spudtater: (Default)
( Apr. 7th, 2011 01:10 pm)
Is it that time of year again already? A co-worker just came round offering a bag of names for the Grand National. I told him no thanks, and left it at that. I try not to make a habit of gambling, whether that's casino, lottery, scratchcard or raffle. The only exception is when it is for a good cause, and the Grand National is kind of the opposite of that.

You see, for all its image of "a bit of good clean fun", the Grand National is actually a rather controversial sport. The jumps are large and fixed, and the horses run at them at full speed, in a large pack. Broken necks are common (from which the horse dies instantly), as are broken legs (after which the horse will almost certainly be destroyed).

Statistically speaking you can expect three horses to die at every Grand National. Last year it was five horses, and the same the year before that. (Full list here.) The organisers have gone to pains to point out the precautions they have taken to prevent more deaths this year, but then they say that every year. I don't doubt that they do their best to minimise risk, but this is an inherently dangerous sport.

And yet we as a nation don't want to hear about Grand National deaths. The words "national institution" are muttered, and the subject is quietly dropped.

I'm hardly the person most obsessed with animal rights — I eat meat on a daily basis, and my support for animal research is pretty much entirely unreserved — but even I balk when animals are dying not for nourishment, not for the advancement of humankind, but for entertainment. I am surprised by Britain's continued love of and support for the Grand National — this, from a nation that is too squeamish to eat horse meat.

If you watch the Grand National this year, be under no illusions — if a horse falls down, and doesn't get up, then it is either dead, or shortly to become so. And wonder, if the camera lingers, whether this is just slightly in the realm of blood sports.

I won't be watching, I won't be betting; I don't have the stomach.
</soapbox>
So Michael Gove was on BBC Breakfast this morning, talking about his proposed school reforms. He seemed to return to two particular obsessions during the interview: getting people from the military qualified as teachers, and encouraging team sports.

Military types, he said, would make the perfect teachers, since they're well versed in both maintaining discipline and "motivating young people". Never mind the fact that the military specialises in quashing creativity and individual thought, and promoting blind, unquestioning obedience to authority — not exactly a trait I'd like to see more of in schools. And never mind, too, that this plan would seem to involve importing sizeable amounts of testosterone-laden young men from an almost exclusively male, macho-poisoned culture into an environment full of attractive, impressionable young ladies in skirts.

And team sports, he says, are the ideal way to build "teamwork" and "cooperation". He contrasts sports like these, with his prime example of a silly, pointless P.E. activity: "circus skills". Yeah, because who needs coordination, control, skill and patience when you could be out rolling around in the mud for a bit of male bonding with a bunch of burly young men?

These two obsessions of his seem hint at an obsession with promoting group thought and obedience at the expense of individualism and creativity. And the former in particular makes me wonder if education is really his priority, or if to some extent he sees his position as the ideal opportunity to get military men and military thinking into schools, and thence beef up our armed forces.

Euch. Fucking Tories.
Tags:
English Defence League: "We're not thugs, we're a balanced mix of people with an important political message. Now, to prove our point, let's go smash up that truck!!!1! Woooo!! Yeah!"

EDL Protesters Attack Sky News Truck — 09 Oct 2010, Sky News

"Oh... there were journalists in it? Well, I'm sure we made a good impression."
Tags:
I seem to have missed any press coverage of it, but Nick Clegg's "YourFreedom" site was launched yesterday. It asks you to list and vote on laws that you would like altered or repealed, in order to better restore and/or preserve the freedoms of the UK people.

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/

Okay, it's easy to mock the coalition government as having "so few ideas it has to ask us what to do", but I think this is a huge improvement on New Labour's attitude to governance, which was more "we'll tell you what to think — and you'd better like it". So let's get on this site and let Nick know what we want. If it all comes to naught, then at least we gave the coalition government the benefit of the doubt.
Tags:
spudtater: (Default)
( May. 11th, 2010 09:48 pm)
It's the "end of an error", as the USians say, and the start of an entirely new one.

Here's hoping that Tory tempered with Lib Dem isn't, overall, too much worse than Labour.

I'm fairly happy about the prospect of a referendum on AV. (Yes, Labour were offering AV off the bat and a referendum on STV, but that was a desperate attempt at staying in power, and never really a realistic — or wise — proposition.)
Tags:
spudtater: (Default)
( May. 10th, 2010 06:48 pm)
Surprised I haven't seen anything about this on my friends list yet: there's another Take Back Parliament demonstration next Saturday. 208 confirmed participants so far (including me). Who else is going to be there?

Must find something purple...
Tags:
...to get to my polling station, I have to walk past a different polling station.

Am tempted to stay up to watch election results roll in tonight... it only happens every five years, after all. But if I do, I'll be knackered tomorrow. And I have work.

May try to get up in the small hours, and catch the last half of them.
Tags:
spudtater: (Default)
( Apr. 18th, 2010 06:14 pm)
The polls have shot up for the Lib Dems, and despite what the naysayers have said, mainly seem to be eating into the Tory vote, not Labour.

A couple of polls have even put them in first place, which is... well... frankly staggering. I didn't think I'd see the day.

Unfortunately, due to vote distribution, the jump in percentage of vote for the Lib Dems doesn't give them a proportional increase in seats... instead, Labour looks like it will win out at the current vote share. (It'll still be a hung parliament, of course; that's looking like a virtual certainty now).

But if the Lib Dems could shoot up from around 20% to almost 30%, how much more could they do?

I notice there's a a Facebook group called We got Rage Against the Machine to #1, we can get the Lib Dems into office, which now has over 85,000 members. Even if it is ultimately unsuccessful, it's making me feel a little bit fuzzy inside.   8^)

Bet Gord and Dave are now feeling stupid about having railed on about "voter apathy" in today's youth...
Tags:
spudtater: (Default)
( Feb. 20th, 2010 08:15 pm)
First science linky is this very interesting article about ozone depletion denialists. It points out how the exact same tactics being used by climate change denialists today were being used by politicians and industry groups in the 70s/80s, before the discovery of the ozone hole forced a massive backpedal. Particularly interesting is... no, just read the article.   8^)

Second linky is to Ben Goldacre's Bad Science blog, about the Ying Wu chinese herbal medicine case (a woman was given pills for acne, got cancer, and ended up having to have both kidneys and urinary tract removed).

Upon telling [personal profile] galaxy_girl that the industry was entirely unregulated, she responded that "they could be selling rat poison for all we know". I then proceeded to discover via this, this and this:

Aristolochic acid is a rodent carcinogen found in Aristolochia and Asarum, both in the Aristolochiaceae family of plants.

Well, then.
spudtater: (Default)
( Jan. 27th, 2010 01:02 pm)

Monday's word-of-the-day calendar informed me about Nellie Bly, 19th century investigative journalist extraordinaire.

Wiki extracts )

Why have I not heard of this awesomeness before?


This morning's news included the story of a report on the question: "should people in troubled relationships stay together for the sake of the children?". To which the answer turned out to be: "No". Or, more specifically, "unhappiness in children is more likely to be influenced by conflict in their family than the family's structure"

Thank you. You'd have thought that would be bleedin' obvious, but apparently not, as they then interviewed some fucking Tory who went on to explain how this survey, comprehensive and unbiased though it might be, contradicted the beliefs and policies of the Conservative party and was therefore, obviously, wrong.

I may be paraphrasing there. But only a little.

My personal feelings are that the increase in divorce levels are consequences of nothing more complex than the fact that more women are able to support themselves, giving them an increased chance of being able to escape unhappy or abusive relationships. But this would contradict that rose-tinted image of 1950's household nirvana that is so bloody pervasive in this country, wouldn't it?

spudtater: (Default)
( Jun. 4th, 2009 08:13 pm)
Have held my nose and voted for my MEPs. (Ended up supporting the haggis-fancying diagonalised-execution-fetishists — best of a bad lot, IMHO.)

Polls are open 'til 10, if you haven't voted yet.
Tags:
Thanks to [livejournal.com profile] gominokouhai for bringing to my attention the Open Rights Group questionnaire to MEP candidates, which included questions on copyright, data retention, personal data and the open internet.

Unfortunately — and somewhat disturbingly — no Labour politicians have replied to this questionnaire. A smattering of Tories have, and their responses show that they have not changed their spots. The Liberal Democrats are better, but not as good as I would have expected from them. In particular, their top candidate for Scotland, George Lyon, only agrees with the ORG on half the issues, marking him out as on the less liberal side of the party.

So now I'm looking at changing my vote. SNP or Greens? The SNP top candidate Ian Hudghton has responded "Agree" on all fronts. For the Greens, Elaine Morrison's responses do not appear on the 'Scotland' page above, but she has told me via personal correspondence that they are "Agree/Agree/Agree*/Agree" respectively. Bonus points to her for taking her time to respond even this late into an election campaign.

Anyway, neither SNP nor Green parties are 100% appealing, but I don't feel I can vote for a LibDem candidate who is as soft on individual freedoms as George Lyon is, either. Who should I vote for?

* EDIT: Elaine's responses updated above; her initial response accidentally missed one out.
spudtater: (Default)
( May. 16th, 2009 12:57 pm)

Is it that time again already? The European Parliamentary Elections are just around the corner, on Thursday 4 June. I don't know about you, but I've had a surprising dearth of information about this election — not a single political pamphlet has swanned its way through my door yet, and I've actually had to go and seek out information about the various parties standing.

For anybody else who's feeling confused: the electoral region is Scotland, (unless you're in some other constituency), and the candidates are broken down by UK party, not by European ones. (i.e. you'd vote for the SNP, not the EFA). Here's a full list of who's standing for election in Scotland.

Currently Scotland has two Labour politicians, two Tories, two SNPs and one LibDem in the European Parliament. The European Parliament has its own curious, confusing and continually-shifting set of super-parties. The current pecking order is:

  • The EPP–ED group, a conservative/christian democratic alliance that includes the UK Conservative party.
  • The Party of European Socialists, which includes UK Labour.
  • The ALDE group, a collection of liberal and democratic parties that includes the various UK Liberal Democratic parties.
  • UEN, a national conservative group to which no UK parties are aligned.
  • The Greens–EFA group, a loose collection of green and regionalist parties including the various UK Green parties, the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru and Mebyon Kernow.
  • The EUL–NGL group, a communist/democratic socialist/eco-socialist alliance whose only UK member appears to be Sinn Féin
  • The I/D group, a eurosceptic group that includes the UK Independence Party
  • Misc

But don't let that confuse you. Vote for who you think best represents you, and if you don't know who that might be, pop along to the various parties' web sites! I'm voting Liberal Democrat, but don't let me sway you; make up your own mind. Go on — democracy's everybody's responsibility.

Tags:
spudtater: (Default)
( Apr. 4th, 2009 09:19 pm)

What I saw: a blog collecting stories from G20 protestors and observers in London. (Link from [livejournal.com profile] batswing)

It seems police are up to their old tricks again, "kettling" protests (forcing them into smaller and smaller spaces for many hours without access to food, water or toilet facilities), and behaving aggressively to attempt to instigate violence. Spoiling for a fight, basically.

Excerpts )

Video of police charging and using physical violence against peaceful protestors. (Protestors have their hands in the air, and are chanting "this is not a riot" and "shame on you". Police are pummelling them with batons and shield edges.)

News article: "Baton charges and kettling: police's G20 crowd control tactics under fire", The Guardian, 3 Apr 2009.

spudtater: (Default)
( Feb. 9th, 2009 08:25 pm)
Those of you who know anything about polygraph lie detector tests will know that they are considered pseudo-science by most academics — they tend to show the results that the examiner expects to see, and largely work on the principle of intimidation. They're basically a stress test, and stress is not a good indicator of when somebody is lying.

If a test that includes measures of breathing, blood pressure, pulse and skin conductivity is inaccurate, how much more so will mere telephone-based lie detection be? And yet our very own Department of Work and Pensions is currently running trials of one such system; already hundreds of thousands of pounds have been denied to claimants based on the results of these tests.

And the details of this system? It turns out that it consists of just 500 lines of Visual Basic code — that's less than most A-Level computing projects — written by a single person with no qualifications whatsoever, either in computing or psychology.

Gak.

"It also claimed that two other Labour peers – Lord Moonie, a former defence minister, and Lord Snape, former MP for West Bromwich – were willing to use their influence"

The Grauniad, 27 Jan 2009

Tags:
spudtater: (Default)
( Nov. 22nd, 2008 10:00 pm)
You answered 22 out of 33 correctly — 66.67%
Take the quiz


It won't surprise most readers too much to hear that the average American scored only 49%. What is completely shocking, however, is that the average US elected official scored only 44%, 5% less than the average man in the street.

As [livejournal.com profile] autopope puts it, that goes some way to explaining Sarah Palin.

Why do Americans enjoy electing people so much stupider than themselves?
Tags:
.

Profile

spudtater: (Default)
spudtater

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags