Expectations after Brexit: Polly Toynbee, Part 2

Posted by on

Toynbee writes: “The moment is fertile for some yet-worse demagogue who calls for throwing out migrants already here.  Expect the volume to be raised against the “elites” – anti- parliament, anti-politics, bored with democracy itself.  Ignite hatred against Europe, blame Brussels for deliberately impoverishing us in revenge, (Tories already blame Brussels for policies they themselves have implemented. Ed.), stirring centuries-old enmities.

“Blend all that with a little nationalistic, leftish populism; nationalise our utilities and rail, eject foreign owners from key industries and property, pump up the armed forces and national pride, scrap the Human Rights legislation, make the BBC a government information department”, oh, and make it unpleasant enough for the people in the City that they would resettle in Frankfurt, however reluctantly.

The British regard themselves as a tolerant, moderate nation.  So, until Trump, did the Americans. Polly Toynbee calls this prospect “militant majoritarianism”.    I call it a form of fascism, and it’s happening in Eastern Europe and the United States as well.  It could lead to the diminution of the EU as we know it.  Winner?  Certainly not our young people, who regard themselves as citizens of the world (good for them!) and who face a tough future as it is.  It will be Russia, which has perceived EU and NATO enlargement be encircling and threatening them.  Of course, the Brexit people (no plan, no vision, all emotion) will be incapable of recognising what they have wrought, nor will they take  responsibility for it, if it happens.  It’s always somebody else’s fault.  Epicurus wouldn’t believe all this!

Polly Toynbee and Brexit

Posted by on

Polly Toynbee has an excellent article in The Guardian on June 14th.  She points out that, however well the dangers of Brexit are explained, people simply are not listening.  Immigration and Turkey are what is on their frontal lobes.  The reality is that An actual Brexit will mean little change, except a big drop in sterling and thus higher prices.  The same migrants will be there and the same sense of powerlessness. The inevitable recession will mean more misery, the country will still rely on the City and property bubbles.  Meanwhile most people will continue to have low skills, low productivity, atrophied public services, hopes raised and dashed.  Boris and Gove will have changed expectations and may be unable to control the situation, especially as a triumphant, extreme right wing government will enact more stringent government cuts, and disillusionment increases

I spend a significant time in Britain and find the level of service, to be polite, disappointing. People are not trained for their jobs and don’t understand the products they deal with.  To say “nothing works” is an exaggeration, but if it were not for the foreigners who populate the shops, the frustrations would be immense.  What Britain tends to get are the young, enterprising Europeans, maybe better educated than many Brits, and only passing through as they improve their English.  Ban them and I shudder to think what customer service will be like. Meanwhile, other migrants enter, somehow or other, their small boats beached in obscure coves, No one will be able to police that adequately.  Any improvement promised is pie in the sky.  (The whole thing is, in my opinion, a political ploy by the Right to get rid of Cameron and install a neoliberal government).

By all means, hold me to this!  Prove me wrong!

Modern art has hit the buffers: a curator’s introduction to an exhibit by a Portuguese painter

Posted by on

A letter from Portugal

“The criterion behind this choice of paintings by Manuel Amadon, now shown at Casa das Historias , that is to say, the various possibilities of creating groups and relations within this universe of images, is freely devised in a curatorial approach that is unrestrained  by any kind of systematic vision or predefined selective methodology.  Even though they share a common subject – the empty but inhabitable spaces of houses, or of theatrical stages and boxes- these pieces, created between 1975 and 2008, only coalesce around an enquiry into a meaning that emerges out of things. “The pictures all have an ominous simplicity,” the curator states.  There is indeed no doubt that Manuel Amado’s work develops out of a mystery that is, in principle, a simple one; normal things are seen from a different angle, and thus our conceptions of subjectivity in comprehending the world may become the real source of the enigma. Each one of these paintings is, then, an exercise in perceiving the invisible in the visible of the piece.  Instead of reflecting the visible , Amado’s painting makes something visible.

The invisible forces in Manuel Amado’s painting are, first of all, the affective ties to the spaces he has inhabited, which are revealed through the memory, not a photographic one, but a reconfigured memory that contains resonances from both the present and the past, the moment in which these spaces are being remembered by the artist through painting. (  ……….and on, and on, and on, etcetera. It gets even worse, I promise you, and I am having to copy it laboriously by hand onto my i- pad.  Enough!)

The paintings were actually rather good.  The painter has a unique and rcognisable style and one could easily imagine one of the paintings on one’s own living room wall.

But where do they find the people to write this gobbledygook, and who is persuaded by it?  It’s an attempt to claim the work is somehow something it is not, a use of language designed to bamboozle the viewer with the use of highflown language, making the comprehensible incomprehensible. Does it add value to the painting? No, it does not.  In fact, it gets between the painter and his potential market and encourages the purchaser to put  his credit card back in his wallet.

The perils of heaping work on customers

Posted by on

“The ‘self-service revolution’  has been wonderful for companies.  What better way to strip out costs than to replace supermarket cashiers with machines, or make passengers print out their boarding passes?  In a new book, Shadow Work, Craig Lambert argues that “the reason why so many people feel overworked these days is that they are constantly being asked to do ‘unseen’ jobs”, by everyone from Amazon to the taxman. The cumulative effect is to feel like “a slave to the machine”. Some of these developments have in fact been driven by customer preference, but there is now a clear and worrying divide between “cattle class” and “business class” offerings: the service industries have eliminated “the personal touch” from their mass-market products, while “no amount of fawning is too much” for well-heeled customers. And if they abandon trying to differentiate themselves with good service, the effect is “to train customers to shop on price”, making them vulnerable to attack from discounters. Just ask Britain’s mainstream supermarkets”. ( Schumpeter, The Economist)

We encountered  a very charming man who, a year ago, had sold his technology company and is now looking around for new opportunities. He agreed that the idea of customer service is dying or dead. One can never get past the young woman on the phone.  She either can’t or won’t put you through to her supervisor, and often doesn’t know who he is anyway. The management treat customers like cattle, ignoring complaints and suggestions, offering limited training to the front line staff, and imagining themselves customer orientated when they send  out gormless opinion polls,  another means of taking up your precious time.  And by the way, most of the non- financial websites do not need elaborate “accounts” and log-ins, which are marketing ploys and have nothing to do with security.

Time for a revolt by the customer!

Do people have children to fit in?

Posted by on

Letter to the New Scientist from Laura Re:

“Your article on having kids does not take into account one crucial factor contributing to happiness: fitting in with your peers. My grandmother, talking about the war, used to say: we were poor but it didn’t matter, because everybody else was. My aunt once stated that she eventually decided to get married because all her friends had. That’s not mere copycat behaviour: it expresses the need to share similar lifestyles to avoid being left out.

I would guess that the reason people over 40 are the happiest, because most of their friends have families. No one wants to be the odd one out”. (Laura Re, Parma, Italy)

Or they must want to conform?  Getting married or having  a child just because all around you are doing the same thing seems pathetic  to me.  I really wanted to have children; it never occurred to me that I was following my leader  and  conforming.  I thought I might be able to do a good job as a caring father, and that, in due course I could be instrumental in producing decent, educated, civilised human beings – and have a happy family life into the bargain.

What happened to thinking  for yourself?  Also, what happened to the view that, if you have a demanding job, but your spouse is unlikely to help with child- rearing, then it is rational (and kind to unborn children) not to have children that you feel you cannot look after well.   Copycat conception without thinking why you want children, how you can afford them, and if you even like little kids at all if it comes to that,  borders on the irresponsible.  We are not sheep.  We have a choice these days.