Category Archives: Politics & Society

>How do we cope with the disease of pointlessness?

Posted on by 4 comments

>

When critics of Western society actually have a point they usually draw parrallels to Ancient Rome and Greece. In recent years athiests, agnostics, and those believing in philosophies of religion rather than the supernatural, have boomed in number. Ferdinand Mount, who was once head of Thatcher’s policy unit in Downing Street, has written a book called “Full Circle: How the Classical World Came Back to Us”. In this work he paints: Anaximander, a pre-Socratic philosopher, as the first Darwinian; Lucretius as the Richard Dawkins of 55BC; Mithras and Mick Jaeger as the God and semi-God on the brink of satisfaction. Mental illness, and declining belief in what we had once said the West stood for: democracy, liberalism and freedoms; have resulted in apathy, depression and a feeling of pointlessness.

So how do we avoid/tackle this problem? If they followed from the lack of strong beliefs then how do we avoid the widespread immoralities often referred to throughout Ancient Greece and Rome?

I know this picture is a bit biased but imagine it correlated against a graph showing how many people felt life was pointless. And secondly, if Mount is right then might we be headed for a new Dark Ages?

>Does multiculturalism actually work?

Posted on by 7 comments

>

There have been many cases in history where people have praised how a country/empire has managed to peacefully manage a population of many different ethnic and linguistic groups. But they usually have difficulties too. It’s often put down to results. In 1998 when France won the World Cup it was seen as the success of multi-culturalism. Today, when French society is having significant problems and the wolrd cup squad seems to echo the country’s ethno-cultural divisions, many of the same commentators say that it points to the failure of multi-culturalism. Indeed since the recession hit Europe there has been a resurgence of the right wing, and a habit of treating immigrants as scape-goats.

So is there any truth in the current fears about multiculturalism? Is it merely scaremongering? Or is it a factor, but a less significant one than others such as the economy?

>Must David always become Goliath? Must the hero become the villain?

Posted on by 2 comments

>

In 1947 Israel was seen as David, a small power facing huge Arab Goliaths, and worthy of pity because of it. Yet now Israel is seen as a clumsy bully, and sometimes even stupid in its stubborn persistance with its ‘Iron Wall’ philosophies. The ‘Iron Wall’ philosophy was developed in the 20s, so before Israel even existed. It says any sign of non-compliance with Israel must be met with over-whelming force. And there is little doubt that from then till now that philosophy has created a bully. So was the process inevitable?

Have you ever heard the phrase “You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain”? I’m afraid it doesn’t have a great intellectual source. It’s from the new Batman film (unless it was said elsewhere before). Do you think it’s true? Do good guys, heros, liberators and such forth always become the bad guys of the future?

P.S. I apologize for putting something else into biblical terms Sean. It just seems appropriate with Israel.

>What role should the International Criminal Court play?

Posted on by 3 comments

>

The ICC is a permanent tribunal set up to prosecute individuals for: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. It was created by the Rome Statute only 8 years ago. Yet despite the opposition of big powers like the US and China, it’s commonly seen as having been succesful to date. It has indicted people, inlcuding a serving President, in Sudan, Uganda, Congo, Central African Republic and Kenya.

However, throughout its existence it has not had the power to excercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, and it is now being debated as to whether we should give the ICC that power. What do you think? Is it practical? Is it desirable? And should we be discussing giving or taking away even more power than just this?

>Vision versus Pragmatism

Posted on by 11 comments

>Many of us are used to the word ‘vision’ meaning something good. But the UK Conservative Party seem to be suggesting the opposite.

Throughout the election campaign, and continuing into Government both Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne have been saying something along the lines of this:

Paraphrased from an answer to a journalist by George Osborne: “You could either say that we have all the answers and all the vision to solve every problem. Or you could say that we accept we do not have every answer, and will instead launch reviews to correctly evaluate each task as it comes.”

In answer to this the journalist highlighted how long they’d been in opposition (13 years), supposedly to think of issues like this; and questioned why they had not got the answers after so long.

What do you think? Is a healthy dose of pragmatism all we need in government? Is vision merely a sign of excessive personal ambition as Cameron frequently suggests? Or do you think the Conservatives’ attack on visionary ideals is hypocritical, or even suggestive of a lack of forward planning?

« Older Entries Recent Entries »