Showing posts with label The Late Great Great Britain?. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Late Great Great Britain?. Show all posts

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Unwanted Thoughts Of A Rank Outsider

The long awaited vote is on in Scotland. I have absolutely no dog in the question of an independent Scotland. Not a one. Oh, I think there is some Scots blood in me somewhere, but I'm pretty sure it is awash in a sea of Irish and English red that it amounts to not a lot. I certainly have never been one of those Americans that searches back through his genealogy in order to know what tartan to order. I look terrible in plaid anyway.

Indeed, the going on in Scotland lately have been about a form of nationalism that has very little to do with the American experience. In many ways the Union that forms the UK is a little more in keeping with our national experience in the US than the clarion call of the monoculture that is good old fashioned nationalism. Its particularly strange as those most loudly proclaiming the need for Scottish independence seem to have no idea how conservative such a call really is. As well, the romance of it all can be a bit intoxicating, especially for us American observers. The United States has very little that smacks of the "ancestral" about it. When we use the term it is almost always used metaphorically. To live in a place where it actually applies.... well, that is the stuff of fiction for us.

Which may explain why part of me hopes Scotland says "no" today. The ancestry is real all right, but I wonder if the romance of it all isn't just as fictional for them as it would be for us. Think of the fantasies of those who romanticize the antebellum South. In these flights from the real world difficulties are never faced and the drawbacks and dark sides are ignored or completely forgotten. In the debates on Scottish independence I've seen on CSPAN there was a disturbing amount of faith put into slogans by the "Yes" proponents, as if translating them into reality would be the easy part. No. Spouting slogans is the easy part. All the rest of it is very hard.

Whatever happens all I can say is good luck to the people of Scotland, and the UK as a whole.

Wait? This won't affect the price of Scotch...
will it?  

Tuesday, August 09, 2011

Welcome To Welfareland

In this piece excusing the rioters across Britain, the Guardian’s Nina Power points out the following as an “explanation” for what we are seeing:

 Haringey, the borough that includes Tottenham, has the fourth highest level of child poverty in London and an unemployment rate of 8.8%, double the national average

So, this one borough has an unemployment rate less than it has been nationwide in the United States for more than two years, and we are supposed to believe rioting is the appropriate response?

Oh, but there is more says Nina:

Since the coalition came to power just over a year ago, the country has seen multiple student protests, occupations of dozens of universities, several strikes, a half-a-million-strong trade union march and now unrest on the streets of the capital (preceded by clashes with Bristol police in Stokes Croft earlier in the year). Each of these events was sparked by a different cause, yet all take place against a backdrop of brutal cuts and enforced austerity measures.

I, for one, don’t care. I’m certain that even with the cuts the benefits available to the average Brit far exceeds that commonly available to people here in the States.  The idea these folks are being put into a third world situation is simply ludicrous. It seems much more likely we are dealing with spoiled brats and thugs.

Of course, any given situation may have a real point of contention or grievance that demands a call for justice, but that isn’t the “cause” of this display of mass criminality. What we are seeing here is less a cry of “justice!” and more a cry of “more! more! more!” and “gimme! gimme! gimme!”

Thursday, April 28, 2011

A Message To Everyone On Earth: With All Due Respect, Screw Your Delicate Sensibilities

Meet the straw that broke this camel's back: Pub singer's 'racism' arrest over Kung Fu Fighting performance


A pub singer has been arrested on suspicion of racial harassment after singing King Fu Fighting in front of two Chinese people.

Simon Ledger says he fears he will end up with a criminal record for performing the 1974 disco classic at a seafront bar on the Isle of Wight on Sunday after two people walking past apparently took offence.

The 34-year-old, from the island, regularly features Carl Douglas’s 1974 number one hit in his set when he performs at the Driftwood Beach Bar in Sandown.

But after striking up the melody in front of customers at the weekend he noticed a man of Chinese origin walking past with his mother, making gestures at him and taking a picture on his mobile phone.

He said that he later received a telephone call from police - while he was dining in a Chinese restaurant - asking him to meet officers about the incident.

He was then arrested and questioned before being bailed.

