What's that got to do with the price of chips?

To blog is to think

2011-03-05T18:31:00.005+01:00

Returning to blogging after an absence of 16 months! The need in me to write a blog again has arisen for a number of reasons. First and foremost the need to write something, whether it be a book, a blog or whatever. Secondly the mind-numbing boredom, inactivity, and sheep-like nature of social media like Facebook and Twitter. Thirdly, disillusionment over my return to the Catholic faith two years ago. And finally, societal developments globally, but also and primarily in Sweden.

I'm not going to write about all those now. But I am going to write a bit about Swedish society.
A few things generally lacking in Swedish society today are civil courage - i.e. standing up for what you think is right and intervening when you see something morally wrong or criminal or pointing out to people that you think what they are doing or saying is wrong and unacceptable.

Linked to this, and partly a cause for the decrease in civil courage, is the rising level of unpleasantness and violence in people when they are justifiably challenged.

Now, and this is the trickiest part to write without sounding like a xenophobe or racist.
I hate racism and I hate racial and cultural stereotypes. However, the more time goes by, the
more I realise that stereotpyes are based on experience, "no smoke wihtout fire" as the old saying goes.
Of course one person's experience is hardly the basis for a stereotype but when dozens of people report experiencing the same thing well then surely it's gone beyond being a stereotype and is nearing the realms of a cultural trait, that is felt to be acceptable by that culture.

And negative stereotypes or negative cultural traits cannot be defeated if the object of the stereotype continues year after year to answer to what the stereotype claims and refuses to accept that certain things in one country aren't acceptable in other countries. Just because something is a part of one culture doesn't mean it has to be accepted by other cultures in other countries where said trait is not acceptable.

Again today, I had another "foreign" man (I enclose the word foreign as I am myself a foreigner in Sweden, I do so because I dislike negative adjectivesl ike non-Swede, non-Christian, unbeliever, non-white, unAmerican etc.) man blow up in my face because I told him what he was doing in a shop was unacceptable and wrong, he just went ballistic, lost it completely and wanted to know if I wanted to hit him. He simply fulfilled the stereotype that Swedes have of this particular group of migrants, which is: violent, unreasonable and unable to communicate at a normal level.
Had he been a Swede, I would have made exactly the same challenge, however I doubt I would have been responded to in that way. That said, Swedes don't do in shops what this man was doing!

What saddens me is partly that more people are not willing to challenge this kind of behaviour and that's because of the expected, and unfortunately the violent response, which is becoming
more and more usual in society as a whole.

But what saddens me even more is that some members of this particular migrant group still haven't realised that the dislike they evoke in some people isn't racism and has nothing to do with them being foreigners or being olive skinned or being of a different religion, but it has to do with the rude and violent way that more and more of them speak and behave towards other people in the country they've moved to.

I wish they could see how damaging their behaviour is towards themselves.
What saddens me most though is that discussions like this can't usually be had for fear of being branded racist.

Old style cycling

2009-11-02T11:58:00.001+01:00

Old style cycling

While cycling to work this morning (well in fact I originally wrote this on 10th August on another forum) with my briefcase hanging on the handlebars of my old fashioned ungeared sit-up-and-beg bicycle, parallel to the frame, I realised of course that a gentleman cycling to work in the first half of the 20th century didn't have a rucksack on his back to crease his jacket and make him sweaty, or panniers on a carrier on the back of his bicycle, he simply hung his briefcase on the handlebars.

This is perfectly safe on old fashioned bicycles because the handlebars being correctly up quite high and the bicycle frame itself prevent any risk of the briefcase going into the wheel. I changed over to such a bicycle about 8 years ago, due to pains in my lower back from hybrid, mountain and racer style bicycles.Since then I have had no pains, as I sit up straight & my backside resides on a very comfortable sprung Brooks leather saddle - Made in England of course.

I have no gears, so I have to use more leg power, good for the old heart! So no unsightly cables.I have a dynamo light on a bracket in front of the headset - so no batteries. Also I only have a coaster brake, so again no ugly cables.I also have no need for a carrier,as I have handlebar and saddle bags, in keeping with the vintage look. Which on an old bike is easy because of the metal loops on the saddle and the space on the handlebars that aren't cluttered up by lights, cables, gear changers etc. And an old-fashioed bell out by one of the handgrips.

Of course vintage cycling isn't just about old fashioned practicality,ease of use and comfort; it is naturally also about the dignified look! And the positive looks and remarks one garners from passers-by.
For example, last Thursday, as I came out of a shop ,there were two old men admiring some of the bicycles outside , and as I cycled off one said, "that's a nice bike you've got there".Now I don't think they'd have said that if I was on my Claud Butler hybrid.

Old style cycling - comfortable, clean, easy, healthy...but most importanlty perhaps, elegant and refined.

Since August however, in fact in late September I converted my "new" sit up and beg into a 1930s style "path racer"

More about such oddities later.

Life

2009-05-03T21:02:00.005+01:00

Life takes on peculiar turns and changes.
Death does the same with each act.
Still surprised by each new twist
By each new interpretation, but
Shouldn't be,as there's very little
New from age to age in the game of
Life and death.

Always shocked when someone dies
Always outraged when someone's killed
Life is full of death, and
Death is a part of life.

Denial

2009-04-22T15:37:00.003+01:00

DENIAL

Nothing's happened
No it didn't happen
The TV is wrong OKAY,
That's just a film!

Yes mummy's fine darling
She'll be home later
No she wasn't there today
She's out of town.

It's just some sick joke
That the networks are playing
You'll see
Mummy'll be home
In time for tea.

This is a piece I wrote in about 97 or 98.

In the summer we're just animals

2009-04-16T17:14:00.002+01:00

Have you noticed that come the warm weather, the retreat of Jack Frost, a.k.a. Kung Bore, the
light days, the healing rays, and the calming breezes that we -mankind - especially in the northern hemisphere revert to some kind of Neanderthal pre-civilised, pre-industrialised, pre-urban catalogue of behavioural traits.

During the winter, the cold, the damp, the wet, the dark, the heavy snow, we carry on with our lives in deepest, darkest, wintry January in exactly the same way as we did in October.
That is to say we carry on driving our cars, going to work and doing everything we usually do, making no concessions, for the fact that it is winter, in the way that the animal kingdom does by going into hibernation, reducing activity, storing food, warmth and energy.

Yet come the warmth & the sun, we get randy, we start peeling off for the heat, we have more sex or at least want to have more sex, and when on holiday we rest in the sunny afternoons after big meals, just like lions. In short, we revert to a more natural animal like behaviour.

That said, I hate the sun.

Five hours

2009-03-29T22:02:00.002+01:00

11/10/01

Tiredness hit me not
Suddenly, but slowly &
Persistently like the
Wearing down of wood by Water.

My eyes first closed at 4pm but
I didn't fall asleep until 9.

Five hours waiting in an airport
Trying to stay awake,
Fighting the clutches of Morpheus.

Dreams came fast
And frequently
Distorted by the twisted
Events of the day, and
The 5 hours of struggling
To stay awake.

Turning & sweating in
An unfriendly bed in a
Hotel in a foreign metropolis.

I awoke at 4am
Scared & exhausted
By the nightmares
That reflected the truth
In their terrifying way.

And found myself
In my own bed at home
The day before I left.

These premonitions of
A terrible trip & that five
Hour wait made me
Cancel my flight & my
Meeting.

The News at 10 on the
Day of my cancelled trip
Reported the crash of my
Flight at 9pm, the
9pm when I fell asleep.

Only now I wouldn't
Fall asleep at 9pm
For ever, as my
Dreams had saved me
From that flight.

Now it is 9pm on the
Day after my flight & I'm
Afraid to go to sleep.
But a voice tells me it's safe.

Then I awake with a start
Dripping in sweat &
It's only 6pm.
I have some tea & a
Sandwich then
Retire at 9pm
Feeling safe.

And had a fantastic
Night's sleep.

Did this really happen
Or did I dream it?

Found texts from the past

2009-03-29T21:50:00.003+01:00

Today I found an old notebook of mine from 2001, full of poems, notes, queries, worries and disjointed scribblings.

11/10/01

A leaf falls as a
Person cries,

For the dying season
For the closing year.

The tears fall on the
Fallen leaves,

That shudder for an instant
With the promise of lie,

Then wilt & die when
The tears have dried,

Tears for the dying season
Tears for the closing year.

The passing and ageing
Of another twelve-month,

And like the fallen
Dying leaf,

The person falls & dies
In his ageing grief.

Doesn't time fly?

2009-03-29T16:21:00.004+01:00

Doesn't time fly? I can't believe that it's been four months now since I last wrote here, and my life anyway is much the same.

The huge change of course in the last few months for many people has been the phenomenal explosion in the use of Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Youtube, Bebo and dozens of other social cyber-networks.
One of the knock-on negative effects, in my opinion, has been a decline, rather than an increase, in the writing of daily blogs, at least on the blogs I read anyway.

Some learned type somewhere on the other side of The Pond recently presented the theory, a theory that I agree with, that social cyber-networks ultimately make people lonlier, despite the huge number of cyber friends that people seem to have. And presumably also because the people who were lonely in the first place got into social networking in what we now know was a false hope of making friends in cyberspace that would hopefully become friends in real ife.

But instead of finding real friends they find themselves sitting in front of a computer screen on their own at home every evening waiting for people to respond to their input on any number of social networks and discussion forums, rather than going out and meeting real people.

To me that's a sad, tragic development in the use of the internet.

Now, I'm not sad and lonely but I do know that I spend far too much time on Facebook, both at home and at work, both during the week and at weekends; and my very limited blogging since November has been due to my increased use of Facebook.

During tea-breaks and lunch-breaks at work the topic of discussion is invariably about the actual phenomenon of social cyber-networking, of what's happening to Facebook, Myspace, Twitter, Youtube etc. The general usual daily chat of a staff room of years, decades and centuries past now seems to be redundant, because so much of people's everyday lives is now listed, written about and discussed on Facebook, Bebo, Twitter, Myspace etc.

In one small rebellious way of my own I'm in the process of removing all the "friends" from my Facebook list of "friends" that are colleagues I actually work with or see on a daily basis.

Doesn't time fly when you're having fun? I wonder if it flies just as fast when you're sad and lonely at home on your own in front of a computer screen and trying to make friends on the internet.

Probably not.

The plimsoles,runners,trainers & football boots of our childhood

2008-11-25T11:21:00.004+01:00

I originally posted this on a streetwear forum on 20th November

This is primarily intended for the older British boys amongst us, who were schoolboys in the 60s and 70s. Just a bit of fun, hope some of you can get a nostalgic smile or heart twinge out of long forgotten days and long forgotten footwear.

Remembering school plimsoles with the instep elastic rather than laces, usually in black or navy. Made of canvas, rubber soled. Completely flat, no heel,no support. And having to do cross country runs in them....could you imagine what the authorities would do if a school did that nowadays, permitted kids to run cross country in totally unsuitable footwear?

Then later, moving on to lace-up plimsoles. And those of us who did military service back in the 70s and early 80s will remember the agony those things caused. Well, that was the bad stuff, now for some good stuff

Then at school, football and rugby boots were always considered as either weapons or a necessary evil. I remember having inherited a pair of really old (roughly 1940s or 50s), heavy, proper boot-height football boots, way up over the ankle bone, with aluminium studs. So no one came near me on the field when I played football or rugby in those things, they were weapons. Totally different to the lightweight football shoes of today with plastic studs.

The brands we had in football boots in the 70s were Mitre, Diadora, Lotto, Umbro, Gola, and Bata. I don't remember ever seeing anyone playing foortball or rugby in Adidas or Puma back then, but maybe there were. I just don't remember them. I remember having Lotto and Bata boots (Bata Made in England - orignally a Czechoslovakian company. Lotto like Diadora originally Italian).

Now a few weeks ago I got chatting to a couple of mates, all 3 of us between 45 and 55, and so we started verbally listing the makes of trainers we had on the street and when out running, back in the 60s and 70s. As well as what we were wearing on the pitch. Apart from the aforementioned football/rugby boot brands, the first classic we all remembered of course was the Dunlop Green Flash - which in all honesty was basically a canvas lace-up plimsole with a slightly better sole and some support. http://www.rubbersole.co.uk/dunlop_lace_green.aspx

Then the next classic was the black adidias running shoe with white stripes. When I was a kid Adidas came in a whole range of colours from black to white (with nothing inbetween - shades of Henry Ford) And of course the all white Stan Smiths. And the green soled Adidas white tennis shoes with the green heel top. Surprisingly though, the whites with black stripes is not something I remember from back then, again just my memory perhaps.
And of course cricket boots and tennis shoes from Slazenger.

Now whose heart here still skips a nostlagic beat when he sees a pair of classic sleek black Pumas. Or a pair of Gola Harriers? I know mine does.I recently bought a pair of those classic black Pumas with black suede toe and heel and white Puma track on the side. My next purchase will be a pair of the reissued classic Gola Harriers. http://www.golaclassics.com/ProductList.asp?CategoryID=6 Click on any shoe for a whole range of colour combinations in that style.

Of course this would be the Harrier for me: http://www.golaclassics.com/ProductD...rID=2200&Set=1

And how 70s retro is this for example: http://www.golaclassics.com/ProductD...rID=2411&Set=0

So this is it as I remember it when I was a schoolboy mid 60s to 1978.

Trainers/runners (on the street, in the park, at home but never permitted with school uniform during school hours or en route to and from school. And woe betide the schoolboy who was caught anywhere between his house door and the classroom wearing trainers):
Adidas
Dunlop
Gola
Puma

Football and rugby boots:
Bata
Lotto
Mitre
Umbro

Cricket boots and tennis shoes:
Adidas
Dunlop
Slazenger

So back then, in London, we had:
no Nike, no Reebok, no Bagheera, no Brooks, no Asics, no New Balance, no Fila, no Converse, no Fred Perry, no Lacoste, no Le Coq Sportif.

My holy trinity:
1.Puma
2.Adidas
3.Gola

Trivia fact: Rudolph "Rudi" Dassler the founder of Puma, had previously set up Adidas the world's first athletic shoe maker with his brother Adolph "Adi" Dassler in 1924. Have a look at that name again Adi Dassler.They had a falling out in the 40s and so Rudi set up his own company, Puma.

And for the real trainer freaks amongst us, Puma in a kind of a "Toyota-making-Lexus-as-an-exclusive-model" way, now has a Rudolf D Schuhfabrik range - Rudidas as I like to jokingly call it.
For example, these beauties. http://www.yoox.com/item.asp?cod10=44119764&TP=5990
The "Rudidas" don't have the Puma track but a Puma itself and a Rudolph D emblem.

Keep running!

Detectives and mysteries

2008-10-19T07:21:00.005+01:00

Suddenly I feel an urge, after a discussion on another forum, to talk about detective and mystery writers.

I'm a huge fan of Sherlock Holmes, I have been for years. And he was best portrayed as I'm sure we all agree by Jeremy Brett.
Caleb Carr's Doctor Kreizler of two novels is also a favourite.Not forgetting of course that Carr recently wrote a Sherlock Holmes novel, The Italian Secretary, which I thoroughly enjoyed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Italian_Secretary
Fans of both Doyle & Carr are now of course calling for Carr to invite Holmes to Gotham (New York for those of you not familiar with the old nickname for that city) to work with Kreizler or the Dr. to London to work with Holmes.
I also enjoyed Laurie R King's interpretations of Holmes in the first couple of decades of the 20th C as seen through the eyes of Holmes' young American wife Mary Russell in the Mary Russell Mysteries series. The only one that dragged and was altogether unsatisfactory was "Locked Rooms". All the others, which I've read, were superb.
Ian Rankin's John Rebus is my current favourite contemporary detective, mostly operating in Edinburgh, in the 21st C.
Years ago of course I read many of Colin Dexter's excellent Inspector Morse novels.
Another favourite contemporary detective is Peter Robinson's Inspector Banks. Although Banks' novels can drag a little bit too.
The hard-boiled American stuff has never appealed to me nor the splatter type detective/CSI stuff.
Reginald Hill and PD James were for me just too slow, too old fashioned and too boring.
Minette Walters, Elizabeth George and Caroline Graham all seem to deal more in tweedy quaint English countryside murder (a la some of Agatha Christie's work) rather than real police work. The Midsomer Murders are more farce than detective series, as far as I'm concerned.

But by far and away my most favourite detective of all time, more so than Rebus, Holmes and Morse is Andrew Martin's Jim Stringer- railway detective. Read them in order starting with The Necropolis Railway (which really existed- running from Waterloo Station to Brookwood Cemetery in Surrey) and just soak up the ambience he creates of steam railways and crime and England in the golden years before the Great War.http://www.jimstringernovels.com/page3.htm

You won't regret it I promise you.

Responding to idiots (clicka här för VF)

2008-09-05T08:04:00.004+01:00

FOR MY SWEDISH READERS

Min insändare till VF - fredag 5 sept 08

Sluta försvara brottslingar!
Svar till pragmatikern 3 sept.

Jag undrar om du och Bror Duktig, och Bror Obildad och Bror Smarto och vad ni nu har för andra noms de plume inser hur dumma ni låter.

Du, Pragmatikern, precis som alla dessa Bröder är ingenting mer än en försvarare för våldtäktsmän och rånare.

Om vi nu ska ta din vridna logik till sin logiska slutsats då skulle du också försvara en våldtäktsman som våldtog din mor, syster, flickvän, fru, eller dotter när de var kanske lättklädda under sommaren och vinglade hem sent nån kväll efter några öl?

Men nej, jag misstänker att du skulle då vara lika hycklande som du är provocerande med dina dumma inlägg och hitta på nån ursäkt för varför det var fel just denna gång att våldta den lättklädda salongsberusade kvinnan som råkade vara släkt med dig!

Alla har rätt att vara dumma och att göra dumma saker som att inte ta en taxi hem mitt på natten eller vandrar in i farliga områden men sånt dumhet är absolut ingen ursäkt för våldtäkt och rån!

Sluta med att försvara brottslingar!

JAMES BUTLER

Och här är den dumma insändaren från idioten pragmatikern 3 sept 08

Borde tagit taxi...

Apropå kvinnor och våldtäktsmänJag tror en viss pragmatism i ämnet kan vara på sin plats. Har en kvinna rätt att gå klädd hur hon vill, var och när hon vill och samtidigt vara kraftigt berusad? Absolut, ingen tvekan om det.

Finns det fog för att säga att hon får skylla sig själv om hon blir antastad vid vissa premisser baserade på uppräknade faktorer? Där i ligger kärnfrågan, eller?Jag tänkte söka ett svar på den frågan med en analogi.Besitter en man samma uppräknade rättigheter som en kvinna? Absolut, ingen tvekan om det.

MEN! Om en man i armanikostym, skimrande rolex och blänkande dolce-gabanabälte, pratandes högljutt och sluddrande i sin mobil på en vinglig vandring genom Harlem i New York klockan 02.00 blir påhoppad, rånad och kraftigt misshandlad. Får han skylla sig själv? Personligen anser jag att han var en riktig idiot som inte tog taxi hem...

Olympics, schmalympics

2008-08-18T15:30:00.004+01:00

Quite a few of the "sports" (and I use the term sports lightly) at the olympics are similar to the late night sports shown on cable and satellite channels at all hours from 10 pm onwards when you've put the kids to bed or come in from the pub and you simply have a craving to see some sport and when anything will do as long as it is sport. "Sports" for example like darts, snooker, golf, endless poker programmes, American fake wrestling, ultimate fighting, air races in souped up small planes, 2-a-side beach volleyball and a whole range of various uninteresting and uninspiring motorbike and saloon car races in Germany, Italy, Holland and so on....

I make this comparison because every day at work since the olympics started I'm watching grown men (mostly) and some women watching the most obscure sports on TV during working hours and listening to them discussing them. Often the most worrying part is how they discuss them, as if they are suddenly experts in some new sport they've suddenly developed an extremely profound interest in, for example, women's softball...well I know why the men are
interested in that sport. Any sport that has women in tight tops and waving their arms about frantically is going to garner massive interest from the male population.

This craving for all sorts of sport regardless of quality and type is another clear indication that markets have totally gone from being governed by demand to being governed by supply from TV channels and various sporting organisations.

In exactly the same way that the mobile phone branch has taken complete control of and has dominated and created demand for its products, especially over the last 10 years, regardless of what individuals actually need.

The motto in today's society, from the powers that be both behind the olympics and the mobile phone branch is clearly:
You don't know what you need or want until we've told you, then shown you, then convinced you, then converted you, then sold you the product, be it floor gymnastics with ribbons, hoola hoops and balls to the latest all-singing, all-dancing mobile phone.

Welcome to the 21st century......now I must rush home to see some women's softball...apparently the US team are very good ;O) Or at least they wear the tightest tops...apparently, according to a work colleague :O)

The Swedish version

2008-08-18T15:24:00.003+01:00

Here it is in Swedish, the similarity of some words and some deliberately incorrect Swedish grammar make it work, therefore it doesn't work in English.

De var en gång en svart räka
Som trodde sig vara en råka
Men en vän sa "Kanske är du en Kråka"
Och en till vän sa "Nej, inte fågel alls,
Men kanske är du en kräft-a för att du är så stor-a"
Men räkan sa bara "krax, krax"
Och sen hördes en flax, flax, och då var han borta.

Nonsense animal poem with a linguistic twist

2008-08-14T10:22:00.005+01:00

While cycling home on Tuesday I found myself getting sillier and sillier as I composed a little Edward Lear like nonsense poem about animals in my head, which I would now like to share with you.

However, with a little linguistic twist, the poem I composed in my head was in Swedish so I am going to write it in Swedish but using the Irish alphabet and its pronunciation of letters.
Some help along the way though, the Irish alphabet,which predates the English by almost a thousand years, and which is almost the same as the Latin, does not contain the following letters:

J, K, Q, V, W, X, Y, Z and of course none of the later various European accented, cedillaed or umlauted letters either.

So the English hard J sound as in James does not exist in Irish, in the same way that it doesn't exist in French either.

Instead, also like the French, S followed by an accented vowel does the job, for example Séamas is pronouned like a French person saying James i.e Shay-mass, and that "Latin/romance" pronunciation is exactly why James in Irish is Séamas.

