Wednesday, 26 March 2014

Social exclusion denial

Here’s another of those puzzling comments from a Social-Exclusion-Denier that seem to characterise our current elite…

According to Andy McSmith in the Indy, Liam Marshall-Ascough, a Conservative member of Crawley Borough Council in West Sussex, has obstructed a plan to introduce a food bank in the town hall, because he frankly does not think it is necessary:

'People aren’t in poverty in terms of going without food,' he tells the latest edition of the Crawley News. 'You try booking a restaurant in Crawley on a Friday or Saturday night. You can’t do it.'

His local restaurateurs won’t be best pleased at this discouragement of trade (if there are any of course: one literal explanation for his remark could be the complete absence of said facilities, but this seems unlikely).

More to the point, how do local residents feel about having a representative capable of such disarmingly irrational thought? In particular, how do those who didn’t vote for him feel about those who did?

This is hardly an isolated example – stories of bizarre thinking on the part of UKIP representatives are especially common these days (e.g.). Is this a trend peculiar to our age? Is it the consequence of effortless publicity, that means people with ideological incontinence leave their undigested waste in public so consistently?

26 Mar 2014 08:56:13 | Social exclusion

1 Comment

To be honest I'm not surprised - it seems almost to be a requirement of office for politicians, other public figures and indeed journalists, to be unable to put two thoughts together in any coherent form. In some cases this is of course because they are so arrogant they think no one else can see the 3 card trick they are trying to pull. That I can understand since it is the standard M.O. for politics in this country. What is worrying me though are those who don't appear to know that they are doing it and see nothing wrong with what they are saying.

Posted by: Ian Bertram | Friday, 28 March 2014 at 11:10

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Blue-sea thinking A few years ago I took part in a city visioning project in Peterborough, in the low-lying east of England. In a 3D modelling exercise, some of us were putting homes on stilts. I recall that it had to be pointed out to one or two local stakeholders that by 2030, they will probably be under water. (Image via). The lesson was that this hadn’t been taken on - although recent months of flooding will by now have helped to spread awareness among all but the most bone-headed and selfish (naming no names, some of which are here). I was reminded of this while flicking through the Guardian’s article and images about floating cities. These places already exist, after a fashion – enormous cruise ships for the flitting unlocated wealthy, who apparently would rather keep circumnavigating the globe than pay taxes to a state – but not yet in the sense envisaged by a few architects, planners and utopians such as the Seasteading Institute. Either way, in the promo material the sea is nearly always crystal clear and flat. Incidentally, I don't take much interest in films, but I'd appreciate it if someone could direct me to an apocalyptic post-flood movie I saw part of once, which had memorable lines like 'They did something bad, the ancestors, didn't they?' You bet they did. This is fascinating stuff, and I’m all for an ambitious dose of what amounts to blue-sea thinking, every so often. It’s easy to drift off into some unrealistic scenarios though. Here’s the Seasteading take on the personal advantages of living in a floating village, for example: ‘Personal Freedom - People will soon be able to live in floating cities, and enjoy the freedom of the high seas. As the last unclaimed territory on the earth, the ocean provides the ability to live peacefully without the encyclopedia of laws and tangle of bureaucracies present on land. Seasteaders will be able to start fresh, live with minimal regulation, and explore a bold experiment with personal freedom.’ You might need Californian contact lenses to see things that way, but to me that’s just a cue to think more closely about the nature of neighbouring in contexts where people may not have much choice in the kind of floating neighbourhood they have to inhabit. What kind of scale are we talking about? What kind of neighbourhood might it be, for instance, if you can’t just get up and walk across some notional blurred boundary into the next one? What are the governance implications? What kinds of social network might we come to depend on? And who will occupy the physical high ground?
PREVIOUS POST
Have your say The recent silence hereabouts is due to sub-optimal health. I've been clearing my throat. For days. Hmm, nothing wrong with this blog that a few posts won't cure. Oh look, here's a note on 'How to consult the public', over on Freedom from Command and Control: 'The words are important. The word ‘consultation’ has been replaced by the words dialogue and conversation. The conversation should be described as ongoing, constructive and mature, it is never a childish, unproductive one-off. To have a proper conversation, you need plenty of written documents. Make these documents comprehensive, polished and final. Seal off the consultation document with a front cover, logo and strapline. This creates the impression that the proposals are early ideas, open to change rather than a fait accomplis. Advertise the consultation with the original phrases ‘Have your say’ and ‘We’re listening’. Illustrative with photos of ears and megaphones. The look you are going for is jaunty, fun and patronising.' 'An event with more than 0 members of the community is a success. If no one comes, ask staff who live locally to ‘wear a different hat’ and contribute. If you are disappointed with the turnout, remember the dialogue is ongoing, not a one-off. No one can reach ‘Hard to Reach’ people. If they do reach back, you’ll end up with more writing up to do. At this point, the phrase ‘consultation fatigue’ becomes your friend. Rather than trying again, arrange an internal discussion on the causes of apathy in the community. If no one comes, the loop is closed and your work is done. Thanks (indirectly) Simon!

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments