Reparation de Freitas - what do the BBC owe the black population of Britain?

Of all the issues that were linked to the business of slave trading, there is perhaps valid concern in the reparation movement, and reason to assess if those whose lives have been almost irreparably fractured and divided from African culture and then used within Western economies to the benefit of their owners. There have been perhaps three major injustices against the black population who have emigrated from the West Indies to the UK – the first being the enslavement of their forefathers, the second being the racism and the general rejection and hostility that they endured upon arrival in the UK and the third being the bad acting of the de Freitas family on Eastenders in the early 1990’s. There are reparations that are owed for the profits of slavery that maybe will be paid back to the black population. There are also possibly going to be some forms of adjustment to the treatment of the black population that could also be offered to black population in relation to the maltreatment upon arrival in the UK. Finally, there could also be some form of reparation for the portrayal of the black population as the worst actors of all time on Eastenders in the de Freitas family. This is really the most severe of manipulations of black culture and possibly worse than the Black and White Minstrel show. Perhaps one day the BBC will recognise the role they have played in denigrating black culture. What does the BBC owe the black population – are they a collective of the descendents of former slave masters as has been speculated before?

Language, slavery and nationalism: can we get insights from etymology?

Some references to the differences in Basque language to that spoken elsewhere in Spain may indicate a potentially interesting set of issues(see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basque_language). It is assumed by linguists that variations in language can be linked to issues of migration of social groups and that trends in the form of language will be linked in a systematic manner to a defined space according to the population within that space and their heritage, which is interlinked to other populations from linked geographical areas, that language is spatially influenced if not defined.

There are deemed to be such strong trends in language use geographically, that it is possible to infer population movement according to the variation in language use and conversely, it is possible to identify what is termed a ‘language isolate’ may exist.(see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_isolate). The general term of ‘migration’ may be of interest in this case, there is an assumption that there is free movement of people across Europe, and for this to have taken place for some significant time – if any beginning point could be meaningfully established.

What does the term ‘language isolate’ actually mask other forms of social activity – perhaps as there are the groups who have an almost Russian language in the north of Spain because they were uprooted and sold to the Spanish business elite in a white-on-white slave trade. We as a nation tend not to have a great awareness of slavery outside of that which took place involving the indigenous African population. There may have been a great many ‘migrations’ which were not carried out through personal choice and perhaps there are equally as strong divisions in the white population as there are between some black white groups. Perhaps there could be other explanations of why Basque culture is different to that elsewhere in Northern Spain as well but this may provide a point of reference.

To an extent it could be argued that there may have been the birth of the slave industry as a result of stability of sea travel which led to a different form of slavery to that which was employed when road travel was the main form of slave trading. Perhaps there were a number of synonymous incidents of slave uprisings which led to the decline of interest in white-white slave trading and the spin doctors of the 15th century managed to convince us that we were all being well managed.

This may seem a little ironic bearing in mind Bernie Grant’s comment to Tony Blair regarding his mothers maiden name – Blair. Were Mr Blair’s forefathers the owners of Mr Grant’s? The contemporary master of spin may have had a long family history of being involved in spin related activities. This may still need to be challenged. I personally feel there is some significant bias in the methods used by the media in highlighting the nature of the problems of slavery – there were injustices connected to it but there should always be a responsible comparison made to the living conditions of the time for the white British population to indicate exactly how poor living conditions were for all at the time. Also, a great many forms of slavery may be overlooked to a point where they may as well be written out of history. Descendants of Indian slaves reside in Fiji and were deported from Uganda in the 1970's – yet the main image of slave in contemporary society is black, of African origin.

The coverage of the Beckford family, a south-west family of slave traders, in the relatively recent documentaries on the BBC may also reflect a bias. There were actions sanctioned by the British government when most of the white population were not treated much better than slaves themselves which involved the initiation of the international slave trade. While I may fear great many of the people who run Britain today, who largely control the media, are descendents of slave-master families who shape our history and want to spread the guilt of their forefathers families across the whole nation themselves rather than organisations still in existence take responsibility for what took place. Lloyds Insurance (Lloyds of London), Lloyds TSB and Barclays have all strong enough links to establishing themselves through slavery to be more directly held responsible for any reparation if this does get strong public backing.

