The Young or the Dead?

I feel a little like a 19th century maiden aunt giving a young niece advice on how to have really great dirty, sweaty sex, but in many ways that is okay because the people I'm appealing to are sometimes blinded by love and high sugar content food and drink.

The old, the disaffected, the disenfranchised and the ignorant - but mainly the old - have plunged the youth of this country into a situation at least 76% of those that voted didn't want and while, in reality, the majority of them will dismiss the vote on a minute-by-minute basis, the youth of this country with half a brain will know that there is now an even bigger hurdle in front of them than they could ever have imagined. For some young people in this country there is nothing but covert rebellion, weed, sex and the same slog their parents and grandparents suffered and regardless of the social and educational reasons, a large part of it is down to parents looking at their children like they are some kind of bizarre investment and wondering when that huge money pit is either going to pay back some of the money spent on them or bugger off the family payroll.

I've worked with some unbelievably intelligent kids whose lives are fait accomplis - their fathers have stated, quite categorically that work is the way forward, none of this going to college and bettering yourself nonsense. Trying to convince these kids they should fight for their future is a cross between trying to convince a racist they should have voted remain and a real fight - you'd have more chance donning a Moses costume and trying to convince the Red Sea to part. I have friends in Corby who can point out walking human tragedies around that town - people who, had they been looked after properly by our governments, could have become someone good - people who contribute. Yes, these people didn't want whatever opportunities were pushed their way, but on estates in Corby anything coming from Westminster is viewed with suspicion and therefore anything passed down by local government has the same stigma attached; plus the children of people with nothing are indoctrinated by the spite their parents hold for the establishment.

The problem is in these urban ghettos, of which Corby and every other town in Northants (and all over the country) also have people who simply do not believe that politicians are even aware of them and whenever they do fall on their radar it's to try and make their lives harder - and frankly, who can blame them. It simply doesn't matter what you say to some people, prove to them or give them examples of why, people think governments are there to shaft us - a necessary evil.

I've met people who have conveyed to me that they truly believe this is Purgatory; that living here and now is a punishment for a previous life's indiscretions. I've met more people who have become increasingly paranoid about everything and I'm seeing scary levels of intolerance that would have been frowned upon ten years ago. The sad truth is people are ignorant because influence exists everywhere and in austere times negative influence resonates more.

The people affected by negative influence the most are the elderly and what the elderly did last Thursday was stick a massive two fingers up at their children, their grandchildren and their future generations. They weren't influenced by the fact they could be screwing up everything they worked hard for and some of them won't care. Both parties operated Project Fear, the Leave campaign scared the OAPs more while simultaneously tweaking the nostalgia gland.

What we now need is a brighter future, because for 48% of the population it looks bleaker than a landslide UKip General Election victory and what everyone seems to have forgotten about are all those kids in schools and apprenticeships who had absolutely no say whatsoever in their futures. Every 'child' under 18 on June 22nd didn't have representation and how many of them would have been subjected to their parents' or grandparents' racist invective? Many of them, living in a completely multi-cultural world, dismiss it, but others, like the kid who was resigned to leaving school at 16 and getting a job, will perpetuate it.

Politics was something reserved for 6th form when I was at school and while schools today have some politics in their curriculum, the nature of it and the passions it stirs, especially amongst left leaning teachers means it's more like a mechanics manual than a creative writing class. This is completely wrong.

I believe that politics is something that we are exposed to every day - we simply can't avoid it, yet the majority of us systematically blank it from our minds. We try not to align the two because for some of us it really is too difficult to reconcile. But it is a fact, from your shopping to your use of parks you are using politics, you are part of politics, you are aiding the economy to allow you to relax in the park. Obviously, it is a lot more complicated than that, but that pretty much sums it up. If you lived in a world inhabited by 150,000 people on a planet the size of Northampton, it might be as simple as that. Every child from the moment they are born - the NHS - to the moment they walk out of school - and onto JSA - is, in many ways, affected by politics more than you or I and yet they have no voice, because of politics.

I'm not suggesting that any child under the age of twelve should be forced to suffer 'lessons' about politics, but once a child enters Year 9 they should get a mandatory one lesson a week, rising to two in Year 11. Before you start arguing about bias, just remember that kids are subject to political bias whenever there's an election on, whenever something happens that effects their parents. Whenever something unique like a referendum happens, so they're not going to be exposed to anything worse than they see at home; but that isn't really a starter here. My little experience in education saw something I really didn't expect - Conservative teachers; there might not be that many, but they exist. If schools have to or chose to put Politics on their curriculum then they employ politically diverse teachers and if that seems a bit radical, think of it this way - kids share everything with each other and now more than when I was at school because of electronic devices and social networks; teachers sharing personal beliefs is always something special, it forms bonds, and more importantly kids listen to 'secrets' with all ears; if they think they're sharing something it sticks and it focuses minds much better than pawing over books. Politics should be about discussion, debate and demystification as well as how and why it works and what it does for us.

I was asked once by a young guy why we paid taxes. I thought it was a weird question until he quantified it. We pay Council Tax, we pay VAT, we pay fuel tax, we pay road tax, if people die they pay inheritance tax, we pay taxes on house purchases, we have to buy a TV license, and then there's pensions and National Insurance, taxes on fags and booze, we even buy lottery tickets, where does all of this money go and then you have income tax, which is the biggest chunk of the lot. I suddenly realised that young people simply don't understand and that's because they are not educated about it. We send our kids to school and they leave and are thrown in the deep end without adequate preparation. This is a society that will allow any 16 year old to have a baby, but not vote until they're 18. If you didn't understand how society worked you'd probably wonder why we leave our kids so under-prepared and even if you do understand it...