C is always pronunced in Irish as K
Q is the same as K anyway so C is used there too.
V is sounded in Irish by the consonant pair BH
W is sounded in Irish by the consonant pair MH
X (as in max or rex) is sounded in Irish, as it is in the Norwegian KS, by the logical consonant pair CS. And sometimes by CH, which sometimes also sounds like a throaty gurgled K, as in Bach and loch.
Y is covered by several combinations.
The English Z sound is not used in Irish
RH is a soft R. some other combinations also soften the consonants. And in some only the first letter of the combination is pronounced. For exmaple the Irish word for table is exavtly the same as in Swedish bord. However, "the table" is "an mbord" which is pronounced "uh mord"

So here it is (Irish spelling and pronunciation conventions only NOT vocab or word order, which remain Swedish. Title in Swedish to get you started)

Det var en gång en svart räka

De bhar en gángh en sbhart rhaica
Som trodde sé bhara en rháca
Men en bhain sa "Chansé air du en chráca"
Och en till bhain sa "Né, inte fágel alls, men chansé air du en chraiftha fer at du air sá stora"
Men rhaican sa bara "chracs, chracs" och sen hurdes en fhlacs, fhlacs och dá bhar han bortha.

If you're up for the challenge you can post your correct translation to standard Swedish here as a comment to this post.

Slan go foill (See you later)

Touristy things we didn't do in London

2008-08-11T17:16:00.002+01:00

We didn't go to the tower of London or Madame Tussauds and we didn't eat fish & chips(I wanted to but A, just didn't find time to cram it in and B, simply forgot) . We didn't go on a sightseeing bus or sightseeing tour of any kind. We didn't go on the London eye.

What we did do though was show our sons where we used to live and the parks and museums and places we used to visit as Londoners.

And of course we took them to the seven floors of toys that is Hamley's Toy Shop. And took them on loads of double decker buses and tubes, which they loved and to several adventure playgrounds which they also loved!

Oh and before I forget

2008-08-11T16:51:00.003+01:00

Penguins, which swim linearly under water like seals and dolphins, which can't fly, and which seem to have fur rather than feathers are to me not birds, they are some kind of hybrid dinosaur-mammal as far as I'm concerned.

And the duck billed platypus with its...well, duck's bill, webbed feet and egg laying is not a mammal in my book, it is some kind of bird-mammal hybrid. So what, if it's got four legs!

Anyway these two creatures simply support my long-held opinion that the biologists of the late 19th and early to mid 20th centuries must have just got bored at creating all those families, classes, genuses and species, resulting in these two and some other unusual species, (like the species of shark, supposedly a fish, that gives birth to live young rather than eggs) slipping through the net and ending up incorrectly classified as birds and mammals. So by the end anything with four legs and a fur coat had to be a mammal and anything without fully developed upper limbs had to be a bird.

Penguins are not birds, I don't care what you say. And the cheetah with its dog like head and body and non-retractable dog-like claws and with no relatives in the cat family is not a cat! It is a canine!

Post-holiday explosion post

2008-08-11T16:04:00.005+01:00

Now back at work after my holiday. And so many things happened during it, just before it and after it that I just have to unload here in an explosive manner in one post, then service will be resumed as usual.

My family and I spent the last week of July in London:

It has become extremely expensive in London

The only thing that was cheaper in London than in Sweden was the clothes sales. Bought some lovely sports shirts and a coat at extremely reduced prices, often 80% off!

The air fare with Ryanaior was extremely cheap 2,800 SEK return for 4 of us
It doesn't feel safe to walk about at nightitme in London anymore
The humidity was up in the 80s, that added to an overcrowded tourist packed city just made the weather unbearable
The vast majority of shop staff, bus, tube and train staff have problems understanding basic English - very irritating
Foodstuffs are full of much more additives, nitrates and sulphates than in Sweden -not at all healthy
Glad to leave after a week

I never cease to be amazed at what some Swedes think is suitable attire for various semi-formal and formal occasions and what is and what isn't suitable behaviour at such occasions. Turning up in Crocs and getting completely pissed by 9 pm and behaving like an idiot seems to be totally acceptable to some.

Why do roadworks and the laying of heating pipes and so on take sooooo bloody long in Sweden? Probably partly because roadworkers and pipe layers in Sweden, unlike those in the UK, all seem to have long lunch breaks, finish work at about 3pm, have every Friday and weekend off, and have summer holidays in the middle of projects. It just wouldn't...well it simply isn't tolerated in the UK! Projectys are worked on in shifts often around the clock and at weekends until the job is done. That way the disruption to traffic and residents is as short a period as possible.

USA, UK and EU and Nato once again all criticise Russia in typical russophobia knee-jerk reaction mode and take the side of Georgia without finding out the full facts.

When Grenada was "invaded" by Cuban troops, the US sent troops to Grenada to protect the US citizens and kick the Cubans out. ...hhhmmmm...sounds fmailiar...yea the US then did exactly what Russia is doing now...protecting its citizens in another country.

Under the Soviet Union the South Ossetians had autonomy. But when the USSR dissolved in 91, Georgia tried to claim South Ossetia, who simply said "No" and "Why? we were autonomous under the USSR why should Georgia claim us now"

The only reason Georgia, the US, UK, Nato and EU are making such a stance here is because of the oil.

The South Ossetian freedom fighters (supported by Russia) have my support!

A few weeks ago I found out that in English HBT is GLBT. Then today I found out that in South Africa they say GLBTI. The I apparently stands for intersexual. As my favourite singer Morrissey said "There is no such thing as normal" good!

Today if my father was alive he would have been celebrating his 72nd birthday. However, sadly he died aged 53 in 1989 - after a 14 year illness.

Some countries, in this case the USA, never learn from history

2008-07-11T19:28:00.002+01:00

I'm indulging in a bit of provocative lateral "what-if" thinking.

The US and Israel have started rattling sabres again this time towards Iran because they're afeared that Iran's uranium enriching programme is intended for the manufacture of nuclear warheads for missiles, so the US and Israel feel that they would be justified in a pre-emptive strike to prevent said missiles being made.
Hhmmm....then I thought, well surely the US must see the irony inherent in that logic and it isn't going to escape many people's minds that perhaps the Japanese in 1941 were also justified in their pre-emptive strike agaist Pearl Harbour to prevent themselves from being attacked by nuclear weapons. That is to say of course, if they even knew that Oppenheimer was working on them, which I doubt.
But it would be a beautiful irony wouldn't it. Either way it didn't work becasue the US as we all know dropped two A bombs on the Japanese.
And just as that attack only added to the USA's resolve to enter the war, a joint Israeli-US pre-emptive strike on Iran would only make the Iranians even more determined to wipe Israel off the face of the earth and presumably to launch attacks against the USA.

Seems to me that the US hasn't learned from the historical mistakes of others

Restricted music competition stomps on culture

2008-07-10T16:19:00.002+01:00

This was the last entry on my free thought blog.

26th May 2008
Not only irrelevant music but...

…no right to free speech or free expression
What am I talking about then?
Well, the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC) of course.
The rules clearly state that the lyrics must not be offensive, must not contain swearing, and must not contain poltiics in any shape or form (in other words no free speech) . Added to that is the rule that limits each performance to a maximum of six people on stage (in other words no free expression) and the rule preventing political manifestations, symbols and uniforms means that the ESC is not only irrelevant from a sociopolitical viewpoint but also from a cultural viewpoint.
And so it is thus reduced to a collection of songs for Europe supervised by a committee that still wants to see Europe (and the rest of the world presumably) through rose tinted glasses, ignoring all the sociopolitical strife and upheaval going on all around us and pretending that everything is all hunky-dorey, peace & love and hugs & kisses and everyone’s happy! All one big happy family from the west coasts of Iceland and Ireland to the Urals and the Caucases! RUBBISH!

And why do I think the music is culturally irrelevant? Well, because all music is based on the culture it is created in, and a large part of any culture is the sociopolitical situation of that culture’s homeland. So for example, if you prevent that which is a huge part of, for example, Irish or Serbian or Israeli culture, in other words a long history of sociopolitical problems, you are in turn preventing a huge part of the cultural make-up of Ireland or Israel or Serbia from being represented in song. Thus making the songs as about as irrelevant as it is possible to make songs.

Whether you like the music or not or whether or not you think the music and the whole show is good or bad is I’m afraid yet another irrelevance.

Status quo protection v free expression

2008-07-10T16:15:00.002+01:00

This was the third entry on my other blog, and agian osme editing needed and desired for my part.

Status quo protection v free expression
12th May 2008

At what level of management, leadership, supervision do you think an individual starts worrying about protecting the status quo, in other words, protecting his/her job, wage, reputation, lifestyle, and overly worrying what others think about them rather than defending strongly held personal opinions? And to what level will they sink in order to protect it?

I have in the past, as have most people, encountered many individuals who clearly follow the party line or their company’s policies or preferred opinions regarding certain socio-political, gender, cultural workplace issues that they obviously don’t agree with, and would rather prefer not to support.

And that is quite normal in the workplace even for managers on the lowest rung of the ladder. And usually they don’t have any leverage or tools to support their position if someone should express a view contrary to the workplace views or policies in force.

Yet they continue in that role year after year, simply to protect the status quo, their position, their livelihood, and occasionally being hated for it by workers under their supervision.

Middle managers of course, in this battle between the status quo and freedom of expression and thought, do have tools at their disposal. For example, they can withhold benefits, time off, holidays, pay rises. And worst of all influence the co-workers of the free speaker/free thinker by even resorting to bullying, or “abuse of authority” as it is called in polite legal terms.

Then at the top of the pile we have those who have the most to lose should they express something they really feel or think rather than defending the status quo and their own jobs and reputations when spouting the party/workplace line in conflict with a normal worker who is ironically expressing support of something the top dog him/herself secretly agrees with.

And that can’t be healthy for the top dog, be s/he a Director General, CEO, MD, Colonel, Mayor, Commissioner etc.

In fact, it must be mentally tiring, defending the socio-political, gender, cultural views that your workplace encourages but which you don’t agree with when in conflict with someone saying something you do secretly agree with. Or defending them to such an extent that you must clearly realise that you are infringing on the rights of the worker expressing the contrary.

And so the level of status quo protection here includes all forms of management bullying, peer group pressure, making the individual look stupid or basically trying to shut them up with threats that are not the reserve of top managers but rather 12-year-old children in the school playground.

Free speech is not at all the same thing as free expression

2008-07-10T16:12:00.002+01:00

This was the next one,again with some necessary and wanted editing:

Free speech is not free expression
20th March 2008

However, one should never confuse the right to free speech with the ability to express one’s self freely as a result of free thinking. The two are only similar semantically.
Something to consider and digest as an example.
Free speech: kill all abortion doctors - The very contradictory rallying cry of “pro-life” activists outside abortion clinics. “Pro-life? but you’re advocating murder, do you know what the word hypocrite means?”
Free thinking and subsequent free expression of a thought : use aborted foetuses to provide nutrition rich food for new mothers - Why not? Many cultures eat the placenta so why not aborted foetuses?

The Earth is no longer flat

2008-07-10T16:02:00.003+01:00

Well, at least The Earth is Flat is no more.....in other words I'm shutting down my other blog The Earth is Flat and I'm going to move the old posts from there over here. And then continue with this blog with a combination of serious and more lighthearted input.