Perhaps the concept of nation was developed to legitimate slave trading to a rather ill-equipped population who would not have the education to challenge this type of notion. Have we all been misled regarding ‘nationalism’ being the most important part of our identities, as British subjects, when this could be more readily be linked to masking foreign policy malpractice? Nationalism in this sense makes us relatively easy to govern rather than aware. If this is the case perhaps we should be engaged in a process of developing a post-colonial national identity based upon racial, cultural and social harmonies linked to British heritage, rather than cultural pride in our history per se. If it was a means of controlling the British population and making an unmanageable situation manageable, this should be acknowledged.

I assume that there are a number of reasons why reparation movements don’t get off the ground in the UK and one of these may be diverse – if any do I hope they are balanced and minimise negative impacts. In answer to the question posed I guess I would gravitate towards the opinion that there is little chance of insight from etymology because it is shaped by a strongly manipulated version of social history which will continue to affect us.

Gender issues campaigning – should this take place through joint campaigning between men and women?

To a great extent the feminist movement appears to have become effective in improving the status of women in society across all social classes and across all divides. This is a rather bold generalisation and may require some criticism for refinement. However, there has as a general trend been a significant increase in the numbers of women in work, sharing of household duties which were largely understood to be the role of women to undertake and increases in the salaries that the average woman earns.

Whilst there tends to be a range of feminist action ranging from the conservative to the radical there is possible scope to examine issues of gender in conjunction with the opposite sex rather than be carried out by women, perhaps to give the indication that either men are not necessary for gender issues campaigning or would perhaps aim to take too much control and dominate the proceedings. Feminist research and feminist action may be so geared to the issues that women may face that men’s interests may entirely be disregarded to a point where it is counter productive for women’s interests in general.

Perhaps some gender issues campaigning could be done more effectively and support the well-being of both men and women if it was done through the collective action of both men and women. Deciding an agenda for action would be an interesting as there would need to be some means of trying to separate out issues which would be best dealt with by women alone, those perhaps best dealt with by men and those that would benefit both genders being dealt with in conjunction with each other.

There may not be an enormous need for minor campaigning groups like ‘Fathers for Justice’ rather than a broad change across the whole of society, however, representation in the media does tend to be important on some levels for improving cohesion between otherwise disparate groups and indicating the overall changes that are perhaps desirable for many in society. I could hardly say there is a vacuum left by the disbanding of fathers for justice, but I would state that the types of Mr. Blair, Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg all appear to be suitable candidates to take a gender equality agenda into the mainstream of party politics even further.

Each of them appear to be polite, sensitive and intelligent enough to lead on this type of agenda but there tends to be an attempt not to deal too directly with gender issues overtly as it may get them labelled as ‘politically correct’ or out of synch with public needs. One issue that tends to suggest that they may be refined is a facial characteristic, they lack big noses. I do wonder if there is covert semi-racial discrimination against men who have big noses, like myself. It may contribute to an image of someone who is unrefined and not fitting within the Aryan stereotype that is generally still adored in the West despite it’s links with Nazism. Perhaps each of them fulfils a preferable white racial stereotype and the media do not wish to challenge – the Euro-Indian hybrid. The continuation of Nazism in the west goes uninterrupted.

While it may seem like an unnecessary aside, I do feel discriminated against – I bought a nose clip for swimming and it was too small for my nose – because, I presume, JJB Sport is run by a Nazi cartel who want people of part Jewish origin and other people with big noses to die of heart disease. Maybe I should try to organise a campaign – to highlight what Nazism there is in Earlsdon. JJB are anti-semetic through and through. Nazis go back to Bolton or whatever small northern town you are from. In the mean time will the main political party leadership examine what form of coordination of gender issue campaigning can be legitimately undertaken for more substantial progress to be made sooner in the interests of both men and women.

‘The Testicle Shadow’ – should we be compensating people in China?

Having seen the relatively recent changes in attitude towards the environment and the introduction of off-setting carbon impacts through payment into a fund which would support development work, presumably overseas, to offset the carbon impacts of travel, it has crossed my mind what real changes are likely to result from this action. What seems likely to be the major qualm I would have about these means of generating revenue is that this is a further means of taxing those who are probably conscientious enough not to cause unnecessary pollution through leisure driving whilst those who maybe do take a lot of leisure trips don’t get penalised. Others may criticise the project work undertaken as being unlikely to achieve the objectives that need to be met in terms of carbon balancing. But as an extra 'conscience tax' it is not suitable and could be incorporated into tax which is already paid on fuel - the government could offset carbon use for us without extra voluntary contributions and spread the burden.

Carbon off-setting as a concept is interesting. Perhaps there could be some change through having the right concepts in society which can lead to major changes in ‘culture’ and to an extent can change the way that we live and use resources. This to an extent does reflect the notion that if we change language we will change the way we think and act as a result which isn’t necessarily correct. However, having the right terminology in place may assist with saving the planet. The ‘ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT’ appealed to me to a degree when I was reading social policy several years ago, because it is a means of assessing environmental impact of individuals and areas perhaps even the size of London, which have an ecological footprint the size of the UK. There may have been a long history of selecting linguistic terms which were aimed at promoting greater care for the environment and were dropped into life through the mass media and the etymology of the situation may be interesting. The role of the government in supporting notions of equality despite differences in material wealth and reduction of environmentally degrading action is significant in this position and they may be in a position to sponsor the development of concepts through academic funding and then to develop links between academia and the media allowing an illusion of non-state-dominated social management to emerge. Having said that I tend only to come across the term in the Guardian and on Radio 4 so I presume that there aren't many page 3 girls offsetting their carbon impacts through their overseas photoshoots.

Off-setting carbon use may not be that poor an idea if only there were some way to get those who undertake leisure travel to pay up. Arguably, there is a meaningless distinction between work and leisure travel – leisure travel is important to our well-being to a great extent and maybe shouldn’t be taxed. It should perhaps be excessive leisure travel and excessive work travel when there was no alternative to the means of fossil-fuel driven transport used. Should an average family expect weekends away five times over the course of the year and do some carbon off-setting on trips that they take above this level? Maybe one overseas family holiday every year and then off-set carbon use above this level? Will this actually appeal to the self-crucifying middle classes who wish to thank the individuals overseas who they will never meet or know – how poetic. Perhaps what is wrong with most of this is that it’s all too nice. It needs national government action.

If there were greater threat relating to the role that we all play in environmental degradation then perhaps there could be a greater response. One means of doing this may be to consider the sacrifices that are put upon the population of China. The restrictions that limit family size may have a significant bearing on the impact of environmental damage each family inflicts. If you value your testicles, or those of your partner, then perhaps you should consider your civil liberties and the liberties that others are denied for the sake of maintaining environmental quality. You may think this is only a racist joke, however, there could be some very significant aspects to the need to consider the freedoms that we may experience in the west. Perhaps this is another reservation that I should state over this type of action – that the underlying issue in Britain of the government having fostered as sense of racial supremacy has not been dealt with and we get opportunity to ‘sponsor’ those who are less well off financially than our-British-selves. The multi-dimensionality of social exclusion does give some implication that the resource-poor/time-rich may have some approaches to living that we may benefit from as their resource-rich/time-poor counterparts. This implies that there could be means for a non-financial payback through spiritual growth or other means of relating to the world through expertise thatmay be gained from counterparts.

Maybe there could be a testicle tax on the types who have blatant disregard for the pollution they cause? We offer payment because of the size of our carbon emissions and the size of our ecological footprint and we should not perhaps be too ashamed of covering the cost of our testicle shadows. Perhaps one of the Blair Babes could suggest this to the likes of Jeremy Clarkson who appears to have little regard for the environment and the self-indulgent leisure driving habits. Maybe I should be given government sponsorship to sire some children owing to massive amount of cycling I’ve done….

Perhaps a Western man who can’t cycle should have a vasectomy at the age of twenty-one? Maybe this is one way of stopping parents doing the ‘school run’ and getting kids cycling again. I don’t know about you but I’m going to get my bicycle clips out early this year. Maybe the political parties should get on with offering to offset carbon use without any further voluntary contributions?

Redefining 'political correctness': should the British use a less politicised term of ‘common humility’?

There is more than a slight backlash against the movement of political correctness within the UK media as a whole and this is one area where the media seem in tune with the British public at large – what tends to be accepted in the UK is that there is no apparent alternative to the movement that ‘political correctness’ has become, when it may just be the beginning of a revitalised approach to human relations and how they are termed in everyday language use.

There may not be a single source, of course, of political correctness as a movement, though as the history of the situation gets formed, it may be possible to assume that there was a need for a perhaps international common framework to discuss and describe number of forms of disadvantage that resulted in lower social and economic status for an individual. This may as a result be an example of the process of globalisation of culture which marks the interchange between Britain and the US socially and economically. This may of course not be the case, there doesn’t seem to be an exponent from the US who would argue that the same terminology should be adopted in the UK or elsewhere in Europe that may have been seen to be suitable in the USA.

The backlash against global processes may reflect a resistance to the processes of globalisation as a whole, which may not be visible but is taking place in a great many forms through the discussion groups which were used to select appropriate terms to use within an organisation to avoid discriminatory action. Arguably, those who have disliked the new terminology of political correctness have not been connected to the processes of selecting the most appropriate language for an organisational context. There may be solid grounds to reject the use of terms of courtesy based upon language which does not connect with the social history of the users of the terminology. The process of managing this form of social change and ensuring that there were positive impacts all round are considerable. All of this creates a position where there may be a need to reject elements of the globalisation of culture and seek a national, regional or more local solution that are part of a more prominent movement which helps get those who feel resentment to the ‘politically correct’ on board.

Deconstructions of political correctness may include a more complex picture of competing interests that incorporate what I am stating. Would they indicate that it were a movement that it provides a means of avoiding discriminatory language which can not only restrict the development of the person that it is being used to describe but also to ensure that any one who is working with them may not be accused of discriminating against them? This also could be in the interests of an employer who may not wish to be involved in either providing substandard working conditions where harassment may take place but also may avoid the risk of prosecution through negligence over not addressing this type of matter. In whose interests does political correctness take place as a process may also be worth asking as there may be some benefits for the vulnerable groups who are not discriminated against, although perhaps there is a greater benefit for those who get to grips with how the terminology can be used so they can progress in their careers.

There may be good reason to question the beneficiaries of political correctness – as a movement political correctness may not have addressed any unequal power relations but only offered window dressing to those who were looking to absolve themselves from engaging in any meaningful form of social change. This type of change in language use is little more than a lubricant to capitalism and maintains distinct power relations rather than challenges them in any way. It would be interesting to examine who the major beneficiaries of political correctness have been so far. It does assist in some ways with the sense of a meritocracy and sense of social and economic freedoms.

The meritocratic nature of Blair’s Britain may be subject to further analysis at an appropriate point. We may then find that there are ‘relationally challenged’ individuals that are those who do not have a great opportunity through extended family or others who are ‘aesthetically challenged’ when looks are fully recognised as being a particularly significant issue in the preferences of employers. Maybe one day….

If social and economic power relations are not being challenged and there is an aversion to the US approach of political correctness which may be due to financial and public image reasons being central to undertaking the process of cultural change then there may be scope to undertake a more British approach. Finance and public image may not be matters necessarily central to British culture and there could be reason, despite common ground with the US, to separate and form a more British movement. This has been undertaken by the left wing councils of the 1980'S and not respected for what it was - maybe it is time to review this.

Mental illness – How heavily gendered should the diagnostic frameworks be?

Following a brief discussion with a psychiatrist who refused to put anger into a diagnostic framework I have considered exactly how the mechanisms operate which lead us to see women report more mental illness and men die younger, statistically speaking because of alcohol related diseases. It was a point made continually through the M.Sc. course I did that women may tend to get depressed, report symptoms and then get diagnosed with depression, thus elevating the statistics of women and mental illness – probably to a level they may be classed as accurate. While on the other hand, men presumably during medical examinations, may report that they have been drinking heavily and this not necessarily be converted to a statistic in relation to mental health. It will be a rather clumsy discussion to deal with such a nebulous terms as mental health, especially in relation to gender; while it may almost not be worthwhile raising these points, I do think some generalisations need to be questioned.

The frequency of reported mental illness does almost invariably indicate more frequent reporting than with men which may reflect how gender appropriate it is to report the symptoms of depression etc within the consulting room of a GP. If the information on the increase in male suicide in the UK is also considered – especially with regard to the increase in rate of suicide for young men. It is approximately twice as high as for women despite the implication that men have better mental health than women by the less frequent reporting of mental health problems.

Arguably, there could be more gendered concepts of mental illness relating to male and female forms of anxiety, depression and other well-being states which increase service use to a suitable degree. At present the diagnostic frameworks may make additional problems emerge and as a nation we could look towards more gendered and more appealing concepts of well being and mental health problems which encourage greater participation in health services that everyone in Britain is paying towards.

At present the use of existing concepts tends to continue an element within our culture which ensures that we are operating in the rules of the asylum and other institutions that we have not been able to make a clean break from over several centuries. There are possibly methods of social management that may be nearing an end in the next few decades which would require – it may simply be a change in nomenclature and make minimal difference but if managed across the whole of society as a significant period of change it could alter things for the next generation.

Whilst there may be some significant differences between Britain and Europe there could be adequate common ground in order to make this a European wide movement coordinated by the EU – this I think is wishful thinking but it could be an area for possible development – would most young men prefer different terminology applied to their life experience which puts them in a position to alter the way they live so they feel better? It may also be a particularly important step for the improvements that could take place for women and reduction in problems with their mental health as well.

This actually arose out of a discussion I had with someone who I knew who worked in the psychiatric profession. She tended to degrade some very intense feelings that had been reported to her of anger because they were not clinically relevant and wanted to home in on issues that were in the diagnostic manual. It strikes me as interesting that anger does not figure as part of the diagnoses that are made when it is to a degree expressed as being a socially appropriate emotion that men may express – are there other instances of men reporting feelings and these being ignored by clinical staff because they aren’t adequately stated in diagnostic manuals? It would be wholly unwise to suggest this outside of a blog in a more formal context as this is not based on a great deal of qualitative information, however, it may be interesting to form a corpus as is termed by Fairclough and to examine the discursive practice around this particular issue.

Whilst staff in mental health services may be committed to what they do, be willing to endure certain maltreatment which most people would be wholly intimidated and offended by there does need to be a strong commitment to the frameworks that psychiatric professional works within. There is a strong belief that the actions of staff who participate in such systems are going to result in significant improvements in the well-being of the patient. Unfortunately, the standards theoretically and procedurally that psychiatric professionals work to are not high and there isn’t a very strong explanatory framework for exactly why interventions work when they do. This is beyond the control of the vast majority of psychiatric staff – contributing further to the difficulties that they have by offering inadequate conceptualisations of how mental illness may be experienced within a culture only may serve to restrict the ability of the staff.

There are a great many concepts within the realms of mental illness, psychiatry and well being that may require significant review at present and while there are so called random attacks that mental health services appear to lack any understanding of why they take place this may be one area that could prove pivotal. Many of the diagnostic categories that are used to tend to exacerbate the mental distress that an individual may experience – for instance if there were action taken against an individual and they were classed as being paranoid for reporting it within mental health services many people would acknowledge that this could cause frustration and lead to anger, especially if there were a willingness only to employ mental health services as a result as a means of protecting the public at large, when there are individuals in the public who were causing such problems. This action of mental health services to have a negative and damaging effect upon the well being of the person reporting ‘mental illness’ could be classed as psychiatric iatrogenesis. It will be a long time until the staff within health services, politics and relevant sections of the Police acknowledge this term and its significance in terms of reducing the so called random and violent attacks.

The sucess of privatisation - were improvements in telecommunications due to advances in technology not privatisation?

Of all the most positive impacts that Thacherism made there was a feeling that there was going to be a major series of improvements to standards of living because the free market coming into it's own and liberating us from our old left ways.

The winter of discontent was all about the dead being 'left unburied' and society falling apart because of evil, selfish socialism. There were great assumptions that were made about the significance of privatisation and how significant the improvements were and to a large extent I wonder if journalism has failed the nation (or is it run by the same collective or nazi's who want all public resources privatised) I really can’t say. I think there was a need for change as most left-wingers around in the 1970’s would have agreed but it’s been change that has privileged a few with some signs of evidence of this, such as British Gas share dividends and increases in the value of the shares, rather than the many who may have been genuinely unaware of what a good deal nationalised distribution of domestic fuel could be.

The issue of how important the impact made by the ‘successful’ privatisation of the telecommunications industry was for the UK can not be understated. It did to a large extent shape the expectations of the public who may not have been majorly concerned or interested in private ownership of their already owned resources – is this completely my imagination or was this a well conceived plot to dupe the British nation into believing that privatisation was going to be a major benefit to the British public?

It’s interesting to explore the multiple impacts of privatisation – but perhaps, on another day.

Cameron: Did he pay lip service to well-being or make a commitment?

David Cameron made a commitment to the ‘well-being’ of the nation should he become Prime Minister despite it being a notoriously slippery concept that tends not to mean a great deal even within professional practice at best and possibly at worst means the least when it is used by politicians. There may have been great honour in intent when this statement was made and I think this could have been given, amongst other statements, to try and divide the Cameron era from that of his predecessors – there seemed very little in the way of genuine concern for the quality of life of the population especially the working class during the Conservative parties domination of national politics in the eighties and the first part of the nineties and an overwhelming interest in the success of the wealthy. This probably caused some resentment towards Conservative party from anyone who had a degree of either professional or personal moral responsibility for reducing health inequalities and Cameron may be interested in trying to capitalise on the dissatisfaction with the Brown-Blair governments who work in public health related professions over relatively meaty issues such as this.
The under-spend on Public Health nationwide which appears to have taken place as a result of the lack of ring-fencing of funds aimed at public health initiatives is not likely to be a target for the Conservative party as a whole – they are less than likely to maintain their track record of reducing inequalities in health, inadvertently as they did under Major, than the Blair-Brown government and unlikely to pursue this as a policy. Perhaps the Blair and Brown governments are using measures to lead to the general improvement in some lifestyle factors and not in others? It does seem unusual that there has been some concern that there was not the reduction in inequalities that one may have anticipated since Blair & Brown have tackled the great many root causes of mortality and morbidity in the UK. While this goes on and maybe hasn’t been explained in terms of the causal models that will dictate funding maybe those in public health and health promotion are restricting themselves until a coherent explanation has been put forward through the national bodies for the professions related to public health.
The concern that the concept of well-being will be devalued by a politician may be present in some corners and to a degree this may be a valid concern. However, it is likely that like any concept worth discussing it will be the site of ideological struggle, as Norman Fairclough would state. As a result issue areas like ‘crime’ and ‘the family’ are hotly debated within politics in terms of the level of involvement from the state and this tends to be how political action occurs. It does strike me as interesting that Mr. Cameron has not stamped his own personal mark on what well-being would mean within the context of his environmentally concerned conservatives. There is some potential that this use of the term may lead to the progress that is necessary in order to move the conceptualisation of well -being on from the definitions of health offered by the World Health Organisation as a complete state of social, mental and physical well-being and that described in the Ottawa Charter. Maybe there could be developments made in the next few years shaped by the current British political scene.
The extent to which well being is taken seriously as a goal within the health service may be still under question. There has been a greater emphasis than before of examining the nature of the power relations within professional consultation and improvements made in Doctor-patient communication and offering choice in patient consultations where this is feasible – to a degree the changes in operation of the NHS should results in advances in theory including changes in the way that well-being is thought of. To a degree these changes may have already have taken place. A few things spring to mind from time to time that I think could be taken forward within the political agenda at present and the current political bottle neck in British party politics may provide what could be a substantial opportunity to
It is difficult to predict what forms of finance would be necessary to make a real commitment to well-being - no doubt this is something that was also considered under Blair. Cameron has criticised initiatives which may have been likely to lead to substantial changes in well-being perhaps necessary many years before someone can alter the course of their lives, for instance the drug misuse interventions that have not substantially increased success rates of termination of drug misuse. Has the technocratic nature of the Blair Brown agenda and the ‘what works’ approach replaced ideological approaches to party politics and will this commitment to well being be a similar approach by Cameron to a branded conservatism which will act as a benchmark for his political arrival? If anything I assume it is highly likely that well-being will be dropped down the agenda further rather than be taken forward conceptually. This appears to be pure lip service to the term.
While overspends in other NHS delivery areas are soaking up funding that may have initially have been set aside for public health interventions there does seem to be a potential political scalp to be claimed: it does seem that controlling the spending within public health would be necessary in order to achieve a substantial change in well-being. Taking the agenda forwards requires a style of leadership and willingness to listen to the workforce that Mr Cameron hasn’t demonstrated frequently. If this is to be managed ‘on existing resources’ perhaps some form of challenge laid down by the UK national health promotion and public health bodies to Mr Cameron to say what he means and mean what he says may be timely. Would the UK health promotion network offer anything in the way of the necessary political melting pot of conflicting issues between groups that would provide a means of making a significant amount of progress in this area and greatly improve the impacts of policies that are developed in this area?

What other methods of facilitation of mental illness could take place?

I assume that most people would consider it to be entirely plausible that there is likely to be a natural progression of mental illness following say offensive behaviour or criminal activity someone may reasonably be excluded and subject to a reduction in self esteem which then plausibly leads into depression reduced self care, disconnection from the same norms as others and become socially isolated etc. Then lacking the reinforcement and incentive through lack of appropriate social contact there will be a reduction biologically in various chemicals within an individual who may then require chemical support in order to normalise after this has manifested itself through anxiety, depression or other symptoms.
I assume again maybe rightly or wrongly there could be a great many alternate explanations bubbling under which may partially support this type of bio-psycho-social model of the development of mental illness which requires a medical intervention to rectify problems. I am really sceptical about this and have had no real joy in getting this type of matter addressed – mainstream political parties seem to disregard this as a matter of course and have a strong desire to marginalise anyone who may have experienced mental ill health and there seems total willingness to disregard the type of allegations that someone may make on the basis that they are paranoid and for example ‘look or appear mentally ill’. My own experience leads me to believe that there could be a great many problems linked together that would be difficult to separate and certainly this type of explanation should not be disregarded. If alternate explanations are dismissed as paranoid speculation then this could take place without investigation or concern from the authorities, who resemble something like the cast of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.
Whether it’s worth speculating on this or not I can’t say – I think it’s likely that there are various forms of medication that have been developed for ‘state’ purposes that could involve medication which has been specifically developed for degrading mental health. The CIA probably possesses drugs that can entirely melt your brains. They’re probably used in the USA for prisoners in Guantanamo Bay to ensure that they breakdown just a little bit and while the US government can deny they exist, as representatives of the British government would also do. The theory behind them is probably not that sophisticated. Depression lifts for the 50 million or so who are taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) ensure that there is an increased level of serotonin around the neurons the brain – what could be simpler but to have a drug which could do the opposite of the SSRIs an unselective serotonin reuptake facilitator? You’d feel like death warmed up having the most impossible low that would be imaginable. What’s interesting about this is that there is the theory in place and technology to develop this, however, governments across the world would continue to deny their existence. Will anything give?

Marxism - will it connect to neo-liberalism?

Having read around the subject of Marxism and seem its' various impacts on an extremely wide range of academic thinking and made attempts to link into related fields of practice through, for example, the SWP it is an area of political thinking that I’ve found to be much of a cornerstone of academia and political life together. The few SWP meetings I attended had only a minute element in the air of religious fervour and while this was almost negligible it did feel real, in the sense that one may sense a degree of atmosphere within a church or during important ceremony. Will the construct of Marxism that remains in society ever be revisited to the same degree as it was during the course of the 20th Century? It does seem unlikely that there will ever be the same degree of social relevance of the construct as there was in Russia and Eastern Europe in the first half of the century and likening Marxism as a doctrine to a religious movement is something I do inadvertantly. This is not intended to be derogatory - while elements of Marxist thinking may have been concerned with freedom from manipulation and a process of liberating the labour force this may no longer be a central element. If it were, surely greater attention would be paid to making activism effective?

Contemporary marxists tends to be concerned with the examination of the social and economic conditions of the time and not the formation of regimes that has taken place over a period of centuries. This may have been an element of the marxism that led to revolutions and could well provide some relevance to the action of Marxist who have such strong commitment to their principles. This will not happen during our lifetimes as far as I can see although there may be more peaceful revolutions planned in the future which appeal to the masses.

It is with some concern that I have to highlight issues connected to Third Way Politics (eg. Giddens, 1998) and it is this that causes some concern as there doesn’t seem to be what I class as a natural transition from the left to the neo-liberalism of present day Britain. Would a revised form of Marxist Communism resurrect the potential of socialism above the nonsense of 'Third Way' Politics? The third way thinkers could pay closer attention to the notion of neo-liberalism as a framework, rather than the notion of neo-liberalism as a right wing concept. For instance, if there were intent for workers to control an organisation in which they work this may be dealt with within a contemporary agenda through rotating management cycles, through sole ownership of the company on the part of an individual or the collective developing through solely worker owned shares.

This could amount to a form of Marxism, bordering on communism, in neo-liberal clothing that is dressed in neo-liberal language. However, with the emphasis on diversity that there is within the economy which may be supported quite readily by the major political parties at present, this potential tends not to be taken advantage of by Marxist bodies and it seems quite abhorrent to try to expand this agenda. It’s interesting that this element of neo-liberalism which I think gets discussed occasionally has never found a stable set of principles academically or political to be recognised but is discussed outside of such forums.

Has there been significant manipulation of the RESPECT coalition using inappropriate means?

Having been linked only relatively superficially to the RESPECT coalition I didn't make a significant impact on the party membership, their procedures or their policies. I did wonder frequently about a couple of their members and think that they may have been subject to influence to render them less likely to be of impact within a number of political forums.

I feel that it's likely that I was subject to influence in order to reduce my ability to deal with a number of situations within the party meetings, particularly in what seemed like open discussion. I don't think there will be any 'evidence' of this but I certainly think it's likely that I was subject to influence while I was still a relatively young child and not likely to be taken seriously - how would the British public feel about the far left organisations if they were comprised of people who had been subject to manipulation and engaged in politics in a manner that was likely to leave them unlikely to be successful? Furthermore, if the methods of manipulation were so absurd that if anyone who did voice concerns about the manipulation were classed as insane and potentially dangerous as a result of stating such paranoid thoughts would this be in any way acceptable political manipulation?

I have also wondered about the UKIP Party and whether or not anyone linked to that coalition felt that there were unusual methods used upon them - quite possibly there were significant problems within UKIP which have been reflected by the lack of public profile - I can't state at this point only indicate that there could have been the same methods used upon us all....