Selective mourning

Once again, for the 4th day in a row, media outlets across the country are drowning us in reports about the Boston bombings. 3 people died including an 8 year old boy and a Chinese exchange student and dozens were badly injured.

Since then 27 people have been killed and dozens injured by a suicide bomb in a cafe in Baghdad, an earthquake has hit Pakistan, killing 34 and injuring hundreds, a further 17 Pakistani's were killed following a bomb at a secularist rally, dozens have been killed by a bomb in Syria and a 5 year old Indian girl is fighting for her life after a brutal sexual attack.

These are just the stories that news outlets bothered printing.. and I only found these after a lot of digging. Did you hear about these at all?

Shouldn't every death be worth reporting when it's done in such a horrific way? Why is it that there's such uproar when an American is killed but if someone from an Arab country is killed in exactly the same way it doesn't even get a mention? No one cares.

I understand that it's rarer for these sorts of things to happen in America, and all of us westies seem to be in awe of America and treat it like some sort of 'mother country', but if we only really care when a disaster like this happens in the west and shrug our shoulders when it happens in the East then we are a heartbreakingly divided planet.

Of course the Boston bombings are terrible and my heart goes out to all involved but equally my heart  goes out to the people involved in bombings and tragic deaths elsewhere in the world. I am so so sorry to them for the way one half of the planet didn't even know, or seem to care, that they've died.


Just a note- if you're like me and are sick of western news values then this is a really good news website which covers stories equally all around the world

The UK Idiot Party

With support for Ukip growing at an alarming rate, let's take a look into their misguided policies and scaremongering statements shall we?

1. 75% of our laws are dictated by the EU

A statement Ukip have been very proud to put in their leaflets and TV campaigns but official records show that the actual percentage is near 15%. So a slight exaggeration there, Ukip.. There are also many restrictions on what the EU can legislate on meaning they have very little say on laws in this country.

2. By leaving the EU we will save £36 billion a year

Again, greatly exaggerated. It actually works out around £4 billion a year to be in the EU however many argue the economic benefits justify this. And in relation to some of the other things the government spends money on, EU membership is just a cup of water out of the ocean. Seriously, Ukip, where are you getting these statistics from and how are you getting away with lying to us so outrageously? 

3. Global warming has not been proven. We will stop the building of wind turbines and encourage coal power.

Of course! global warming is just a myth. The ice caps are melting at an alarming rate and a giant hole is forming in the ozone layer just because the world is quirky and spontaneous like that. And instead of running things using renewable energy such as wind power, let's use million year old dead trees. Cause let's face it, we're running out of wind but coal will last forever.

4. We will repeal the Human Rights Act

For some reason people seem to think the Human Rights Act is there only to ensure prisoners get it easy and illegal immigrants can stay in this country. Once again a few bad cases has ruined it for everyone. Ukip and even the Conservative party have said that they want to completely stop their commitment to human rights all together. I'm sure I don't need to spell out how dangerous this move could be to freedom in this country. Even in this 'highly democratic' country measures need to be put in place to protect people from the abuses of government.

5. End the doctrine of multiculturalism which has torn this country apart

So we should stop teaching children to accept people from different cultures? Ukip may think that it's immigrants which are 'destroying Britain' and threatening our way of life but really it's the racist, intolerant, blindly patriotic thugs which are giving it a bad name.

6. Hold a referendum on the hunting ban and repeal the smoking ban

Cause we all miss smelling like an ashtray with our lungs full of second hand smoke after a trip to the pub. After the pub fancy getting the boys together to chase some foxes and watch our dogs rip them apart? It's tradition after all. Tallyho!

PEOPLE! Ukip may seem like the way forward. The top parties at the moment are all as bad as each other but don't be duped by (the highly photogenic, I must say) Nigel Farage who's managed to make a scapegoat out of immigrants as the cause of all our problems.

Plus just look at those shifty eyes... ¬____¬ I'm watching you, Nigel...

First past the.. Wait.. where's the post?

Britain is such a democratic nation, isn't it? I mean, look at our voting system. Whoever gets the most votes wins, how on earth could it possibly be fairer than that?

In reality first past the post isn't actually fair at all. In fact it's possibly the unfairest voting system of them all. 

The thing that baffles me most is the name... because there is no post. Candidates don't actually have to get past any point at all in order to be elected. Say there were 4 candidates competing to become an MP in your constituency, the MP could be elected with as little as 25.1% of the vote, leaving 74.9% a bit miffed (yay maths!). If you consider the average 35% of people who don't bother voting either, that doesn't give the MP a lot of legitimacy. 

