Silencing the Crickets!

I've cycled a fair few miles this year, most recent years, generally avoiding the heavier traffic, targeting the quieter country lanes. Observations would be that the weather's been rather on the damp side, the air not as on fire as is that further south, around the Mediterranean for example. Numbers of Swifts and Hirundines (Swallows and Martins), if anything, may even be up a squeak upon last year's alarmingly poor showing. Butterfly populations, with the notable exception of Silver-washed Fritillaries and Red Admirals, continue to plummet. Bee populations have nose-dived! Now, solo rider as I often am, I recognise that my observations offer mere anecdotal, route specific, information but...

The 'insect narrative'- insect apocalypse- butterflies more specifically, would have it that the preceding and higher-than-average-summer-temperatures have had significant impact upon several key species. Significant? Maybe. Certainly the farming lobby is implying as much, guardians of the countryside that they are, except to note...

Given that the farming community continues also to spread toxic reservoirs of pesticides- over 150 varieties- across England's green and 'pleasant' lands, maybe, just maybe, they're not the best people with whom to have entrusted the land in the first instance. Their particular (farming lobby) narrative argues that the hot summers are to blame. Mmmm! Since 'taking back control' an additional 36 pesticides, banned by the EU, are now free to bleed into the landscape. Dutifully, the EU kept a concerned eye upon the Monsato world view. We should probably count blessings that Bayer's 2016 acquisition of the giant managed to precede the UK's 2017 goose step to the right!

By all means, justly curse the water monopolies for pumping millions into shareholder pockets, whilst doing the same with effluent and excrement into our rivers and coastal waters but we should also be aware that the farmers continue to produce the bulk of the pollution. And, in so doing, they are contributing majorly to an...


Insect Apocalypse!


The water companies may be ably assisting with the poisoning but they're not yet the ones grubbing out the hedgerows and repurposing land away from wildlife. Except where it may be artificially preserved for bloody sports! The Water Companies are not the ones responsible for allowing animal excrements and nitrates to leach into the water tables and to weep, puss-like, into our rivers. The water company's touch is a far more human one. BBC's Countryfile works hard at filtering and remoulding public consciousness, more's the pity they can't assist with filtering out some of the effluent the farmers are producing.

A recent government pledge to abandon (also) the tiny remnant protection for our waterways, this time at the behest of the 'developer' lobbyists, may yet cause the burden of annihilation to shift. We can sense TBI's Starmer cabinet spinning up through the gears of change. One million new homes! Wow, almost a quarter of the shortfall that's been manufactured under this same government. Watch those dead-eyed client journos pretend not to have noticed the slight of hand.

On a recent summer's afternoon I stopped to stand and stare at a huge acreage of Red Clover. The adjacent country lane had long since been closed-off to transport, excepting bikes and pedestrians; Bramble was snaking across the tarmac from the verges. I watched the pink landscape for well over ten minutes and managed to detect not one single Honey Bee. Two Bumblebees, just about double digits of Hoverflies, one Brown China-Mark Moth and, perhaps, as many as twenty, either Large or Small, White Butterflies, but no Honey Bees! So determined was I to find at least one that I wandered up and down the adjacent lane (the aforementioned totals include this) eventually giving up and riding onward. Modern farming obliterating the Butterflies...

Silencing the Crickets!

No more the quiet chirrup in the long grass, the crack of leather on willow!

Decimating the moths, obliterating the hoverflies, wiping out the beetles and the bugs, thus starving the spiders, enacting a bee apocalypse. But, never fear the grown-ups are back in charge! And, at the eleventh hour, the planet is surely to be saved. Again! And yet again, from the very same gang that drove us here in the first place. Wave some flags, why don't we?

There is an accumulating raft of statistics and facts, that will be pawed over at some indeterminate time in the future, that various non-client 'journalists' and other authors, social scientists, may reference to chart the demise of 21st Century UK, perhaps Western society, hopefully not yet the entire modern world. Who will, then, want or have the time to stop and to reminisce about the former planet we once held? Increasingly, we find ourselves bumping along the bottom, pseudo-functioning at the behest of many of the absolute worst individuals that could ever have been envisaged at the helm. Whether it be global warming- with troughing days numbered Sunak ($1.5 billion in the pocket) now barely even troubles to disguise the corruption- mass species extinction, pollution of our waterways, other forms of pollution, decimation of public services, housing (home ownership and rental), public health and the NHS- both Starmer and Streeting continue to work with private health-care companies, inequality, private monopoly takeovers (privatisation and stealth), eroded democracy, media ownership and messaging, the list is beyond alarming! All of those here listed fully apply to the UK but wildfire expansion of the neoliberal conflagration is spreading fast to engulf also many other nations.

Sacrificing the Honey Bees!

Sugar for the paparazzi. Keeping the buzzing inside the tent.

There's also the monetisation of seemingly everything! Beware, wherever there are private interests with hands in the jar, fat-cat CEOs to cloak in ermine and to dine, shareholder skimming to be done, the profit motive, then there will be leaks! Small leaks, big leaks, expanding leaks! Leaking and leeching from the many to the very few! Prominent amongst a sparsity of Labour election ideas is the one to bring in private lobbyists to 'work' upon (thus insert) Reeves's ideas to grow the economy. It's like something out of a recurring neoliberal nightmare!

Let's focus upon the monetisation of sport! Narrow it down, specifically, to the monetisation of cricket. Chart an...


Absence of Cricketers.

Hobbling into my mid-sixties, I grew up watching Test Cricket. The first series that I can still clearly recall was England at home to Pakistan in the summer of 1974, Geoff Arnold's swing bowling and Derek Underwood's 'deadly' spin on a sticky wicket! The sublime batting of first Zaheer Abbas, then Dennis Amiss, only black-and-white but really so much better than its five-decades-evolved counterpart. The cricket stayed on throughout the day, Sundays were set aside as a Christian-Empire rest day! No adverts! Nobody seriously thought to deny viewers access to their national side, playing at home. Well, maybe Kerry Packer, maybe the then little-known spawn of a Mr and Mrs Murdoch. Where was contraception when we needed it?

In glorious full black-and-white, 'twas possible to watch as Underwood systematically out-thought, toyed with and set up the batsman, in real time. I don't recall whether there were even replays, whether, if one missed the wicket, one had to wait until the half-hour highlights programme in the late evening. And, if one didn't catch that, that was it! Missed! How cricket coverage has moved on, except...

Has it? Has it really? Moved on?

2023, forty-nine years worth of technical advances later, one may access a full hour's worth of Technicolor highlights, at any time that suits, as many times as one wishes. But, this comes at the expense of the full day's coverage, which has been whisked away behind a pay-wall. After England's eventual triumph in the one day World Cup, I took the trouble to pen a letter to the England and Wales Cricket Board; even got a reply requesting that I give the then Chairman a phone call to discuss any grievances. Which I declined to do, he wasn't upon the verge of conversion, but he was being jolly well remunerated! Jolly well!

I was not a spin bowler but I didn't need to be in order to appreciate the range of subtleties incorporated into the spinner's repertoire. The guile the bowler employs when adjusting length, speed of trajectory and width, maybe targeting the footmarks, maybe giving some air. And, when the spinner's a wrist spinner, a leg-break bowler, or someone as skilful as Ravi Ashwin (India), or the sadly missed Shane Warne, or the since retired Graham Swann! One simply cannot be expected to appreciate what's properly behind the wicket that just happened when one has only witnessed the single ball being bowled.