Here to start off is the first post I wrote over there, with some necessary corrective and self-preservation editing:

Being a Free Thinker
13th March 2008

One often hears people using the phrase, “I’m a free thinker”. What they are in fact doing when they say that is marking the fact that they don’t consider themselves to be like anyone else. Well, let me ask you, who in their right individual mind does consider themselves to be like anyone else? Everyone, who is mentally healthy, should consider themselves to be unique to some degree, and in various ways, both large and small.

No, people who say that are usually far from free thinkers, they simply want others to know that they generally don’t agree with one or more commonly held views, for example, racism is wrong. So many racists, rather than say, “No it isn’t” fall back on their standard phrase, “Well, I’m a free thinker” rather than defend racism.

The “I’m a free thinker” crowd nearly always use the phrase as a get-out clause. And truth be told the one thing they are most frightened of is free thinking. They want to be part of the status quo but they also want to be viewed as different to Joe Bloggs. And that’s a dilemma most of them can never work their way out of.
That’s just an example of the misuse of the phrase “free thinker”.

With this blog, I want people to consider what free thinking and free expression really are. Thinking freely, devoid of influence from society as a whole, being able to express your innermost thoughts, ideas, desires and so on, devoid of what your family, friends, colleagues and neighbours might say if you express something, some desire, some wish, some need outside the norm. Devoid of influence from the accepted norms, ethics, standards and morals of modern society.

Free thinking and expression is about analysisng what you personally feel, not what your employer, your superior officer, your parents, your spouse, your church, your political party or your pensions advisor says you should feel.

It’s about using your intelligence and your emotions to think and form opinions for yourself. To decide what you really want, not on some nonsensical, abstract, Oprah level about “life’s goals” and other such pseudo-spiritual rubbish.

But about what you want on a daily basis with regard to work, food, sex, money, clothing, sports, hobbies and so on. And about not being afraid to freely express your innermost thoughts, opinions,desires, hates and so on.

Free thinking and free expression is being able to say that, no, I don’t buy into that oft repeated platitude ”all races are equal”. And I don’t think all peoples are equally as developed and intelligent as each other. And I don’t think everyone thinks the same the world over and I know that not everyone shares the same ethics, standards and morals. And I know that not every nationality values life equally. A simple look at the conflicts currently ongoing around the world will tell any sane person all of the above. But saying all that doesn’t make me a racist or even the same as the racist, who simply falls back on “I’m a free thinker” without any explanation. I’m simply an acute observer of people’s behaviour the world over, behaviour and values that differ so greatly from my own!

So don’t tell me I’m the same as a Saudi Arabian executioner cutting off a person’s head in public, because I could never contemplate killing someone, I’ve never even felt like I really want to.

Being a free thinker does mean of course that you will have to defend your views more often than not. But if that frigthens you off, if you let society, colleagues, family tell you that your thoughts, views, emotions are wrong then you are not a free thinker.

The cult of the individual....

2008-07-09T15:44:00.004+01:00

...and the perceived rights of the individual and the whole notion of liberalism advocating each man (woman) for him/herself and advocating the individual as being more important than society as a whole, is for me the only reasonable explanation for the selfishness, naivety, self-centred attitude, and lack of respect for
others displayed by the 22 year old woman in the following incident that occurred at Arvika last weekend. And the only possible reason why incidents like this are becoming more and more commonplace.

Ok, the 22 year old woman complimented a 25 year old woman (who was a complete stranger to her) on her hairstyle.

The 25 year old, not knowing this woman, made some presumably throw away comment as you do to strangers that suddenly say things to you out of the blue.

The 22 year old took offence to this response and poured her cup of hot coffee down the inside of the 25 year old's blouse.

And so quite rightly the 25 year old in shock and self-defence gave the 22 year old a slap in the face.........but guess who it was who reported the incident to the police?...WRONG! It was the 22 year old.

I mean talk about naive, talk about lack of respect, talk about self-centred. Talk about a total absence of the rights of others.

Stuff

2008-07-09T15:21:00.004+01:00

Well the last month has gone by in a flash.

I spent 16 to 20 June trying to get everytihng done at work before going on two weeks holiday.
Now I'm back after those two weeks working for one week and trying to get everytihng done at work before going on three weeks holiday. It feels like work never adopts a stadard run-of-the-mill everday pace but is always either urgent and rushed or slow and boring.

Then about a month ago I started up a some cricket with some Pakistani and Swedish friends. A great way to get a bit of exercise and sun and have some fun for a few hours on a Sunday afternoon. Apart from when we got absolutely drenched 3 weeks ago.

I was at Arvika festival on Saturday/Sunday for THIRTEEN hours and discovered some great goth, industrial and synth bands I'd never heard before intermixed maongst the boring indie pop bands.

I'm going to see Iron Maiden at Stockholm Stadion on 16th July.

And on 22nd July we're flying to London for a week there.

Then by the beginning of August I hope life and work will be back to "normal". I really don't like the summer or taking holidays.

What a witty answer

2008-06-09T17:10:00.005+01:00

Sorry in advance to any English readers but this just doesn't work in English.

Well, the congress for Vänster (the Swedish Socialist Party as I call them...Why? Well, simply because that's what Vänster is ) ended at the weekend. Or The Left Party of Sweden as they call themselves http://www.vansterpartiet.se/kongress2008/

But everytime I read or hear The Left Party of Sweden, I think, "Someone's left the party and it's only 11 o'clock"

I listened to quite a bit of what was going on there on P1. And I just have to share with you what must be the wittiest response of the year by anyone to any question.

It was said by a party member when asked for his response to two of the motions put forward

motion: to accept file sharing, as it is impossible to stop, prevent or control.
motion: to re-opon contact with Cuba

His response was "Ja till fildelning nej till Fidel ledning"

What a witty answer, made even wittier by the fact that it contains all the facts and is a correct and clear response.

My socialist heart was also warmed by the fact that the congress voted NOT to stand on the same electoral platform as the Social Democrats and the Green Party at the next election. And by the continued call to leave the EU.

Coming from London, you see, I've always had a problem with this rödgrönröra in Sweden.
My view is simply this, that you're either a socialist(vänster) or a social democrat or a fruit-loop, green party, middle-class, hippy-liberal trying to save the planet, you can't be all three!

And I'm not.

Let's play doctors and nurses

2008-06-04T15:50:00.003+01:00

Or at least let's play with their wages a bit.

In my opinion nurses are every bit as important as doctors. Okay, doctors and surgeons have a huge personal responsibility, which I imagine is often extremely mentally taxing. And of course there are fewer of them than there are nurses.

But their extra responsibility, extra training, and their scarcity do not explain the Grand Canyon like chasm between a fully trained nurse's wage and a doctor's wage in Sweden.

We all now know, thanks ot the strike, that nurses, depending on their particular role and skills and healthcare authority they work for, earn roughly between 18 and 25 thousand krona per month.

However, what the vast majority of Swedes don't know is exactly how much various types of doctor earn.

Well, I can tell you, in Sweden doctors and surgeons, again depending on their particular role and skills and the healthcare authority they work for, earn between roughly 25 and 70 thousand krona per month.

Don't be fooled by what various union and healthcare websites tell you about how much they earn, because those figures are only recommendations from unions for the minimum that an AT or ST should earn.

I know several doctors in Karlstad, some are personal friends. And while the nurses' strike was on I aksed three of them how much they earned. Being a foreigner I can get away with asking such questions ;O)

1. ST - hospital - 42,000
2. ST at a clinic (vårdcentral) - 55,000
3. AT - hospital - 32,000

So perhaps the association of local healthcare authorities could look to doctor's pay scales to find the extra money, for argument's sake let's say 5 thousand a month, that nurses so badly need but more importantly so rightly deserve.

After all, doctors on 55,ooo a month aren't going to miss 5 grand going to a just and good cause i.e into a nurse's wage packet, now are they?

Equal treatment from your council? Yes but only if you've got an expensive house.

2008-06-02T16:14:00.004+01:00

Sometimes I get very angry at the behaviour of county councils etc. But not as much as last Wednesday 28th May, when I read in VF (local Swedish newspaper) about the open and blatant disregard of equal treatment for all by Karlstad Municipality. Treatment which they even admit to and which is based on saving money.

Basically, some houses in Vålberg (an area outside Karlstad) are at serious risk of subsiding into the ground and surroundning watercourses, so Karlstad Municipality wants to buy these six houses for a cheap price, forcing the families living in them to move, and then tear the houses down. BECAUSE the total value of those six houses is far below the cost of work to shore up the ground to make it safe for those families to continue to live there.

But one family is refusing to sell and move and the municipality can't do anything about it, unless and until the risk of building collapse is re-classified as imminent.

HOWEVER, and this is where I get really pissed off!

A few kilometres north of Vålberg is another area with the same problem, and by now, you've all guessed where I'm going with this.

But in this other area, each threatened property is worth approximatley 3 times as much as those in Vålberg. And the municipality is already planning the work to shore up the ground in this richer area.

Clearly again money talks!

But the houses of the poor can be bought cheaply then simply torn down.

Whatever happened to solidarity? Is that a dirty word nowadays, who's speaking up for these
people in Vålberg?

It seems that the happiness, quality of life, and fairness for all it's residents means absolutely FUCK ALL to Karlstad Municipality!

I really feel for those people in Vålberg.

Complain, complain,complain

2008-05-30T12:50:00.003+01:00

As a sunny weekend is upon us I just want to reflect for a few minutes about the unbelievable amount of unnecessary complaining that Karlstad residents indulge in via letters to newspapers.

Here is a list of recent unbelievably stupid and unnecessary complaints to the letters' pages of the two local newspapers

Complaining about:
People exposing skin while sunbathing
People sunbathing in public places
People lying on the grass
Buses not taking every single route that every single person wants
Radio stations playing current music
Radio stations not playing music from 70 years ago that no one wants to listen to anyway
Youngster,youngsters,youngsters
Pensioners, pensioners,pensioners
People who drive too slow

And so on.....

So Karlstad calm down and listen to some Bob Marley ..."sun is shining..."

Finally - a memorial to the non-famine caused by the British

2008-05-23T10:42:00.007+01:00

Finally!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7415927.stm

However, the fact remains that the so called "famine" in Ireland in the 1840s was nothing of the sort - it was a failure by the British government (some say an attempt at genocide) to feed the people of Ireland with the other food that was still being produced by the Irish in Ireland (meat, fish, vegetables, crops) The Irish don't refer to it as "The Famine" but as "The Great Hunger"
Because they were denied food when there was plenty of meat and crops available.

And the word famine means "severe shortage of food" But there was no shortage of food, there was plenty of food being shipped out under armed guard to England and being eaten by the English in Dublin!

The two basic facts everyone needs to know, but which the British government still keeps quiet about after more than 150 years are these:

1. The potato crop failed, in other words the potato blight destroyed all the potatoes. Thus destroyng the one staple food source that the working and poor Irish were "allowed" to eat. Especially those working the land in rural areas.

2. There was plenty of food in the country, plenty of meat, and other crops and other vegetables. It's remarkable that the British seem to think that the potato blight must have killed off
pigs, cows, carrots, wheat, oats, fish and chickens as well!

HOWEVER, the poor people of Ireland were not permitted to eat these foodstuffs, the majority of which was produced for the English living in Ireland or was being shipped to England for English tables during the famine.

Listen to Sinéad O'Connors song "famine" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCe8Fw8vyM

Or read any good book about the history of Ireland and you'll soon realise that calling, The Great Hunger a "famine" is like calling an April shower in London a monsoon!

