WHEN THEY COME FOR YOU..

I am deeply concerned about what is happening to independent journalists in the UK – with squads of police meeting planes when they arrive in the country and subjecting them to degrading treatment for their opinions. I don’t pretend to understand the implications of the various anti-Terrorist Acts which have been passed in the UK since 2000 by both Labour and Conservative governments – but they are having a chilling effect on the freedom of expression that the Brits used to pride themselves for. Here’s the latest incident

Richard Medhurst was coming home through Heathrow airport, only to be arrested 

and have his equipment confiscated. He was questioned under his alleged support for 

a proscribed terrorist organisation, presumably Hamas, but he was told very little 

about why he was detained! He was kept in uncomfortable conditions for 24 hours 

and not allowed to notify friends or family of his arrest. He is now unsure if police 

are going to allow him to work, meaning he could be left without an income.
The police officers who arrested Medhurst know there is zero chance that he is a 

terrorist. He has made his opposition to violence and terrorism loud and clear, but 

whereas terrorism used to mean you were planning to kill people, it now means you 

have expressed opinions the state has not authorised.

Medhurst described what happened when the plane landed quite brilliantly and passionately 

on X/Twitter. The police and government have surely met their match in him.

Medhurst is unquestionably pro-Palestinian and has posted tweets which could 
be interpreted as supportive of Hamas. For example, he has stated that Hamas 
“has a legal right to resist an invading, occupying force.” These words are perfectly 
true, of course. Any people have a right to resist invading forces, so long as they 
do so within the confines of international law. While you could certainly argue 
that Hamas does not respect international law, neither does Israel, and Israel 
is the invading force, plus it has killed 33 times more civilians than Hamas (and 
that is probably a significant underestimate).
Medhurst has criticised Hamas for violating international law, for example, stating 
it was wrong for a Hamas guard to execute an Israeli hostage. Medhurst’s position 
seems to be that Palestinians have a right to resist invasion and occupation, so 
long as they respect international law, and when they fail to do so, that is wrong.

The prime minister of the UK, on the other hand, has argued Israel has a right 
to invade, occupy and starve Palestine, as long as it does so within the confines 
of international law (which is basically what Medhurst said about Hamas!) The 
problem is Israel cannot do those things within the confines of the law as the 
International Court of Justice has made clear. From a legal perspective Starmer’s 
position is more problematic than Medhurst’s. He is ignoring the ICJ’s ruling 
that arms sales and other support for Israel must stop immediately, yet he 
has not been arrested.
If Medhurst can be arrested for tweets that could be seen as supportive of Hamas, 
why are people not being arrested for supporting the IDF? Why are Zionists 
allowed to express support for clearly genocidal actions? We’ve seen the horrific 
mass rapes at the Sde Teiman concentration camp. If a Twitter user expresses 
their sympathies for the accused IDF soldiers, will they be arrested?

We live in a country where a teenage girl can lose her citizenship for being groomed 
online and flying to Syria to marry an ISIS member when she was a minor, but 
a British citizen can fly to Israel, participate in the destruction of 80% of 
the homes in Gaza, the killing of tens of thousands (perhaps 200,000) civilians,
 and even run a rape centre where prisoners are sodomised with electrified 
metal poles, and then they can return home and get on with their life as 
though nothing happened. 
      If you object to this, there is every chance you will be arrested for a hate 
crime! 
British citizens are allowed to participate in terrorism and genocide for the 
Israeli state, our politicians are allowed to supply the weapons that blow Palestinian 
children to pieces, but if someone criticises the Israeli state, they are the ones 
who are treated as terrorists!
It’s not just Richard Medhurst who has fallen foul of our censorship laws, 
it’s Vanessa Beeley, Craig Murray, Kit Klarenberg, and most noteworthy of 
all Julian Assange. When people are not arrested for wrong think, they are 
sacked, and it’s not just the journalists like Sangita Myska, it’s the academics 
like David Miller and Amira Abdelhamid.
But it’s not just high profile cases of people being silenced, ordinary people are 
being arrested for wrong think at an increasing rate. Yet the government wants 
to introduce more censorship laws that would, among other things, treat misogyny 
like terrorism and crack down on any ideology seen as radicalising young people. 
Given that we’ve heard accusations of TikTok turning young people into Hamas, 
you can see where this is going…...
I don’t think people appreciate the risk independent writers take by standing 
up for what’s right. We can have our livelihood threatened at any moment and 
be taken away from our families. I’m genuinely worried about going through 
an airport in case someone has objected to one of my articles. I’m left 
wondering if my door will be broken down for a tweet, even though I oppose 
violence and terrorism in the strongest possible terms. I’ve already made the 
decision that if the state ever tried to censor me, I would defy them, even if 
that meant going to jail, but it’s crazy I have to think like that in a so-called 
free society. 
The UK is becoming everything it accuses China of being.
 
UPDATE 
He’s still under investigation – “flight risk” intimating  they never close an 
investigation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JV-VdMxODM 

https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1djGXrzPBBvxZ interview with George Galloway
Further Update
Yet another journalist - Sarah Wilkinson - has been arrested by the pro-Genocide regime 
of the UK Government. She was subjected to horrific treatment as indicated in an untervieww she did
which is discussed in this post 
https://www.councilestatemedia.uk/p/shocking-revelations-about-sarah
Yet another update
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-police-charge-co-founder-palestine-action-under-terrorism-act

FURTHER UPDATE
Police admitted they had taken her passport and have now removed all bail conditions
https://x.com/i/status/1832753916481605780 

CAN WE PENETRATE A SOUL?

The internet has dramatically transformed how we communicate. Gone are the days when we put pen to paper, popped the results in a postbox and had them delivered a few days later by a postman. But when I have a writing block, I still resort to pen and paper but it has to be a particular type of pen and a particular type of paper – ideally a Faber-Castell or uniPiN pen (fountain pens even better) and a Clairefontaine or Atoma paper – with carefully removable pages which can be pinned back in.

The letters (and diaries) of famous people have been collected and published in attempts to reveal their character. How does this change when we can communicate instantaneously? When the Russians invaded Ukraine and started a bloody war, I was moved to start a file to try to celebrate LIFE

Violence and viruses have snuffed the life from millions of people these past few years. The increasing sight of mass graves suggest a growing indifference to the value of the individual life. Remember how easily people talked during COVID of the “culling” of the elderly – adding the phrase to the euphemisms which imperial governments have been using increasingly in the past half-century such as “friendly fire” and “collateral damage”. No wonder that we can’t share Steven Pinker’s optimism about human aggression. Beneath our civilised veneer, we don’t question the readiness with which Russian leaders have been willing to sacrifice millions of individuals over the past century.

“One death is a tragedy, a million deaths a statistic” was first attributed to Stalin in 1947 as ‘If only one man dies of hunger, that is a tragedy. If millions die, that’s only statistics’.

I for one will never forget a conversation with a young Russian interpreter in St Petersburg in January 1991 when I was on a WHO mission to the city - when she spoke about how meaningless life was for her as a Russian.

With Ukraine (and now Gaza) descending into hell, I recently stumbled via an article and book about Ukraine’s cultural heritage into the field of memoirs which I last posted about some years ago. Somehow, against such slaughter, it seemed appropriate to assert that life has value – and should be lived to the full.The website Lives Retold reminded me of Theodor Zeldin’s great venture of self-portraits.

I started with a list of autobiographies simply in the order in which I remembered them – but then realised that intellectual biographies often get to parts sometimes not realised by autobiographers themselves. And Naomi Mitchinson reminded me that Diaries can do the same.

Since then, whenever I come across a reference to a memoir, diary, collected 

letters or indeed biographies I try to find the book, download it (with the url) 

and add a few notes to remind me (and the reader) of its significance. These, 

with some notes from Paul Theroux about his favourite reading, now amount to 

more than 40 pages which you can find at Diaries, Letters and Memoirs

Tempus Fugit

I was 82 last weekend - the face that stares back at me from the mirror has only a vague resemblance to my old passport photos. When my mother made the decision, at age 95, to transfer from the independent flat she had in a small and lightly ”supported accommodation” I vividly remember her looking around at her new neighbours – most of whom were considerably younger than her – and remarking (quietly) that there were a lot of old people around! It is indeed all in the mind…..It’s more than 50 years since The Coming of Age by Simone de Beauvoir burst on the world

This masterful work takes the fear of age as a cultural phenomenon and seeks to give voice to a silenced and detested class of human beings. What she concludes from her investigation into the experience, fear and stigma of old age is that even though the process of aging and the decline into death is an inescapable, existential phenomenon for those human beings who live long enough to experience it, there is no justification for our loathing older members of society – nor should the “aged” merely resign themselves to waiting for death or for younger members of society to treat them as the invisible class. Rather, Beauvoir argues…. that old age must still be a time of creative and meaningful projects and relationships with others. This means that above all else, old age must not be a time of boredom, but a time of continuous political and social action. This requires a change of orientation among the aged themselves and within society as a whole which must transform its idea that a person is only valuable insofar as they are profitable. Instead, both individuals and society must recognize that a person’s value lies in his or her humanity - which is unaffected by age.

Thanks to campaigning efforts of bodies such as Age Concern (in the UK) and the efforts of prominent older people such as retired trade union leader Jack Jones and Joan Bakewell, I noticed signs about a decade or so ago of such positive developments….but the media and entertainment industry (which still tends to set the tone) is still remarkably “ageist. On Golden Pond was unusual for 1981 (with Henry Fonda and Katherine Hepburn as the elderly couple) but was a one-off - presumably the studios calculated they needed more upbeat messages. More recently we have had the French film “All Together” with Jane Fonda and Geraldine Chaplin and, in early 2013, another (more harrowing) French film. In the same year a Japanese politician was caught telling the elderly to hurry up and die but British think-tanks offered some reasoned discussions about housing options for the elderly in the UK and good material on the whole issue of images and perceptions of old age. The writer Penelope Lively had a more celebratory piece -

So this is old age. If you are not yet in it, you may be shuddering. If you are, you will perhaps disagree, in which case I can only say: this is how it is for me. And if it sounds – to anyone – a pretty pallid sort of place, I can refute that. It is not. Certain desires and drives have gone. But what remains is response.

I am as alive to the world as I have ever been – alive to everything I see and hear and feel. I revel in the spring sunshine, and the cream and purple hellebore in the garden; I listen to a radio discussion about the ethics of selective abortion, and chip in at points; the sound of a beloved voice on the phone brings a surge of pleasure.
I think there is a sea-change, in old age – a metamorphosis of the sensibilities. With those old consuming vigours now muted, something else comes into its own – an almost luxurious appreciation of the world that you are still in.

Spring was never so vibrant; autumn never so richly gold. People are of abiding interest – observed in the street, overheard on a bus. The small pleasures have bloomed into points of relish in the day – food, opening the newspaper (new minted, just for me), a shower, the comfort of bed. It is almost like some kind of end-game salute to the intensity of childhood experience, when the world was new. It is an old accustomed world now, but invested with fresh significance; I've seen all this before, done all this, but am somehow able to find new and sharpened pleasure.

The following year, Jenni Diski had a much nastier take on old age in a piece called “However I smell”. Atul Gawande may be a surgeon and Professor but is not your normal medic. In this interesting interview earlier this year in Guernica magazine he explains how he came to be able to give voice to his own uncertainties and to celebrate by example the importance of “listening” – something which medical training has apparently come round to only recently…… (this critical section of the interview is toward the end)

The biggest thing I found was that when these clinicians were at their best, they were recognizing that people had priorities besides merely living longer. The most important and reliable way that we can understand what people’s priorities are, besides just living longer, is to simply ask. And we don’t ask.

Guernica: How did your research on end-of-life care change how you behaved as a doctor?

Atul Gawande: As a doctor, I felt really incompetent when trying to understand how to talk to patients and their loved ones about an illness that we were not going to be able to make better. We might be able to stave off certain components of it, or maybe we couldn’t even do that. And I felt unprepared when it came to having those difficult conversations and helping patients make those decisions.

I found that these end-of-life care experts were making me feel much more competent. They were giving me the words that I could use, and I began to use those words. I’d simply say to a patient, “I’m worried about how things are going.” I’d ask questions like, “Tell me what you understand about your health and your prognosis.” “Tell me what your goals are, if time is short.” “Tell me what your fears and worries are for the future.” “Tell me what the outcomes are that you would find unacceptable.”

I'm afraid that my blog doesn't allow  me to put tables up so I'll have to do with the table in books about death and dying 

Joseph Epstein penned this magnificent ode to approaching 80

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/weekly-standard/hitting-eighty-2006010

this first part of a series

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/oct/05/penelope-lively-old-age

e-lively-old-age

Visions of a Better Future?

In times like these, we all need HOPE – and few expressed this more forcibly than the totally forgotten pre-war German author Ernst Bloch remembered in this 2018 article. We are probably more familiar with Rebecca Solnit’s uplifting Hope in the Dark, first published in 2004 in reaction to the Iraq War and updated in 2016. Or, the lesser known We – reviving social hope Ronald Aronson in 2017

I have been tremendously encouraged by a recent book Alternative Societies 

for a Pluralist Socialism by Luke Martell (2023) who introduces it memorably thus -

We often evaluate and criticize existing society. This book is less about criticism of how things are and more about alternatives. In times of terrible global problems and great gloom, it examines how things could be better. It is an exercise in idealism, but rooted in reality, in the now as much as the future. It is about realistic ways of getting to a better future, also how that future might be organized. It is about alternative societies, how to get to them and what they can be. I do not believe clear oppositions or dichotomies work intellectually or politically. So, I make no apologies that the book argues for pluralism and complexity. However, it does not advocate just a mix- and- match approach. I have genuinely not started with a predetermined perspective, but I think many of the alternatives I look at imply socialism.

Martell continues

At the same time, I have tried to write this book in an accessible way, and on alternatives being practised as well as theories about them. I hope readers outside academia and institutional education, including those who have never been to university, will find it readable. I have deliberately not written the book in a polemical or rhetorical way.

My aim is not to inspire the sympathetic, but to talk to the unsure. I think the latter are more open to logical and analytical argument, which sometimes has to go into detail.

For me, the most defining aspect of socialism is democratic and collective ownership in the economy, which has come back more into mainstream politics in recent years. Chapter 5 looks more closely at this, focusing especially on proposals for, and practices of, local, decentralized, and democratized social ownership, about which there have been new thinking and experiments, often localized but relevant also at levels above the local. I sympathize with such proposals and trials of the democratic economy but see dangers in localism and in optimism about winning support for them.

Good overviews of alternative forms of social organization can be found in The Dictionary of Alternatives Martin Parker 2007 an accessible introduction to relevant ideas, and in more depth in The Routledge Companion to Alternative Organization Parker et al (2013) .

Other Books on Socialism

Twenty- First Socialism Jeremy Gilbert (2020)

UPDATE

Luke Martell's blog is worth a look https://lukesnotes.mataroa.blog/

Exploring CHANGE

I continue to add mainly books (but a few articles) to what has become a 75 page collection of notes about more than 100 texts. You’ll find the latest version on the first line of the top-right hand column headed “Ebooks you can access”. The literature on change is, of course, immense but is divided very much into five completely separate fields which, curiously, seem totally uninterested in each other - dealing with

• the individual which draws on psychology and tends to be interested in 

things like stress;  

• one which focuses on the technological aspects – and how they are  

commercially exploited

• the organisational which focuses on the management of change aș 

organisations react to the technological changes (with companies, the public sector and the NGO field receiving different treatment);

• the societal which is interested in collective challenges to power 

which often go under the label of “social change” but has also attracted the interest of scientists exploring the world of complexity

• only a very few recent writers have been brave enough to attempt a synthesis

I’ve added one of very few good articles about change - this 1998 piece by

Kieron Healy on “Social Change – mechanisms and metaphors” who writes
 

Despite its importance to the social sciences — or perhaps because of it — there 

has been a lot of disagreement about the best way to deal with change. This 

disagreement extends to arguments about whether there is even a sensible question 

to address in the first place. If change is the stuff of social life, some argue, then 

social science just is the study of change. Talk of “Social Change” per se is empty 

precisely because it encompasses everything. Critics reply, to the contrary, that 

the social sciences have almost entirely ignored the issue and concerned themselves 

with a more tractable world of stability and equilibrium. The problem of change 

can hardly be avoided, but theory and explanation are unthinkingly applied, largely 

metaphorical, and usually no better than folk wisdom can manage.

Social change was, at the end of the 19^th century, a rather abstract subject fit only for such social theorists as Comte, Marx and Weber. The 1960s, however, saw a more rebellious spirit stir – although the books on the subject¹ were still essentially theoretical and aimed at an academic audience – with the exception of historians Barrington Moore², Sydney Tarrow³ and Charles Tilly⁴. But all of that changed in the 1990s – triggered perhaps by the Velvet Revolutions demonstrating the power of ordinary citizens. Other academics began to wake up and notice that the masses had political agency⁵

Saul Alinsky, Paulo Freire and Ivan Illich were my inspirations to the power of community activism in the late 1960s from which I took a “pincer approach” to force change in Strathclyde Regional council by a combination of political drive from the top and community pressures from below. The organisational culture was, of course, one of classic bureaucracy⁶ – but, from its very start, some of us made sure that it had to contend with the unruly forces of political idealism and community power.

Thirty years later. I was doing a lot of training sessions in the Presidential Academies of Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan and developed there what I called the “opportunistic” or “windows of opportunity” theory of change against what I started to call “impervious regimes” ie so confident of the lack of challenge to their rule that they had become impervious to their citizens.

“Most of the time our systems seem impervious to change – but always (and suddenly) an opportunity arises. Those who care about the future of their society, prepare for these “windows of opportunity”. And the preparation is about analysis, mobilisation and trust.

• It is about us caring enough about our organisation and society to speak out about the need for change.

• It is about taking the trouble to think and read about ways to improve things

• to help create and run networks of such change.

• And it is about establishing a personal reputation for probity and good judgement

• that people will follow your lead when that window of opportunity arises”.

There may be too much of a Leninist touch to this formula! In these days of “systems and chaos theory” we probably require a bit more humility – and flexibility.

But I do remember reading Managing Change and making it stick by Roger 

Plant when it first came out in paperback in 1989/90.  This was the very first 

book I came across on the topic - and note the date! It was only in the 1990s 

that the “management of change” exploded into fashionability7 

1Such as Theories of Social Change Applebaum, Richard (1970), Social change: Sources, patterns and consequences Etzioni, Amitai and Etzioni-Halevy nEva (1973) and Introduction to Theories of Social Change Strassen H and Randall S (1974)

 Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy Barrington Moore (1966)

  Power in Movement – social movement and contentious politics Sydney Tarrow (1994 – 2011 ed)

  From Mobilisation to Revolution  Charles Tilly (1977)

  Another World is Possible – world social forum proposals for an alternative globalization ed WF Fisher and T Ponniah (2003)

6So brilliantly described in Bureaucracy – what government agencies do and why they do it James Q Wilson (Basic Books 1989) although a somewhat different view is taken in “The Value of Bureaucracy” by Paul du Gay (Oxford Univerity Press 2004)

7 with The Expertise of the Change Agent - public performance and backstage activity (David Buchanan (Prentice-Hall 1992) for example offering some fascinating insights us the deeply impressive