There is also a staggering difference between the percentage of votes a party gets and how that is changed into seats in parliament. In 2010 23% of the population voted for the Lib Dems.. Guess what proportion of the seats they got? 9%. So through first past the post a party which was voted for by nearly a quarter of the population didn't even get 10% of the seats in the Commons... Yeah, sounds fair.  

But the main thing which winds me up about this system of voting? It means that unless you vote for the 2 main parties, possibly 3, your vote doesn't count at all. In 2010 this meant that the 10million people who didn't vote Labour, Conservative or Lib Dem might as well have stayed at home (unless you live in the Brighton Pavilion constituency and voted Green- go you!). It's no secret I'm a socialist and, sadly, there is no point in me voting at all. My constituency has voted Conservative since the first world war and it's unlikely to ever change hands, tough luck if you support anyone else- you have no voice. 

For those who actually noticed that there was a referendum to change the voting system to AV a couple of years ago, that wouldn't have changed things either. AV would have been a step in the right direction because you can state a second preference but it still produces very similar results to FPTP.

There are loads of different ways to elect people but most have only heard of first past the post. If you're interested in the different systems (there's no shame in being a politics geek!) the electoral reform society explains them all here. My favourite is the single transferable vote :).

 

Squeezing the press

Lord Leveson has somehow made what could be summed up in a few short sentences last 2000 pages. And, while I admire the man's ability to waffle, I believe this whole thing has been blown greatly out of proportion.

When a small number of journalists are able to hack into people's phones and bribe the police, this isn't a sign that we need to reduce the freedom of the entire press, it is a sign that the right to privacy isn't being properly enforced and that the justice system is failing.

Phone hacking was carried out by a small number of people at a few of Britain's newspapers. As a result tighter restrictions are being considered which punishes the entire press and also damages freedom of expression. I thought harassment, phone hacking and bribing police officers were illegal anyway? Punish the people who've done these crimes not the entire industry! Broadcast and radio in this country is already tightly regulated and now the press could be heading in the same direction. 

When newspapers are having to show articles to lawyers before they're published through fear of being fined millions of pounds, they're not going to be able to properly carry out their service to the public.

So what, Hugh Grants pissed off? And Kate and Gerry McCann have found yet another way to squeeze themselves into the limelight. This isn't a good enough reason to strip the UK of it's only free media outlet.

Behold, the true ruler of this great nation

Back in 2007 it was reported that for every £7 spent in the UK, £1 of that was spent at Tesco, making them a tidy profit of £2.5 billion. It now stands at approximately £1 in £10, leaving Tesco boss Phillip Clarke angry that profits have started falling (only by a few £million, mind you).

It was uncovered that workers at a farm in Costa Rica, which was growing bananas for Tesco, earned only 33p an hour. This forced them to work long hours and even during dangerous pesticide sprays.

During Tesco's biggest period of expansion it was estimated that 50 independent retailers a week were closing down across the country as they simply could not compete with the commercial superpower setting up stores right on their doorstep. 260 stores have been opened in the UK this year alone.

Chances are with the almost 3000 stores and 38,592,000 square feet of land Tesco owns in the UK alone, you won't have to walk very far to find one.

The chances are, too, that you have no option but to shop there. Unless you pop down to your nearest One Stop. Oh, wait, that's owned by Tesco too.

This means Tesco will continue to grow, continue to make unimaginable profit, continue to underpay its suppliers and continue to leave small business owners with no option but to close up shop.

Let's all take a moment to pay homage to the true power in this country.

And we still think the free market is such a great idea?

Man love rules, ok?

Gay marriage should have been made legal decades ago.

I think it's a travesty and an absolute insult to the 3.6 million gay people in this country that it's not.

I can't entirely get my head around why people are still, in this day and age, against equal rights. 

Most of the arguments against gay marriage come from the church and religion. Many say that the bible defines marriage as between one man and one woman (but that's only as long as we ignore all the polygamy in the old testament). So, we're focusing on the new testament here, I see. Oh, the bible says homosexuality is a sin? But the new testament doesn't even mention homosexuality? Ah you're referring to the passage in the old testament calling gay sex an abomination? ...But I thought we were ignoring the old testament? ... See my point?

