Be very, very afraid

I’m always frustrated when people defend not voting or not taking an interest in the political system by claiming that all politicians are the same. I’ve never believed that they are. I am convinced there are some of them driven purely by altruistic political belief and are not just there to line their pockets. I hope I’m right.

Last week’s report on the Hillsborough disaster frightened me probably more than most of the ‘revelations’ of the past few years. It seemed to me that ‘corruption’ in public life had spread further than many imagined in a way that was quite insidious and fascist in nature, and, it started with Thatcher as I’d often suspected. It made me realise that politics is still riddled with vested interest and corruption and it permeates all levels. The ‘Establishment’ rules like it has always ruled. Very often the ‘Establishment’ is made up from a smallish number of families and interlopers, all public school educated and hell bent on preserving the status quo. They fight tooth and nail to keep what they have. They play dirty. Very, very dirty.

Perhaps it is time to just kick everybody out from top to bottom and start all over again?

Oh Moses! - Murder in the family

If you have a blog or a website you will know what hours of fun can be had from looking at the ‘search statistics’. These are the terms that people enter into a search engine that then bring them to your site. I like the serendipitous nature of it all. Some search terms are quite bizarre but I do like the strange but small degrees of separation that link sites around the interweb. But little did I know that when I looked at the statistics a few months ago where they would lead me or what would be revealed. It shocked me I can tell you, which is one of the reasons it’s taken me a little while to write about it.

One of my blog posts that gets quite a lot of hits is about a visit I made to Chatham Dockyard. Most of the hits seem to be generated by the bit about a Stanley Spencer exhibition. But I also wrote about the rope-making factory that they have there. In the piece I happen to mention the Haverhill Rope Works, a business that my great-grandfather William Whiting had a part share in. It was a search for ‘Haverhill rope works’ that lead me to discover quite a shocking fact. There can’t be that many people that knew about or would want to search for the Haverhill rope works. My curiosity was such that I had to find out what else came up apart from blog when I searched. I was not surprised to find the Museum of East Anglian Life came near the top for they actually have a rope making machine from the Haverhill factory. My blog was listed at that all important Nº7 spot. Just above was an entry entitled ‘William Whiting 1864-1941 - Haverhill Whitings’. I was intrigued. I had to visit this site. The site in question turns out to be a lovingly researched reference by Simon Hutchison who is like me descended from Haverhill Whitings. There on the page in question was mention of my great-grandfather, along with his wife and children, one of whom was my grandmother and several other great aunts and uncles that I had known.

It was then that I noticed Simon's mention of Moses Whiting “William was the eldest child of Moses and Emma Whiting. He was born in 1864 in Burton End, Haverhill, where he appears on the 1871 census. By this time he has two sisters, Emma and Alice, and a brother, John. Another brother, James, was born in 1874 but two years later tragedy befell him when he was murdered by his father.” In a sad and cruel irony great-great-grandfather had broken one of the commandments allegedly revealed by his namesake. That commandment was ‘thou shalt not kill’. It would seem that my great-great-grandfather had committed murder by taking the life of his own son, and by the newspaper account that Simon Hutchison references, it is a sad, sorry and macabre tale.

The newspaper report about the incident and in particular the coroner’s hearing suggests that there was a history of madness within the family: “The prisoner’s awful affliction is certainly hereditary, for a long list of attempted suicides, and, in fact, suicides which have been committed by various members of the prisoner’s family are mentioned.” The report makes reference to Moses in the court saying that he did not take the slightest interest in the proceedings and spent most of the time shuffling back and forth on his seat. Later on in the hearing there is reference made to Moses possibly suffering from Delirium Tremens although it was stated he had not taken drink for three or four weeks. There is also reference to the brother of Moses being in an asylum. Despite the jury’s verdict of “Wilful Murder” it is clear that this poor soul, my great-great-grandfather was not in charge of his mental faculties when he took the life of his two year old son.