Or a Pollock and Donald spell of fast bowling, Gough and Caddick, Lillie and Thompson, Harmison and Flintoff, Waqar Younis and Wasim Akram, Anderson and Broad. Half-a-dozen random balls cannot even begin to capture the sheer willpower of an innings like Atherton's against the rage of a fired-up Alan Donald- when the umpire has missed an off-the-face caught behind, or Bob Willis's famous rout of the Australians. Wickets and selected shots just doesn't cut it!

Listen to radio coverage- it used to work so wonderfully well with the TV volume tuned down- and one thing that none of the commentators, nor the guests, seems prepared or able to talk about is the loss of one of the nation's key sports to Murdoch's pay-wall. The BBC website- all the highlights!- might boast about a poll to pick the best side ever! How would we know? The very idea illustrates the chosen avenue. I doubt John Edrich would have given much thought to the matter.

There's money to be made, for those on the inside track! The ICC and the ECB have the skimming down pat! In 2020 more money was gambled on cricket than on any other sport, and that was before the introduction of the latest cash cow, The Hundred! Last thing they want is another racism controversy. Very neatly reverse-swept under the carpet! Rocking the boat, who's in and who's out? And not the small leaky ones, more like ocean-going luxury cruisers, these. Exclusive stuff!

Whisper it- the talkSport commentators daren't- but the gambling cartels are raking it in! Why else would we 'need' The Hundred? Bet on anything! Curiously, the gambling CEOs don't, they've invested shrewdly (covertly) in the Commons- 19 Tory and 9 Labour MPs. And, when the fun stops...


talkSport are owned by the Wireless Group, in turn owned by Murdoch's News Corp- all roads lead to formerly Rome, since when bought up by Uncle Rupert! Sports betting in 2021 amounted to $194.63 billion, an annual increase of $173 billion on the previous year. And, we dream to wonder why MPs have not better addressed the nation's booming gambling crisis! Breaths will not be held!

It's not really my ticket but I did listen to England's first (2023) 20Twenty defeat of New Zealand, then tune in for the highlights in the evening. Beggars and all that... It's a very poor substitute for Test Cricket but, the ratios improve, 240 balls trimmed down to an hour(ish) offers a greater spread of the game.

Transforming Cricket.

An enabling paparazzi. A defunct media.

Except... no longer does an hour's highlights actually equate to an hour's highlights. The programme will commence with the customary chat- a selection of insiders will impart scene-setting noise at the outset, and when a spinner's wicket does occur replays will be shown from, yes, square-leg! Where better to fully appreciate the degree of spin? A change of innings and why not wheel out a different set of talking heads. And, don't forget to allocate time for the after-match analysis, so perhaps half-an-hour, maybe, if we're lucky? Toblerone boundaries may injure the occasional fielder but note the extra advertising revenue! Wrestle the coverage away from the BBC and be sure, in the ad. breaks, to notice the happy face of the fictional gambling winner! Why, it's almost as if the editors know nothing about cricket... or gambling. But, they will be very well aware that their's is currently a slice of the largest share of something well in excess of $194.63 billion! No wonder the Test scene is under threat, no wonder free-to-air isn't getting the gig, no wonder the commentators are so well suited up. Just like with used-up former PMs, there's £millions in that pot! Tuck in! Austerity's not for that lot!

Bereft of the cricket we grew to love in our youths, still we would be naive to think the carve-up has yet concluded. Listen to former captain, now Sky-voice-box, Michael Vaughan, and the shadow of 'The Hundred' lurks behind every pause, every intake of breath. The current Sun-comic alternative preference of 'choice'- although not ours'- where upon each and every boundary will be accompanied by Marvel Comic styled graphics- 'Bish!' 'Bash!' 'Bosh!'- wickets will flash with epileptic threat! The Hundred, where the children of the CEOs, the Chairpeople, the Directors, have been let loose with the graphics toys.

In stark contrast to the UK's visible plummeting Cricket populations the International Cricket Council has ballooned to such immense proportions of wealth such as to feeding-frenzy-threaten even itself, or parts thereof. Lord Woolf's long since ignored report into the governance of the International Cricket Council rather proves the point. Woolf recommended the restructuring, mainly financial, of the executive board but, in the scene where the biggest cockroaches feast upon the smaller ones, too late, the even bigger Board of Control for Cricket in India rejected and ignored all proposals. The IPL has bloated to the point where it may now take well in excess of 2 $billion per game! Humanity may have rather tended to consider itself above the lesser species, those that might defecate the nest, or consume younger siblings as a snack, yet sheer greed has shown this not to be the case. India, England and Australia lord the burrow, the smaller Test nations would do well to look elsewhere. The human species feasts openly upon itself, the minnows count the costs.

Like a fast food victim who needs to be winched out through the roof, the ICC has now relocated from Lords, to where the taxes are even fewer and the checks absent altogether, Dubai! Where, curious by-product of wet dishcloth and wasp-chewing bulldog, Giles Clarke and, cleared of match fixing, apparently?, Narayanaswami Shrinivasan may further snuffle up the game. Son-in-law, Gurunath Meiyappan, was (purely coincidentally) found guilty of illegal betting. No relation, Shanthakumaran Sreesanth, was banned for life for spot-fixing, also coincidentally. But Narayanaswami Shrinivasan was cleared, apparently. No, really!

Silencing fans of Cricket!

Fleecing the addicts!

Bet now! And remember, when the fun stops!

It pretty much already has for many who still remember. And, what's left? Well...

It's just not cricket!

Warning signs! If ever they were needed, or indeed to be heeded- but that would require an actual free media, as opposed to a freed-up billionaire-auctioned media- Giles Clarke began as yet another investment banker- no rhyming pun intended- then on to wines, then pets, then bulk storage. He has had fingers in Adult Learning, the Council of the European Union, Theatre and Disfigurement 'charity' Changing Faces. Currently Clarke is Chairman and controlling shareholder at Westleigh Investments, which dabbles in telecommunications, event catering, gun sports, independent schools software and silicon chips. At Somerset, where he was Chairman (definitely not 'chairperson!'), he worked with gun-toting 'charmer,' now Lord Botham. Promoted up the ladder, to non-executive director of the ECB- where I suspect I once briefly caught up- where he 'negotiated' (negotiated, mind) a four year TV and Radio deal with BSkyB, Five (Radio) and (minimally) the BBC. In 2015 he rose, as so often do certain substances, to President of the ECB. Knighted in 2012, of course he was. He has worked with, now convicted, American financier Allen Stanford, whereupon Kevin Pietersen briefly floated back to the surface. Warning signs indeed! Somewhat larger, decidedly less inclined to interview, immeasurably more wealthy, Clarke latterly appears to have adopted more of the wet dishcloth, marginally less wasp-chewing bulldog. But that's because he's so very far removed from the likes of us, so very shielded from questions that might elicit the wasp-in-the-mouth side.

Like the most exquisite jigsaw puzzle, each and every invertebrate slots precisely into place, onward and upward to incorporate the entire animal kingdom, the living environment, an evolved balance between feasting and being feasted upon...

Violence evolved into a perfect living art-form! And yet...

The most bloated of the globe's Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) seek to misrule it all to their own designs.

Like the most deranged jigsaw imaginable, imperfectly overlaid- because nothing actually fits- in such manner that every tumour bleeds poison into each and every neighbouring mismatched tumour- transport, education, health, medicine, war, international aid, refugees, warfare, welfare, lawfare, environment, energy, utilities, wildlife, housing, employment, food, retirement, entertainment, sport, cricket, inequality, democracy, media, information, technology, etc, etc, etc...

As Giant Jenga, modified in celebration of today's greedaholic, or the most urgent yet conceived 'to do' list, we could bicker as to how to structure the tower. A game for all the family as the planet goes down the drain.
Economy
Climate
Pollution
Crime
Political corruption
Lobbying
Accountability
(Grenfell, Windrush, Media Phone Hacking, Hillsborough, Orgreave) Productivity
Loss of habitat
Roads
Industrial relations
Investment
Gambling
NHS
Dentistry
Mental health
Home insulation
Housing (rental sector)
Housing (mortgages)
Industry
Next pandemic
GDP
Ecology
Diplomatic relations
Media bias
Weaponisation of anti-Semitism
Refugee crisis
Detention of Refugees (UK)
Lawfare
Warfare and the Arms Trade
Air quality
Emergency services
Legacy
Wildlife diversity
Building standards
RAAC
AI


Violence re-imagined unto ugly oblivion!

Greed begets greed, begets greed...

Fractal decay!

Unto Oblivion!

Beware not only the short-pitched bowling!

Now that the reins are entirely in the grasping claws of such shadowy business men as Clarke, sorry Lord Clarke (Rugby School), and Narayanaswami Shrinivasan, I think still at liberty at time of publication, squirrelled away to non-cricketing Dubai, those of us who still recall the glory of Test Cricket, free to air, may wonder at the diminution of the 'lesser' Test Nations. Lift the 'Astroturf' and watch the IPL feasting upon the lesser Test Nations. There are just so many, curiously so wide-eyed, former and current players and commentators with at-least-half-a-handle upon what is happening. But dare they speak out and risk upsetting that lumbering gravy train? For clues, listen to the former Test Players, those most comfortably nestled in the Sky networks, the Hundred Teams. Listen between the words and watch their eyes! Torn or committed? Monetise the players, monetise the fans, and discard the rest. Which is RAAC and which is sound?

For the concerned cricketing onlooker 'Death of a Gentleman' is a must watch documentary. I think that so much of 'society' might be similarly detailed and described. The bloated foreign dictator threat has become something of a dead cat, we should be far more concerned with the bloated dictators currently embedded in every fibre of what we once almost held. Threaten to tip the cart and watch the bloaters react. Why, they might even label you as an anti-Semite!

Massacring true Cricket! Banqueting the Cockroaches!

Ultimately...

It's just not Cricket!

A Fictional Globe

It is said that all governments indulge in propaganda, whether they be the good or the bad ones. So, to simply know that your government lies to its population does not necessarily mark it down as being a bad one. But seriously, should this ever be considered a reasonable state of affairs?

Perhaps instead, so as to comply with modern-day western neoliberal expectations, must we now consider the above as if through a tailored prism? Maybe this alone is one highly significant reason that so many younger citizens choose to escape to those other (cyber) places, from whence governments may be banished? The prism of their escapism may serve after a fashion, but we cannot eat there, or hug, or empty our bladders. So instead we are cursed, mostly, to observe reality through the cut-diamond prism of those who we should truly despise. Or fear. Likely both!

The Tory-Brexiteer Daily Mail- now separated through the decades, from its unholy fandom of Hitler's Fascists- and the Mail on Sunday unashamedly espouse the more alt-right factions of the Tory Party. The phone-hacking Daily Express and the Sunday Express, now slipped free of the reins of high-prifile Tory Richard Desmond, fall under the ownership of the mysterious and ginormous Reach plc. Rupert Murdoch's Sun and Sunday Sun fall under the massive umbrella of News UK Independent. This unholy trinity of falsehood make up a significant bulk of the UK's tabloid sales. All are unashamedly Tory supporting. These 'news' outlets have no interest in pulling back the curtain.

Pretending greater respectability, under the guise of broadsheet or recent-broadsheet, are the Daily and Sunday Telegraphs, both owned by the Tory Brexiteer Sir Frederick Hugh Barclay, as is the alt-right comic, The Spectator, effectively through a 'tax-conscious' Jersey Company, Press Holdings. The Times and the Sunday Times reside within the mega-media-group, News UK. Here we enter the dark world view of Rupert Murdoch- if we care to turn over further stones here also resides arch-phone hacker (CEO) Rebekah Brooks. Again, both 'collectives' routinely align themselves at the right-hand corner of the UK's increasingly undemocratic Conservative Party. The landscape may well have been seeded with more florid vocabulary but the search for truth is likely to prove just as barren.

The Financial Times terms itself as liberal-leaning, owned by the Japanese 'holding company,' Nikkei. The Daily Mirror defines itself as a Labour-aligned news outlet, curiously owned by the same umbrella group as the Daily and Sunday Express, Reach plc. The Guardian and the Observer, effectively one and the same news outlet, is now owned by the Guardian Media Group, or the Scott Trust, which became a limited company in 2008. The paper's glory days rather came to an abrupt stop with the resignation of Alan Rusbridger in 2015. Prior to this it could rightly lay serious claim to being amongst the best of the UK's somewhat meagre pool of genuine investigative journalists. Sadly, with the rise of a certain Jonathan Freedland- he cannot act alone- the paper's trajectory has done a full 180! The Independent, which now espouses more Liberalism than its former Labour 'boasts,' is owned by a conglomerate of wealthy business types: the Russian Lord Evgeny Lebedev (dubious honours care of Boris Johnson), Sultan Muhammad Abuljadayel and Justin Byam Shaw. Quite naturally, the truths we are afforded must first satisfy the whims of this elite.

I think it would be only fair to suggest that, if one were ever hopeful of unearthing anything approaching honest and well-sourced investigative journalism amongst the corporate media, the latter group would be the most likely place to start digging! But first one should thoroughly research the outlet's ownership and set one's expectations low. And, unless one is searching also historically, say prior to the departure of Rusbridger, one might save some time by avoiding the Guardian or the Observer.

Of course, there is also the post-glorious BBC to keep any transgressor upon his or her toes! We reference specifically the BBC here because it is the BBC, a public service broadcaster, that is to say, 'in the service of the public! The BBC's recently (2008) appointed director-general is one Timothy Douglas Davie. Davie stood for election as a Conservative councillor for Hammersmith in 1993 and was the deputy chairperson of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative party in the same decade. So, no conflicts there then! The Corporation's political editor, since 2015, has been one Laura Kuenssberg. Kuenssberg curiously identifies herself as a journalist. In her given role she has mastered the art of corner-cutting the BBC's formerly-honourable tradition of news 'verification via two independent sources.' Perhaps these days more accurately we should think of her as a retweeter. Such niceties as verification do not really feature in her 'journalistic code.' Entirely as does her ITV 'colleague,' Robert Peston, these days Kuenssberg sits at the forefront of 'breaking retweets,' comfortably inside the exclusive Commons circle of rogues. She may be required to seriously self-censor, but she's mighty quick on the draw, backed up pseudo-admirably by the likes of Andrew Marr, and formerly by Andrew Neil. When I used to get out more those I met in foreign climes would cite the BBC as being a global news role model! I wonder if those people would feel the same in 2021?

One could pretend to wonder quite what the thought processes were at the Monopolies Commission when 'GB News'- Andrew Neil's new misinformation factory- and Murdoch's 'News UK TV' were both ushered so cursorily past the panel. Maybe they'd identified a gap in the market for a couple of alt-Conservative units? Andrew Neil would have it that the BBC is far too left wing. In a far from candid assessment of his values, he regards himself as eminently reasonable. The significant chunk of his pseudo-journalistic trajectory has been as the behest of Murdoch. From his non-scientific background he has espoused climate-change-denial. And there in a nutshell, right there, is what we should regard as a telegraphed warning?

The UK's MSM or perhaps the corporate media, at its best, selectively reports, ostensibly, for the UK market. That is to say, it reports on behalf of the market, that part of the market by which it is owned. Although it is not really often openly discussed, it must be recognised as having a particular vested interest at home. But, in these times of increasingly international commerce it might also be recognised as having significant interests beyond our shores. Here the lines become far more variable. Variably and often conveniently blurred!

Ranging widely between 'occasionally' and 'frequently,' heavily dependant upon the nation in question, it may appear as if our 'more liberal' news outlets, specifically those that do not self-identify as 'politically Conservative,' may be 'better' given to the 'honest' reporting of foreign news events than they are to the 'honest' reporting of home news. Over there, upon distant shores, we are (sometimes) shown the world as it 'more truly' is, tooth and claw! Of course, anyone with even half an eye upon the current international Palestinian and Israeli news, will realise that this is most definitely not the case with all other nations. More's the pity! Such overseas news as this may often be presented as 'complicated,' but really it isn't! Or not in the manner suggested. Often it's only 'complicated' through the given fact that there may be a century of falsehood to unpick, prior to addressing the current situation, that and the given convenience of requiring such a label as 'complicated,' behind which to hide the atrocities.

Within the BBC and within the Guardian one is certainly never permitted to hint that anti-Semitism has been weaponised. Anyone who has troubled to run a cursory eye over the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism- more so the 11 illustrations, 7 of which equate criticism of an increasingly apartheid Israel state with anti-Semitic comment- cannot help but recognise the duplicity of the words. Kenneth Stern, the man who drafted the original document, has argued that it is no longer fit for purpose. Almost nothing has so 'admirably' demonstrated this to be the case than has the weaponisation by Sir Keir (Keith) Starmer, given free rein by a corporate media to deplete the Labour Party of any remaining semblance of purpose (socialism). The ultimate statesman, Nelson Mandela, was seldom driven to greater ire than when he was required to address the issue of Israel's treatment of the oppressed Palestinians. Gandhi himself was an anti-Zionist! Both these individuals would be cast into the wilderness by today's values!

But, if the means of information dispersal has been bought and filleted then it speaks with the words it is given. No longer is it required to search out those inconvenient truths! No longer is it expected to unearth those awkward facts! We may well shrug our shoulders and sigh. If we are 'older' likely we have long since written off much of the laughingly termed 'free press,' perhaps also we will have witnessed just too many of those 'Fiona-Bruce-Andrew-Marr-John Humphries-Emma-Barnett-John-Ware-BBC' moments to have swallowed the Andrew Neil-"Lefty" guff! But, medical journals too- the British Medical Journal- surely not? One may have to dig a little deeper but, without proper and free independent investigative journalism, one shouldn't be that surprised. In order to get through to the roots of the following example of 'self-censoring,' albeit 'lobbied self-censoring,' one might want to access the link provided by the fourth comment, which helpfully provides access to the original uncensored letter (at the time of posting). Most people will be oblivious to this sort of propaganda; very few have the energy, the time or the determination to dig!

So, what of the Labour Party, those warriors of the oppressed? What of their battle to cut through the injustice and to better inform the world? John Mann (Labour MP and ardent Zionist) was filmed shouting at Ken Livingstone, permitted (by the corporate media) so to do. What are the chances of those cameras having been there? Of course neither Mann nor corporate media was there to properly investigate the finer nuances of any truth. John Mann elevated to the House of Lords by Tory PM Boris Johnson, Advisor to the current Tory Government on anti-Semitism. What are the chances of that? No need to do the research, Lord Mann, somebody else will be pulling those strings! Expenses scammer Ian Austin (Labour MP and Labour Friend of Israel) filmed stating that voters should support the Tories at the 2019 General Election, elevated to the Lords by Boris Johnson. What are the chances of that? Massive arms to Saudi Arabia supporting John Woodcock (investigated Labour MP and Labour Friend of Israel), endorsing the Tories at the 2019 General Election, elevated to the Lords as Tory Government Advisor on Violence and Disruption, by Boris Johnson. What are the chances of that? Obviously he won't be required to 'investigate' the uncomfortable truth of the death, destruction, 'violence and disruption' of those Saudi weapons upon the people of Yemen. Rabid huntsfan and Brexiteer Kate Hoey (Labour MP), friend of Farage, elevated to the Lords by PM Johnson. What are the chances of that? Sir Kier (Keith) Starmer, busy dismantling the labour contingent of the Labour Party. The BBC, the Guardian and the corporate Media, in general, almost without voice on the validity of Labour expulsions. What are the chances of that? Where next for Starmer? Clearly he won't be leading a gutted Labour Party to any kind of election victory. But, on a personal level, could that be the House of Lords beckoning yet again?

Why, it's almost as if all those former Labour MPs have far better served their chosen cause by simply pretending to espouse Labour values? They'd have vanished into the deep blue fug inside that swamp of their own ilk. In future, we should be prepared to look more closely for the conflicting affiliations, within those politicians with whom we 'choose' to invest our vote? Look rather for that which conflicts!

If we believe the BBC and the corporate media we should take it as gospel that the Labour Party, certainly the BBC, take anti-Semitism very seriously. Wasn't it Deputy Angela Raynor herself who announced to the world that, 'the party would suspend thousands and thousands,' if that's what it would take? Certainly that was a great many more than the EHRC report into anti-Semitism found, some thousands and nine-hundred and ninety-eight more... if one is prepared to read the text rather than to passively permit the corporate media to misdirect it upon our behalf.

Author and wordsmith Michael Rosen almost died during the worst days of the Covid pandemic. We can't even know officially what it was that nearly killed him because he was still in an induced coma more than 28 days after a first positive diagnosis of the virus. Fortunately for us all the coroner was spared the dilemma of quite what to put upon his death certificate. Such is life upon the fictional globe! Anyway, that same Michael Rosen was 'yet another' victim of those vile Labour anti-Semites, when it was found that his children's novel, 'We're Going on a Bear Hunt,' was doctored in a publicity shot of Jeremy Corbyn reading to some school children. A vile anti-Semite had superimposed, 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,' upon the cover. Certain expulsion! Or so one could be forgiven for believing.

For reasons best known to the BBC the tweeter of the image has not been named. For reasons better known to the leadership of the Labour Party this university lecturer and Director of Labour Against anti-Semitism, one Dr Pete Newbon, cannot be named or disciplined. For reasons better understood by the Jewish Chronicle- example of the rag's intent here- and Hope not Hate these vociferous defenders of their faith have reasoned that it is best not to even acknowledge that such an incident has taken place. From the far more honourable perspective of understanding the nuances of language, Michael Rosen has not even requested that the university dismiss the offending lecturer, yet it has not prevented certain factions (again) labelling him as 'the wrong kind of Jew!' He's reasonably famous, so is he worthy of a news story, BBC?

With the reporting of news generally perhaps it is a perception borne of (my) age but still it is a perception of nationally embraced indifference! Observing the whirls of litter that frequently punctuate any short or lengthy drive one can so easily assume that too many individuals have become indifferent. Observing the growing numbers of speeding scooters weaving through our busy pavements one can so easily assume that there is an air of indifference. The local councils that have permitted this invasion? Indifferent, eyes instead transfixed by the money! Whether passively accepted or else embraced, indifference appears to be the current mode of convenience.

Just as people- just enough of them to serve- have become indifferent to open corruption. Indifferent to the increasingly blatant abuses of power by our so-termed politicians. Not all of them, maybe, but far too many to enable any sort of democratic accountability. Indifferent to the mistreatment of the nation's NHS and its Covid-depleted staff. Indifferent to the blatant nepotism that runs, end to end, through our society. Indifferent to poverty! Indifferent to inequality! Indifferent to slum housing! Indifferent to homelessness! Indifferent to growing food-bank use! Indifferent to it all! Not everyone, but enough to serve. Until the affects ever become personal, of course! To dance so dextrously, around this narrative, around the facts, requires a spinelessly compliant corporate media.

Not so long ago we watched on as over seventy people burned to a crisp in a residential tower block. Yet, within a few months, there was already a growing wider-indifference to the selectively reported fact that the inquiry would be rigged! How many towers in the UK have yet to be modified so as not to fall into the very same and 'cheapest option' category, or to become the next potential human furnace?

Many of those who are culpable, complicit, are dying in comfortable old age, inequality writ large! Of course the Grenfell Inquiry isn't armed to identify those people. Which ministers were complicit in legislating so that the panels that other countries would not deploy could still be deemed fine for the UK, some of the UK? Who lobbied to have the red tape removed? Who cut those corners and consequently the costs? And so it will be with the massive chumocracy that has made hay during this pandemic. All the usual boots duly filled!

Food banks have proliferated, poverty is has not been just the preserve of those foreign shores for decades now. So, the pretence that something will be done has been shiny-wrapped in the term, 'levelling up.' Never mind that it means nothing, it doesn't need to, there's nobody to properly report upon the fact. If one wishes to better understand the grasp that this government has upon inequality listen to them gleefully announcing that, ' nobody in the country should be expected to have to pay more than (a paltry) extra £55 a month, in order to have their home made safe.' So, when they talk about 'levelling up' are they, at some subliminal level, referencing the direction of those potential future flames?

Earlier in 2021 a hundred-year-old man who, armed to the teeth, liked nothing better than to help deplete the planet of some of its alternative species of larger mammals, or to blast holes into some of the globe's rarer birdlife, died in unimaginable luxury, surrounded by unimaginable wealth and privilege. If one were a tad slow with the TV remote one might be forgiven for having seen and observed him sycophantically being elevated as someone of almost godly talents and insight. That the citizens of the UK should unquestioningly revere the ground upon which treads the royal foot, that it should regard as fair play the divvying up of our landmass such that the remarkably extended royal family regards all the best bits as its private playgrounds, whereupon so many of those creatures are routinely slaughtered, is surely bizarre beyond fathoming! The idea that, at some time in a dim and doctored past, one heavily armoured ego fought another heavily armoured ego in order to determine who should henceforth regard the UK as personal possession seems more akin to a fictional globe than to any semblance of reality!

Allegra Stratton, for those who do not know and until very recently, held the role of Downing Street Press Secretary. Now, if we accept (and we should) that such a role is likely to involve an element of remodelling of the news, surely it is also reasonable to acknowledge that such a character should never be entrusted with the conveyance of undoctored fact? Instead consider, she has formerly worked for the Times, the New Statesman, the Independent and the Guardian newspapers. In 2012 she was the political editor of the BBC's Newsnight. In 2015 she left the BBC to join ITV News, as national editor, also co-presenting Peston on Sunday. Not until 2020 does she start in a role in which one would expect her political allegiances to emerge, before moving on to Downing Street Press Secretary. Just one glimpse at her alt-right tendencies, when she misrepresented and humiliated a single working mother as an unemployed (yet another 'undeserving') benefits claimant (Newsnight 2012) should really have served as due warning that Allegra could not be entrusted with the conveyance of actual news. Alas, her deep blue affiliations merely seem to have opened yet grander doors! Currently she is 'entrusted' with the role of spokesperson for the COP26 conference in Glasgow. 'Climate change!' Isn't that far too serious to be ceremonially wrapped up in falsehood? Where are the alarm bells? Where are the journalists?

I am reminded of a 2016 interview that the BBC's Andrew Marr conducted with Noam Chomsky, where Chomsky laid out for the interviewer the reality that the interview would more than likely be being conducted by somebody else entirely if not for the fact that Marr was prepared to routinely operate with a large slice of 'self censorship.' There has been no evidence to suggest that Marr has opted for journalism over self-censorship in the intervening years. It's an uncomfortable truth to swallow, to be confronted with the understanding that those journalists who best exercise the 'correct' degrees of self censorship are the ones who are permitted to rise to the 'top,' insight into Andrew Neil's pseudo-belligerence, if not so much his current trajectory!

Given the glut of crises bearing down upon the planet it is surely almost impossible to select which is most urgently in need of championing. But, if it was possible, I think it more than likely that we'd find ourselves on the opposite side of the barricades to the machine of the UK state.

The UK has shipped over £400 millions in arms to Israel since 2015- Hell, those are UK-crafted weapons being used to flatten Gaza and to kill innocent Palestinians and to destroy their homes and livelihoods, the colonial-settler's response to the sporadic resistance of the oppressed- and yet still the UK's corporate media would have us believe that there is some sort of 'war' going on. The United Nations recognises the inherent right of a colonised people to defend itself from an occupier and yet, according to the Board of Deputies and other currently Zionist organisations, one should not be permitted make the observation that much of the land that is now termed 'Israel' has become so at the wrong end of a loaded gun. In 1948, 1956 and 1967, yet again, Israel has used its military might to invade and to grab huge swathes of Palestinian lands, still regarded as an illegal occupation in the eyes of the UN and much of the world. Israeli incursions have barely stopped ever since. Every time yet more Palestinian homes are bulldozed for the colonisers, or Palestinian lands are bombarded by US and UK arms- Israel 'defending' itself from the land it invaded?- only if absolutely-cornered and relentlessly-pressurised, for long enough, will the corporate media deign to misrepresent the troubles at all.

The hyper-one-sided bloodshed may be relayed to the UK population as 'complicated' Middle Eastern issues,' or 'a war!' Hezbollah will be routinely written up as the terrorists, whilst the Israeli Defence Force as 'driven to retaliation' or 'conducting reprisals.' The fictional globe can so often be a very bloody one, particularly in the Palestinian Homelands. In recent days even the Guardian has found itself upon awkward grounds and yet it still pastes over the facts with misapplied labels like 'War!' 'retaliation' or 'reprisals.' Likely many of the complicit journalists are uncomfortable with the degrees of self-censorship required. The alternatives are that somebody else entirely may be found to pen those column inches!

When we're discussing arms sales it's really not as simple as Britain's economic standing in the global economy in 'the immediate'! There are long-term consequences, as with slavery there are not two sides to this issue. The military, which includes the police, are not simply uniformed citizens of the same community as are we. Military contact points and displays are not benign, armistices day is no longer about the veterans of World Wars One and Two, although the corporate media would have us believe so. Our poppies are no longer providing for those who fought in black and white footage, in the trenches of a century ago. I just so happened to switch on to the BBC's 'Sewing Bee' on the 19th May, not really my choice, and very soon I changed channels to something else- I no longer recall what. But, before I did so, I chanced to catch the programme's theme, to refashion army surplus clothing into civilian every-day items, military camouflage upon the high street. It was innocently watched by many, no doubt, but seriously! Blurring or softening the lines between military tool of the state and that of an unquestioning civilian population?

Priti Patel and her tabloid following may hate those refugees: maybe, in the interests of honesty, we should step back for a moment's reflection to consider, which nation had a very major hand in creating them in the first place?

Whether it be the Hillsborough cover-up or maybe the latest reported major miscarriage of justice, the postmasters IT dispute with the Post Office, there is just such a gulf widening between the real and the fictional globe! As it happened, and in real time, it was possible to watch the postmasters being wrongly accused and wrongly imprisoned, as the first accusations were being made, and to sense that something highly unjust was taking place before our eyes. Even now the wheels of the system that was so quick to condemn appear to have slowed to a virtual stop, rather than to swiftly redress this miscarriage of justice for those that have not since died! How much longer for the Grenfell's deceased and displaced? How much longer for the miners of Orgreave? Maybe our great-great-grandchildren will one day learn the depth of the cover-up concerning the predator that was Jimmy Savile *. Maybe, in the interests of not whitewashing history, we should have another statue erected to the man, perhaps during one of the many touching moments of comradery with Mrs T? Obviously we'd also need a small and unobtrusive plaque, just a small covering note, as 'twere, something easily hidden, so as not to compromise the aspect.

In a moment of high drama, journalist-blogger Roman Protasevich was recently abducted from an illegally diverted aircraft, by Belarusian KGB agents. Quite rightly, the western corporate media were all over it like a rash, 'holding truth to power!' Journalism! We can't have unaccountable governments just making it up as they see fit! But, hold on, weren't these same journalists all falling into obedient line recently, when it appeared to those with half an eye to see that the United States was gearing up to do much the same thing, with the complicit help of the UK? Even the filleted Guardian, and the BBC, were preparing to pretend that there wasn't a time when the same Guardian 'newspaper' was happily championing the very same Julian Assange? Surely it must be a remarkably Orwellian western world that can so readily rise up in outrage over one incident, whilst so wilfully pretending that the greater crime isn't taking place at one and the same moment in time! Both are clear instances of extraordinary rendition, albeit one still pending. If in doubt ask Jack Straw or Tony Blair, at least get a quote from two men who should know better than most. The United Nations and the ECJ have stated that Assange should immediately be reunited with his freedom, why the corporate media silence?

Or the 264 page 'Sewel Commission' on race and ethnic disparities, commissioned by PM Johnson? Tony Sewel himself, hand-picked by the Prime Minister- Sewel, who's own 'helpful' opinions were already in the public domain? Government marks its own homework! As many more open lecturers and teaching staff have likely relayed to their pupils, "If you're going to cheat don't get caught!"

If only the UK Government could somehow mesh 'our' military and 'our' governmental manoeuvrings? Under the 'watch' of a spineless corporate media it might just slip past enough of the population? Hell, we already know that our PM and our various ministers of state habitually and routinely lie to the electorate, what's the fuss? It's slowly but surely becoming almost white noise now. Enter Lord Geidt, appointed by Johnson, with a list of military honours as long as your arm, formerly the queen's own Private Secretary, 'alleged' former military clean up man. Will it wash? Will it even matter?

Hancock, who, as Health Secretary, did award NHS contracts to his own sister, who did have a 15% interest in one of the companies (shredding documents!), was adjudged guilty of a "minor technical breach." A curious rewording of something, which might formerly have been regarded as corruption and a sacking offense! Lord Geidt will not be taking "any further action," Geidt said that the 'good' name of Hancock had not been damaged, it should in no way "impugn" Mr Hancock's 'good name.' I think we'll be the judge of that! He elaborated that although there had been 'no conflict of interest,' there was a 'danger' that it could have 'looked like one.' Are we now completely through the looking glass?

PM Johnson, who did spend a prince's ransom of magic money upon refurbishing his official Downing Street flat, without officially bothering to care how it was to be paid for, Lord Geidt has declared to have acted "unwisely." Again he was happy that 'no reasonably perceived conflict' had arisen, and that the ministerial code had not been broken. Geidt said that Johnson knew 'nothing' of the payments made by Tory peer David Brownlow, and who are we to question such military wisdom? But, before we close, just for a moment consider what the UK's corporate media would be penning, if this had happened in any Central African or Central American Republic.

It would seem that the 'protective ring' that Matt Hancock, Health Minister, had thrown up, formerly around care homes, has finally and very belatedly begun to work its magic.

Jimmy Savile comment observed care of Stewart Lee.

The English Fielding!

I'm 'sure' that we've all been glued to our TVs, following the England Cricket Team's trials and tribulations during the non-knockout stages of the Home Cricket World Cup. I know that I have. Well, sort of... in so far as it's been possible... but mostly not!

Of course, as many disillusioned fans will already have mourned, and although we are currently in the throes of a home World Cup citing England as the tournament's questionable favourites, one is not permitted to properly watch this international event, unless one subscribes to Sky TV. It barely needs mention that all genuine cricket fans- those currently residing in the UK- should now hold the International Cricket Council and the UK's colluding government in the utmost of contempt for this unprecedented betrayal of the nation's cricket lovers. It takes little imagination to consider quite how the denial of viewing rights to English football fans would be received were this the men's Football World Cup, during either a home or an overseas tournament!

But Sky, and most likely those of the ilk of Jeremy Hunt, have already 'pocketed' the backhanders or otherwise reaped the rewards bestowed by those mighty betting cartels, and cricket viewing is strictly now only available on a pay-to-view basis. That is to write that those responsible for this reprehensible state of affairs have reaped rewards that have thus far been denied to many/most of the rest of the us.



Through one of two probably unavoidable concessions, something to do with this being a home world cup maybe, Channel 4 have been showing highlights in the wee small hours, well after the game's known conclusion, the sort of highlights whereby a strategic-ebbing-and-flowing whole-day contest is reduced to well under an hour's 'play,' the sort whereby well-crafted spin bowling replays are shown from some bizarrely off-set camera angles- invariably not from behind the bowler's arm, the sort that gets away with shaving away approaching 90% of the game?  One might easily be forgiven for considering it entirely impossible to capture even the merest semblance of a feel for the great game under such circumstances.

Of note, and because this is a home world cup, it has also been made possible to listen to ball-by-ball commentary via BBC Radio 5LX. Normally, during home or away Tests or ODIs, even this reluctantly conceded offering is jealously guarded as the wider Sky-cartel's interests (TalkSport) has recently stolen also the rights to this service.



In the unlikely event of England perhaps winning this tournament, will the open-top bus celebrations also be covered exclusively by Sky TV? Or will the then government and the BBC be looking to access the glitz, in order to distract from further and other non-related ongoing national injustices, maybe something to do with Grenfell or Windrush or the numbers of homeless people dying upon our streets? Should the BBC eventually report any related bus-top celebrations maybe whole communities within the capital will be left wondering quite what the blazes is going on!

The wonder is that this sort of theft, because that's effectively what it is, is not being more openly discussed... maybe upon the BBC?

And this is where, unlike the England Team's inconsistent performances to date, the fielding has been truly sublime!  One might even be forgiven for not having noticed the actions of those careful hands, so seamless is their operation.



The BBC Radio 5LX commentary, which continues to be of the very best quality, as many long-term fans will already know, actually offers easily the most practical of all the options. It is anyway often impractical to view the entirety of many games, whereas listening to every ball alongside the ongoing analysis and banter can usually be comfortably worked into and around many of the day's other chores. Longer sessions may be watched, as and when desired, or one may rush to the screen upon the fall of a wicket or another such thrill! In an ideal world the discerning cricket fan should, unless otherwise detained, always have live international cricket on the TV, inferior TV commentary muted, instead ball-by-ball Test Match Special commentary keeping said fan fully abreast of the state of play. If it should transpire that there is such a place as heaven then I'm reasonably confident that this state of affairs substitutes a very close approximation. But we do not currently operate a 'heaven on earth' approach in the sporting realms of cricket, do we? Or, for that matter, in any other aspects of life in sunny England!

The days of Henry Blofeld, John Arlott, Christopher Martin-Jenkins and the unsurpassable Brian Johnston may well be behind us and the younger generation of commentators may almost perfectly have stepped up to the plate, but all of this is going to be of precious little benefit if thieving Sky still retains absolute control of the whole damned package! And is there any real concern that this sport may be effectively lost to a generation of fans, or are 'we' all just troughing to the max until it becomes beyond 'feasible' to continue to pretend that the gambling cartels are just there for the benefit of a casual occasional flutter?



As Boycott never tires of reminding us, old Agnew- somewhat of an intergenerational bridge in terms of commentary- was slightly uncomfortable as a test cricketer, strictly a bowler and, in so far as we can judge from his short test career, somewhat lacking in penetration. But since his conversion to commentating his fielding has been quite impeccable! Never a dropped ball! If any lunchtime guest should so much as hint at the lack of international cricket currently being free-to-air-programmed for the general public he will swoop down and field the ball before one has barely noticed it having been played. Snaffled and pocketed... seamlessly. And, in so far as his own conscience is concerned, well, there we have that old 'lack of penetration' again coming to the fore. Politely he will not commit to comment, politely he will evade the subject. A tidy fielder, uncontroversial! Jonathan may prepare a delightful afterthought upon the day's play, in the form of a podcast, but this is really of little more value than tomorrow's newspapers.

Branching out somewhat, into the outfield, those old enough to remember will perhaps recall that many faces and voices dotted far-and-wide across the current BBC (and beyond) were formerly Tory MPs. They may present or co-present all manner of interesting programmes, and a few more questionable ones ('Anne Widdecombe Versus,' ITV), or perhaps appear in the highly dubious role of 'celebrity.' There is Michael Portillo, there is Matthew Parris, there is Giles Brandreth, there is Anne Widdecombe, there is Neil and especially Christine Hamilton, there is Edwina Curry, there would be a great many more if so many of them hadn't been sent to the House of Lords in order to sleep it off on a generous expenses account. And then there is Andrew Neil (host of 'The Daily Politics' BBC2) and George Osborne (editor of the Evening Standard) and Piers Morgan (host of 'Good Morning Britain' ITV1), partiality spread thick and far! Miles Jupp (host of the 'News Quiz,' BBC R4) was quietly doing a more than passable job at deep square, before a slight tear of maybe conscience brought about a sudden and unexpected period of convalescence. Several of them perhaps mediocre or even passable amateur cricketers in their time, but all now given essentially to the darker art of fielding.



It is truly surprising that England do not win more of these international affairs, so packed is the in-and-outfield with these characters.

John Humphrys (BBC) has been fielding point since the early 1980s, Laura Kuenssberg (BBC) recently brought in to the slip cordon alongside Andrew Marr (BBC). These high-profile characters, key positions, are likely to take the majority of the catches, but credit also please to those who tidy up along the boundary ropes, the Matt Bakers (BBC), the Graeme Nortons (BBC), I would 'say' irrepressible but they're not, are they? Tidy fielders, but otherwise thoroughly repressible.

Yet, rather like one is beginning to wonder if the England Cricket Team have not been slightly overrated, do we think that even the packed outfield of the current English Political Game will ever be quite enough to undertake the immense challenge that lies ahead? Just a hint of the immensity of which was shared with us just the other day ('Our Next Prime Minister' BBC2), woefully patching that huge gap left through the absence of cricket- one would imagine that the remainder will have to be plugged by property programmes, game shows and maybe cookery programmes, reality TV? There it was, the televised debate of the Tory 'hopefuls!' Quite why the whole nation was being foisted with this when barely 70,000 bigots may bother to declare a 'preference,' but there we have it.



We listened to and we watched the Tory leadership contenders trying to dig themselves out- a sticky wicket, another monumental batting collapse- who will be able to place the greater distance between himself and the policies of the last two decades? How will Windrush be dealt with, what about Grenfell, the rise in poverty, the rise in food-bank usage, homelessness, slum landlords, rising hate-crime, inequality, the environment, plastic pollution, the decimation of our wildlife populations, education funding, the covert privatisation of the NHS? Well, it was almost as if none of these chancers had been present throughout those twenty years. Old captain May, watching the 'car-crash' from the pavilion, worrying about her legacy- she needn't, it's pretty much etched in stone (numerous headstones)! "Elect me and I will build a heaven upon this Earth, whereupon all of my children shall thrive." "Sometimes tax-cuts (for the more affluent) actually create wealth," even here Sajid Javid was out of his depth?

And we put them in yet again? We're going to need to pack that outfield!

All Trumped Up!

Or, maybe it is more 'All Trumped over?'

I can still vaguely recall- the Daily Mail pages of my parents breakfast table- an imagined yawning divide between life in the UK and that of the US of A. Five shillings was still just occasionally referred to as 'a dollar,' and the UK had, in those more aspirational times, recently voted to join the Common Market.

America, or more precisely the United States of America, was then a very different type of place, a place to be dipped in to- so as to avoid the sugar rush- a place to be glimpsed through the silver screen, a place to be talked about in jealous moderation, before again docking and then getting on with the more-down-to-earth world of everyday life.

Footfall One

In the days of my youth the four-dollars-to-the-pound exchange rate had, in reality, already long departed. During the immediate post WWII years, through an element far more of iron fist than of slight of hand, the Americans had effectively orchestrated one of the UK's worst financial crises. The 'global conflict had not helped, or perhaps it had. The net result was that, by the 1970s, the exchange rate was closer to $2.50 than four, although the slang of a 'dollar' still sometimes presided. But the USA had, it seems, already absorbed the valuable lesson that battles, even those of the domestic nature (and of many flavours), didn't necessarily need to be fought in one's own backyard.