Evil politicians might want less people to be interested, because lower turn outs mean bigger chances of winning. If compulsory voting is not on or ever likely to be on the agenda then we have to start educating our kids about politics, even if it bores the shit out of them. The daughter of an old friend recently had a lesson at school - she's Year 11 - and it was about council taxes, pension schemes, insurances and being aware that planning for the future is something school leavers should really be thinking about - not all the time, because knowledge is not necessarily power, but it does remove the huge amounts of anger and frustration exhibited by the youth when faced with such trials as benefits, rent agreements and single living. Schools are kind of gearing up kids to be at home now, focusing on careers again but not teaching kids about the perils that face them, especially if they have radical parents; and I mean 'radical' in the term they view their children as earners rather than learners.

Stop perpetuating myths, urban legends and prejudice by allowing them to view their parents' opinions with objectivity; if we continue the way we're going huge swathes of the country won't even bother to vote and less and less people will feel compelled to venture into politics and it will become like it was in the 19th century, lots of rich and privileged people screwing you down and the people feeling helpless, worthless and alienated. If you are a parent and you value your kids' futures, then you should start to encourage them to be interested. It's kind of a duty if we want fairer representation in the future, when many of us will have retired and will be worrying about pensions, houses, food and our limited futures.

Lower the voting age to 16, or raise all legal ages to 17; at 15 a kid is facing at least three years of education ahead, but 16 and 17 year-olds face four or five years of not having a say in their future and by the time they do they're not interested. Get schools to promote student councils, that have to be run to include all, and that means some of the dodgy kids and even some from SEN or the disenfranchised - give them a voice and some responsibility and watch them shine and more importantly watch them assert positive peer pressure. You don't have to radicalise students to get them interested in the future of their country, you just have to make them think (and know) they will have a voice.

It's time to engage and involve the young in tomorrow.

The Last Word

Worst Case Scenario

The country decides to leave the European Union. What could happen?

The stock market could crash and there could be a massive run on Sterling, devaluing Britain by as much as £40billion over night.

This will spark an emergency budget to put safeguards in place should the arse fall out of the economy.

David Cameron - growing increasingly unpopular - resigns and triggers a leadership battle in the Conservatives, where those in favour of Leave become the leading contenders, people with an extreme right-wing leaning and who have publicly stated that the cuts to public services are not deep enough and are unlikely to channel whatever piddly amount is saved from leaving into those services and the excuse will be the fall in stock and the fiscal effect on leaving.

Not a lot else will happen during the first two years as our government attempts to negotiate trade deals and discovers that it cannot accept any existing deal without allowing the freedom of movement - just ask Norway or Switzerland. Except, some things will happen, socially.

As one political reporter (Norman Smith) said, 'Whatever happens it will change the face of the UK'. He knows, as do many others, that the extreme examples of xenophobia exhibited throughout the campaign will spill out onto the streets, probably whatever the result. The referendum has allowed prejudices to be almost acceptable, as like-minded people congregate to castigate and show extreme opinions that align them with some of the worst terrorists and this will affect foreign migrants in this country, who will be stuck in a limbo, not knowing what the immediate future holds for them.

The scary thing is if intimidation begins (continues) and starts to drive EU migrants (and others) out of the country, there is an idiot minority who will view this as a victory and once it starts 'reclaiming the country' will become something that the far right will begin to practice, because if we vote to leave then the lunatics will really be in control of the asylum. You might not care about the economy (you really should) or bureaucracy (there's probably more of it in UK law than in the EU) or even the migrant issue (depending on who you believe it's either the big issue or not really a concern), you might just feel it seems the right thing to do.

That hangnail - you know if you bite at it you'll end up making your finger bleed and sore for a few days. You know that pulling at it is the stupid thing to do, but you do it anyhow and you'll probably do it again. This isn't a hangnail, this is like cutting off your nose to spite your face. This isn't a frivolous thing; this isn't about getting one over the government, or screwing David Cameron, this is self-harm. Ask yourself this: the UK might be a better place out - that fairy tale might come true and Boris & co., will be right. It might not change much at all and you might shrug your shoulders and say 'Meh', or... it might be costing you your job, your children's jobs and futures, your pockets and purses, your civil liberties and you might wonder what the hell has happened and who can you blame for it?

If you vote Remain and nothing changes will it be that bad? But just think, for a second, put those feelings to one side and think about the future, what if it all turns to shit? What if your house devalues by 35%? What if your pension disappears either through lack of money or a corporate raider like Philip Green? What if there are no jobs, no money sloshing around the economy, no cheap goods - what if you can no longer buy what you want or at the right price? People don't want second best, but they sometimes have to accept it - but it tends to be their choice; if you never have the first choice any more and pay more for what you have to have, is that better than it is now? Do you really really want some kind of mythical independence if it is going to cost your kids their future? Can you truly live with yourself if you are one of the people responsible for the isolation and bankruptcy of our great nation?

Vote Remain.

Conspiracy Theories

"As Naomi Klein documents in The Shock Doctrine, neoliberal theorists advocated the use of crises to impose unpopular policies while people were distracted" From a George Monbiot column in The Guardian.

Ask yourself this: when a government releases information about plans or policy changes, buried beneath some major news story dominating the headlines and reducing other news to minor status - is that any different than a conspiracy theory turned inside out?

We are currently living in an era of fear and because fear is all around is we allow things we would normally question without hesitation to ensure that fear doesn't get us, personally. The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse arrived ages ago given the amount of Famine, Pestilence, War and Death (disguised as Poverty) we get subjected to on a weekly basis. Since 2001, it's like the news has to be like a Die Hard film or people will switch off. Sometimes life almost seems to be orchestrated and not by some omnipotent god, but probably some multi-billionaire with media interests and a cold dead heart.

Sometimes the world seems a little like a massive soap opera and at other times like the lunatics have been running the asylum, for a while. The concept of the 'conspiracy theory' has always been more attractive when the world is more crisis prone and, of course, in the 21st century even having a conspiracy theory is either madness or, if you have any evidence, not really a conspiracy theory at all. Some conspiracy theories are quite benign and highly plausible, others are as desperate as a 1996 post-match Kevin Keegan interview; most depend on a chain of information, a string of people and an unfathomable amount of probability that, if it's true then, someone will at some point talk. The biggest problem with a conspiracy theory is the longer it exists without a whistleblower or someone to throw something to give it credence, the more likely it's not going to have anything more than a grain of truth - if that. Wishful thinking mixed with the need for plausible (even if implausible) answers.

However, how about something that on the surface seems unlikely, doesn't have a big chain of potentially loose-lipped co-conspirators, but could ultimately reap the goal that is desired. Confused? Good.

I want you, if you can be bothered or even remember, to cast your mind back to when David Cameron was 'negotiating' the deal with the EU that he was going to use as the main reason for us staying in the EU, when he calls the much-heralded referendum. The man looked destroyed and beaten; like a leader who had lost. He hasn't looked even remotely in control of things since then and while he comes across business-as-usual in PMQs, he's uncertain and a bit dithering when confronted with unscripted questions and situations. He's also been the target of some interesting attacks, which have led to even more interesting public solidarity scenes within the Tory party which, behind closed doors, appears to be tearing itself apart.

Then look at George Osborne and how his star has descended like it was actually a housebrick. Look how he has gone from Dave's logical successor to being almost toxic. Now Theresa May is under scrutiny and even if Nick Clegg's allegations come to nothing; that's another one of Team Cameron who is seeing leadership chances dwindle.

How better to ruin the Remain vote than show those in favour of it on the ropes? But that's just a wee bit too obvious and quite see-through. It could, however, be made to look like this because there has to be a post mortem. I've said for years that Tories play the long game and in this instance maybe a strong faction within the party is playing that game, one that looks beyond the increasingly unpopular leader team?

The reason I mentioned Cameron's late night negotiations is because he went into that meeting asking for not a lot and he was given next to nothing. One of the leading nations in the EU and he couldn't change it how his party wanted it - which was essentially to opt out of anything we didn't agree 100% with - and that meant things were going to go badly wrong for him. You see (and this is the only part of this theory I'm in two minds about), I think Dave's election win was a bit unexpected for the party. I think, as did many others, it was going to be a hung parliament and they would be the party to form another coalition. It would also trigger a leadership contest and it would give the party the opportunity to either big up Boris or find go the other way and find someone less charismatic, but more pragmatic for the coalition to come. Contrary to some popular conspiracy theories, the voters occasionally surprise people. There are some who believe the Tories weren't really prepared for power in 1992, despite having been in for 13 previous years. John Major was not seen as a valiant and fearless leader and almost from the beginning of that government's reign it was plagued by scandals that Thatcher's team would have shrugged off. Parallels have been drawn.

Dave is elected and makes his own plans to go leaving his own legacy in the shape of Osborne or May, but this isn't fast enough for the party or even what it really wants. Things are not going as planned and something has to be done. Except, the only wrinkle in this is an unexpected opportunity and that is the EU referendum. The Tory Party - not necessarily all their MPs and members, but the Party is probably anti-EU. It throws up too many obstacles to prevent them from having the country they believe we should have and while many are pro-EU, the old school have a very narrow view of it, possibly skewered by a sense of empire or entitlement - we are British after all. What if the current government don't care what way you vote? Vote in and nothing changes, vote out and they benefit even more.

The Tories aren't exactly setting the world on fire with their pro-Europe campaigning. It seems to be down to MPs of other persuasions, celebrities and business to make the case. Dave is doing his bit, but he's being constantly distracted and implicated to the point where Jeremy Corbyn is more trusted on Europe and Corbyn is a bit of a sceptic. But what if Dave has no real reason to fight? What if he knew back in January that his days were numbered? The MPs can talk him up and give him public backing, but it all seems a little false when the next minute the Out campaign are criticising their own party/government because of some Euro tragedy. It all seems to be stage managed to give subtly different appearances to whoever interprets it and all slightly negative.

The Out call the In campaign 'Project Fear' when in actual reality it is 'Project Fact'. The Out campaign seem to be basing their campaign on the fact that people will still trade with us wherever we are and that they'd be cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Um... France? They'll be the first in the queue to renegotiate and they'll be setting the price high or go away. Not one single Out campaigner has said categorically that prices won't rise. Ask your neighbour this - if you're £20 a week worse off for leaving the EU and there's just as many foreigners here, will voting out be worth it?

I can't reiterate this point enough (because it seems to be neglected in the coverage) - we have no guarantees whatsoever we're even going to be able to renegotiate the same terms we currently have, so to expect us to get stuff cheaper is ludicrous. Plus, consider this - we give Europe two fingers, how desperate are they going to be to deal with us at all? How confident are you that nothing will change, things will get cheaper and everyone will be happy again? Do you really believe Michael Gove when he says that £50billion of the money we won't be paying the EU will go to the NHS? Or will it go to the private companies who have taken over parts of the NHS?

The way the Tories are dividing up the country and selling off what's left; it won't matter if we're in or out for them. They will still clean up; so it could be they're doing what they hoped to do last May, but now with added incentives. That's a conspiracy theory that could have some weight.

My Instincts Are Probably Wrong, But...

I was round a friend's house last night, dropping off a data stick and enjoying a chat and a coffee - we both like to put the world to rights. Last night, I forecast that David Cameron would be gone sooner rather than later. It was a throwaway comment - more hopeful than informed - but my instincts have been pretty sharp in recent years, especially about politics and a little later, without the jest, I made the forecast again.

I said something along these lines: the general ignorance, xenophobia and cold-heartedness of middle England is sad because our society will allow exceptions which makes them seem like hypocrites but somehow that'll be okay or will be written off as 'diversity'. The establishment is moving the people to the right by feeding us a diet of fear and more people are being suckered in while offence is being tolerated more often.

It's easier now to nod in agreement when someone moans about the amount of 'migrants' or 'foreigners' coming into the country than to try and argue with them. People no longer care about facts, they just want to believe someone who agrees with them.

I reckon the country will vote us out of Europe by as much as 65% (maybe more) and within two years 'I Told You So' will be the most recognisable political phrase used by the remaining 35%. What the 'Out' brigade can't seem to get their heads around is as far as Europe will be concerned we would become Russia - big, lucrative but not part of the team.

People and governments don't seem to realise that if they did something the rest of Europe didn't like they'd get sanctions. That's trade sanctions; the prevention of certain things being imported or a ban on exports and, of course, as we've learned from Russia, sanctions are tolerated and help breed even more fanatical nationalism.

Can you imagine Theresa May getting the UK Bill of Rights passed to replace the Human Rights Act? Can you imagine the rest of the civilised world's reaction to something more akin to North Korea? Do not accuse me of being a scaremonger unless you can give me a single concrete reason to change the current rights of humans to something that suits the state more than the individual.

Pulling out of Europe would cause another Scottish referendum and this time they'd go and be queuing in Brussels asking to join before David Dimbleby's breakfast. Despite what you might think, there would be many in Northern Ireland - devout Loyalists - who would consider ceding from the UK because much of NI's trade and economic resurgence has been through its deals with Europe and not the rest of the UK. Things aren't perfect in NI, but they are brilliant compared to what they were and that isn't just down to a peace agreement, it's because NI is a good place to live - economically. Imagine the damage Europe not dealing with us so favourably would have there. And, ironically, we can complain about all those nasty migrants flooding into our country, what would we do if 2 million Loyalists had to be repatriated? I know, it's not ever likely to happen, countries simply don't move entire nations into hostile environments...

The aftermath of it would be more than a disaster for whoever the PM is because if we vote to come out I reckon Cameron will quit. He'd have to because whether he's a puppet or his own man he's not going to want to be known as the PM who oversaw the downfall of the United Kingdom (he'd rather George got that award) - I believe he understands pride. This would mean a fight between Gideon Osborne, Theresa May, Boris Johnson and A.N. Other to become PM and the simple fact that whoever claimed the prize would be accepting a decaying poison chalice would inevitably force them into a General Election and for two reasons: 1) If the establishment doesn't want us to leave Europe because of the inevitable damage it would cause and 2) to simply get a mandate to begin to run the country like a totalitarian dictatorship which oppresses the poor and disenfranchised - because they are a drain on society and people's ability to work - and gives the rest enough money to always want for more.

So, 21st Century USA is the model the Tories are aiming for and one wonders, quite simply, what Tories' problems with the poor, disenfranchised and unfortunate is? By all means target the feckless, lazy and criminal; but why think everyone is trying it on? I meet so many genuine people in need, I simply can't understand how a government can treat them so contemptuously.

Part of the problem is that our schoolchildren are taught a curriculum that doesn't reflect the needs of the 21st century child, so we are breeding an increasing number of apathetic worker drones who thrive on a diet of mindless 'entertainment' and political apathy; political activists probably convert as many people as JWs do. Therefore what is needed is something being changed in schools; perhaps making the teaching of politics compulsory, like Maths and English, because and quite simply, politics is one thing that affects everyone everyday even if they're not aware of it. Kids need to understand why we have politics rather than be made to hate it and think it's anachronistic and something old people do. But, of course, the existential problem with teaching school kids about politics is how do make it unbiased; how do you ensure your teachers are being fair and balanced and not secretly indoctrinating the youth into a future violent revolution? You can't. I'm being melodramatic, but people have opinions, even teachers, and regardless of what you might think I've never met one who hasn't expressed one in a classroom, playground or dining hall.

The solution is simple; you employ a politically diverse trio of politics teachers and you divide the students political year into three terms: Autumn/Winter: Conservatives (and all the right wing); Winter/Spring: Socialism/Labour (and all the left wing) and Summer: Liberalism and extremism (because a liberal is the best placed person to be objective about extremism).

I've wildly digressed, but there is a point hiding in there and that is with exception of a referendum, fewer people every year are voting; a large percentage of those not voting are the young and the disenfranchised - probably two groups that need a fairer society. We are relying more and more on career politicians, all playing their own mental version of Celebrity PM, while less people get involved in the ultimate decision making. What is scary is the fear being generated by the Right at the thought of a fair-minded man being in charge of the country. Have the Tories learned nothing from history? Humans don't like oppression and eventually they rise up against it. Have the Tories ever wondered why there are only ever riots when they're in power? Or the mass marches in London tend to be when a Tory government is around (or a Blair one, which is pretty much the same thing). What often happens when a society becomes a bit fairer is the majority of the people are happy; it tends to be the greedy that ruin it for everyone else.

What we need are future generations that will make the right decisions for the people not for a few and that will only happen if we teach kids how important having an understanding of politics is, but more importantly, how to look for fair and unbiased opinion and coverage, because mainstream media news is no longer unbiased and benefits from the nuances of deceit developed by the entertainment industry.

I don't know if there are any politicians in the country who believe that everything about it needs an overhaul and that we should be investing in a country to still be great in 100 years, because your grand and great grand kids will want a world for their children and not a capitalist wasteland of inequality, hate and mistrust.

The Smell of Sewage

"We all live in our own little bubbles," said a good friend of mine in regard to what we see on social media, etc. He is right and some of these little bubbles tend to perpetuate lies because people would rather believe what suits them than actually bother to do any research.

This is pretty much how governments are decided. I'll vote for who I see as the party to look after my self-interest. This is why whenever you attempt to guilt a Tory voter into accepting that they belong to the I'm All Right, Jack demographic, they get offended; because people like to think they are benevolent and kind hearted, but as long as they can do it from a distance and be seen as right on then that's all they need to do.

Today, a journalist on the BBC who I'm not familiar with said something that even out of context is reason some governments fall. "People have long memories when something affects them."

The Tories were actually trying to blame Labour this morning for the poor state of flood defences, because, if they hadn't had to sort the disaster Labour left behind this may never have happened and people will actually believe this; but they will be people who live on hills or nowhere near rivers and these people will be none the wiser about the fact that Osborne - the austerity chancellor - is still borrowing money and that money is being used to keep banks and corporations sweet, not for shoring up the infrastructure of the country - because I challenge anyone to give me an example of the Tories doing anything other than sticking a plaster over a gaping gunshot wound?

And when not-so gorgeous George continues to rape the poor and disenfranchised, it'll seem fair because it won't be affecting you. Except it will. Tories don't like taxation, but they love indirect taxation. Tories don't invest in the infrastructure and while it doesn't affect you, who cares. Well, you should because if they don't fork out for rebuilding, you'll end up footing the bill by some roundabout way - that's the way they work.

The floods could well be a political disaster for our pig-loving PM because at some point, especially if it continues to rain, they will have to spend more than a token few million on something they won't be able to recoup in some way. Spending money that disappears is anathema to the Tories and their right wing press buddies are struggling to keep focused on the peace-loving terrorist, because the people are fed up with it and want to know what the government are going to actually do about the crumbling country.

The Tories are only good with the economy because they tell you they are and they have lots of mates who perpetuate the lie.

Tories lie and then lie some more. Remember this when you vote for them next time, because next time it might be you they screw.

It's Got to Be True, It Was in the Paper

It's far too early for a lasting shift in public opinion, but some political analysts and media specialists are likening The Sun's defamation of Jeremy Corbyn at the Cenotaph to its initial coverage of the Hillsborough disaster. The paper lied and as a result there has been a backlash. The attacks on a politician who at worst can be accused of having principles have been ratcheted up a few notches to the point where it's getting nasty.

We could be heading for a tipping point - a stage in the proceedings where it can fall one of two ways. The problem is I can't help thinking this is a carefully planned assault, one that gives Corbyn an edge for the next two or three years, but sees it wane as we approach 2020 and the Tory propaganda machine rolls into overdrive and the fear factor is increased, because the Tories probably have already realised that they won't win the next election on policies. We will see a campaign across the media that makes the 'bacon butty face' seem like a playground insult.

Or the PLP will panic, ructions will appear, splits will happen, Corbyn will be ousted and one of the 'others' will step into the breach and return the party more central, angering the CLP and members but leaving them trapped between a rock and a hard place. Can Labour really afford to allow the Tories free reign until 2025 when who knows what the world will be like and how much money there will be to rebuild crumbling Britain.

What has to happen to make all the people who don't care, or who think this government is looking after their best interests, realise that the country is a better, safer, place when the majority are happy, not just those unaffected by cut after cut, destroying the safety net we all agreed to put in place in case, heaven forbid, we need it.

Some people I know think I describe a bleak and unrealistic picture of the world they can't see from out of their windows or that I paint the Tories as borderline Nazis with an agenda that would be admirable if it was physically achievable without damaging the people who need it the most, while rewarding people who, really, honestly, don't need any more. Some people need to realise that austerity might mean not going on a third foreign holiday or buying a new BMW for the missus this year; because an extra 1p in tax you could pay, could help save your life one day by ensuring the NHS is working or you have a good chance of a job if you lose the one you're in. Or it might mean a few kids getting decent meals and maybe their parents too. It shouldn't matter if you think someone is a scumbag, they shouldn't be forced into the fringes of society if it can be avoided - that was how we got the way we are in the first place. The problem is people shouldn't pay tax, the poor should pay for everything and the rich should just preen themselves while being waited on, hand and foot.

I completely understand why the media is the way it is, their masters are genuinely scared that if nothing else Corbyn will get people interested in politics; make people consider fairness as a concept worth trying again. Do you want a world populated by mindless, opinion-less drones, working endlessly while others reap the benefits while dreaming up new ways to work you harder for less so they can have more? Because what do you think will happen to all the people in council estates, housing associations, dingy flats, who might have flat screen TVs and iphones but also have loans with Wonga and live so hand to mouth that if something goes wrong someone misses out. The people with money drove the poor to want to aspire; they made them proud and vain and willing to get in debt to have a TV that they will believe their more fortunate friends will think was achieved through hard work or necessary guile, thus moving them up their friends' respect scale. That was Thatcher's fault - check the history books if you don't believe me.

The feckless are also a bi-product of this; through years of neglect in the 80s entire generations of people lost 10 years of working and many never returned and as a result their off-spring generally felt the world was going to be as fair to them as it was to their folks and that's when some places turned into sink-hole estates in 80s and remain enclaves of the underclasses. A benefit culture has helped create these people, so something needs to be done to break the cycle, but beating the donkey often leads to disappointment or a kick in the shins.

So what benefit does a media organisation have from smear campaigns that could end up with a chunk of their subscribers being unable to continue paying them millions because they backed a government taking money away from people who could be giving it to them?

None. Unless they know something we don't. Perhaps Sky are already losing too much money to debt collectors because all those families in the country's shittiest areas can no longer afford to pay £30 to £120 a month. You can bet the Sun doesn't really make NewsCorpse any money; it's just another tool for Murdock's megalomania.

The ignorant need to realise that if they read something in a daily rag that isn't true, then that's how they should treat everything in that paper, because people being picky and choosy about what they believe was actually one of the key reasons how the Nazi party won power in Germany.

No Surprises

Tax credit abolition. China building our nuclear reactors. TTIP rampant. £2billion short fall on NHS budget. AstraZeneca Zero tax deal. More and more public spending cuts. If anyone is at all surprised by the events in the last week then you need to revise more.

George Osborne's main criteria is to get the deficit down, yet no right wing press has made much of the fact the budget deficit is higher now than it ever was under Labour; or that Gorgeous George has actually borrowed more money - not for the country, but to help line the pockets of his new chums. We get Corbyn and the asteroid in the news, while Tories literally dismantle everything that is admirable about this country and not even a sniff of it - anywhere 'creditable'.

When I suggested that a Tory government would penalise the poor and disenfranchised, many soft Tories I know accused me of the kind of scaremongering our right wing press gets away with on a daily basis. Some even suggested, when I said that tax credits would be the first thing to go that I really had no idea and I was working purely on an anti-Tory agenda. I accused many people of not caring for the country or the people and I was told, quite categorically that despite not having a job and being a victim of austerity cuts TWICE, I didn't know what I was talking about. I accused them of being 'alright Jacks' and was pretty much ostracised and told they were doing it for their kids - because, as we know, the Tories are the party that plan for the future of your kids. I mean look at the amount of schools, hospitals, nurseries and child-based community projects they fund or have built...

Champagne is back on the menu at the Tory conference; but more alarming than anything else are the steel fences around the venue and the armed guards, and snipers on roofs. At the labour Party conference a week before any Tony, Gordon or Mandleson could have strolled up to Jeremy Corbyn and shook his hand. The Tories are the party in power; they have a majority; they are telling us what a good job they're doing - so why are they barricading themselves away from their adoring general public - I mean 60,000 turned out yesterday to wish Dave and Gideon a good conference, did the PM pop out and say thanks?

The pinnacle of how far the general public has lost touch with politics was summed up, yet again, by someone I know who believes that everything on ITV is indicative of the country as a whole. I had had this argument many months ago when my brother suggested that you only had to watch Jeremy Kyle to realise why people should never vote Labour - as if anyone other than Margaret Thatcher can be blamed for the rise of the Chav class. It also is never noted that people who appear on Kyle's show represent less than 0.01% of benefit claimers in the country and according to a survey the majority of these people would vote UKIP or Conservative because they're 'aspirational' - yet, they're not. The problem is when you read facts about things and it doesn't come from a recognised news source, people who don't want to believe it, won't.

All over the news today is Cameron's promise for a 7-day-a-week NHS. This has been trumpeted all over the media, yet senior NHS doctors have been quick to point out that there isn't enough staff to cope with it at the moment and unless the government invests in new medical staff then this is a promise that people will struggle to see. The government are believed to have misplaced £2billion of NHS money - according to less right wing newspapers - perhaps that £2billion is what is going to be used to train the next generation of doctors and nurses?

Also, just to prove what a lefty I am - this 5p plastic bag charge will pretty much only affect the poor. Most affluent Tories who stuff plastic bags with their caviar and Wagu beef can afford to buy a bag for life or more likely pay the 5p charge over and over again - then the poor and disenfranchised will get the blame for all the landfill bin bags, because the media can and will do that and most of you will believe it...

This is England 2015.

Fear of Islam

The climate of fear generated by the current government, the coalition and, sadly, the last Labour administration has finally begun to eat itself. There will still be Daily Mail readers who will quiver with fear at the mention of immigrants, Muslims, communist Labour leaders, or, if they're Express readers the fear will probably be apocalyptic weather, foreign spiders and the ghost of Diana coming to haunt us all... I said this before (it's a famous quote): the only thing we have to fear is fear itself and politicians and newspapers have this tied up like an ebola-infused Christmas turkey complete with ISIS chef hats and a semtex stuffing.

The latest example of our (non) Nanny State was the interrogation of a 12-year-old Muslim lad for using the term 'eco-terrorism', in a French lesson (so he said it in French - that's more impressive than I could have managed), when talking about protecting the planet from global warming. The boy was taken out of class a few days later, questioned about terrorism, about ISIS and naturally his parents went incandescent with rage. Sadly, this didn't surprise me in the slightest...

A few years ago I worked for one of those Academy schools - the kind that essentially are run as businesses and not as benevolent educational centres. The school was results driven, behaviour intolerant and was run by a former businesswoman with less educational experience than the average schoolkid - she cosseted her teachers, abused her support staff (treating them in many ways worse than students) and began a form of ethnic cleansing to ensure her school was never ever regarded as a Special Measures place, ever again.

Regardless of that, this school has a good Ofsted rating, good examination results and a good reputation throughout the town (not too good locally, though). I was employed to work with the 'problem' kids - the disruptive, the non-conformists and the poor and disenfranchised that were needed to be alienated and oppressed so they perpetuated the situation into future generations (but not at this school...). I was taken on by the new deputy head of behaviour; he had a brief to change the way the school worked and looked at problem students, and I got the job because of the diversity I brought to it and the fact that I am a reformer and not a disciplinarian. This school was not addressing issues in a proactive way and therefore the problem was not going away - I was the antidote.

But this isn't about that, because with all the best intentions some things won't change if you get too much opposition from people who don't understand how this new, progressive way of dealing with young people works and want immediate, gratifying, punishment. 50% of the teachers at that school were simply not interested in why, they just wanted blood and therefore my boss continually had to justify my methods - even with the evidence of it working staring them in their collective faces. But, this really isn't about that and I have a gagging order to prove it. What this is about was one of the things that happened that probably just ensured the school enforced said gagging order on me.

I'd been doing the job about a year when I met 'Mohammed'. He was the least likely occupant of my 'bad kids' class - an extremely intelligent young British Pakistani Muslim from an exceptionally good and well-respected family. Mo (as we shall call him) was placed in isolation because he'd hacked the school's computer system and altered all of his mates' exam results. I have to admit to having more than just a bit of sneaky admiration for this. The school employed six IT specialists and this kid turned them inside out and was punished. I argued that we were doing the wrong thing; that the kind of punishment this kid needed was education not being placed with the 'usual suspects'. I also argued that the school should embrace such a precocious talent and get him working with the IT department to devise a way to stop future Mohammeds from hacking their system. This suggestion was treated in the same way as suggesting we made a child porn movie with the pupils - what made it worse was no one, not even my boss, could see the sense in doing something Microsoft and Apple did wholesale in the 1990s - employ the enemy.

Mo spent a week with me and there was nothing I could do with him; a Class A student who was now a cult hero in the school and that was the school's fault - they did nothing the way it should have been done and as a result this extremely intelligent kid was banned from using a computer or mobile devices while on the premises - a school with pretty much a net book for every pupil, limited net access and a progressive learning policy that embraced the future of technology; so they treated a potential child prodigy like a criminal.

Fast forward six months...

My job had changed; a new school year and a new role, one that took me all over the school dealing with unacceptable behaviour as it happened rather than dealing with it in a retro way. It was one of the few progressive suggestions I made that was treated seriously - although the senior members of staff who wanted us to go back to the cane were always challenging my role with my boss. It was hard work dealing with the staff because unlike the kids many of them were set in their ways. I had spent six years working with young offenders and seriously disenfranchised young people - I was actually in a far better position than half of these archaic dinosaurs to understand the whys and wherefores - so I was obviously ignored with gusto.

I got a call on my radio; it was lunch and I was asked to go and check a commotion in the boys toilets. On arrival I found Mo in a seriously bad way. He had had some kind of seizure, and was flailing around saying he couldn't see and my gut feeling was I was witnessing something very very bad. I cleared the toilets, radioed reception and ordered them to call an ambulance. this was initially refused because I wasn't the school nurse. When she arrived and radioed reception to tell them to call the bloody ambulance you would have thought they would have done that, but no, reception informed the headmistress and her deputy and they 'took over'.

Forty minutes of this poor boy fitting, having a seizure and being in complete and utter hysterics because he couldn't see and he had a headache that he said felt like his head was trying to split into two and the school finally called for an ambulance. I was a mixture of horrified and angry, but I had a job to do, as it was made clear to me, bluntly. Mo's family were informed and as his parents arrived at the school, so did the ambulance. Fortunately the paramedics took over, leaving all the staff who were involved to stand around and pontificate about things like Mo's dad and his reaction to his son's potentially serious seizure; how mum didn't seem upset about it and worse than anything else, the suggestion that these Muslims don't think about their kids the same way as us decent British people.

I was appalled and at the end of the day approached my boss and pointed out that I'd worked with Mo for less than a week, but I was aware his father was an Imam and his reaction was perfectly normal, and that because of the diversity training I had had throughout my work with young people, I was aware that the behaviour of the parents was cultural and had nothing to do with how they may or may not have felt about their children, especially in a stressful place surrounded by non-Muslims. He suggested I speak to the designated 'diversity' rep in the school.

I did and she agreed with my complaints and said she's take it to the staff meeting that evening. The following day I was rudely spoken to by the head, in front of my boss, who later tried to say it had nothing to do with me, but it was clear that my criticism of the way the staff treated the boy and the remarks made after had really pissed her off. The school dismissed my call for some diversity training out of hand, claiming it wasn't needed and that I should concentrate on my job and not others. It was an utterly appalling treatment that was made worse by suggestions from senior members of staff that Mo was actually play-acting and was doing it to get attention.

Unsurprisingly over the next couple of months my job was put under tremendous scrutiny; it was clear that I'd upset some people by speaking the truth and the school didn't like that.

The rest is attached to the gagging order - one made, you have to argue to prevent me from talking about the circumstances by which I eventually 'left by mutual consent' and they gave me money too. They didn't want me there, probably because I questioned the way they did things. I even harbour feelings that I might have been set up. I expect nothing has changed at this school; I expect it's still run as a business; culture and cultural deviations are not even taken into consideration and the way the school's CPO goes about her job I'm amazed that we haven't had more anti-terrorist assault squads descend on the school as it has at least a 15% Muslim content and must be regarded as a perfect breeding ground for anti-British, pro-extremist Islam beliefs. The fact that most of these 15% will end up as lawyers, doctors. or successful businessmen is immaterial.

There have been a number of headlines in the press over the last few years about schools and extremism; my guess is the climate of fear has gripped the educational system like someone has laced the chips at school dinners with antibiotic resistant gonorrhoea. If the marginalised see themselves as being targeted by 'authority' then it easily becomes a fait accompli. Having read a number of reports that completely overreacted - therefore inadvertently sowed a seed - and been a witness to cultural ignorance and general disregard by teachers, I'm grateful for some of the kids - whether they're good or bad - because whether you're gay, Muslim, disabled or SEN, most of the kids I have ever worked with have no problem with any of these things. Teachers, on the other hand...

***

I mentioned 'sowing the seed' and back in 2005, I witnessed something that absolutely disgusted me. I was working at Bassett's Court, doing a night shift and I was standing out the back smoking a fag when a young black lad on a push bike came riding towards me aiming for the alley that ran down the side of the hostel. He looked like any normal 12-year-old kid out, after school, riding his bike. Suddenly a police car came racing along the road to Bassett's (a dead end) and a young copper jumped out of the car and shouted at the kid on the bike; who stopped in his tracks and put his bike down - an obvious sign he was guilty if ever I saw one.

The copper searched the kid and asked him a load of questions. The kid did everything he was asked politely despite the heavy-handed casual racism he was being subjected to and all the time the copper was aware I was standing there watching. The kid finally got on his bike and rode off looking shell shocked and upset, while the copper looked at me. I said nothing, but the young fascist obviously read my mind, "He fitted the description of a shoplifter in town," he said to me like this was all I needed to think he was protecting society from dangerous threats.
"Wasn't him though was it?" I asked. The young copper waved his hand at me, like I didn't understand.
"Just doing my job, sir." He said and I couldn't help but reply...
"Just ensuring that that black lad has just lost any respect he might have had for the police, eh?" I walked back inside the building, I had no interest in arguing with a racist wearing a policeman's uniform.

10 years later and we're actually regressing. That's what fear does. Fear also starts wars and I get the feeling that some people in higher politics view a war as the easiest way to solve the wave after wave of crises we keep being warned about, by the government and the neo-liberal press.

The Wider Angle

May 6. E-Day.

The right wing press have the Tories with a 10 point lead in the opinion polls; the middle ground papers have it as low as 4 and are talking Hung Parliaments. I think opinion polls count for nought except to attempt to reinvigorate the ailing party. We've seen over the last couple of decades how unreliable polls can be.

We now have one calendar month of increasingly desperate showmanship to try and winkle a positive vote out of us; I expect there will be many people who are either undecided or will go out of their way to either vote for an alternative, spoil their ballot or just won't bother; because, let's face it, whoever wins, the government get back in!

As I no longer see myself as a Labour supporter; I'd not lose too much sleep if they failed to achieve a majority; however, I probably would lose a lot of sleep if Cameron and his cronies did. We could see the wholesale destruction of everything we have left before we have another attempt at getting rid of them. This time we have to make sure that there is No Overall Control. We have to say, "No, it's time for compromise, not for false loyalties!"

If you live in a constituency that is a solid shoe-in for the big two, then rally your friends and your undecided acquaintances and argue the point for focusing on an Independent candidate; or if its possible, whether the Lib Dem could pull off a shock. I'm not suggesting you vote for Clegg and his amateurs (Vince Cable aside), but I'd rather his party held the balance of power than either of the other two - perhaps if that was the case, we might see some fair and even handed politics in this country and nothing too extreme.

This year I'm mainly advocating Tactical Voting. Do what you can to send a message out to the 'government' that you've had it up to here with party politics and political shenanigans and you'd rather we had real people, concerned about real issues, running the country.

Alternatively, find an independent candidate who doesn't represent the Loony Left or the Fascist Right and throw some support behind her or him. If there's someone who is standing because of the feeling that the current MPs are only really interested in themselves, first and foremost, then support them and help them get their message across. Provided he or she's not got any really loopy ideas in the manifesto, you could help to transform politics in this country, for the better, forever!

Don't say you're not going to vote, just don't vote for the establishment any more!