I'm sick and tired of people picking and choosing the parts of the bible they agree with and ignoring the parts they don't. They're using their religion to cover up their own prejudices and as a weapon to take away other people's rights. The truth of the matter is that they find gay people icky. Well, that's their problem.

If you don't want a gay marriage, don't have one.

The other arguments I've seen have been bigoted statements such as 'It will devalue conventional marriages' and 'It'll lead to polygamy and marrying your dog becoming legal'. I've even heard things such as 'It'll make children more likely to be gay'

With great arguments such as this it's no wonder the government  is hesitant to give gay people equal rights.

  Love is love no matter who it's between. Gay couples deserve to celebrate their love just as much as straight couples. And that's all this argument should come down to. 

Just a quick note:

Just so you don't think I'm one of those crazy, hate preaching atheists which prowls around the interwebs, let me just explain one thing. I am not against religion. People have the right to believe what they want. I am, however a secularist. Religious beliefs should be kept out of political policy and not infringe on people's rights,That's all.

Welcome to capitalism, please leave all humaity at the door

Capitalist society is so just and fair, isn't it?

Look at how many apps are available on android and the app store. 
Not got a smartphone? Don't worry, someone in Vodafone or 02 will find you a great deal.

Remember, you're not really a person unless you have one.

Oh, you're only earning £50,000 a year? How can you cope? I know, only having two bathrooms in your house makes life so inconvenient. 

You need to earn more money. You need to work harder. You want lots of nice shiny new things. 

Oh whoops, that evil government's trying to tax your multimillion pound company. Better think of a loophole to get out of that. It's not like they'll use the money for anything important anyway.

People on benefits are lazy. You've worked really hard monopolising the industry. You've crushed all competition. You deserve this.

What's that? You work three jobs but still have to choose between food and heating? 

Stop complaining. Get another job. Try harder.

No. I don't have any spare change. If you had made an effort in life you would have a roof over your head. 

You deserve this.

Why does it take a death to cause change?

I was disgusted to read recently about the death of Savita Halappanavar, a woman who was denied an abortion in Ireland, even though she was suffering a miscarriage, and died as a result of septicemia.

The reason the doctors gave her as to why they wouldn't abort her baby?: 'This is a catholic country'.

I'm sorry but when did religion come before the Hippocratic oath? It was clear the baby was dying and Savita was in danger but since the foetus still had a faint heartbeat the doctors didn't do anything.
What about Savita's heartbeat? The doctors blind obedience to their faith has led to two deaths instead of one.

I guess there is a silver lining here as this story has caused international uproar and pressure on the Irish government to change the law, and if not, make their abortion laws clearer.

But the main thing this story shows is that religion needs to stay far away from the realm of politics. I mean, a few galaxies away. Abortions are against your faith? Great- don't get one. But don't legislate so that no one else is allowed one either. Women should have the choice.

Did we really need a martyr to exemplify this point?

If Savita had suffered this miscarriage in the UK, for example, just a few miles away, she would still be alive. Ireland needs to escape from the middle ages and abort its ridiculous abortion laws.

Why we're failing our children

When I was 16 I made a decision which changed my life forever.

I decided to study politics.

I didn't know anything about politics. At all. I didn't understand our system at all. I didn't understand elections at all. I didn't know any of the political parties in this country's views or policies. I knew my Dad voted for the Tories and if it wasn't for that one crazy, impulsive decision I made back when I was 16 I would probably be voting Tory as well. What a scary thought.

Then all of a sudden in a year my eyes were opened. I realised that what I thought was a democracy is actually a joke. I learned that the way we elect our leaders means that they don't have as much legitimacy as they should and I was shown ways that this could be changed so that everyone received fairer representation. It was suddenly clear that the three main parties in this country are all, apart from a few small things, exactly the same. My teachers didn't push me to feel this way- in fact they were very neutral. They showed us the facts and we drew up our own conclusions.

I can promise you, most of the people in my class felt the same way.

Why is it that I only learned about politics when I went to college and chose to? I think this is one of the biggest failings in this country. at school we get taught how to solve long equations, recite Shakespeare and even how to put on a condom but we don't get taught how to vote. We don't get given even the most basic understanding of our political system and the parties within it.

Recently me and a friend from my course had an assignment to go out and ask the general public a question on a subject of our choice. We chose lowering the voting age to 16. We asked a few students from our uni and do you know what many of them said? 'I'm 18 and I don't know who to vote for' that or 'oh, I don't really have an opinion on that'. Democracy in action people.

