the story of a “nice guy, good trader” at Deutsche Bank, dragged through the courts and eventually bankrupted. Deutsche Bank went though the guys trades, all his emails, and dredged up whatever nuggets of compromising information they could. Stevenson was told “I like you, I think you’re a good person, but sometimes bad things happen to good people. We can make life very difficult for you. You’re going to find out about that”.

I think you’d struggle to find a more concise example of the business mindset. As Stevenson points out, itโ€™s โ€œso obviously similar to the wayโ€ฆ gangsters speakโ€, as ruthless as anything heard in the unassuming cafes and gloomy bars of the criminal underworld. It’s little wonder Stevenson thinks “a lot of the guys who become traders, if they grew up on the (Ilford) streets I grew up on, would’ve been drug dealers”. But they didnโ€™t and theyโ€™re not.

Itโ€™s clear to me, these โ€œtoo big to failโ€ institutions are more than willing to accept cut corners, shady practices, illegality, if thereโ€™s money to be made. But when an earner expressed a desire “to leave and work for charity” they start “very strongly implying” legal action, intent on wreaking his life.

โ€œThe truth is, your family background, where you went to schoolโ€ฆ determine whether or not you even get your foot through the door, let alone rise through the ranks.โ€ Thatโ€™s not Stevenson talking but broadcaster Carol Vorderman telling a concurrent truth, this time about the television industry.

Edinburgh TV Festival

Her recent Alternative MacTaggart lecture describes an industry “dominated by nepotism” and unsurprisingly “run by the upper middle class”. If you doubt this, a recent study by the Sutton Trust Social Mobility and Opportunity found “children from richer families enjoy better opportunities in schools (62%), universities (62%)โ€ฆ and jobs (54%)”. In another of their studies Elitist Britain 2019 they highlight “a โ€˜pipelineโ€™ from independent schools through Oxbridge and into top jobs”. And in yet another, now very old report The Educational Backgrounds of Leading Journalists they found more than “half (54%) of the countryโ€™s leading news journalists were educated in private schools”. To put that in context, only 7% of the population get a private school education.

This deliberately constructed, protectionist, pipeline is fed and maintained by, as Vorderman so eloquently puts it, snobbery, “regional snobbery, class snobbery and educational snobbery” all conspiring to create an ecosystem of “programmes awash with views given by those with acceptable accents”. It’s the “same faces talking to the same faces in the same conversations” especially when it comes to political programming. As Noam Chomsky once said to journalists Andrew Marr “if you believe something different, you wouldnโ€™t be sitting where youโ€™re sitting”.

Another, more accurate, way to understand snobbery, is dissociation. The same detachment from consequence pointed to by Stevenson, allows the beneficiaries of this pipeline to act without conscience or imagination, and without imagination there is no empathy.

Stevenson had become the most profitable Citibank trader in the world betting that society would collapse, and “everybody could see that I’d done that” but no one cared, no one thought, “Should we do something?” because they put their gains before everything else.

If we live in a predatory systems, as I think we do, government should protect its citizens against exploitation, but it doesnโ€™t. In fact, I’d argue, the government is just as much a predator as any individual or business or class. Why have successive governments been so invested in the policy of privatisation? Privatisation is sold as the way to improve services, that’s a lie. Privatisation is just an efficient way to syphon public money into private hands. It’s aggravated daylight robbery. It’s criminal. Which brings me to the last in my kaleidoscope of stories, Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s inquest report into the 72 deaths in Grenfell Tower.

Byline Times
The Guardian
The Guardian

The 1700 page report points the finger of blame in many directions, at cladding manufacturers and architects, builders and third-party testing bodies, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and David Cameron’s “bonfire of red tape” so enthusiastically supported by housing secretary Eric Pickles. But it’s the attitude of the Tenant Management Organisation (TMO) who “consistently ignored residentsโ€™ views” and engaged in a “pattern of concealmentโ€ฆ in relation to fire safety matters” that reveals the real, foundational, base, reason for this tragedy, dissociation, snobbery.

The TMO had this deadly facade installed on Grenfell because they wanted to “improve its physical appearanceโ€ฆ prevent it looking like a poor relation” of other properties in the area. They didn’t care about the tenants of a rundown tower block, only how it looked to their rich neighbours. “Any suggestion it was to improve energy efficiency came later.” One of the richest boroughs in London, with some the most expensive property in the world, didn’t like how a tower block looked. And because the landlord saw those tenants as less than they cut corners, ignored warnings, and clad it in an unsafe product.

Following the publication of the Moore-Bick Report a major police inquiry is under way. Offences could include “corporate manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter, fraud, perverting the course of justice and misconduct in public office”. But weโ€™ll have to wait, who knows how long, for charges, court proceedings, and any convictions. I have one word to describe my expectations, Hillsborough. 

I’m not saying there aren’t laws or standards of behaviour. I’m saying those laws and standards of behaviour are only considered when the person or company, institution or government, get caught causing harm. Actions speak, and they tell me, only gain is considered.

This criminality permeates every aspect of society. The previous government’s attempts to achieve personal and political gain were extensive. They lied about the benefits of leaving the European Union. Promoted herd immunity at the beginning of the pandemic. Partied during lockdown. Created a VIP procurement lane so friends and donors of the Conservative Party could secure lucrative PPE contracts. They implemented think tank driven policy. Proposed unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy. Introduced authoritarian privacy intrusions and attacks on civil liberties. Crashed the economy. Their actions were criminal both literally and metaphorically.

Into these obvious, headline grabbing, examples of harm I’d lump swathes of other dissociated behaviours, including high prices, low wages, soaring rents, unsafe housing, food poverty, innutritious foodstuffs, fast food, brainwashing algorithms, advertising propaganda, nudge theory, collecting information, selling secrets, profiteering public services, tax dodging multinationals, money laundering banks, low tax territories, colonialism, wars, genocide, ecocide. Theyโ€™re getting away with murder.

Understanding all of this, seeing what so often looks like a kaleidoscopic mess, relies on separating the binaries of right and wrong, of knowing the difference between the two. But if your life, your entire reason, is unchecked self-interest, then itโ€™s not hard to see how doing what benefits you is considered right and good, regardless of the consequences to others. That to me reeks and wreaks psychopathic. And if thatโ€™s the dominant behaviour being pushed and practiced, business as usual, weโ€™re all trapped by a self-perpetuating misery that forces us to choose, exploit or be exploited. To survive these structures, never mind thrive in them, we must become something toxic not only to those around us, but to ourselves. We shouldn’t have to live like this.


Source:

  1. The Instigators (2024)
  2. How Millionaire Bankers Actually Work – Insider
  3. Everything that is Wrong with the TV Industry
  4. The Alternative MacTaggart
  5. Grenfell report blames decades of government failure and โ€˜systematic dishonestyโ€™ of companies
  6. Grenfell Tower fire report who was at fault and what was landlordโ€™s role
  7. ExxonMobil knew, they knew!
  8. The Big Idea – Noam Chomsky on Propaganda – Transcript
  9. Social Mobility and Opportunity
  10. Elitist Britain 2019
  11. The Educational Backgrounds of Leading Journalists

Share this:

  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • More
  • Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted on 17 September 202327 September 2023

The Online Safety Bill

Coercive control by another name

Imagine every time you leave your house handing your name, address, and telephone number to every Tom, Dick, or Harriet you meet. What about giving your passport or driving licence numbers to a high-street shop before you’re allowed in? Sounds ridiculous? Well that’s what the government’s Online Safety Bill is proposing.

UK based digital campaigning organisation the Open Rights Group are warning of far-reaching consequences if plans to mandate “age verification for much of the web” are enacted.

UK ONLINE SAFETY BILL WILL MANDATE DANGEROUS AGE VERIFICATION FOR MUCH OF THE WEB
Open Rights Group

This will result in an enormous shift in the availability of information online, and pose a serious threat to the privacy of UK internet users.

Open Rights Group

The bill will force sites to verify your age by using either government issued identification documents or biometric information, face scans, to accurately estimate your age. The problem with this technology is it doesn’t exist, certainly not while also protecting your privacy.

There is no privacy-protective age estimation or verification process currently in existence that functions accurately.

Open Rights Group

Not only will your ability to access content both privately and anonymously disappear completely, it could result in “large swathes of content” being removed for all UK users. Sites will have to choose between expensive, privacy-intrusive, age checks or sanitising their sites based on your IP address.

I’m aware GCHQ already monitors internet traffic with their Tempora programme.

In June 2013 the US whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the US and the UK security services are routinely collecting, processing and storing vast quantities of global digital communications.

Amnesty International

Their actions are so intrusive, in 2020 Amnesty International announced plans to take the UK government to court over what they called “industrial scale spying”.

Amnesty International

The system seems to operate by allowing GCHQ to survey internet traffic flowing through different cables at regular intervals, and then automatically detecting which are most interesting, and harvesting the information from those.

The Guardian

The Guardian

As reprehensible as Tempora is, the Online Safety Bill is more insidious. While GCHQ’s internet surveillance is scraping metadata searching for evidence of wrongdoing, the Online Safety Bill presumes guilt, that we’re trying to access something we shouldn’t, so preemptively restricts access. In the eyes of the government we’re all children in need of correction and training.

Opposing these plans will invariably be met with hostility. Without a hint of hypocrisy, proponents of the bill will jettison the previously sacrosanct principle that parents should be responsible for safeguarding their children, preferring instead the paternalistic high-handedness so often favoured by those who think they’re our betters, labelling critics as irresponsible, or some kind of predator, if you don’t accept the need for the government’s intrusions.

While I agree protecting children is important, I wonder about the real motivations for such draconian measures? Why does such an outwardly libertarian free-market government want to control the trade in information?

Perhaps restricting access is a Trojan Horse, and the real reasons can be found elsewhere. Back in July The Guardian reported Apple are threatening to withdraw FaceTime and iMessage from the UK because the Online Safety Bill wants to give “the Home Office the power to seek access to encrypted content”.

The Guardian

The company said the proposals would โ€œresult in an impossible choice between complying with a Home Office mandate to secretly install vulnerabilities into new security technologies (which Apple would never do), or to forgo development of those technologies altogether.

The Guardian

The government wants a back door into secure end-to-end encryption, so like some tabloid journalist hacking your phone, they can access your private, personal, intimate, communications. With a swing of a legislative axe, under the guise of protecting children, the privacy of all UK internet users will be excised. Worse than that, everyone in the UK will know, if they didn’t already, nothing they think or do is private.

Some might be happy to make that trade, I am not. It’s just another tributary swelling the river of authoritarianism. A river already bloated by this government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, described by Sacha Deshmukh, CEO of Amnesty International in the UK, as a “dark day for civil liberties”.

This deeply-authoritarian Bill places profound and significant restrictions on the basic right to peacefully protest.

Amnesty International

Amnesty International

The genesis of the act is a report, published by the opaque right-wing think-tank the Policy Exchange, warning of Extinction Rebellion’s “subversive agenda” and urging government to legislate against their actions.

Policy Exchange

As this paper showsโ€ฆ the leaders of Extinction Rebellion seek a more subversive agenda, one that is rooted in the political extremism of anarchism, eco-socialism and radical anti-capitalist environmentalism.

Policy Exchange

The Policy Exchange was set up in 2002 by Nicholas Boles, Michael Gove, and Francis Maude. In 2007 it was described as “the largest, but also the most influential think tank on the right” by The Daily Telegraph. In a not unsurprising twist, openDemocracy revealed in 2022 the Policy Exchange received money from the ExxonMobil Corporation. In 2017 the fossil fuel giant gave $30,000 to the American Friends of Policy Exchange.

openDemocracy

Policy Exchange has also received donations from several leading UK oil and energy companies.

openDemocracy

The report, Extremism Rebellion, is a seventy-six page attack on Extinction Rebellion, claiming to expose the history and strategies of an “extremist organisation” that threatens “democracy and the state” by seducing “celebrities, politicians and members of the public” into thinking their “methods and tactics are honourable and justified”.

No one can now plead ignorance of the ominous and threatening intentions of this campaigning organisation.

Policy Exchange

No one is, and by presuming people don’t understand the radical intentions of Extinction Rebellion, the Policy Exchange want readers to believe they’re uncovering something hidden. They’re not. Extinction Rebellion grew out of the anti-globalisation Occupy Movement, which took its inspiration from the Arab Spring, and unlike the Policy Exchange has an absolute commitment to openness and participatory democracy. All of the documents, reports, and videos quoted by the Policy Exchange, as evidence of Extinction Rebellion’s hidden agenda, are public and freely available on the internet. How long they remain accessible is anyone’s guess? Who knows what will happen when the Online Safety Bill becomes an Act?

Personally I don’t think anyone interested in Extinction Rebellion misunderstand their intentions. They understand perfectly well what’s at stake and what needs to be done. They agree with Extinction Rebellionโ€™s “Declaration of Rebellion” and all that entails.

We, in alignment with our consciences and our reasoning, declare ourselves in rebellion against our government and the corrupted, inept institutions that threaten our futureโ€ฆ the wilful complicity displayed by our Government has shattered meaningful democracy and cast aside the common interest in favour of short-term gain and private profits.

Policy Exchange

Extinction Rebellion

People understand all too well, they live with it every day, the free market “will inevitably destroy life on earth and must therefore be brought to an end”. The Policy Exchange knows this, that’s why they wrote the report. The government understands it, that’s why they created the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act. One is the most influential think-tank on the right and gets money from the fossil fuel industry, the other services the needs of the existing economic order. Both are intent on silencing groups protesting the calamities caused by the current economic death-cult.

The thinking that underpins the Policy Exchange report recently made an ignominious appearance in government. A story in Byline Times reported on the significant impact financial scandals surrounding Coronavirus contracts is having on the UK’s international reputation. We’ve dropped ten places on the Corruption Perceptions Index compiled by Transparency International.

The UK has gone from being perceived as the eighth least corrupt nation out of 180 countries to the 18th least corrupt between 2017 and 2022.

Byline Times

Byline Times

When the Cabinet Office permanent secretary Alex Chisholm gave evidence to the Commonsโ€™ Public Accounts Committee, he blamed “noisy reporting” for the decline in the UK’s international standing.

This led to a strong response from Labourโ€™s Dame Meg Hillier, the committeeโ€™s chair, who accused the Government of โ€œflying blindโ€ on the levels of fraud and corruption perpetrated against it โ€œdespite widespread awareness of the toxic threat posed by these despicable crimesโ€.

Byline Times

Personally I think Chisholm’s response exposes the patronising contempt government has for anyone who isn’t them. It screams privilege and entitlement, belligerently embracing the gangster maxim, if no one sees it, it didn’t happen.

None of this is new, but helped by a complicit media, I think it’s been getting steadily worse since the 2016 referendum. The government achieved their current majority because a coordinated media campaign eviscerated Jeremy Corbyn’s chances in the 2019 general election. Why’s that important? Because that win allowed the government to pass the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act. Journalists should be holding the government to account, investigating the implementation and impact of the Online Safety Bill, but they’re not.

Journalist think of themselves as fearless crusaders, speaking truth to power.

It was the job then and it is the job now for the BBC, for journalism in general, to challenge those in power.

The Free Press

I’d argue most, certainly the heavy hitters of British journalism, are so embedded in the very narrow orthodoxies of the British Establishment, their analysis is at best biased, at worst propagandist.

Free Press

The thing is, far too many journalist are educated and shaped by the institutions of the ruling class. With their private school educations, and Oxbridge degrees, and nepotistic connections, they’re as much a part of the establishment as the Church of England, and believe the orthodoxies of this elitism to be the natural order. As Noam Chomsky told Andrew Marr in 1996 “if you believe something different, you wouldnโ€™t be sitting where youโ€™re sitting”. [[The Big Idea – Noam Chomsky on Propaganda]]

Again not new, George Orwell described this topography in the proposed preface to Animal Farm. First published in the Times Literary Supplement in 1972, under the title “Freedom of the Press” it was rejected by the publisher in the 1940s because at a time, when the “prevailing orthodoxy is an uncritical admiration of Soviet Russia”, he was critical of Russia.

At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question.

George Orwell

By rejecting the orthodoxies of current economic age and demand something more sustainable Extinction Rebellion made themselves a target. Itโ€™s why the government created the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act. They want to silence the chorus of rebellion. It’s why we’ll end up with the restrictions and intrusions of the Online Safety Bill. The government want to limit the information we can access, profoundly restricting what we can see and hear. It’s hard for me not to see all of this an attempt to coerce and isolate people in United Kingdom.

This desire to isolate the United Kingdom may be one of the many reasons we were manipulated into leaving the European Union. In 2019 Thomas Friedman wrote an opinion piece for the New York Times, The United Kingdom Has Gone Mad. It struck me at the time as refreshingly antagonistic to the orthodoxy being pushed by the British media.

New York Times

What weโ€™re seeing is a country thatโ€™s determined to commit economic suicide but canโ€™t even agree on how to kill itself.

The New York Times

One of the things that stands out now is a quote from John Hagel, the co-head of Deloitteโ€™s Center for the Edge.

The companies that will create the most economic value in the future, will be the ones that find ways to participate more effectively in a broader range of more diverse knowledge flows that can refresh knowledge stocks at an accelerating rate.

The New York Times

We’re being ruled by a government that “wants to disconnect from a connected world”. They’re doing this by restricting what we can see, say, and do. In another context this might be called coercive control.

This controlling behaviour is designed to make a person dependent by isolating them from support, exploiting them, depriving them of independence and regulating their everyday behaviour.

Women’s Aid Federation of England

To paraphrase the Woman’s Aid description of coercive control, this pattern of abuse works to limit human rights by reducing a victims ability for action. Think Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act and restrictions on the right to protest. This is done by depriving independence and regulating everyday behaviour. Think about what’s happening with the Online Safety Bill’s demands for access to secure end-to-end encryption. Both bits of legislation seeking to regulate everyday behaviour.

How we escape such widespread abuse is beyond me? Perhaps realising what’s happening is the first step?


Sources:

  1. Open Rights Group – Online Safety Bill
  2. Amnesty International – Mass Surveillance
  3. The Guardian – How does GCHQ’s internet surveillance work?
  4. The Guardian – Apple suggests iMessage and FaceTime could be withdrawn in UK over law change
  5. Amnesty International – UK Dark day for civil liberties as ‘deeply-authoritarian’ Policing Bill passed by Lords
  6. Policy Exchange – Extremism Rebellion
  7. The Daily Telegraph – The Right’s 100 Most Influential
  8. openDemocracy – Revealed: Policing bill was dreamed up by secretive oil-funded think tank
  9. Extinction Rebellion – Declaration of Rebellion
  10. Transparency International – Corruption Perceptions Index
  11. Byline Times – ‘Noisy Reporting’ by Media of COVID Financial Scandals led to UK’s Slump in Corruption Index, Cabinet Office Claim
  12. The Free Press – Mapping the Establishment โ€“ Elitism Among the Top 100 UK Journalists
  13. Scratching Dog Pissed on a Tree – The Big Idea – Noam Chomsky on Propaganda
  14. George Orwell – The Freedom of the Press
  15. The New York Times – The United Kingdom Has Gone Mad
  16. Womenโ€™s Aid – What is coercive control?

Share this:

  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • More
  • Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted on 5 January 202318 February 2023

Anti-strike law

Two things jump out when I look at the governmentโ€™s anti-strike proposals. First, curtailing an individual’s right to withdraw their labour frames workers as assets. Not in the “benefit” understanding of the word, but as “property”. And second, I wonder if these attacks are part of a wider push by libertarians towards charter cities?

The Guardian

The idea pushed by Rishi Sunak, reported in The Guardian, that the “right to strike has to be balanced with the right of the British public to be able to go about their lives without suffering” is government doublespeak, code for employers having the right to profit, no matter the cost or suffering of workers.

Similar rhetoric was used back in 2016, during the Junior Doctors dispute, by the then Health Secretary, our current Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt. I remember lots of talk about poorer outcomes for patients at weekends, and a demand for a seven-days-a-week health service. The NHS has always been a seven-days-a-week service.

The governmentโ€™s plan, Hunt’s endgame, was to make the contracts more palatable in a private sector takeover of the NHS.

Open Democracy

Caroline Molloy has written a detailed and damning account of Jeremy Hunt’s time as Health Secretary for Open Democracy. She includes this quote from his contribution to Direct Democracy, a 2005 book where he outlines his ambition “to break down the barriers between private and public provision, in effect denationalising the provision of healthcare in Britainโ€. Hunt thought then, and my guess still thinks, the NHS is โ€œno longer relevant in the 21st centuryโ€. I think he’s wrong, universal healthcare is not a cost itโ€™s a benefit?

The dispute with the Junior Doctors was eventually resolved. Hunt got what he wanted, a five-of-seven workforce. They’re the same conditions expected of retail workers. No overtime for working unsocial hours, weekends, or bank holidays. You work five out of every seven days, regardless. It’s brutal, and takes its toll on the mind, body, and soul, of anyone forced to endure it.

Attacks on workers rights, rolling back pay and conditions, is always framed as a desire for efficiencies. It’s not about efficiencies. It’s about getting more for less. More work for less pay. Meaning more profit for employers, even in the public sector, because as we have seen the difference between public and private is being broken down. I fear the reason for these attacks, on all of our rights, is a wider push towards the model of England as a collection of charter cities.

Iโ€™ve been reading about charter cities since the referendum. When Boris Johnson became Prime Minister and Rishi Sunak was his Chancellor of the Exchequer the idea seemed to gain traction. Everything I read about them makes my jaw clench, triggering all kinds of dystopian scenarios in my hyper-vigilance. I can imagine a future in which Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland seek independence from England. Each for their own reasons but primarily because they’ve had enough of the colonial attitudes of Westminster. If they go, it’s possible the historic regions of Northumberland and Cornwall will follow.