Here's the lyrics to Sinead O'Connor's song "Famine" for those of you who don't want to watch Youtube or who can't understand everything she's singing:

OK, I want to talk about Ireland
Specifically I want to talk about the "famine"
About the fact that there never really was one
There was no "famine"
See Irish people were only ALLOWED to eat potatoes
All of the other food
Meat fish vegetables
Were shipped out of the country under armed guard
To England while the Irish people starved
And then on the middle of all this
They gave us money not to teach our children Irish
And so we lost our history
And this is what I think is still hurting me
See we're like a child that's been battered
Has to drive itself out of it's head because it's fightened
Still feels all the painful feelings
But they lose contact with the memory
And this leads to massive self-destruction
ALCOHOLISM DRUG ADICTION
All desperate attempts at running
And in it's worst form
Becomes actual killing
And if there ever is gonna be healing
There has to be remembering
And then grieving
So that there then can be forgiving
There has to be knowledge and understanding
An American army regulation
Says you mustn't kill more than 10% of a nation
'Cos to do so causes permanent "psychological damage"
It's not permanent but they didn't know that
Anyway during the supposed "famine"
We lost a lot more than 10% of a nation
Through deaths on land or on ships of emigration
But what finally broke us was not starvation
BUT IT'S USE IN THE CONTROLLING OF OUR EDUCATION
Schools go on about "Black 47"
On and on about "The terrible "famine""
But what they don't say is in truth
There really never was one
So let's take a look shall we
The highest statistics of child abuse in the EEC
And we say we're a Christian country
But we've lost contact with our history
See we used to worship God as a mother
We're sufferin from POST TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER
Look at all our old men in the pubs
Look at all our young people on drugs
We used to worship God as a mother
Now look at what we're doing to each other
We've even made killers of ourselves
The most child-like trusting people in the Universe
And this is what's wrong with us
Our history books
THE PARENT FIGURES lied to us
I see the Irish
As a race like a child
That got itself bashed in the face
And if there ever is gonna be healing
There has to be remembering
And then grieving
So that there then can be FORGIVING
There has to be KNOWLEDGE and UNDERSTANDING.

Disgusting class perceptions in Britain's universities

2008-05-22T15:27:00.008+01:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/7414311.stm

This appeared on the BBC news site today in the education section.
And once again we’re reminded of the elitist attitudes of some university professors, doctors, lecturers with regard to the intelligence or as they would have people believe, the lack thereof of the working classes.

Of course we all know their opinions aren’t worth the air they’ve expended to utter them. Simply because these type of people aren’t professional psychologists, they are simply expressing their bigoted right wing "nurture over nature" academic views as yet one more way of defending the class discrimination that still goes on in UK universities at all levels from application to graduation.

Charlton’s view is yet more protection of the status quo and his idea of academia. And he seems so caught up in his idea that the upper classes are more intelligent, that responses stating the logic of cause & effect, like that from Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, seem to be something he can’t absorb or is unwilling to acknowledge.

Sally Hunt said: "It should come as little surprise that people who enjoy a more privileged upbringing have a better start in life.”

Exactly! And I’m reminded of a research project on class perceptions that was carried out in England almost 20 years ago.

One part of the project interviewed a societal cross-section of 12 year old girls to identify how they viewed themselves and what expectations they had.
One indicator was the following simple question “Can you ride a horse?”

Now, in well-off middle and upper class areas the girls at private and boarding schools invariably answered “Yes, I can” or “Yes, but I’m not very good at it” or “Yes, but I don’t really like it” or “I don’t know, because I haven’t tried yet” or "I'm sure I'll be able to when I try" and other similar responses, but none of them answered “No”. Because clearly they had been given the chance to try horse riding and could ride. Or clearly expected that they would be able to try it in the near future. Note the use of the word “yet” in the last response.

In less well off mixed middle and working class areas school girls at comprehensive state schools responded invariably with “I don’t know” or ”I’ve never tried” or “Yes” or “No” With no clear future expectations identified either way, but rather a clear ambiguity amongst the different social/class types of the respondents, who obviously had varying expectations of what they might or might not be likely to achieve or try in the future.

Then finally they asked school girls at comprehensive schools in poor working class inner city areas. And now they found, as they had expected from the outset, that there was now absolutely no ambiguity whatsoever. All the girls simply assumed based on their own perceptions of their class and social situation, as well as the perceptions of others about their class and social situation, that horse riding was something that wasn’t even considered and dismissed as an impossibility for them, it was even lower than that, it wasn’t even given a second’s thought. And so close to a 100% of the girls, when asked, “Can you ride a horse?” simply and in a matter-of-fact manner answered, “No”.

The fundamental fact is this: that denial of access to something doesn't mean you're no good at it, or not suited to it, mentally or physically, it simply means you haven't even been given the chance to try it.

Advertising and the expression of strange theories dressed up as research and science

2008-05-21T11:09:00.005+01:00

Advertising and the expression of strange theories dressed up as research and science

OR

Mathematical lies, statistics, and scaremongering

They amount to much the same thing, but before I dive into an analysis of this, illustrated by a current example, let me give you my favourite quote regarding statistics:

Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. ~Aaron Levenstein

Indeed, and a truer and more concise quote on statistics you won’t find anywhere. Believe me, I’ve tried, and I always come back to Levenstein’s as the best description in under 20 words. There are some great anonymous quotes about statistics but by being anonymous they lack credence. And just as importantly they lack the sting that comes with quotes from famous people. I mean, if you relate an Oscar Wilde quote to someone and say you don’t know who it’s by, it doesn’t have the sting and panache of delivering the quote then rounding off grandly by simply saying two words –Oscar Wilde.

A lengthier but equally dismissive quote regarding statistics comes from one of my favourite authors:
While the individual man is an insoluble puzzle, in the aggregate he becomes a mathematical certainty. You can, for example, never foretell what any one man will be up to, but you can say with precision what an average number will be up to. Individuals vary, but percentages remain constant. So says the statistician. ~Arthur Conan Doyle

Anyway, I am often amazed how various companies; especially motor vehicle manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, security companies, medical companies, and even individual scientists, doctors, politicians, and bureaucrats use statistics to enforce their claims and to hide the truths contrary to their claims.

Sometimes I get the feeling that people using statistics think they have invoked some kind of sacred shield that prevents questioning or rebuttal and that makes everyone else ignorant to what the statistics in question are concealing.

Here is one so mind-numbingly unconvincing that I choked on my breakfast back on 27th March when it appeared in a small article in my local daily newspaper VF (Värmlands Folkblad), here in Sweden.

The article was entitled (all following translations are my own, which as a professional translator didn’t prove difficult) :

“A roundish waist at 40 increases the risk for dementia”

So, my first thought is, well, I’m in the risk zone then, I’m 46 now, I’ve got a roundish belly and have had for several years, so I’m interested, I’ll keep reading.

So having got past the scaremongering of the title and the first paragraph telling people in their 40s with round bellies that they are going to suffer from senile dementia in later years and espousing the unreliable findings of this research and therefore this strange theory, I got down to the cold hard statistical lies….sorry I mean…facts.

Of course, by now, even before I’ve told you, you know this is going to be about a study in the US!

Well, the study took 6,583 healthy people in the USA and measured their waists when they were aged between 40 and 45.

Thirty six years later, 16 percent of them were found to be suffering from dementia…… OH MY GOD THAT’S TERRIBLE! SIXTEEN PERCENT…OH NO…THAT’S AWFUL!

I better start dieting, I better exercise more ………HANG ON, HANG ON, HANG ON A SECOND……hold your horses, not so fast there…. 16 percent? 16 percent? That’s not even one quarter!
That means that 84 percent …read that again, EIGHTY FOUR PERCENT didn’t develop dementia!

Please now read Levenstein’s quote again: Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.

So what was the point of this article other than to scare people approaching 40 into exercising and dieting? Well, as far as I can see there was no point because no companies were mentioned, no medical institutions in the US were named, and no individual scientists or medicos were named.

The only answer I can come up with is that once again, someone at the news agency, in this case TT, has been blinded by statistics and thought this particular statistic newsworthy, even though it is clearly unreliable, and that there simply is no news story there.

This kind of reporting of statistics could go on ad infinitum were it allowed to occur on a daily basis, for example, we would end up with reports like this : 88 percent of all Irishmen living in Sweden are married to Swedish women – totally uninteresting, totally irrelevant, totally pointless… the statistic that is, not the marriage to the Swedish woman!

And then someone at VF has also been impressed by this non-newsworthy, unreliable scaremongering statistic and thought, “WOW we must print this!”

Which all goes to show that statistics are simply numbers, instead of words, telling you what someone else thinks, and what someone else wants you to hear, wants you to believe and buy into, and ultimately to buy their product or service or follow their advice.

Numbers, and especially when used as statistics, seem to be, for many people, more trustworthy than words, and many people believe that numbers don’t and simply can’t lie.

Well just like words, it is what the numbers don’t tell you that you need to look into, because every single person who uses statistics has an agenda, so don’t be scare mongered or forced into thinking their agenda is the same as yours, especially when the statistics come from what many view as reliable sources i.e. government officials and medical experts.

Let me leave you then with a quote which perfectly captures the essence of number manipulation:

Torture numbers, and they'll confess to anything. ~Gregg Easterbrook

Ssangyong

2008-04-14T16:18:00.002+01:00

Ssangyong.

A small car sales business in a small town not too far from my own uses the following sales slogan in newspaper ads, “We sell quality second-hand cars of the known makes”. Now, read that again and you will understand how difficult it was for me last week, when I saw their ad in the paper, to resist the temptation to ring them up and ask, “Hello, I’m looking for an unknown make of car. Now I know you only sell the known makes but by definition that either means you sell every single make of car there is or you have some inside information about what the unknown makes are, can you help?” Then, when they’d asked me what the hell I was rattling on about and what make of car I was looking for I’d say, “Well, of course I’m referring to your sales slogan and the make I’m looking for is a Murphy-Svensson, do you know where I can buy one?”

Then of course, just before they dismissed me as an idiot and told me not to call back I would shout Ssangyong as loudly as I could, just before they slammed the phone down, not wishing to associate themselves with unknown Korean vehicles.

Knowledge is exactly what it says on the tin. For any given field, subject, object, or concept you either possess it or you don’t. One can’t claim, as many experts in various fields do, to know that, “what we know is only a fraction of what there is to know in this area of study, the unknown in this field is comprised of perhaps another 75% on top of what we know now.” Really, Mr Scientist, how do you know that? What do you base that on?

This kind of reasoning which crops up in almost every field of social, political and scientific study reminds me of the fantastic sketch the Scottish comedian Craig Ferguson performed back in the early 90s, when he was still a stand-up comic supporting the likes of Eddie Izzard and Billy Connolly and before he started appearing in terrible American sitcoms. (He is the Scottish executive in Drew Carey).

The first two lines of the sketch are all I need to make his point (at the time) and mine now.
In a heavy Scottish accent, “Right, ladies and gentlemen of the audience, I am going to talk about the unknown…oooooh…spooky stuff….oooooh.. Right, what do we know about the unknown? …..long pause….. Well, nothing, because it’s unknown!”

Anyway, if you know the name of a car make but you don’t want to sell it that doesn’t make it unknown. Unreliable, unfavourable and un-sellable in your mind perhaps but far from unknown, because you have made an active choice not to sell certain makes, therefore they cannot be unknown to you.

