Seeing some minor protests from British republicans on the day of the Royal river Thames pageant a few weekends past was a little disappointing. While the BBC (showing their idea of impartiality) gave them some publicity, a few placards and the odd shouted insult reduced a valid debate about republicanism to a cheap and tacky stunt. These misguided hecklers confused the different between the Queen herself and the principles of monarchy.
Monarchy, in its British or European style, is as acceptable form of head of government with an elected prime minister, if performed under the consent of the general public. Whilst there has been no ballot or vote for such a style, there can be no doubt of the popularity across the nation. Republicans campaign for the end of monarchy without explaining what benefits would be gained by having a different style of ruler. It is more about moaning the unfairness of the current establishment instead of suggesting an improved alternative choice.
My novel approach is letting any monarchical dynasty die out naturally by only accepting a single direct linage with the mantle (or crown) of office passing solely to the eldest offspring. A new public referendum takes place at the time that branch of the family tree ends, deciding whether the nation wants a new monarch family to flourish, continuing with the existing family - along a different branch to take root, or accept a true republic with elections for a new president every five years. Again, should that single hereditary branch be agreed it would continue passing the baton down the generations.
Britain currently (June 2012) has two in direct line of succession from HM The Queen; her eldest son Prince Charles then his eldest son Prince William. That is the chosen and closed path. All others are now excluded, born into this world as are the rest of us without privilege or rank. All those bylines often used by newspapers' royal correspondents who is sixth or eighteenth in line for throne would no longer be used.
Under this single heredity line rule, the end of the current succession, even under the most tragic of circumstances, could be an organised and agreed progression. A proper referendum would be held the following May and the new heir and their successors to the British crown would be invested in the June. A few months without a crown head of state would give time for reflection and quiet consideration. While the British public have the opportunity to debate the choices, so do the commonwealth and other countries that have the British monarch as their head of state.
In the near future the general public may decide whether the time of the British monarchy has served its purpose without properly considering the choices available. While the Queen, whose jubilee is celebrated this month, has served with distinction, Prince Charles has limited public approval yet will be accepted out of respect for his mother. It is to Prince William that the royalists hope he revive this tired and abused office...
For briefiest of moments the sun shone. A little ray of hope from a knock on the front door. A pretty woman and elderly lady inform the prodigical son has returned or at least the vet.
A few minutes before lunch bubbled away on the stove, followed by the maiden voyager of a new bicycle. A beautiful summer day, England fighting back in the Test match, with a small list of chores waiting for the late afternoon. Them three large raps on glass dug up buried memories.
Found on the street behind home, thin scared and ill, Acer had been discovered and rescued. In such a bad state the poor creature went straight to the vet. A quick scan identified, a missed phone call, and these two rescurers arrived at my door.
They had the common decency explaining the news might be bad. Even so, Acer found. Four months hiding out in local undergrowth took it tolled on the poor creature. After a few minutes of polite conversation, two engaged calls for the vet, information became available.
Feline leukemia, with possible cancerous growths, the vet needed answers, quickly. Three minutes laters, passing through a late orange light, here at the vet. Life moves on, people live with secrets. Hidden fears, self doubts, all of those little nagging thoughts that course through minds all day. Putting a brave face hidding those true scars pressures man down. Here in a small clinic stood a thin skin troubled soul.
Words of warning tried soften the shock. It didn't. Lock in a cage suffered God's innocen creature. Matted fur, bloated eyes stared out from behind bars, head jerked through unconsous torment. More explanation justified the only dicision. Then through pain and effort he walked out the condemned ceil. He must of recognised me, he must of.
That poor pet looking, pleading for forgiveness, for a change of unwinding time, back when that door gave the chance of freedom turned sour bitter regret. Losing the will slumping down on the counter staring. Gentle strokes couldn't muster a purr of statisfaction. Only a look of deep pity. If only this, if only that. Thousands of decisions made daily have little consquence. One did. One comdemed a poor cat three months of suffering, before the final act.
A moment later deep painless neverending sleep, perchance dreaming of better times. Acer.
Accepting that the internet might be one of man's greatest discovery.
Instead of transforming our lives for the greatest good, the internet has adopted the traits and morals of the current generations.
Not pornography, not the countless spam and trolls sites, the black hats - those petty trolls lived under bridges long before email, usenet, or even http became standards
Our twentieth century demand for instant gratification when shopping along with insatiable attitipe for entertainment in all forms of the media. Constant comsumption takes priority over all other imaginative crafts and hobbies.
