May Versus Corbyn: The TV Debate

May vs Corbyn: The TV «Debate»

Clarity is all. It wasn't quite a debate because the two weren't face to face but I thought it an interesting exercise anyway. I thought neither did particularly well but nor did they do particularly badly. Judging by its reactions, the audience was quite well balanced in its sympathies, even including a small but obvious UKIP claque.

The clearest point that came through to me was when Paxman questioned May on her view of the economic impact of Brexit, which May had stated before the referendum as likely to be very damaging. May, very pointedly I thought under close questioning from Paxman, made no attempt to retract that opinion. She merely repeated that she was going to make a success of Brexit (and that «strong and stable government» would help, even if it doesn't affect the strength of the EU hand in negotiations).

So, what could success look like. Presumably it means minimising the economic damage. What else can it mean? With trading agreements with the EU and some 50+ other countries certain to be generally less advantageous (see previous postings), the economic damage could be very considerable indeed. Add the cost of Brexit and….……...So how can damage be minimised? I can't see any way other than a quick trade agreement with the EU, which must therefore be very much on their terms. That was what impressed me most in the debate and I don't think it came though clearly, perhaps because both contestants were on the same side regarding Brexit. Nonetheless Brexit will go ahead since both major political parties support what one commentator described as «a unique national act of deliberate self-harm». The decision of an electorate admittedly lied to, misinformed and widely ignorant of the consequences must be «respected».

And clarity is perhaps what is most lacking. The government has made several efforts to avoid parliamentary scrutiny of negotiations and most of the British press is unlikely to publish any bad news in that regard. May insists she needs lack of clarity so as not to reveal her negotiating hand but the EU has insisted that all negotiations must be open and transparent; so the EU itself will be an invaluable source of information over the coming years. Indeed, the EU has stated that it believes the British electorate is still ignorant of the implications of Brexit, as it most obviously is. Why would people vote to be worse off?

Two things trouble me most. One is the seemingly far too easy general acceptance of essentially empty slogans. To the «making Britain great» and «taking control» can now be added «strong and stable government» and the comfortably optimistic escape clause that «nobody yet knows how things will turn out». Nobody yet knows whether the world will end tomorrow but one can examine the evidence, think (above all, THINK) and come to some form of reasonably probable conclusion. I hate that so few people seem to question what this populist garbage and blind unsubstantiated hope really means. The other troubling item is the aggressive stance of extreme right-wing, essentially UKIP, supporters on every public platform. It smacks too much of brown shirts. I can't remember when the neo-Nazi element in the British public was as prominent as it is now.

Macron And The Secret Of Life

Macron And The Secret Of Life

I had proposed to Steve that we should have a meeting of the English conversation class at my house, for aperitifs, rather than in the room below the Mairie, and he agreed. So this evening we did it. It was a success in all respects, I think. Certainly everybody seemed to enjoy themselves, some staying for three hours and everybody for at least two. The food all got eaten (I hate left-overs from aperitif sessions), the wine supply was seriously diminished and the conversation never flagged. Most importantly, with a couple of minor lapses, everyone spoke English all the time. (I had threatened them with Wolof and Spanish as the only acceptable alternatives to English for the evening, sure that nobody spoke either.) Two-three hours solid of English was no mean feat for people who still find speaking English a challenge.. I felt I had to congratulate everyone. These are people who wanted more in life, but not financially.

It led me to reflect on life here. For me it is great; I love the locality, a lot of the people, the weather, the scenery, the local produce and the village life in general. But I am retired and can afford to indulge in all that. For a younger person the scene must be different. Younger people need to build a life and job opportunites and variety here are very constrained. Some, it seems, are content to just «get by». They survive economically on casual employment and are otherwise content just to enjoy the same good things that I do. But building a better life must be problematic. With just oneself to take care of there is little problem but if one wants to raise a family and give them a better life, how can it be done?

The problem is probably common in small rural communities across the world. Here it seems to coalesce into two distinct attitudes among the French to themselves and, indeed, to their new President. I have French friends who want things to stay very much as they are, because life as it is seems good to them. Others decry this, say the French are just dozing, and laud what they perceive as the anglo-saxon attitude of «get up and go». Some have commented on how the English (friends Jo and Steve and I) have invigorated the life of the village with our English conversation classes, organisation of ad hoc choirs, (English) floral displays and boules playing.

A contributing factor is certainly the oft-proclaimed north-south divide and from which you happen to originate; in other words, the weather. If the outlook is cold, wet and bleak, whatever you do you are not going to relax outside. Also you need to keep warm and you need the money to fund that, a considerable incentive to use initiatve and find paid work. This in turn, I feel, spills over into social life. Do you just accept what the commune offers for entertainment and interest or do something to add to it? So what is the secret for a satisfying life?