You know what? I've had it with this bullshit. Someone say something you find offensive? Well, welcome to the real world where things are tough all over. If you don't want to be a "victim" then stop play-acting the part. If you want to confront something you find offensive then learn how to construct a logical argument and write a goddam op-ed.

What began as merely sickeningly annoying "woe is me and my kind" shtick has now become a serious threat to human freedom and dignity (well, as much dignity as one can muster singing "Kung Fu Fighting".)

So to all you "sensitive" types in the world out there, you can stick your "feelings" where the sun don't shine. Freedom is a hell of a lot more important.

Of course, you could try growing up and becoming an adult, or is that just crazy talk?

Wednesday, March 03, 2010

You Wanted Him, You Got Him

See where it gets you: More Diplomatic Incompetence from the Obama Administration

One wonders: does the Obama administration deliberately try to screw up our foreign policy, or is it just a matter of ignorance and incompetence? This is painful reading: "Argentina celebrates diplomatic coup as Hillary Clinton calls for talks over Falklands."

Argentina was celebrating a diplomatic coup yesterday in its attempt to force Britain to accept talks on the future of the Falkland Islands, after a two-hour meeting in Buenos Aires between Hillary Clinton and President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.

Responding to a request from Mrs Kirchner for "friendly mediation" between Britain and Argentina, Mrs Clinton, the US Secretary of State, said she agreed that talks were a sensible way forward and offered "to encourage both countries to sit down".

Her intervention defied Britain's longstanding position that there should be no negotiations unless the islands' 3,000 inhabitants asked for them. It was hailed in Buenos Aires as a major diplomatic victory, but condemned in the Falklands.

So, once again, the Obama administration has sold Great Britain, formerly our #1 ally, down the river, along with the inhabitants of the Falklands, whose opinions would seem to count for something. We are past the point where anyone could doubt that the Obama administration's hostility toward the U.K. is intentional. Obama seems to have substituted personal pathology for national policy.

I love the UK, but I cannot help but remember the general disdain they lately held George Bush in and the acclamation they showered on Obama. Now, Obama seemingly can't go a week without giving Britain the middle finger salute.

How's that working out for you?

Saturday, December 05, 2009

The BBC Is Not A News Organization

It is sad to say, but the old British Broadcasting Corporation has proven itself to be nothing other than a propaganda arm for the wannabe totalitarians behind the whole "global warming is going to kill us all if we don't cede political power to an unelected elite who will save us from ourselves" garbage.

Not that this is new news. Here is the Mail Online back in 2006:

Some of us complained during the long years when the BBC acted as the propaganda wing of New Labour.

Its new cause is climate change, which is represented as the greatest ever threat to civilisation. These exercises, however, are relatively transparent. We can see we are being worked on.

It's true. They are pretty transparent, but I'm afraid it goes beyond that. The BBC no longer even makes an attempt to even-handedness. Hell, they don't even try to fake it anymore. As such they reveal themselves to be not "useful idiots" but outright "fellow travellers" with the new totalitarian class.

How do I know this? Well, I've been reading the relentless propaganda this last week where the BBC write article after article slamming "flat earth deniers" while never once actually interviewing a skeptical voice. Not only that, but co-workers and clients of the disgraced "scientists" in the middle of the CRU controversy are presented as if they were impartial outsiders to these events. Not a single attempt has been made to ask tough questions, or any questions, of the powers that be.

Since when is it the job of an "independent" press to merely parrot the line of the ruling powers in a democratic society? I mean, I understand how media in 1930's Germany would act in such a cowardly fashion, but what is the BBC's excuse?

Thursday, November 05, 2009

A New Lost Generation (Or Drunk And Stupid Is No Way To Go Through Life)

Thought to follow: "Give pees a chance" student may face jail

A university student who was photographed urinating over a war memorial was warned on Wednesday that he could be jailed for the "disgusting act."

Philip Laing, 19, was charged by police after the picture, which showed him urinating on a poppy wreath following a drinking session in the center of Sheffield, appeared on a national newspaper's website.