All this negative approach is wrong. People form small select association away from the clutter and confusion of the Facebook or Google plus public assemblies. Instead of broadcasting for the whole world, talking a select group in a small corner of the busy web might go unnoticed by the rest. Having the whole world at your keyboard means friends available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in any language. Hobbies, media, crafts, education live as facet of exciting. Instead of looking at the big picture, instead of broad brush strokes the internet is full of small worlds welcoming all types and varieties.
From amateur dramatics throught to zyther players each bunch of friends leave messages, comments, and replies about any and all subjects.
Politicians and decision makers (and a few pamphetters) treat the whole and not the of sum parts. Remembering how small and delicate such budding enterprises shouldn't be isolated instead joining parts of the www makes for better world.
Once the internet is recognised as a collection of small, interested, parties, not a massive entity.
From that knowledge, what would be the future of the internet. If corporations keep trying to control the net. let the net makes it self through, an example would be bitcoin. no corporation could have introduced the new form of currency transfer. google one of the largest company, failed on waves, plus, and many other large scale enterprises, yet gets success for small operations such as
many new social networks, rise and fall in a few months. from the media buzz generated by those friends who met another in a san francisco bar, before the acceptance by hipster, over reach of the founding engineers believing their product is the next facebook. only to find the same features offer by two dozen startups. when the software doesn't meet expectation the mass moves on next new shiny object.
Facebook came successful by making access limited. Supply exceed demands makes the product more attractive. Then the marketing from the friends and acquantices drives demands further. once the bbc and parents become part of the equation the decision makers move forward, searching for the new, the bright, the shinny.
From fashion, music, idea, the young (or is wrong to group by age) look for the next best thing without checking the
What serious advancement happened twenty years since the development of the telegraph, telephone, or the television? Need to see if there were major jumps in mankind because of technology. Need to consider what are advancements that would be signafy.
premise is public spending too much time concentrating on the tool and not on the craft. internet is a tool. what is the craft?
talking about Google or Apple is the same as guessing what the next DeWalt or JCB digger
sites spectulity about the next power drill or chisel set
member of public don't spend time thinking about the next supa-dupa boxes of tricks
yet millions buy them even though the changes are miniscle and doesn't make much of a difference. phones are more powerful, than three year old computers/
first telegraph cable in 1844, latest internet is "telegraph ver2000", major improvements
has the internet been good for democrcy?
need to see if the percentage of popular vote has changed between 1950
Table 406. Participation in Elections for President and U.S. Representatives:1932 to 2006
shows not significant change in voting patterns
internet has produced more writers and musicians
no filter for the bad and rubbish, see the number of unused apps.
industry remains in control, few examples of the artists making it successful
ebay reverted back from an auction to a classified list. craiglist the same
facebook, myspace, are nothing more than daily round robin letters - nothing of real interest
what about working from home - doing what? answering calls, telesales, teachers go to school, clerks to the office
what about science. patents, restrictions, limited access
what about education: learn from home, short term minor topics.
continues nothing more the games machine. remove the entertainment, comics, music, movies, what is left of the internet.
trying to equate the personal computer and the internet. is there a difference
higher business productivity, removed staff, doesn't stop fraud, andto the next
Football was once a nations greatest game. Played by a country's greatest hero. Ruled supremed around the world. Respected by many, feared by a few. Yes, a game that once was great, Britain.
Now look at it. Overrun by foreigners, some can't even speak the language. Rules made in French in a country hundred of miles away. Controlled by the Germans, dominated by the Spanish, worshipped by the Italians. What we need is our game.
Lets start by picking the ball and running with it, that'll confuse the German. Next lets change the shape of the ball, that'll upset the French. Then we can full body tackle the opponents, that will, well you know, the Italians. Finally do away with the goal, stick two sticks in the ground and we can put the ball there, the Spanish won't know what hit them.
There the jobs down. Us little Englanders don't like how the others play our game so we spend year fighting about making a better game. Well not better, a small country thousands of miles around play with more grace. The Australians are better with they can be bother. The South African built a nation on a single game. Even the Italians and French are as go. And the Americans ignore it and us, as do the rest of the world.
So after all that bleating about how we would so much better if we stopped playing one game and reinvented another. It turns out that we still can't kick a ball, don't worry we can try hitting the ball with a slab of willow.
Before the chinese olympics people had the maxim "it could only happen in America", now as more stories make there way from the East so does the saying move across the Pacific. As case in point is the photograph of council workers spray painting grass lawn green.
It's not as uncommon as expected. Companies offer different colours. There's even service businesses that save a house owner the effort of lifting that can over his not so much pride and joy.
Lets not spend too much thinking about the complete and utter waste of money pouring green liquid over residential sedges. Lets spend lots more time on how problems are corrected. Neo-cons count global warning predictions with the often quote "man conquerors nature". After making a problem consumerism and profit correct the problem.
Look at the recent hurricane. After the rescues, the grieving, comes the rebuilding. People puff out chests on how great mankind over comes such natural disasters. We don't learn by nature teaching us a valauble lesson. This town must be restored. A few thousand trees are felled, another mountain top is carved, another oil well is drilled, all proving how man over comes such divestry.
It doesn't how many times building the wrong buildings in the wrong places at the wrong time - man will prevail. It is our god given right. Even suggesting that compact towns with not for profit homes insults that great spirit that built American paid for by government grants paid by Chinese purchasing debt.
Perhaps the Chinese might know the benefit of painting grass.
"They knew ...." over and over that single message is repeated. Most don't wait around of the modifier: "that these criminals were once on a list along with hundreds of other potential criminals". No that wouldn't keept listening from switching stations "They knew" is today's terror lead. At one point this morning that single phase was repeat twelve times with fifeteen around the breakfast news report
Now media can play its play. Not informing, not explaining. That is boring, only taking four minutes if that in hour. There's another fifty minutes with space for the weather followed sports. Lets spend twenty minutes interviewing a councillor from a village in a remote, rural eastern county. After a minute such interview make it apparent that nothing new gets discussed, so it becomes fifteen minutes on how shocking, how it could happen, concluding with the opposing opinion making sure the independent box gets a tick.
Since the wanton act of needless violence we have two minutes of facts, three minutes of analysis, followed by two days of amateur speculation. Although since dozens of inquiries they make extra emphasis about no one will know until weeks after the pack has moved on move interested in some actor bedded a teenage startlet.
Hawks spend time moaning about the lack of the death penalty, if not HDQ. Doves spend time moaning about how the hawks rush for the gallows the moment a hero dies. Neither donate towards educating the children in the poor countries. In month the soldier's name will be forgot, the consipiry theorists archives this story under "They knew".
At certain times in life it dawns how little you know about people. Only last month did make sense that the Blessed Virgin Mary was a Jew. To make matters worst only this week that Karl Marx was a jew. My ignorance knows no boards. It never occurred that certain surnames might indicate Jewish origins: the Bergs, Cohens,
All those small minded people that spuy such vile bigotry and anti-semitism, when a billion Clathoics which week praise her as the personification of motherhood. Soveits campaigned against the jewish nation yet praise a follower
It shows the two-faced argument used by those knowing that at any instance their weak argument falls apart. Instead of treating each person as an individual, we paint an entire race or as with the Jews a creed with the same paint. Proganda breed with public ignorance does not attack these predicues allowing them to fostering over many years.
You can not spot a persons faith by a particular action. A banker could be an athiest or devout christian. A beggar could be a Hindu or a budist. A librarian could be jew or a catholic. Yet we are told that one group or another is leading some world cabal against freedom, demortcatis and the western way. If its not that bunch then it is another.
Trying, as before, condemning an entire regelious faith based on old, tired sterotypes is in itself as bigoted and small minded as those who preach their own vile hatred.
This rant against others petty xenophobes doesn't let me off the hook. A little whisper or hint of a rumour that group of Romerian gyspy families might consider moving some near by would have me installing new locks, checking security, and hiding the silver. Any why? haven't a clue, guess I'm no better than the rest - it's the athist in me
Epithap get old and tired very quickly. Telling degree qualified nurses that they must the muck and grime of the patient missing the point. A nurse has moved beyond the angel in blue check that tucks the corners of the bed, plumps the pillow, while asking if everything is alright dear. These experts have degrees in medical care, patient
While the media continue the attacks against the caring staff because a mismanaged authority couldn't maintain a decent level of good practise, they make the nurses are too superior to wash an elderly gentleman's backside. They are. They are, if you keep suggesting that washing and cleaning are the lowest of lowest chores. They are not.
From kings of England (privvy council, order of the bath, etc), religious messiahs (by washing feet) through to ward B batheing another person has nothing but the greatest respect from both the patient and his family. No adult is more exposed or more vernable than a woman in her 20s carefully cleaning those parts of a body that only the patient's lover see. It is not the lowest of chore. It is one of the most respected professions.
Having to clear the mess and embarassment to a woman who has accidently defected in bed on a public ward with the love and care offered by a highly qualified nursing professional has to be the pinciple of public service. We must not treated the work and duties of a nurse as common chores and have more respect of the work and effort required for such a vocation
|HOME]||email: gmail.com - cullifordboz||[BY-NC-ND|