I’ve written about the dissolution of the Union before, way back in March 2021. I haven’t seen much since then to change my understanding, that “the Conservatives will use these cries for independence as a crisis. One that lets them calve up England as if they were the ancient Kings of Wessex or Mercia”.

A thought on little England

The way I see it, a much reduced England will “be transformed into a series of charter cities. Regions that will claim to be hubs of enterprise and entrepreneurship. When in fact they will be islands of tax avoidance, shell companies, and post office boxes that hide wealth”. In the worst imaginings of this dystopia, I fear the average person will be forced to swear fealty to the cities and the “sovereign individuals” who rule them. We’ll have to take the knee for a job and place to live.

Some argue that charter cities are the reason for Brexit. I think the reasons for Brexit are many and varied. I view their implementation as opportunism. Libertarian think-tanks have been singing their praises for years. The chaos of Brexit is giving them a chance to put that theory into action. Chris Grey in his 15 August 2022 article in the BylineTimes, argues that concerns about charter cities are a conspiracy theory, and warns us to be cautious about making hyperbolic claims.

Byline Times
The Guardian

On the flip side George Monbiot in his 17 August 2022 article offers a compelling argument that freeports, embryonic charter cities, “deliver nothing but harm” and “attract organised crime, money-laundering, drug-trafficking and terrorist finance, while bringing minimal benefits to the nations that host them”.

Despite Grey’s warnings, and in the spirit of hope for the best plan for the worst, I lean towards Monbiot’s understanding of charter cities. Whoever turns out to be correct, attacks on workers rights, all of our human rights, will continue under this Conservative government. And if we’re not careful, the worst excesses of libertarian free-market thinking will have us tugging our forelock in feudal deference.

Share this:

  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • More
  • Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...
Posted on 10 December 20225 February 2023

Is Muskโ€™s Twitter part of a โ€œtotalitarian information warfareโ€

David Troy’s analysis of Elon Muskโ€™s Twitter takeover in BylineTimes is truly scary.

Musk’s takeover might not be the massive financial misstep it seems. Instead itโ€™s the latest salvo of โ€œtotalitarian information warfareโ€ that will, if itโ€™s not stopped, lead us into โ€œgenocide and bloody kinetic warโ€.

Considering the players involved this isnโ€™t hyperbole.

Byline Times

Share this:

  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • More
  • Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky
  • Share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr
  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit

Like this:

Like Loading...
  • Mastodon
  • LinkedIn
  • Link

// Scrapbook

  • Art & Artists
  • Climate & Environment
  • Film & Television
  • Media & Social
  • Music & Musicians
  • Photographs & Photographers
  • Politics & Opinion
  • Science & Technology
  • Thoughts & Stories
  • Writers & Writing

// LessBeauty // MoreBrains

  • Portraits
  • Streets

// LessBeauty // MoreBrainsยฒ

  • Analogue collages
  • Code objects
  • Digital collages
  • Found objects
  • Print collages
  • Physical objects
  • Rotoreliefs
  • Sketches

// Tags

1984 Acrylic Paint Adam Leigh Adrenalin Righting Alphabet Americana Lens Animation Anthony Reiner Beats BlacKeys SuperGrain Film Book Book-adaptation Books Border reivers Boris Johnson Brexit Cambridge Analytica Carrion Character Christine Leigh Cotton Tee Dictionary Donald Trump Drugs Edward S Curtis European Union Facebook Facing the apocalypse Found images Found object Found text FrameMagic App Futurism George Monbiot George Orwell Glossy Photo Paper Gsquad Lens Hipstamatic App Hueless App Inspired by Jacques Villegle Interventions iPhone 4s iPhone 6 iPhone 7 Jimmy Lens John S Lens John Truby Language Mixed Media Netflix Niccolo Machiavelli Notes to Strangers p5js Photo-phit PhotoForge2 App Photoshop Playlists Prime Video Rock BW-11 Film Screenplays Six word stories Story ideas Sugar Film TED Text The Conservative Party The Conversation The Guardian The Labour Party The Prince Toaster Frame Totalitarianism Trailers Transparency Film Twitter US1776 Film Watched-lists Wealth Wonder Lens Zombies

// Archives

// Search

// Information

  • Copyright notice
  • Writing aphorisms
  • Digigraph

[Copyright ยฉ Darrin Nightingale]

Powered by WordPress.com.
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d