Thankfully Moses did not face that most abhorrent of punishments, the death penalty, but instead the poor soul spent the rest of his days in Broadmoor. I have no doubt that Broadmoor was no picnic and that he suffered under a regime that probably neither recognised what his condition was nor was able to treat it particularly effectively.

As I pointed out in a previous post my father has HD. Huntington’s Disease is a particularly cruel disease that attacks parts of the brain, it affects different people in different ways, generating a number of symptoms including aggressive behaviour, involuntary movements and a whole host of others that are equally unpleasant. My grandmother Elsie, the granddaughter of Moses also had HD. HD is hereditary. Unfortunately I don’t know if my great-grandfather William had it, and it is possible that grandma received her faulty gene from her mother, but William selling his share of the Haverhill Rope Works at an early-ish age and moving to a different town suggests that he may we have had the disease even if it was never identified as such. My mother has told me that when my grandmother apparently first showed signs of HD relatives had said it as ‘nerves’ and suggested there was a history of ‘nerves’ in the family. Whilst I can prove nothing, I suspect it was grandma’s father William that had HD, and that it had been passed down from his father Moses. Every mention of Moses in the newspaper report points to behaviour consistent with Huntington’s disease. He was probably never diagnosed at the time with it because the first thorough description of the disease, by George Huntington, was only published four years before in 1872, and in the USA. There is no cure for HD. The only treatment is a range of drugs and dietary aids to help subdue the effects of its onset. Treatments that poor Moses would never had a chance to receive.

It doesn’t bear thinking about how tormented, ridiculed and abused a number of my ancestors must have been. They must have suffered terribly at the hands of people who I’m sure were quick to look at superstition for answers to why they displayed the symptoms that they did. No wonder it is alleged that a number attempted and some committed suicide. It could be that I have this awful condition, and whilst there still is no cure I am thankful that the treatment I will receive if I do will be so much more humane than the punishment presumably metered out on many a poor Whiting in years gone by.

I will never know if my grandmother knew about the murder in the family but I’m pretty sure my father doesn’t. Unfortunately in his present condition I don’t feel able to discuss it with him. My mother certainly didn’t know about it and she is confident that if father did know about he would have shared it with her whilst they were married. I am thankful to Simon Hutchison’s painstaking and comprehensive research into the Whiting family history for bringing this to light.


Updated here on 27/5/17

Evening all

Blame is easy, blame is cheap. Blame doesn’t really achieve a great deal. As a society we are all to blame for the Frankenstein’s monster of a country that we have created, but rather than waste too much time on blame we need to understand how things have gone badly wrong, and set about trying to create a better life for everyone.

Since the Tories have been in power we have seen a great many people covering a wide range of socio-economic groups taking to the streets. If they’ve done nothing else the Tory cuts have managed to get a lot of people off their arses to show their disapproval as best they know how. One thing that struck me when I went on the TUC march on the 26th of March this year was how friendly and sympathetic the police en route seemed to be. I suppose it is understandable really. They were no doubt bruised by the criticism over kettling and concerned over how the cuts would affect them.

I was born into an age when Dixon of Dock Green epitomised the British bobby on the beat and we all wore rose-tinted spectacles. The police force, I suspect never was or never will be like that. Today’s police force is an entirely different animal. I think one thing that tends to get forgotten is that the police force is a public service. They exist to maintain the rule of law to the best of their ability; a rule of law that can only be maintained with the co-operation and consent of the public. The police aren’t perfect, as I’m sure that many amongst their ranks would agree they are human like the rest of us but given the tasks that are expected of them and given the resources at their disposal I think they do a pretty good job. Clearly the recent revelations about the News International/police cosy relationship, trigger-happiness episodes, continued racism and some examples of thuggery during recent disturbances don’t do anything to enhance their reputation, and need to be addressed. But policing isn’t something to be done in a vacuum. The police are as much a part of society as you or I, we need to work with them and they need to work with the population as a whole. Using them as scapegoats is neither productive or will it serve any purpose. The government are just adding to the divisions in society by blaming the police for the extent of the destruction in this week’s riots. Yesterday’s comments by Cameron and May weren’t helpful at all and are a perfect example of what is wrong with our ‘me, me, me’ society.