Maybe the government hasn't made teaching politics in school mandatory yet because they don't want the UK's teenagers to know how undemocratic and one sided our political system is. They would rather they just voted how their parents vote. No questions asked.

This country would become a so much more ideologically vibrant place if only we showed our young people that there is more than just one way to think and to see the world.

Save our furry friends!

The pure stupidity and stubbornness of the British government never ceases to amaze me. 

Can someone please explain to me why, after seeing the alternatives and getting advice from dozens of scientists and experts, the government is still going to go ahead with its insane badger culling policy. A vaccine program is being developed while I type and scientists everywhere are not only saying that slaughtering 70% of Britain's badger population won't stop bovine TB, it may in fact make it worse. 

Maybe the conservatives are still sore about the banning of fox hunting and are trying to find a way of allowing people to mindlessly slaughter animals which can't fight back. after all, it's tradition- and tradition must be defended, no matter how inhumane and outdated it is.

The best way to reduce bovine TB is simply to make the area farmers graze their cows in more secure, so badgers can't get in. Thousands of healthy badgers are going to be killed, for seemingly no reason at all.

please if you read this, sign the petition. If we make our voice loud enough maybe the government will be able to hear it through all that jingling in their pockets .

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/38257

 UPDATE 

 Looks like the cull has been put off for a year. Hopefully that will be enough time for either the government to come to its senses or an effective vaccine program to be developed. I'm gunna go with the latter.

Old enough to die for you, but not old enough to vote for you

There is speculation that following plans to allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote on the Scottish independence referendum, the government might just let them vote in general elections too.

Of course the lords are kicking up a massive stink about this, probably moaning about adding thousands more of the 'great unwashed' into the franchise. A note to those moaning about it being too big a constitutional change- so was extending the vote to women? and Britain recovered from that pretty quickly.

though I agree that most 16 and 17 year olds aren't clued up enough on politics at the moment to make a well enough informed decision, this change would mean that politics will have to be taught in schools, even if it's just a few PSHE lessons.

At 16 I was already very political and knew exactly who i would have voted for in the 2010 elections but I was denied the opportunity (not that it would have made any difference to the result). 

At 16 people are allowed to have sex, have to pay taxes if they work and can even join the army but they're not allowed to vote. I think there's something very very wrong about that. At 16 most are considered adults however the government is still treating them like children by taking away their democratic voice.

The trouble with freedom of speech

I've just read a news article about a man who's been imprisoned for eight months for wearing a t-shirt celebrating the deaths of police officers Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone. 

Now I don't know about you but I think that by giving people punishments for saying controversial and offensive things we give them more of a platform. If this insane person was ignored instead of imprisoned no one would have heard what he has to say.. Now it's plastered all over the national news. 

But of course people can't ignore it can they? Why get annoyed or offended over it, yeah what he said was disgusting but he only did it to get a reaction- so don't react! We're supposed to have freedom of speech in this country but that's slowly being taken away by those who aren't exercising their right to not pay attention to it. 

Better yet, exercise your right to freedom of speech and call him a wanker! 

Come on, this guy's shirt said 'kill a cop 4 fun.com ha, haa?' he clearly has his 5 A-Cs.. Don't give him what he wants.

Ed Milliband the happy slug

Ed Miliband reminds me of a slug. you can almost see the slime ooze out of him. that slimy smile, that slimy voice, the way his eyes recede into his head when you poke them. maybe we should attack him with salt and watch him melt away. I've just watched his speech from the labour conference and now even I feel slimy just from looking at him. Everyone saying that it was his best speech so far, erm.. it's not hard! He could have gone out there and said 'I like men' and that still would have been his best speech so far. Isn't it cute when people laugh at their own crappy jokes? And excuse me if I'm wrong but I thought he was the leader of the labour party? So why is he trying to bring back Benjamin Disraeli's idea of 'one nation'? That was a conservative move which tried to stop the lower classes rising against the ruling classes back in the 1800s, not the inspirational, selfless feat they seem to think it was. This speech has just proved that all of the 3 main parties are, deep down conservatives. They may act like they're miles apart from each other in the political spectrum but the British public, in reality, have three choices- right wing, right wing or right wing. We truly are a conservative nation. Hallelujah!

Can you imagine if good ol' Ed became the figurehead of our country? A happy little oblivious slug with a little annoying nasally voice and no real or original ideas about how to rescue this country.