"The image of your urinating over the poppy wreath on the war memorial in this city will make most turn away in disgust, shock and sadness," said District Judge Anthony Browne.

"It has undoubtedly distressed and upset many. The war memorial is a sacred and a special place."

Laing, who appeared in the dock wearing a poppy, pleaded guilty to outraging public decency when he appeared at Sheffield Magistrates' Court.

Browne adjourned sentencing for reports, saying all options including custody, were open, the Press Association reported.

The court heard that Laing, a sports technology student at Sheffield Hallam University, had drunk a bottle of whisky before attending an organized student drinking session organized by a private company, Carnage UK.

"Carnage is the name of the organization who promote this type of activity and some might say that somebody should be standing alongside you this morning," the judge said.

The court was told Laing had no recollection of the events of the night of October 11 until he was contacted by the university press office and shown the photograph which was later published on the Daily Mail website.

Prosecutor Ian Conway said Laing had immediately admitted the offence when arrested and told police he was "very, very drunk, the drunkest I've ever been since I've been at university."

I love the modifier there. ("Your honor, this is the most drunk I've ever been, since that time I burned down Parliament when I was 12.")

In a sense it would be easy to dismiss this as just another moron in a sea of morons, but really it seems as if the moron sea is growing ever larger. It is growing so large it is becoming more difficult to ignore it.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I will never move in the direction of the neo-prohibitionists who are wrong legally, philosophically, historically and ethically in their opposition to both alcohol and free human moral agency. That being said, there is no reason I have to pass by of the utter stupidity and vacuity represented by things like Carnage UK.

What bothers me most is the sheer lack of class and originality shown by young people, particularly in the UK but also here in the States as well. Pub crawls can be good things, but a corporate sponsored crawl? It gives me the screaming heebie jeebies just thinking about it. This is, of course, the same thing that has taken over Spring Break in the US and its lameness is just as complete. It's disheartening when young people need to have organized chaos. It represents the Disneyification of something that has no business in being Disneyfied in the first place. As proof, I offer this from Carnage UK's defense of its activities:

Carnage said it wanted "students to be safe and for Exeter to have the benefit of a boost to its late night economy, at a time of recession..."
Sheesh. Young people with any spark of dignity and self-motivation would reject this kind of boring crap outright with utter disdain and contempt. These young people don't have that kind of spirit.

What has been done to them?

I'm not sure, but it is hard to think anyone will amount to much who was attracted to this sort of thing in the first place. Its herd mentality at its most brutish. It promises little else but a leaving of ones senses, until the hangover hits, and maybe a random coupling or two. How exciting. How original. How compelling...if you are a cow that is.

Welcome to the contentless generation.

There will be more to say about this I'm afraid.

Sunday, October 04, 2009

Two Countries Separated By A Common Language...Again

BBC gives us this:

A man is seriously ill in hospital after being shot by firearms officers in north London. [emphasis added]

In the States would wouldn't say this guy was "ill." We'd say "Dude, you've been shot!"

We're weird that way.

Thursday, September 03, 2009

British Censors Ban Youthful Looking Models

Really.

The UK advertising watchdog has banned a campaign by the retailer American Apparel for using a partially nude model, who appeared to be under 16, in a series of images that suggested she was "stripping off for an amateur-style photo shoot".

American Apparel's press campaign, which appeared in Vice magazine, featured a series of images of a young-looking girl in states of undress.

The Advertising Standards Authority received a complaint that it was offensive, unsuitable to appear in a magazine that could be seen by children and inappropriate because the model seemed "young and vulnerable and [the ad] could be seen to sexualise a child".


Actually, there is a lot of BS here on all sides. Here is the ad, which is made up of six photographs in total.





Where to begin...

For starters, the young woman looks young. Shocking! But let's get a grip here. She doesn't look 15. I'm around lots of 18-22 year old young women (funny how that happens on a college campus), and lots of them look younger than this model. I have a hard time going up to these women and telling them they look wrong or illegal. Frankly, anyone who looked at this ad and saw a newly pubescent girl has something seriously wrong with them. Fine, she isn't exactly Marilyn Monroe in terms of her figure, but that hardly makes this ad child porn.

As Sp!ked puts it:

Here, the ASA ruling is based on the watchdog second-guessing what people might think the ad shows, regardless of the facts of the matter. Because the 23-year-old girl, according to the ASA, could pass for 16 in parts of the ad, and because the ad could be interpreted to be sexually suggestive, it must be banned.

Of course, the fashion and advertising worlds have always conveyed images of glamour, beauty and desirability and there is often a discrepancy between appearances in advertising and the reality of everyday life. We all know that wearing a hoody might make us feel warm, but it won’t turn us into sex bombs, just as we know that doing the laundry is not a life-affirming experience, as many detergent ads seem to suggest, or that deodorants don’t turn women on.

What is apparent from the ruling on the American Apparel ad is that for some strangely oversensitive individuals and for the self-appointed moral custodians at the ASA, facts and reality do not matter, either. Instead, the spectre of paedophilia haunts their imaginations to such an extent that even a 23-year-old woman could be seen as a child in need of protection.

All true. But even admitting that, the response of American Apparel is almost as laughable, especially for its gutlessness.

American Apparel said the ad was meant to depict the 23-year-old model in a relaxed "home" environment and that the hoodie shown was "soft to the touch" and could be worn directly against the skin. The company added that the ad focused on the hoodie and did not portray the model as "a sex object or in a negative or derogatory light".

Oh, give me a break. Whatever is supposed to come across from this ad about the nature of the product being sold, the model herself was selected in part because of her sex appeal. Hell, it's a unisex garment, so they could have put my 270+ lb ass in the hoodie if they didn't want people to get a whiff of sex. Of course we are supposed to notice the model as sexually attractive. What ad that employs young good looking models doesn't count on getting people's attention that way?

It's the prudishness of it all, by the advertising gestapo AND by American Apparel's wimpy response that I find so disheartening. If we let our self-selected betters decide what we can and cannot see based upon nothing but their subjective perceptions of things, what are we allowed to decide for ourselves.

For example, let's say two 18 year-olds want to get married, but the young women looks 14. Should the state step in and stop the proceedings because the false perception would be of state sanctioned child sex? I'm sorry but law has to limit itself to factual content and cannot be bent to accommodate some people's perceptions only.

But, if we really want to go the other way, well, I'm available for any high priced photo shoots.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Capital Punishment UK Style

Health care rationing strikes again:


A man from east London who began binge-drinking at 13 has died after being denied a life-saving liver transplant.

Gary Reinbach, 22, from Dagenham, was given only a few weeks to live after developing cirrhosis of the liver.

He was admitted to University College Hospital London (UCL) with alcohol damage for the first time 10 weeks ago.

But health chiefs ruled he should not be exempt from strict organ donation criteria which require an alcohol-free period of at least six months.

Mr Reinbach, who died on Sunday, was too ill to be sent home after his admission to hospital.

So the British state gets to decide who lives and who dies based upon arbitrary bureaucratic rules.

And this is supposed to be more "humane" than health care in the US?

I think I'll pass.

And get a load of the scum bags in action:


A statement from NHS Blood and Transplant said: "This case highlights the dilemma doctors face because of the shortage of donated organs.

"They have to make tough decisions about who is going to get the benefit and who is going to take best care of this precious gift."
[emphasis added]


This begs the question, was it really the arbitrary rule that earmarked this young man for death, or was he doomed because the government didn't like his social class?

Saturday, January 31, 2009

English Say English Is Too Confusing

...grunting soon to be the only acceptable form of communication allowed in Britain:

On the streets of Birmingham, the queen's English is now the queens English.

England's second-largest city has decided to drop apostrophes from all its street signs, saying they're confusing and old-fashioned....

"Apostrophes denote possessions that are no longer accurate, and are not needed," [Birmingham City Councilor Martin Mullaney] said. "More importantly, they confuse people. If I want to go to a restaurant, I don't want to have an A-level (high school diploma) in English to find it."

Yep, you heard it right. Mr. Mullaney is so mind-bogglingly stupid he believes one needs a high school education to understand the meaning and proper use of an apostrophe.