This BBC internet news report Riots: Police chiefs angered by Cameron criticism highlights the stupidity of the Tories and concerns that a battle weary police force are having:

“A row has erupted between police chiefs and the government after David Cameron criticised the number of officers deployed to combat this week's riots.

The PM also said the wrong tactics were used - while Home Secretary Theresa May said it was her decision to cancel all police leave to boost numbers.

Sir Hugh Orde, head of the Association of Chief Police Officers, said she had "no power whatsoever" to do that.

It was police, not MPs, who had restored order, he insisted.”

Full story here.

Frankenstein’s Britain

Listening to the radio at lunchtime one couldn’t not help but be moved by the accounts of so many unfortunate folk that have been injured, threatened and had their possessions and livelihoods ruined by the rioting in London and elsewhere. These are real people really suffering; innocent law abiding citizens. As a pacifist I could never excuse or wish to justify any violent act. But, to dismiss those who are rioting on the streets of London and other cities in England merely as gangsters, looters and thugs is to totally misunderstand what is going on in this country. When David Cameron used the term ‘Broken Britain’ in many respects he was right. Oh dear that’s twice when I’ve agreed with him lately. I suspect where we differ though is on how we perceive ‘Broken Britain’ and how we would ‘fix’ it.

For my sins I travel on public transport most weekdays. At either end of my journey from Norwich to Thetford I walk to and from both stations. Almost on a daily basis I see people whose behaviour is just so alien to my neo-polite upper working class sensibilities that I often cringe and wonder how they can be so, quite frankly, horrible, selfish and rude. The dysfunctional behaviour that is displayed by an increasing percentage of the population is both staggering and horrifying. I’m not just talking about what is increasingly and sadly being referred to as an underclass but right across the socio-economic divide. Too many people are just too bloody selfish.

It would be so easy to say that it is all Thatcher’s fault! And I fear I might have been guilty in the past of such a comment. But whilst the seeds of society’s decay were sown in the Thatcher era, “There is no such thing as society: there are individual men and women, and there are families” both Tory and Labour governments have perpetuated and allowed the decay to continue. We live in a me, me, me society where I’m alright Jack sod everyone else prevails. It would seem that in this pseudo-libertarian age it is okay for individuals to break the rules. They apply to everyone else but not me. This approach pervades all sections of society; breaking the rules is now acceptable. It doesn’t matter if it is rudeness, dropping litter, queue jumping, never switching your mobile phone off, driving whilst holding you phone to your ear, speeding, phone-hacking, awarding yourself large pay rises and bonuses, or good old fashioned looting and rioting people, right across society so many individuals just do not give a shit about anyone else or the consequences of their actions. To a certain extent we are all guilty of perpetuating this downward spiral into anarchy. But it doesn’t have to be like this. If enough people want it to change it will. Thankfully we still live in enough of a democracy to make it happen.

The big challenge is to persuade the majority that it is in everyone’s interest to try and improve social cohesion and that equality is the key to improving the society that we live in. It is easier said than done of course as so many people take a burying their head in the sand approach and will just dismiss it as liberal Guardian-reading woolliness. The bigots will call for short sharp shocks, more police and other oppressive solutions, but these are sticking plaster solutions to deal with society’s broken limbs and slashed arteries. Unless we have a society where everybody has genuine opportunities in housing, health, education and employment we will never progress. Unless we recognise that equality really does make a difference and recognise that the wealth gap between the top and the bottom of the economic scale impacts on the quality of life that we all live nothing will change. Looting is going on at both ends of the economic scale. A small minority of undereducated, undernourished under fulfilled poor kids are grabbing all the headlines with cries from the general public of “something must be done” whilst quietly company executives award themselves ridiculously high salaries and ridiculously high bonuses and at the same time making thousands redundant and paying too many others the minimum wage. Looting on a grand scale, causing hardship and ruination to so many good people, and there is simply nothing that anyone seems to want to do about it. Most rich people don’t get rich through pure luck. They get rich through exploiting a situation, people or both. We are not yet a civilised society me thinks.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs illustrates what most humans strive for in their lives. But if you take away the opportunity and the hope of ever improving the human condition from millions of people there are bound to be consequences. More equality won’t solve all this country's ills over night. In fact it’ll take a generation or two before any substantive change will be noticed. But if we make no attempt to even things up matters will just continue to get worse and worse.

