How to support our troops in Afghanistan – Bring them home

It’s right that we should honour our war dead. But it is terribly important that such remembrance doesn’t get confused with the cause for which they fought. Because sometimes (e.g. WW2) that cause is more honourable than others (e.g. Iraq, Afghanistan).
The British soldiers who are now dying in Afghanistan are not in reality dying to preserve our peace and freedom. They are dying to save the government’s (and the Americans’) face, and to prop up a corrupt unelected puppet regime in Kabul. This is a terrible betrayal. Our government is lying to them about the cause for which they are fighting.
It’s important that we don’t betray them by pretending that the cause for which they are fighting is democracy, peace and freedom.. It’s important that we remember them and their fallen comrades, especially at this time of year. And it’s equally important that we support our troops in the best possible way we can: by undercutting lies about what the occupation of Afghanistan is really about, and by bringing them home.
 
p.s. For more info on what the ‘war’ in Afghanistan has really become, information which sadly you won’t hear on the BBC, read the scintillating piece nested here: http://rupertread.org/rupertread.org/wordpress/?p=580

The fees disgrace – blame LABOUR

Let’s be very clear. It was LABOUR who opened the floodgates to the university tuition fees debacle that is now being imposed on our country. The LibDems have allowed it to happen; the Tories made it happen; but it was Labour who commissioned the Browne report, and it was Labour who set the whole thing up in the first place, by imposing top-up fees. As soon as the argument had been made by Charles Clarke that it was right for students to pay a substantial amount toward their higher education, and that higher education free at the point of delivery was going to be a thing of the past, then full-scale marketization became inevitable. It was only a matter of time. I made this argument at the time, as did Ian Gibson. We have, sadly, been proven right by today’s news that the ConDems are going to bring in variable fees of up to £9k.
It is LABOUR who need to take the blame for having created the conditions for this dreadful outcome. (And it is only the Green Party (and the Nats, etc.) who come out of this with clean hands: see http://twitter.com/#!/TheGreenParty)
So: come the next election, let’s all be clear about that. If you want to punish the LibDems over this, then there is no point in voting Labour.

Community litterpick organised by Green Councillors in Wensum ward (my ward)

 
The litterpick is to take place on Sunday 7th November from 2.30pm, in the heart of the North Earlham / Larkman estate:

Green Party Councillors are organising a community litterpick in the Cadge Road area on Sunday 7th November at 2:30pm, meeting initially outside the Grove Pub.

Lots of people have been concerned about the amount of litter in the area and the litterpick is a great way show how much people in the community care about the issue. We will be inviting local businesses and community organisations to come along and take part and we will provide all the equipment to ensure that residents who help out are safe and clean! If _you_ would like to come then email me (or comment here) so we have an idea of numbers – but do feel free in any case just to turn up on the day.
We’re doing this just to make a difference, but we’re also doing it to put pressure on the owners of the Grove Pub site to tidy up the litter on site. They have been asked to do this by Green Councillors and by the neighbourhood manager. The site is frankly in a pretty terrible state, and that makes it harder to keep the area as a whole in a tidy condition. If we take a lead on cleaning up the street around this eyesore, then hopefully the site owners will feel more of an obligation to play their part, too.

Unpredictability and resistance

If you, dear Rupert’s Reader, want to check out what I argue to be the in-principle limited predictability of human behaviour, based on ‘reflexive’ considerations, then you could do worse than to look at my ‘There is no such thing as a social science’. But more directly relevant, in that it specifically discusses the environmental case (which my book does not) is the series of brilliant papers in this area by Larry Lohmann: for instance, http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/resource/whose-voice-speaking ,

http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/sites/thecornerhouse.org.uk/files/SocSci.pdf