These dilemmas come together in Macron. My French friends seem to be ambivalent about him. He won the presidency primarily, I think, as the preferable alternative to Le Pen. What the French seem to find puzzling about him is that he has impeccable credentials for neither right nor left, which confounds their love of pure theory. His penchant for entrepreneurialship appeals to the right but he has socialist tendencies also. The left accept his socialist claims but deplore the entrepreneurial side. The big problem for the French, it seems, is that they can't place him anywhere in theory, neither fowl nor beast. But maybe, just maybe, that is exactly what France needs for a better life for its citizens. Whatever the future holds for French life, to the usual certainties of death and taxes can be added demonstrations and strikes as Macron attempts to make the changes he feels are necessary.

Hyères, Chelsea and Fruit

Hyères

The stay in Hyères for the regional boules championships was very enjoyable even if my team didn't do very well. The hotel looked out over the bay and you could see the Porquerolles islands clearly, bringing to mind Jospeh Conrad's novel The Rover, which I had studied at school. When I go to the coast I still get surprised by how different and far in advance the vegetation there is from that around Mollans, considering it is only a couple of hours drive away. Apart from the Mediterranean pines, which frame all the views, the lack of hard frosts in the region mean that plants that don't survive the winter here are already in full bloom there in early May, gazanias, bougainvillea and many others providing a panoply of vivid colour. The weather wasn't great, with a very high wind blowing continuously, but that somehow suited the scenery and brought The Rover even more to mind.

Chelsea

I have been restrained in mentioning my fanatical support for Chelsea football club in this blog but can't resist mentioning them now that they have once again won the Premier League in England. This time they have done it with not only the grit and consistency required but also panache and flair. I'm among the probably very few supporters now who saw them lift this trophy for the first time in 1955 when, as a 13 year-old I invaded the pitch at the end of the last game of the season and stood in adulation of the team in front of the East Stand. An aunt had taken me to my first game at the stadium, Stamford Bridge, in 1952, a 2-2 draw with Aston Villa if I remember rightly, That was when the bug first bit me and I have been bitten by it ever since. Coincidentally, neighbour Monique told me that she always had all the news about Chelsea from a grandson of hers in Paris who had surprised his family by turning down the offer of a Paris St Germain shirt and insisting he wanted only a Chelsea one. Good for him. When he visits Monique we'll have to get together.

Fruit And Garden

The first cherries are now in the shops and markets. Unlike the season for other fruit the cherry season does not last long but supplements the strawberries and melons now in plentiful supply. I always have a melon and some strawberries in the house at this time of year but will have to find space, in my stomach as well as the house, for some cherries as well. There is a variety here, griottes, that is not sweet (or sour) and is used just in preserves; I never remember encountering them in England but I guess they must be grown there.

And, finally, all the roses in my back garden are now in full bloom so I can't resist adding a photo of some of them. The back garden is looking good and a French friend gave me the French phrase I have been searching for to explain the look to French friends who think it seems to be a jungle or ngelected. The phrase is «un savant désordre»; thanks, Yvette.

Spring/Summer, Food, Gardens: Ruminations

Spring/Summer, Food, Garden: Ruminations

A week ago I was thinking that summer was already here, a thought immediately overturned by several days of wind, storm and rain. The weather even managed to dump a large precipitation of snow on the summit of Mont Ventoux, which had been clear of snow for many weeks until now. The road from the ski station to the summit should have been opened yesterday and I wonder whether a snow plough was sent up to clear it but don't think I'll go up to find out.

Anyway, if it is not definitely summer yet it soon will be, a certainty that I never had in England. Summer never arrives there until June at the earliest and some years seems to forget to arrive ar all. Yesterday, the 1st of May, is a holiday here, as it now is in England. Traditionally, in France, you give a sprig of Lily of the Valley to your loved ones on May 1st, which I think is a rather charming tradition, much more impressive to me than the traditional Russian military parades. If the Russians must have military parades perhaps they could decorate the armaments with sprigs of Lily of the Valley; it would provide a nice counterpoint.

Unlike Britain, the French still have Whitsun as a holiday. The State and religion may be rigidly separated here but the French still hang on to the religious holidays. I view that not as inconsistent but rather as evidence of a strong regard for the quality of life: keep the best bits of everything and to hell with logic if it gets in the way.

The group of us playing boules in Buis yesterday afternoon was approached by an American woman wanting to know where there was a food shop open. Deciding her mangled French might be better served by someone who understood American, the group directed her to me and I had to listen to her mangled English. There had been supermarkets open for a few hours in the morning (a new development on holidays here) but she would have to wait for today. In England there would almost certainly have been a corner shop run by Asians open to serve her. She suggested half-heartedly that she and her friends might come to my house to eat but I uncharitably pointed out the large number of cafe/restaurants open. I expect she experienced culture shock but that would have been coming anyway. The French take their holidays (and lunch hours) very seriously, as she will find out.

In the meantime..…..….…..…...I have to do something about my own food shopping. I usually entertain friends a couple of times per week and had decided to cook pork belly for one evening. I cook it to death, very slowly, so that the fat dissolves and it ends up all meat and crackling. I found it in the small supermarket in Buis, which has a very good butcher. Having asked for that I noticed that they had lamb neck chops at a very reduced price and immediately thought «lamb stew». Given the weather, that seemed appropriate so I bought a number of those. Which means that one or the other has to go in my freezer. In England I only ever had a fridge-top freezer but friend Jo persuaded me I would need a bigger one here, which I duly bought. Now I'm finding that large freezers are like a self-fulfilling prophecy, subject to something like Parkinson's Law: the space available always gets filled. It gets filled because I have a life script learned from my mother, who was always short of money and had me to feed, that you grab a food bargain when you see one. The result? A freezer always full. This is in a place that still has greengrocers, butchers, bakers (and scented-candle makers) and more fresh food widely available than I ever had in England, when I had only a fridge-top freezer. Something has to give; I have some unlearning to do.

My garden, front and back, is coming on nicely (see photos) although the roses in bloom have taken rather a battering from the rain. Four of the clematis in the front are now in bloom and I've managed to extend, or rather deepen the earth, on the roadside opposite my kitchen window and have planted more lavendar, some allium bulbs and rambling nasturtiums to supplement what was already there.

The irises there have more or less finished blooming but a Nellie Moser clematis is full of bloom and the Dublin Bay rose against one of the trees is adding to the colour. I'm hoping the deeper earth will allow the additions to survive when the high-summer heat hits. On the hillsides around, the irises and coronilla that have been regaling us have just over the last few days been joined by the broom, which will extend the yellow panorama for another couple of months.

Brexit Credo

Brexit Credo

Should a country be united? Obviously it helps greatly as far as stable government is concerned, and it certainly did formerly, in time of war, although «the people» will be little concerned in any future war except as recipients as whatever is thrown at them. Cannon fodder is no longer required. But there will probably be a wide range of opinions in any country on any subject of national importance. So, for stable government, which is desirable, how are wide divisions to be avoided?

In the past the obvious wide divisions have generally been between the nobles and the rest of the populace. Nobles held the power and the means to stop the populace usurping it. Throughout the 20th century, revolutions and progresssive moves to democracy of various kinds mean that that power has been eroded; yet deep divisions remain. So what is the basis of them? Class, being noble or not, is clearly not it. I would argue that the current basis for these deep divisions is wealth, the much-discussed wealth gap which has been widening in most western countries for decades now, and has always been even wider in economically developing countries.

Wealth is power, in many senses if not all. And if wealth is the new overriding power, how do the wealthy hang on to it and prevent the general populace getting a larger share of it, as they must want to do? They can't do it by right, as the former nobles could, since revolutions and moves towards democracy have got in the way, hurdles the wealthy must circumvent. So how can the wealthy best circumvent these hurdles whilst keeping the general populace, if not overtly on their side (why should they be that?) then effectively so? There has to be an appeal to what the general populace will identify with. Therein we have the requirements: messages the general populace will identify with and the means to deliver these messages.

The most obvious appeal to the general populace will be a greater share of the general wealth, but that runs counter to the wealthy keeping their wealth. So what else might appeal to the general populace? In a generally benign society there will be a a general fund of goodwill; nobody will automatically think of naked self-interest as a motivation; rather people will think of different views of what the general interest might be. So, if naked self-interest of the wealthy is the goal, what could the messages be? Patriotism is a strong possibility, especially if an enemy to patriotism (traitors, saboteurs, terrorists) can be invoked. Religion is another, if a broad appeal or a narrow target can be found. A third is any potential danger to the general populaces' status quo, however meagre (e.g. uncontrolled external influence). And a fourth is the idea of taking control, control that will allow people the possibility of improving their lives.

Those are enough messages so the remaining question is how to promulgate them. Obviously the need is to take control of the media most seen and read by the general populace and through them promulgate the required messages. If those are in the control of the wealthy, who want above all to retain their wealth, then the job is done.

As it has been, I think.

UK General Election

UK General Election

Having made readers of this blog suffer my ramblings on politics and Brexit I feel I should give an immediate (but only initial) reaction to the news that Theresa May has called a general election. The following are my initial thoughts, having had little time to think things through. They may sound a bit Machiavellian.

I think Theresa May is boxing very cleverly and worry that the opposition is not up to it. I don't believe the claimed reason for the general election is the real one. Theresa May has so far made no clear attempt to unify the country but she does care about parliamentary power, as do most politicians (other than Corbyn), and has worked out that she has a better chance of securing power now than she woud have in 2020 (when most of the downside of Brexit and none of any advantages, if any, would be visible). Corbyn is pro-Brexit. He thinks he'll get the support of the grunt Labour supporters that way and has said he wants a Brexit pro-jobs, workers' rights and public services. Nobody seems to have explained to him that there isn't such a thing. It's just more Alice In Wonderland. The government has now cleverly said that Parliament will have the final say on the eventual Brexit terms but the eventual Brexit terms are so far away (10 years?) as to be irrelevant. Although the Tories have a slim majority in Parliament now the polls show the Tories with a massive majority of support and Corbyn has effectively resigned from doing anything about that. One thing the election does is to allow the real issues to be aired but, since nobody knows for sure what will be negotiated, nobody can say what the outcome of these issues will be. The government can, and almost certainly will, promise everything, say that of course they will negotiate with the best interests of the British people at heart and afterwards simply say, «Sorry, we couldn't get the terms we wanted but we tried». Who can disprove that now?

I'm far from sure that the electorate is up to what it will take to break Brexit, or even ensure it is a soft one, which would be for every Remainer, and I mean every Remainer, to disbelieve whatever the government says and vote tactically to unseat theTory candidate in their constituency. The best feasible result in that case would be a hung Parliament and even then Corbyn could torpedo that if the Labour party doesn't manage to get rid of him beforehand.

My best guess now, and it is only a guess, is that Labour will lose a shed-load of seats, the Lib-Dems will make some gains but not enough to offset the Labour losses, and UKIP may gain a seat or two. The only really persuasive Remain argument for the electorate will be if it can definitely be shown that Brexit must be negative economically, an argument that can easily dismissed as scare stories as it was at the time of the referendum. The negative economic data is already evident but since the result of Brexit negotiations are unknown, who now can prove that those are not scare stories (even though evidence is mounting daily)? And nationalistic cries to «taking control» and «getting our country back» could well trump (Trump) them. Sad, but that is how I see it at the moment. Given the increased majority that the government wants and will probably get, it will proceed to a hard Brexit and the UK can say goodbye to public services, including the NHS. The opposition should then be a lot stronger but it will be too late. Thank you very much, Jeremy Corbyn.

My Poor Country

My Poor Country

I am English but will shortly be applying for French citizenship. The reason is simply that I plan to spend the rest of my life living in France and the Brexit decision means that I will need French citizenship to have full rights here. The delay in my application is because on the 14th of September I will have been living in France, full-time, for 10 years which means that under French law I have a right to stay, but not necessarily full rights as a French citizen. An application before that date could put my right to stay in question, so I shall delay my application until the 14th of September. I have every reason to hope that my application will be successful but no right to claim that it will be. So be it.

I am, or have been, quite proud to be British and have never thought about acquiring a dual nationality before now. Necessity now dictates that. And now, for the first time, I am having to ask myself if I really want to be British (even though I may be able to be both British and French). I have lived in Britain, England to be more precise, for most of my life and have loved being in England. Why should I have any doubts now?

My doubts arise not simply because of the Brexit referendum result but also the follow-up. Successive polls from numerous sources have shown a swing in public opinion away from the referendum result but not by a wide margin. The swing would be enough to reverse the referendum result but only by a margin similar to that which created the result. With daily evidence being revealed that leaving the EU will do Britain economic harm (the precise degree to be debated), why is this so? Why would people continue to vote to be worse of, when most elections in Britain hinge on control of the economy, the expectation that the new government will make people better off, or at least no worse off?

It all seems to me to come down to the fundamental issue of immigration; and ignorance. In all the polls, the rôle of immigrants features as a major issue and is seen as negative despite numerous similar investigations also showing immigrants as not only being positive with respect to the economy but, indeed, essential to it. So, in that respect, popular opinion is in conflict with the facts. There is also the fact that analyses of the referendum voting shows that some 75% of those who voted Remain had continued their education beyond the age of 16. They had brains enough, and used them, to see that the emotionally appealing slogans of «getting my country back» and «taking control» lacked all reasonable content. A similar percentage of people under the age of 26 voted Remain, understandably concerned about the economic consequences of Brexit and their job prospects.

It is therefore difficult to come to any conclusion other than that the referendum result was a victory for xenophobia and ignorance. Anecdotal evidence around the polls tends only to confirm that. Reasons given for continuing to back Brexit in the face of mounting negative economic evidence, if not simply unreasoned repetition of the empty slogans, tend to be xenophobic or outrightly racist. And the steep rise in race-related crimes recorded in the last year only underlines that. The difficult question for me, whether or not I achieve dual nationality, is do I want to be associated with a country currently ruled by xenophobia and ignorance? What is certain is that Britain will be poorer as a result of Bexit, as 70% of MPs declared before the referendum. What is also certain is that in my extremely limited capacity I shall oppose in any way I can the course on which Britain is currently embarked.