These two articles, one from the Guardian and, surprisingly, one from the Telegraph that hint at some of the many complex reasons for what is going on.

There is no argument for a death penalty

For once I agree with David Cameron on something; there is no place in a civilised society for the death penalty. With a number of e-petitions calling for its restoration it looks as though it could well be discussed again by parliament. As well as being abhorrent and absolutely immoral it is also unjustifiable as a deterrent. Personally I don’t accept that deterrents really work and that the way to reduce crime of any sort is to address the causes. Why try to cure something when you can prevent it? Those misguided enough to support this barbaric practise only have to look to America to see that it doesn’t deter murders. Support for the death penalty is the logic of the imbecile. It is the tool of fascists and despots.

On 20th December 2007 I blogged here about how ridiculous a concept it is. This is what I wrote then:

“...Daily Mail readers... ...confuse Justice with Revenge. Justice is only justice when the higher and pure moral ground is taken. State murder is just as wrong as murder by an individual. What right has any person to take the life of another? If you say ‘none’ then you are arguing against the death penalty. If you say ‘some’ or ‘plenty’ then you are saying that murder is acceptable, therefore why are you making it as a crime and one punishable by death at that?

For those of a religious disposition, who believe in a creator god, to take the life of anyone is a blasphemy. You are setting yourself up as an equal to your god. From what I know of the mainstream religions it’s not the done thing. For those of us that don’t need the crutch that is religion, but care about humanity, it would be hypocritical to preach that something is wrong and then go and do the self same thing. Legitimising it under the framework of law doesn’t make it any more justifiable, or any less abhorrent. And for those a little more intellectually challenged (Sun readers etc.), two wrongs don’t make a right!”

 

Crime and punishment

I made a comment recently on a friend’s Facebook wall, or whatever it is called, stating that I was against punishment. It occurs to me that this stance might horrify many people, and I’m not just talking about Daily Mail readers. It might well be just a question of semantics but I truly am against ‘punishment’. Punishment is the action of a bully. Without getting into the rights and wrongs of certain laws, if a person commits what is judged to be a crime by the society that they live in then punishment is not the answer. Punishment is essentially driven by the destructive emotion known as revenge. Revenge has no place in a civilised society.

There are two ways in which our approach to crime is wrong. The first is the revenge aspect that manifests itself as punishment, and the second is that we consistently fail to address the root causes of most crime; those causes being poverty, social deprivation, mental illness etc etc. If someone is convicted of a crime the emphasis should be on rehabilitation. If for their own safety or the safety of the community it is considered necessary to withhold their liberty for the duration of their rehabilitation or part thereof then that is not unreasonable. But removing someone’s liberty should not be seen as punishment. Punishment achieves nothing. Every time someone commits a crime it must be seen as a failure, and it is my belief that it is rarely failure of the individual but a failure of society. Society fails so many people. Rather than dealing with crime in a reactive way we need to prevent crime from happening in the first place. No to “tough on crime” but yes to “tough on the causes of crime”. The solutions are clearly is not as simple as a few slogans. Changing the makeup of society won’t happen overnight. Reducing the gap between rich and poor is never going to be easy. The need to do this has so far eluded the mindset of the majority of the electorate. But that is no reason not to try and persuade them to believe in it. If people could grasp that by significantly reducing the gap between rich and poor that everybody would benefit then perhaps the vast majority might start to come round. You can’t have justice whilst there is injustice.