Presumably, the semi-colon would require a doctorate, or a fifteen year apprenticeship.

Our civilization is doomed.

Wednesday, January 28, 2009

Britain Unleashes Horde Of Doner Kebab Police

I love lots of stuff about the ol' UK, but they seem to have collectively lost their minds: Health survey skewers kebabs

Doner kebabs, standard takeaway fare for thousands of Britons following a night out, contain "shocking" amounts of salt and fat, and many may include meat that is not listed as an ingredient....

The Local Authority Coordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) which coordinated the research, said it had revealed "shocking figures" about the contents of doner kebabs.

"We would never consider kebabs part of a calorie-controlled diet, but the level of saturated fat and salt in some is a serious cause for concern," said Geoffrey Theobald, chairman of LACORS....

The study, which involved tests on 494 kebabs by officers from 76 local authorities across Britain...


No word on if the Army will have to be called in to quell the resulting "kebab riots."

On a related note....I'd kill for a doner kebab right about now.

Saturday, June 14, 2008

All I Can Say Is "Why Not?"


Princess 'caught frolicking naked'

Britain's Princess Eugenie has been reprimanded by her school after being caught frolicking naked on college grounds, it was reported Saturday.

The 18-year-old daughter of Prince Andrew, Duke of York, and Sarah Ferguson, was apprehended for her involvement in end of term "high jinks" at the exclusive Marlborough College, west of London, the UK Press Associated said.

A royal source told the Press Association: "It was nothing more than high jinks at the end of term in May. A group of them were reprimanded and that's the end of the matter."

Good for her. She's got her whole life to be British and staid.

And, I say this in full knowledge that in no time in my life would my public nude frolicking have resulted in only a reprimand.

Saturday, June 07, 2008

Tidal Change?

Conservatives in the UK have got to be feeling pretty good about not being Labour: New poll shows Labour just above LibDems

The Labour Party lags 16 points behind the Conservatives and only just ahead of the country's third party, according to an opinion poll in the Sunday Telegraph.

The ICM poll gives Prime Minister Gordon Brown's party 26 percent, well behind the Conservatives' 42 percent but ahead of the Liberal Democrats' 21 percent.

It said it was the lowest rating recorded for Labour in any ICM poll and it comes just ahead of a security vote on Wednesday in parliament that Brown is in serious danger of losing.

The paper noted that when Brown took over from Tony Blair last June, Labour had a poll rating of 40 percent.

It remains to be seen if the Tories can be seen in a positive light themselves, but, as of today, they have to like there chances going forward.

Saturday, May 31, 2008

Going Out In Style

Only in England: Tube drinks party sparks mayhem

Thousands of people have marked the banning of alcohol on London transport with a party that ended with arrests, assaults and cancelled trains.

Drinkers, many in fancy dress, gathered on Tube trains and station concourses in a last celebration before the ban came into force at midnight.

But police said what should have been a fun event came to an "unfortunate" end.

Six Tube stations were closed, while police made 17 arrests. Six assaults were reported on Tube staff and police.

There were also numerous reports of damage to Tube trains, which led to suspended services.

I've been to London, but I have to admit the first thing I said when I read this story was, "You could drink on the Tube? Really?"

Luckily, British folk from everywhere were ready to send the old tradition out with a little class:

Peter Moore, 35, a sailor from Brighton, said he had downed a can of beer in 10 seconds. "It's sweaty on there, but I'm going round and round until I vomit," he said.

It's the sort of thing that would bring a tear to Peter O'Toole's eye.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

John Stuart Mill Reaches 500 RPM

"Turning over in his grave" somehow didn't seem strong enough: Teenager faces prosecution for calling Scientology 'cult'

A teenager is facing prosecution for using the word "cult" to describe the Church of Scientology.

The unnamed 15-year-old was served the summons by City of London police when he took part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the London headquarters of the controversial religion.

Officers confiscated a placard with the word "cult" on it from the youth, who is under 18, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.

A date has not yet been set for him to appear in court.

The decision to issue the summons has angered human rights activists and support groups for the victims of cults.

The incident happened during a protest against the Church of Scientology on May 10. Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous, who were outside the church's £23m headquarters near St Paul's cathedral, were banned by police from describing Scientology as a cult by police because it was "abusive and insulting".

Writing on an anti-Scientology website, the teenager facing court said: "I brought a sign to the May 10th protest that said: 'Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult.'

"'Within five minutes of arriving I was told by a member of the police that I was not allowed to use that word, and that the final decision would be made by the inspector."

A policewoman later read him section five of the Public Order Act and "strongly advised" him to remove the sign. The section prohibits signs which have representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting.

The teenager refused to back down, quoting a 1984 high court ruling from Mr Justice Latey, in which he described the Church of Scientology as a "cult" which was "corrupt, sinister and dangerous".

After the exchange, a policewoman handed him a court summons and removed his sign.

So when exactly was the flame of human liberty extinguished in Britain? It seems ludicrous that I feel the need to quote John Stuart Mill in this day and age, but it seems we as a civilization have forgotten the important truths he categorized and catalogued:

This, then, is the appropriate region of human liberty. It comprises, first, the inward domain of consciousness; demanding liberty of conscience, in the most comprehensive sense; liberty of thought and feeling; absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological. The liberty of expressing and publishing opinions may seem to fall under a different principle, since it belongs to that part of the conduct of an individual which concerns other people; but, being almost of as much importance as the liberty of thought itself, and resting in great part on the same reasons, is practically inseparable from it. Secondly, the principle requires liberty of tastes and pursuits; of framing the plan of our life to suit our own character; of doing as we like, subject to such consequences as may follow; without impediment from our fellow-creatures, so long as what we do does not harm them even though they should think our conduct foolish, perverse, or wrong. Thirdly, from this liberty of each individual, follows the liberty, within the same limits, of combination among individuals; freedom to unite, for any purpose not involving harm to others: the persons combining being supposed to be of full age, and not forced or deceived.

No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government; and none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified. The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental or spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.

That today in Great Britain peaceful political protest is being criminalized speaks to how far society can creep away from human rights. It's as if they believe what Britain really needs is a kinder and gentler KGB, Gestapo or Stasi, enforcing "proper" political belief because allowing people to think for themselves is "dangerous to the state."

When Mill says, "No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government; and none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified," he actually means it. Mill could only look at Great Britain today and declare is not a free country.

Is the country that gave the world Locke, Sidney, Bentham, Adam Smith, Wollstonecraft, Burke and Mill really alright with that?

Gleaned from DBKP.

Monday, May 19, 2008

The Political Sagacity Of Pop Music

Back in January I made the case that an album by the English group The Holloways signaled a growing antipathy to the governing Labour party in Britain. Today Power Line reports:

The United Kingdom represents an interesting parallel to what is happening in our election season. In the U.K., the Labour party has been in power since 1997, when Tony Blair crushed John Major. British voters are now heartily sick of the Labourites, and recent polls show the Conservative Party leading Labour by twenty points, with the Tories at 45%, Labour at 25%, and the Liberal Democrats at 18%. Nearly all observers expect the Tories to sweep to victory when Prime Minister Gordon Brown is finally forced to call an election.

The Prime Minister's personal standing is even worse than his party's, with 17% approving his performance and 78% disapproving--a worse showing than Neville Chamberlain in 1940! The Conservative Party leader, in contrast, has a net 33% positive favorability rating.

Unsurprising.

Friday, January 25, 2008

So This Is Great Britain?

Come May it will have been 11 years of Labour party rule in the UK. It has been a good run for Labour even if they haven't yet matched the 18 year run of the Tories before them. But I wonder if the inevitable cracks are beginning to show.

First you have the creep of moronic silliness well documented by the BBC:


A story based on the Three Little Pigs fairy tale has been turned down by a government agency's awards panel as the subject matter could offend Muslims.
The digital book, re-telling the classic story, was rejected by judges who warned that "the use of pigs raises cultural issues".

Becta, the government's educational technology agency, is a leading partner in the annual Bett Award for schools.

The judges also attacked Three Little Cowboy Builders for offending builders.

The book's creative director, Anne Curtis, said the idea that including pigs in a story could be interpreted as racism was "like a slap in the face".

The CD-Rom digital version of the traditional story of the three little pigs, called Three Little Cowboy Builders, is aimed at primary school children.

But judges at this year's Bett Award said that they had "concerns about the Asian community and the use of pigs raises cultural issues".

The Three Little Cowboy Builders has already been a prize winner at the recent Education Resource Award - but its Newcastle-based publishers, Shoo-fly, were turned down by the Bett Award panel.

The feedback from the judges explaining why they had rejected the CD-Rom highlighted that they "could not recommend this product to the Muslim community".

They also warned that the story might "alienate parts of the workforce (building trade)".

The judges criticised the stereotyping in the story of the unfortunate pigs: "Is it true that all builders are cowboys, builders get their work blown down, and builders are like pigs?"

Ms Curtis said that rather than preventing the spread of racism, such an attitude was likely to inflame ill-feeling. As another example, she says would that mean that secondary schools could not teach Animal Farm because it features pigs?

Welcome to Labour's Britain, where the "feely-crats" rule. For a country with the intellectual history it has the pervasiveness of such nonsense is simply shocking. We expect to encounter a bit of this sort of stupidity in the United States because we have such a long history of letting nut jobs do what they want as long as they don't bother other people too much. But in today's England they are institutionalizing this feeble mindedness, and letting the loons set governmental policy to the point of regulating content in children's literature.

It's a joke.

And it seems to be the kind of joke that is causing reactions.

I recently picked up a CD by a British band that came as a huge shock to me. The band is called The Holloways and their album is called So This Is Great Britain? When I first listened to it I thought it fell into the usual left of center point of view that you simply come to expect from English music groups, but on closer inspection it actually represents a deeply conservative reaction to the state of the UK today.

The title track offers this:

So this is Great Britain? Welcome aboard
a sinking ship that's full of shit and someone's nicked the oars
With failing false economies and anti-punk autonomy
our once unique identity's been washed from our shores.


Right off the bat you have a call to recover identity in the ideas of Britishness that has somehow been lost.

But it doesn't end there, the song continues to castigate the country for its seeming meaninglessness:

Yeah this is Great Britain, so lets raise a jar
Just look at Georgie Best and how it got him so far
the prince of pleasure lost his crown for getting high and getting down
The alcoholic anti-hero's visibly scarred

Come on Great Britain, lets sleep around
sex is so much fun we better spread it around
It really is infectious and your soul is nothing precious
so grab some meat and treat your loins to that by which they're bound


Whatever I was expecting from them, I certainly wasn't expecting the Holloways to be worried about the state of peoples souls. However, it is a recurring theme on the album. On the track "What's The Difference?" we hear:

What's the difference between you and me?
You've got no mercy, you've got no sympathy.
You're soul is trapped, mine is free
That's the difference between you and me.


Or this from the track "Fuck Ups":

Well a thirty three year old grandma comes up to me and says
'My family's gonna take over this council estate if we keep on giving birth
at this rate.
I'm gonna be a great, great, great grandma by the age of 75,
and I will be clad in fake Burberry, I don't care if I'm dead or alive.'

All the fucked up fuck ups fucking me up with their stories and their tears
and their cigarettes and beers.
I think they're killing me with their grim reality,
If your life is going wrong you better sing along.


I cannot think of a view that has less sympathy with the leftist orthodoxy on the "victim hood" of the poor, or a view that screams more for an ethic of personal responsibility and accountability.

The track "Reinvent Myself?" sums up a Labour weary viewpoint nicely with lines like:

I can't follow ideology,
I'm proud of my identity.


and:

I can't follow our 'democracy'
they don't practice but I tell you they preach
they don't learn but they think they can teach
and I think Mr. Blair is causing anarchy
you can hear him singing God Save The Queen
with The Pistols like a sex machine.


The entire albums reads like a litany of the failures of the left in Britain, and as such it is a breath of very fresh air.