I dare say that at some point in the future I won’t be able to resist ringing them up any longer and one day hope to be driving around my home town in a brand new Murphy-Svensson built in Pakistan or Norway!

Mathematical lies, statistics, and scaremongering

2008-03-28T16:41:00.000+01:00

More on this later, I've just accidentally deleted a huge text....bugger!

Ha ha the witch is dead

2008-03-20T16:14:00.004+01:00

Finally Peter Franke over at VF (local Swedish newspaper) woke up and realised he had a responsibility towards his readers and removed the offensive blog of the two blogging brothers. A blog that has done nothing else since day one than attack the appearance of well known people, and post infantile comments about everything and anything that is unimportant and free of any substance. Basically, the average content of a conversation between media types and teenagers on Stureplan.

All I want to know is why did it take him a month to do it?

Obvious answer is that he was quite happy with the massive figures (and revenue) that that blog was pulling into the website every day. But finally his conscience got the better of him.

Well done Peter. But let's be honest, you took too long to remove it. And you should never have let them blog on VF in the first place. I mean, what were you thinking? Stureplan = Karlstad...nah, not quite!

NWT (a worse local Swedish newspaper) asked the same question about why it took Peter so long to react. And gave much the same obvious answer as I did.

Three holidays in the same week!

2008-03-20T15:48:00.005+01:00

Well Happy St. Patrick's Day, which was on Monday 17th.

And Happy Vernal Equinox to you pagans, which is today 20th.

And Happy Easter, which is on Friday and Sunday

Curious note: In Ireland, because St. Patricks Day was on the Monday of holy week, the church decreed that it was to be celebrated on Friday 15th instead, because the drinking of alcohol is frowned upon during holy week.
So it was celebrated on Friday instead of Monday by many people, especially of course the god-fearing Roman Catholics of mother Ireland.

Of course if the Vatican could work out a better system than the extremely complicated one they currently use for reckoning Easter, then it wouldn't feel like Easter gets earlier and earlier each year, and then it wouldn't clash with St. Patricks Day ;) Because when I was a young lad Easter always seemed to fall in April.

This year is the earliest I've ever known Easter to fall:

Easter Day 2008 - 23rd March ...Twenty third of March!!!!
Easter Day 2007 - 8th April
Easter Day 2006 - 16th April
Easter Day 2005 - 27th March
Easter Day 2004 - 11th April
Easter Day 2003 - 20th April
Easter Day 2002 - 31st March
Easter Day 2001 - 15th April
Easter Day 2000 - 23rd April

So maybe in six years time we'll have St. Patricks Day and Easter on the same Sunday!

Cheers and bless you!

Bjork on Tibet

2008-03-20T15:26:00.007+01:00

Relatively old news now, in the world of news and blogs, but a few weeks ago while giving a concert in China Bjork started screaming out the name "Tibet" over and over again during one of her more political songs.

Which of course backfired on here to some extent, and which will have lasting repercussions for two main reasons:

1. Fans go to a concert to hear you and your music not for you to insult their government. And if I was at that concert I would have felt insulted on behalf of the Chinese.

I remember at a football match here in Sweden about 3 years ago, a club (with a large Assyrian following and players) wanted a standing minute's silence in commemoration of Turkey's atrocities in their country 90 years ago..NINETY YEARS AGO! What? Come on, the Second World War only finished 63 years ago!
This backfired heavily on the club, who were fined for permitting an unlawful political manifestation during a match, which severely angered the visiting club and most of its supporters. And made most of the rest of the footballing community in Sweden hate the club even more than they already did, because it wasn't a popular club to start with - due to constant ethnic toned statements like the one they were fined for.

And

2. If the words and emotions of your music alone can't lead to political change (if that's what you want) then don't start orating from the stage. Alternatively ditch music and take up politics full time.

On the Tibet issue itself, nowadays it's just an old middle class, trendy-lefty, hippy cause that's not even trendy anymore. China owns Tibet, has done for over 50 years now, get used to it. And if anyone in the world is naive enough to think that any form of words or action (i.e. sanctions or boycotting the Olympics) can influence the world's largest economy to do anything other than they want to do or to give up Tibet, then they are profoundly misguided!

The frightening thing is that the undemocratic rule of China will continue unchallegned because: a, it has such a powerful economy: b, the US and China have reached an understanding - based of course largely on pacific rim political economics; and c, Russia doesn't have the clout the old USSR had, so china doesn't see Russia as a threat.

And if anyone thinks that boycotting electrical goods or shoes or toys or tools or clothing made in China in any was has any affect on the Chinese economy then they really haven't got a clue about global economics.

When the name of a town is bigger than the town

2008-03-13T10:01:00.003+01:00

Yesterday I was, along with everyone else on my department at work, in a Swedish town called Arboga. Now Arboga, is probably best known for its liver paté, which can be bought in probably every food shop in Sweden. What else it might be famous for I don't know, other than the fact that it crops up regularly in news, economy, sports and weather reports.

So I was expecting a medium sized town, with plenty of industries dotted around. Instead I found a quaint little old town with some fantastic old buildings, lanes and alleyways, flea markets and churches, and so small that on the way round the square I almost met myself on the way back!

And it got me thinking about how the names of some places are so well known and have a such a tradition linked to them and such reputations that when you finally arrive in them, you're not disappointed just shocked at how small they are.

Perhaps the best example of this is in Ireland and indeed the one that has shocked me the most, namely Tipperary, made famous of course by the song that was sung (apparently) by British and Irish soldiers fighting against the Germans during the First World War.
Driving through it for the first time in '92, I nearly feel out of the driver's seat, as I said to the missus, "Is that it?"
Again, I was expecting some kind of medium sized town, instead I found a lovely small rural town, with no more streets in it than could be counted on one hand!

And in England I've heard many people talk about and praise the greatness of York and Lincoln, both tiny, ancient cities. And they are officially cities. They've given their names to the surrounding counties and are known and famous for so much. The difference between great name and small size is probably greatest in those two English towns.

Maybe, the greatness of such places and the knowledge of their names lies in just that fact. That they are small homely places that their sons and daughters gladly talk about and praise when they're away from and missing home.

It's a long way to Arboga... nah, it doens't quite have the same ring, does it?

Banksy strikes again!

2008-03-06T16:11:00.003+01:00

This time Banksy has struck with an image that very much reminds the viewer of the political
murals of Belfast.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/entertainment_enl_1204805297/img/1.jpg

The accompanying BBC text was: A man walks past a new artwork by graffiti artist Banksy showing two children pledging allegiance to supermarket giant Tesco. It was reportedly discovered on the wall of a pharmacy in Islington, north London on Wednesday morning.

I like it, more please Mr or Ms Bansky whoever you are!

Darwin is spinning!

2008-03-05T10:56:00.004+01:00

The newspaper that I subscribe to and therefore take out of my post box every morning and read over breakfast is called Värmlands Folkblad (VF) - a local newspaper from a rural county of Sweden, which would also appear to be somewhat of a Bible belt if the response to the question posed by VF yesterday on its website is anything to go by.

This was the question "How did mankind come to be?"
And the two options provided were: Evolution - Creation

Then each morning the results of the previous day's voting on the question of the day are printed. The result today is shocking, worrying, annoying, horrifying and quite simply baffling.

Evolution - 29%
Creation - 71%

Of a total, it must be said, of only 1,340 votes. Presumably, I would hope though most of those being members of various churches on the campaign trail yesterday crusading for the creation myth!
And not, I hope, as it would appear at first glance a cross-section of average residents of Värmland.

Someone once observed that Sweden is a rural agricultural community (with all that that entails, from superstition, fanatical religion and invoking the gods of weather and fortune) that has moved into the towns.
Well, if the results of yesterday's question of the day are to believed, then Värmland certainly proves that observation.

And Darwin will be spinning in his grave for a good while yet!

Parents should be banned from buying into the best schools

2008-03-04T16:17:00.003+01:00

I'm cynical enough to think that it can't just be coincidence that a few days after the Swedish PM Fredrik Reinfeldt's visit to London and his cosy chat with the Labour PM Gordon Brown that the Chief Schools Adjudicator dropped this bombshell on the UK. Thus wanting to apply more of the Swedish approach to British schooling, in other words, children should go to their local state school - just as it is for the overwhelming majority of Swedish children.
The irony is that when I went to school in the 60s and 70s in London that was the case, the vast majority of children did go to their local state school.

One point that the report didn't make though, and it is worth making, is that boarding schools and private fee-funded schools don't necessarily always provide children with a better education! A better environment perhaps, with more choices and options. And certainly more status for them and their aspiring middle class parents, but not always a better education!

And while I agree with the proposal, it is too little too late from a Labour government that should have implemented this kind of ban back in '97 when it came into power. But who are we kidding, the UK has a long tradition of the middle and upper classes sending their children to "better" schools. So a proposal on a ban like this, while socially democratic and sound in theory, isn't in my opinion going to have much affect on parents or on the schools that are run down and neglected.

Reported in the Dail Mail on 29th February - follow the link for the full story. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=523211&in_page_id=1770

Meanwhile, here is the main point of the proposal:

"Parents should be banned from buying into the best schools, says watchdog.

Middle-class parents should be barred from "buying" their way into the catchment areas of good schools and make do with sink schools instead, the admissions watchdog said yesterday. Chief Schools Adjudicator Philip Hunter said a proportion of middle-class families should be forced to send their children to less popular schools to make way for disadvantaged pupils. "

Swedish humour doesn't travel well

2008-03-03T17:27:00.005+01:00

A few weeks ago, a couple of Stureplan slickbacks (that is the equivalent of the male Sloane Ranger hooray henry of yesteryear) started their own blogg in one of my local newspapers here in Sweden.

Now a few days before their first entries appeared on their blogg on the newspaper's website, the newspaper in question had a huge article on these two Stockholm bloggers and couldn't stop praising them and how great they were at blogging, and what an honour it was for this newspaper (a small county newspaper, located about 4 hours drive west of Stockholm ) to have them writing a blogg for them.

So last week, at the first opportunity and the first time I remembered to do so I went into this newspaper's website to read this allegedly fantastic blogg by these two brothers. Only to find silly one and two line entries and unfunny jokes and observations by these two. As well as personal attacks on all sorts of people in the sports, media and political arenas. Plus pointless daily observations about their health and various situations and moods they find themselves in. And rants about totally unimportant things that nobody else cares about or even affords a second thought.

The word substance is clearly one they've never heard. Because it is completely absent from their blogg. Or is it just me not understanding this level of puerile Swedish humour?

Maybe it is, in which case, this type of puerile Swedish humour doesn't travel well!

Blogging? Facebook?

2007-10-25T10:43:00.000+01:00

Well, it's been a long time since my last blog entry the reasons for which are twofold - too much work to do and a lack of interest.

When blooging was new to me I was writing an entry a week, roughly. But the novelty of the new wore off quite quickly.Then about two months ago I discovered Facebook and after having had my own Facebook page for about two weeks I removed it.

Partly because I didn't like the ever increasing feeling of "big brother is watching", I mean, lets be honest, governments both good and bad, democratic and totalitarian around the world must be in ecstasy over the voluntary registering of so much personal information and political, religious and sexual views now openly and freely available to them from millions of people in countries as far apart geographically and politically as the US, the UK, India, Russia, Malaysia and so on.

But I deleted my Facebook account mostly because Facebook is a completely and utterly pointless phenomenon. And the laughable amount of causes and groups and their members who actually believe they might be making a difference or that even one politician might take a blind bit of notice of them reminds me of the blue eyed naivety of an upper secondary school common room!

However, I shouldn't be surprised by that because Facebook was created initially by and for American high school kids and that level of thinkling and maturity is clearly visible and pervades most of the causes and groups.

As I become more and more disillusioned with cyber-reporting and cyber-media of all types I find myself more and more going to newsagents and buying UK newspapers, rather than reading them on the net as I used to.

The internet, which back in the mid-90s promised to be a super-cyber-highway promising almost virtual reality experiences, has proved itself to be nothing more than a huge market place interspersed with triviality and groupings of people with nothing better to do than fanny around on Facebook, Friends reunited, Lunarstorm and countless other cyber environments.

Now, where did I put my copy of The Guardian Weekly...?

Gullibility clearly knows no bounds

2007-02-20T09:43:00.000+01:00

Here are the links to four sites that sell what can only be described as "things that shouldn't be for sale or that noboby in their right mind would buy". In other words, sites selling the impossible or selling things that don't belong to them or that don't actually belong to anyone.

But clearly that view is not held by the majority as these products seem to sell very well.
And I must congratulate the people who came up with the ideas to sell what I thought, up to about five years ago, couldn't be sold.

Because it was about five years ago when I first heard of the business idea to sell the right to name a star for a loved one i.e. one of those sparkly things out in space. And having bought that right it would be your star forevermore for the reasonable price of about 20 quid, what a romantic present! (see link two)

Hang on I thought. Surely no one is that gullible that they're going to pay 20 notes to get a framed certificate saying they've named a star for their loved one, and that it's now offically their star...surely no one is going to fall for this snake oil con? Well I was wrong, there are plenty of people who have "bought" the "right" to name stars.

Then on Sunday night while lying in bed listening to the London based radio channel Talksport, I heard an interview with the young American man who recently came up with the idea to sell minutes in time (see link one). He was asked how much "time" he has sold so far and his reply was "Well, so far we've sold over 100,000 minutes at a dollar a piece" Ka-ching! How to make money selling the impossible due to the vanity and gullibility of certain people, well in this case over 100,000 people...so far!!!!

And now we come to snake oil operation number three the "bottled atmosphere" con (see link three). Basically you buy the "atmosphere capture kit" for a fiver (which is just an empty bottle) and you fill it with whatever sample of air you want, for example, open it at your wedding, or child's Christening and capture the atmosphere there..... okaaay! Surely no one... WRONG! ...people are buying it!

Then one that's actually been around for quite a while, bottled oxygen, (see link four) mostly it would seem being bought by sports stars and supermodels, if their advertising is to be believed, who just can't make it through the day without a hit of pure oxygen.... at 12 quid a pop!

Gullible? Not me! Although I did once buy a Ford Scorpio... hhmm...once bitten, twice shy.

Well, what's next I wonder?

Name my child auctions
Sort through my household rubbish for a dollar
Use my garden and pool for a pound an hour.....actually....nah!

Link one:

http://www.taketime.com/

Link two:

http://www.starlistings.co.uk/

Link three:

http://www.bottledatmosphere.co.uk/index.asp?ID=1

Link four:

http://www.wow-gifts.co.uk/oxygen.html

Politeness - nature, culture or etiquette?

2007-02-16T16:37:00.000+01:00

I'm starting to wonder if being polite and helpful to strangers and acquaintances (i.e. not family, workmates or friends) is something that is no longer permitted in our society gone gaga on political correctness and equality for women. Or if it doesn't cross cultural boundaries well or even if human nature varies from society to society.

Last week, coming out of a cornershop onto the very icy street I held the shop door open for an old lady with a walking stick, because I could see she was having trouble keeping upright on the ice and that she was coming into the shop.

Now some Swedes are famous for not being able to say a straightforward thank you. And some are also famous for being unable to say a straightforward, you're welcome, when someone thanks them. Instead they say thank you in terms that praise your good nature, while saying it is too good. And they say, you're welcome, by putting down the service they've just offered or by turning down your thank you.

Well anway, being a non-Swede I was just about to say you're welcome to the expected "thank you" I was sure was on its way, when the old lady looked at me and said "you're far too polite" not offensively but not too kindly either. I mean a simple thank you would have sufficed you old bag!

Then a couple of days later, having dropped my youngest son off at nursery school, I had just come out of the building and was walking away when I saw one of the nursery teachers coming across the ice, carrying, with both hands, the heavy breakfast porridge kettle. Well naturally I walked back the 5 yards and opened the door, but before I even got the door fully open she says
"I can do it myself" Well of course I open the door for her anyway. Again a simple thank you would have sufficed missus!

Am I in a country where politeness is now considered rude because of some strange interpretation of political correctness and female equality? Or is it true that Swedes simply have trouble saying "thank you"? Or do human nature, politeness and etiquette differ so greatly from country to country?

On more than one occasion different Swedes have said to me that the population of Sweden still have the mentality and rough manners of argricultural workers and farmers, because Sweden was still very much an agrarian society right up to the 1970s. The only difference now being that these "farmers" are middle class, live in urban settings and have office jobs.

Now I don't know if that's true or even if I agree with it, but I'm starting to wonder after 10 years of mumbled semi-rude "Thank yous" and non-existent "Your welcomes"

Well like the Irish saying goes "You can take the boy out of the sod, but you can't take the sod
out of the boy" In other words rural manners and customs stay with rural people, regardless of location or job.
I'm sure there's an equivalent saying for urban people, but I've yet to hear it.

And woe betide the next person who's rude to me while I'm helping them!

Thank you

James, civil servant, city dweller

When is a village not a village?

2007-02-01T11:00:00.000+01:00

The question of "What is a village?" only started to rattle around in my head when, in 2000, we moved from our "town" flat in our medium sized town in Sweden to a detached house (what Swedes call a "villa". But which in effect bears absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to white stuccoed haciendas on the Costa del Sol).

Anyway our "villa" (visions of retired East London gangsters lounging by the pool sipping Singapore Slings) is located in what Londoners would call an outer borough. However unlike a London borough or suburb there is very little here, there is no autonomy of any kind, because it is simply an outerlying district of the town. And unlike a dormitory town it isn't even commuting distance into town it is only a five minute drive; because while adjacent to the town it is clearly separated from it by greenery and motorways.

What we've got here is the primary school for several surrounding suburbs, the only shop, and the church and its attached parish centre also for several surrounding suburbs. And a "villlage green" with childrens playgrounds where the church hold regular events and picnics during the summer - everyone is welcome.

So although in Swedish we are called a town district I say that we live in a village, a bit outside town.

BUT, when I look at other outerlying "town districts" I notice that most of them don't have any shops, don't have churches, don't have schools, they are simply dormitory suburbs.

In fact, our area is the only outer district adjacent to the town that has its own school, church and shop. And that is why I say we are the nearest village to our town because we have those public services.

What I would call the true villages a bit further out are more like small urban towns.

Now, what Swedes call villages are simply rural dormitory communities miles from any real towns or in my opinion "real villages", like where I live, and they usually have no public services at all.

Well, this is what Wikipedia says about English villages (although I've removed some aspects specific only to England i.e. Saxons) and I'll write "TRUE" after each element that is true for where we live and "FALSE" after each element that is false. I'll then do the same again for those rural communites in Sweden that are actually called "something or other Village". And so we'll see which are closest in Sweden to English villages, outerlying -in the green belt - town districts like mine, or the rural dormitory communities that Swedes actually call and name as villages.

Where I live first:

"The village is a compact settlement of houses, smaller in size than a town, (TRUE) and generally based on agriculture. (FALSE) In England the main historical distinction between a hamlet and a village is that the latter will have a church, (TRUE) and will therefore usually have been the worship centre of a parish (TRUE) The stereotypical village used to have a "big house" (FALSE) a pub (FALSE) and shops (TRUE) as well as a blacksmith (FALSE). However, many of these facilities are now gone and many villages are dormitories for commuters (FALSE) The population of such a settlement could range from a few hundred people to around five thousand (TRUE) A village was distinguished from a town in that:
A village should not have a regular agricultural market (TRUE), although today such markets are uncommon even in settlements which clearly are towns.
A village does not have a town hall nor a mayor. (TRUE)
There should also be a clear green belt or open fields surrounding its parish borders (TRUE)
The village should not be under the administrative control of an adjacent town or city (FALSE)

Ok that was 8 x TRUE and 6 x FALSE

Now for what Swedes today actually name as villages:

"The village is a compact settlement of houses, smaller in size than a town, (TRUE) and generally based on agriculture. (FALSE) In England the main historical distinction between a hamlet and a village is that the latter will have a church, (FALSE) and will therefore usually have been the worship centre of a parish (FALSE) The stereotypical village used to have a "big house" (FALSE) a pub (FALSE) and shops (FALSE) as well as a blacksmith (FALSE). However, many of these facilities are now gone and many villages are dormitories for commuters (TRUE) The population of such a settlement could range from a few hundred people to around five thousand (FALSE -most Swedish "villages" have only a handful of houses and maybe 50 to 100 residents) A village was distinguished from a town in that:A village should not have a regular agricultural market (TRUE), although today such markets are uncommon even in settlements which clearly are towns. A village does not have a town hall nor a mayor. (TRUE) There should also be a clear green belt or open fields surrounding its parish borders (TRUE) The village should not be under the administrative control of an adjacent town or city (FALSE).

Ok, for exactly the same aspects that was 5 x TRUE and 9 x FALSE

My outerlying town district: 8 TRUE 6 FALSE
Swedish named village: 5 TRUE 9 FALSE

That is only in comparison to English villages of course, but that is what I know and what I can compare to. And supports my view that when translating the Swedish word for a rural community it shouldn't be translated to "village" as it sends the wrong signal to English readers, and anyway isn't a village when viewed from the English idea of what a village is.

Q: So when is a village not a village?
A: When it's located rurally in Sweden.

Have a good weekend,

James, village dweller just outside town.

"England is Wales, Ireland and Scotland isn't it?"

2007-01-17T09:58:00.000+01:00

Again on Monday, for only about the gazillionth time since moving to Sweden, I had to explain to a handful of Swedes the various entities that make up the British Isles and Ireland. And explain that England is only one quarter of the UK. And that none of the other 3 quarters include the Republic of Ireland.

I know it shouldn't, because I should be well-used to it by me, but it still irritates and shocks me every time a Swede refers to the UK as England. Most Swedes actually do this. And of course they're not helped in rectifying their mistake by film and TV programme subtitle writers who persist in translating, Britain,UK, and Great Britain to "England", and British to "engelsk" (lower case in Swedish for languages, nationalities, days of the week and the
months....yeah, weird isn't it!)

Anyway on Monday, when asked (in Swedish of course) "Have you got English citizenship? I gave the one and only possible answer, "There is no such thing as English citizenship, because there is no such state as England" Which was followed by "Huh?" (that was also in Swedish).

I explained, "The state is called The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Great Britain being the geographical name of the island that is England, Scotland and Wales. The British Isles contains two nationalities - British and Irish. I have both citizenships, but only a valid Irish passport. The British one expired about 1o years ago ."

On Monday I didn't go into the complex details about the Isle of Man and the two Channel Islands states but I will now.

All three are separate states, with their own Parliaments and governments and are not part of the EU or the UK. They are self-governing British Crown dependencies. The only matters they may not affect or issue statements on are foreign policy, defence and nationality laws.

However, resdients of the Isle of Man receive full UK passports which inlcude an extra entry detailing their Manx nationality. Whereas residents of the 2 Channel Islands states - The Bailiwick of Guernsey and The Bailiwick of Jersey receive British Islands passports, which have the following on the front cover: "British Islands, Bailiwick of Jersey" or "British Islands, Bailiwick of Guernsey" So slightly different in that they do not have full UK citizenship like a Manx national does.

I then had to explain that Ireland has been a separate state since the end of 1921.
And that while Wales is a country politically and culturally, legally and judicially it has not been a separate country since the middle of the 1500s, when it was annexed to England by the Laws of Wales Act of 1535, under Henry VIII, who as a Tudor of course was partly Welsh himself.

Since then, Wales has been a principality of England and all laws apply to the legal unit of England & Wales. Scotland however, is still a separate country, even though it went into the union with England in 1707.

Then of course that old chestnut the question of Northern Ireland came up, which made me ask "How long have you got?" No, I didn't really ask that, but it isn't something you can answer in five minutes so I gave them the dry basic political answer.

"In 1801 the Kingdom of Ireland went into a union with the Kingdom of Britain, which was after 600 years of on-again, off-again English rule anyway. Then in 1920 the Government of Ireland Act divided the island into Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland, based on religious and ethnic grounds. At the end of 1921 the British Government and the Irish Parliament signed the Treaty making Ireland a separate state. And so since then Northern Ireland has been part of the UK."

Now this next part is me writing now and has nothing to do with what was being discussed on Monday evening. And would have had no place anyway in a simple conversation about the political boundaries and entities of the British Isles.

From its creation in 1921 and up to 1972 Northern Ireland "enjoyed" Unionist self-government, but after about 3 years of The Troubles that the Unionist Protestant authorities in Northern Ireland were unwilling to take action against to protect the Catholics that were being killed and burned out by Protestants, the British Government imposed direct rule from Westminster. And sent in British troops initially to protect Catholics by putting a stop to the sectarian killings and house burnings being committed by Protestants.

These actions were carried out not only by civilians but also by the protestant police force (the RUC) and the part-time territorial army unit of the region, the UDR. They weren't taking direct open action of course, but some of them assisted loyalist organisations with weapons and information and stood by and watched other protestants burning houses and assaulting Catholics without taking the obvious police action to stop it.

Many members of the RUC and UDR of the 1970s were of course later shown to have been members of Orange Lodges (masonic) and some were even members or had close ties to loyalist paramilitary organisations.

Of course, these loyalist atrocities meant that another organisation started taking action again to protect Catholics, the IRA. Which having been in effect quite inactive up to 1970 split into the Officials and Provisionals. The "Provos" stepped up operations while accusing the Officials of embracing parliamentary politics and running down military operations.

And the rest up to the mid-90s and the Good Friday Agreement is sad, bloody, tragic, awful history.

So as far as names go, Ireland is Ireland and England is England, nothing more, nothing less.

In the Shadows of Greatness

2007-01-17T09:35:00.000+01:00

Spare a thought occasionally for all those English towns that have to live in the shadow of great cities, for example: Slough, Watford, Dudley, Birkenhead, Stockport, Gateshead, South Shields.
It can't be much fun having to explain where you're from geographically by using the big shitty beside you to direct visitors and tourists.

Of course the proud small town dweller will give directions like this: "Where's Watford? Well, it's in Southwest Hertfordshire between the M1 and the M25 about 20 minutes drive south down the M1 from Luton"

Whereas pragmatic small town dwellers, resigned to their fate living in the shadows of greatness, will answer, "Where's Watford? Well it's in Northwest London just north of Rickmansworth"

Knowing also that they don't need to name counties and motorway numbers because everyone can find London, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester and Newcastle in a road atlas!

A bag of fish & pommes frites please mon ami

2007-01-16T17:16:00.000+01:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6261885.stm?ls

"On 10 September 1956 French Prime Minister Guy Mollet arrived in London for talks with his British counterpart, Anthony Eden"

Did you read about this yesterday, about the plans that were afoot to unite Britain and France?

Well apparently a "union" was considered in the 1950s, according to secret papers recently unearthed. During the Suez crisis France was really worried, for several reasons but partly because Egypt was funding separatists in Algeria, and because of the troubles in Israel. So the French PM suggested the union with Britain so that they as one state could present a strong unified force in the face of Russia, the US and the two main Middle Eastersn protagonists of the day, Egypt and Israel.

Anyway, it seems that Britain were not totally alien to the idea and France was ready to join the Commonwealth and accept a Queen as head of state. Mon Dieu!

This is of course also very much linked to the later military arm of the WEA (Western European Union) that France and Germany were after for decades during the Cold War and Middle Eastern problems of the 50s, 60s & 70s.

Anyway it never happened and in the end as we know France got in bed with West Germany when they formed the EEC.

What interests me more about this story is of course, as I'm sure you've guessed, the socio-cultural ramifications and possible humorous consequences of such a union.

Brits speaking awful French and the French still refusing to utter a word of L'anglais!
Garlic butter on your fish & pommes frites.
Berets & brollies in the city.
"Coffee & sympathy" just doesn't sound right does it?
Taking the metro or autobus to work...huh?
Buskers only playing accordions, presumably sur la pont de La Thames.

And of course Britain would have exported masses of tea bags and British cars to France to run alongside the equally crappy French cars. At least they had some things in common!

Sacre bleu!

Charlie in your pocket!

2007-01-11T11:57:00.000+01:00

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6250189.stm

Well, it seems that the people of Ireland really like Charlie... and I dont mean Haughey.
Apparently, according to a BBC article today (see link). Scientific researchers at Dublin's City University found traces of cocaine on 100% of the bank notes in the batch they examined.
Some notes had such high levels that the researchers believe that those notes were used for actually snorting coke!
Others with lower levels would have been contaminated in cash tills and wallets.

Apparently cocaine particles stick to the cotton that is contained within the notes, with the higher notes containing greater traces. Well of course, it's far better to snort charlie through a 50 than through a tenner... I mean if you've got it, flaunt it!

Well, I knew drug use was a major problem in Ireland but this really is a surprise.

So today's "I spy" game is to see how many people you can spot in the street, at home, at work, in the pub sniffing Irish bank notes!

Mozzer on a string!

2007-01-10T15:58:00.000+01:00

Well, well, well. The BBC has confrimed today that Morrissey could represent the UK in this years Eurovision contest http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6248109.stm

Well I love Moz! Saw him 3 times in 2006. Twice in my home town in fact. And on the bootleg of the Swedish Radio recording of his second night on my manor you can clearly hear me shouting out "Life is a Pigsty!" just before they start it. Fame at last!

Anyway back to Eurovision... Eurovision 2006 was a great success because finally the voting public showed that Euromuzzak ethno-pop-pap isn't what's wanted. But hard rock and real music in general is!!! Lordi. Lordi !

I'd love to see Moz do it, I think he'd win hands down with a proper rocky song!
And I can imagine that he feels it would put him into that small group of famous British artists that are such an institution, such a huge part of English culture that doing Eurovision isn't considered naff, and it is a small group: Cliff Richard, Lulu, The Shadows, Matt Monroe.
And now Moz.

Let's face it, Moz does play on the '50s & '60s crooner image quite a lot, in his suit & quiff, so Matt Monroe isn't too far off imagewise!
Mozzer, Mozzer, Mozzer!

(Note: Katrina thought that she & her waves were huge, they aren't. So they were naff! To do Eurovision you have to be well etsablished and already a huge success beyond changing musical fashions (Matt Monroe, Cliff Richard etc.) or an absolute beginner. Failing and fading '80s pop bands are naff when they do Eurovision. Sorry Kat, but as much as I loved you at the Mean Fiddler shaking your lovely stuff back in the early 80s, braless in your white vest, on Eurovision you were embarrassing, even though you won!)

Now after such a long entry on this subject dahlings don't start thinking that I'm some kind of Eurovision queen!

Cheers and Le Royaume-Uni: douze point!

The verb to be

2007-01-09T15:59:00.000+01:00

Present simple:

I am
you are
he/she/it is
we are
you are
they are

Present simple negatives; negative contractions;& negative interrogative forms:

I am not - I'm not / amn't I? OR am I not? OR the widely used yet very grammatically suspect aren't I?
you are not - you're not - you aren't / aren't you? OR are you not?
he/she/it is not - he's not - he isn't / isn't he? OR is he not?
we are not - we're not - we aren't / aren't we? OR are we not?
you are not - see 2nd pers. sing.
they are not - they're not - they aren't /aren't they? OR are they not?

You see "amn't I" is correct!

And I base that not only on the written word of grammar that can be seen in all verb tables, but on the fact that it is standard amongst most Irish speakers and amongst many of Irish descent; myself included. My parents used it and I grew up using it.

And also on the fact that when I went to school in Chelsea, London my English teacher used it, and often got asked by non-Irish Catholic pupils in the classroom, "Isn't that wrong miss?" whereby she would point out that amn't I is a perfectly accepted form and is in fact more grammatically correct than aren't I.

Food for thought!

The price of chips

2007-01-09T14:12:00.000+01:00

Having practiced on two blogs I created last year I now "think" I'm ready to run a proper blog with real daily or perhaps weekly - if I'm realistic - input. Well, that's the theory. How it goes in practice remains to be seen.

Why have a blog at all? After several years of sending informative, angry or corrective letters to Swedish newspapers on a whole range of subjects, from how the British police work to what language Yoshua Ben Yusef spoke, I now feel I want a forum on which I can post my views about Sweden and Swedish society from the perspective of a migrant, especially with regard to how Swedes and the Swedish state view the outside world. And to post my views about the UK and Ireland from the perspective of an exile.

One major area of interest has always been languages, linguistics, etymology and socio-culturally related subjects. Hence my job - translator/proofreader/interpreter/English teacher, and the fact that I'm bilingual.

Of particular interest within that field is how English differs not only between Irish English speakers and British English speakers but also between the language of the "English" in the UK and those of Irish descent in the UK . Additionally how the various forms of spoken English are received and perceived by Swedes.

An older blog I had was called "Amn't I is correct!" And I was going to use that title for this one but in the end didn't want to limit myself subject-wise. So "An Irish-Lononder in Sweden" it is.

Another area of interest is the sometimes frighteningly huge and sometimes almost indescernible socio-cultural differences between myself and the Swedes around me and between British/Irish life and Swedish life.

Huge things like the fact that in Sweden everyone through necessity has, or has access to, a car. And in fact many families in Sweden have at least two cars. Now when I lived in London, you didn't really need a car and so accordingly most poeple didn't have cars.
The necessity in Sweden is caused by public transport being so bad or rather so limited due to the relatively small populaiton combined with the size of the country and the great distances that many people commute.

One of the small differences, indescernible to Swedes, that still bugs me is that people here always answer the phone with their name and/or phone number, as if they are obliged to provide the person calling THEM with personal details. Now for obvious security reasons in London you never did that.

Anyway, my blog is going to cover everthing from why amn't I is correct and aren't I is wrong to theology, real ale, and the price of chips!

Cheers!