Considering the iron grip that our erstwhile 'allies' had upon the nation it's a wonder that anything even vaguely American didn't come with some sort of fluorescent toxicity label. And yet still the UK permitted the US to blitz our screens with glitzy images of 'the better life,' often repackaging and selling back to the UK even its own role in WWII. Of course, now Hollywood owns outright the copyright to this narrative and, by default, to the widely perceived history of the post war years. In generations to come maybe the 'facts' of that second global conflict will have been thoroughly rehashed, in order to sit the good ol' US of A at the seat of God-given supremacy? Enough films, enough biographies, enough closed libraries and who knows, the Sky's the limit?

It can have come as no real surprise to the US, that the UK voted so overwhelmingly in favour of joining the Common Market (1973). At least one of those puppet strings was duly, albeit temporarily, severed! But maybe we should have employed sharper and more industrial scissors. Probably, we should have cauterised the wound!

Mull

John Wayne, a man who 'obligingly' stabbed in the back even many of his own former colleagues- I doubt he had any true friends- almost haunted our Sunday afternoon TV screens. He had named virtually all of his fellow Western actors as "communist sympathisers," during the worst days of the McCarthyite purges of Hollywood. Consequently, all of those far-superior actors were blacklisted and Mr Wayne's face became ever-more prominent upon the screens.

Marvel and DC super-hero comics, although still somewhat embryonic in the late sixties UK market, had begun to creep onto the shelves. Even the superhumans preferred to spend their lives in the States, where a driven Bruce Wayne might become a billionaire industrialist (Batman in Gotham City), or Tony Stark a wealthy business magnate (Iron Man), or the mega-patriotic Steve Rogers (Captain America) might both assist ol' Senator McCarthy in his anti-commie-assault whilst, if not literally rewriting chunks of WWII, then at least paving the way 'forward' in this regard. It may have been mere fiction but, Christ, how far from the real New World could this sparkling multiplicity of metropolises honestly be? Even the names were evocative! The Golden Gate Bridge, sunny California, flower-wearing San Francisco, good ol' Texas (don't mention the assassination!)? Gasoline  at tuppence a gallon, was it? Disney, MacDonald, Land O' The Free!

Somebody said to me around that time, "Look to America today to see what will become of the UK 'tomorrow.'" We didn't need to dwell upon the fact that many within the US population couldn't, even then, access proper health care. The US was thought to be aspirational, cleverly marketed as such.

Owning a gun was a mark of freedom, wasn't it? Healthcare was way better, if one worked hard enough and could actually afford it. Those yellow taxis were far more colourful than our rather drab black efforts. All that wonderful music, that which wasn't anyway stolen from the UK. Just hop on a Greyhound bus and the world was your oyster, or was it lobster... a big chunk of it anyway!

Footfall Two

We were peeking at the splendours of Ancient Greece from a mud hut in the corner of a damp forest clearing.

In the UK, the poor man of Europe, all we had was a free-at-point-of-delivery NHS, what's to like? Barely out of rationing? We weren't even permitted to own our very own guns! Council homes, damn them, were blighting the chances of any entrepreneurial and budding developers. Wherever were we expected to get our share of 'Candy Mountain' rough sleepers from? University grants were still being dolled out to just about anyone with the right kind of qualifications and abilities, it was like the dark ages, whereas just across The Pond?

Thatcher happened in the 1980s and by the early 1990s the UK had grasped those bootlaces and... well, pretty much hanged itself! The Military, sorry the curiously unmarked police force, had 'gently' disarmed the unions. Kid gloves? Or was it kid slippers? Boots? The nation's utilities were privatised- and then swiftly renationalised by any-other-government-except our own. Council homes went under the hammer of progress and we haven't looked back since.

Mum always swore that newspapers were excellent for cleaning (up) windows, she omitted to mention that they were also pretty good at clearing up state violence. Handy tip!

The promise hasn't quite come home to roost, but we're getting there, "Look to America... "

So we should, look to America that is. Look across The Pond and 'ahead,' to see what's in store for our children and our grandchildren and, should we get so far...

Even the 'painting' of Thatcher, as some kind of very-worse-kind-of-dragon-manifest- which she absolutely was- has served to cleverly wrong-foot the nation. Hiding behind that grotesque image and far-reaching icy shadow has merely enabled the pillaging to morph and to continue. 'Neoliberal,' it's still the case that many in the UK haven't even now fathomed the truer meaning of the term? The new liberal revolution, whereby everything will be liberated, set free! Even here the imagery is almost, well, liberating- Liberals, aren't they the lot who are given to questioning the worst of Conservative excesses? Now that it's rather too late it seems highly plausible that this newer and more twisted use of the term 'liberal' has not been a mere chance application. Now we are perhaps just beginning, some of us, to realise that it's all simply been a repackaging exercise, marketing in it's purest form yet!

Commerce

The future's always going to remain uncertain, it's always going to remain, by definition, in the future, outside of the purely theoretical, of course it is. I don't suppose that many of Thatcher's speculators will have factored in plastic pollution, or those huge forest fires, or potential seismic events- maybe global warming?- but we should bank upon some of them having done so. The thing about serious money is that it affords serious time, and with serious time comes the ability to contemplate and to speculate upon projection, or upon various potential projections. I doubt those in the woman's think tanks, any of them, will have been able to predict quite where we are at now. But they will have had the money and the time with which to speculate. And they'll have had the money and the marketing with which to nudge the country in the direction of their own choosing.

So, "Look to America... "

'All Trumped up!' then?

But we're gong to need quite a wide angled lens to do so! The US is already decades ahead of the field, dabbling in other governments, playing roulette with other nations cash, sending in the accountants and the bankers and, if that doesn't work sending in the troops to 'ease' things along. Unveiling the international masterplan, though, it's rather like trying to paint fog! So, we're going to have to look ever so carefully, also to their extracurricular excesses. They're not the only nation doing this, but we're not currently allowed to notice some of the others, without being labelled racist, or more specifically...

At least when the British dabbled we did so in style, and the globe was coloured-in accordingly- this bit and that chunk over there, those are our's! People knew where they stood, the smart uniforms were always on hand to help clarify any misunderstandings.

Of course, the nation (US) with an obsessive thirst for publicly-held guns and gun ownership will have ingested also its fair share of gun crime and violence. But so much the merrier if they've also been able export cartloads of armaments to other parts of the globe. Who'd have thought that so much money could have been invested in (well, essentially) death, whether it be gun crime or military conflict? Any signs of a revival in the UK and the wider UK network? What do we think?

Units

Terrorism and terror... fear? Do we live in a more fearful world? Is fear a consequence, or is it perhaps also increasingly a tool? Would the UK, were it not quite so intent upon selling its own armaments, be rather more outspoken and direct in its condemnation of Saudi Arabia, for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi? Has open assassination become far more of an inconvenient tool than an actual crime, when carried out by certain factions? The 'good' factions? The richer factions!

In the background, ducking currently under the radar of international conflict, migrant refugees, various environmental crises, and Presidential buffoonery and general incompetence, we still have TTIP, wriggling like an eel, morphing and evolving, repackaging itself. The NHS will be liberated, if not wholesale then piece by tiny piece. Given that other European nations appear to have a better grasp on this concept than do 'our lot,' then it is likely that it will be slowly privatised and then renationalised by governments other than our own.

Much of sport may well have gone to the gambling cartels- self-regulation, what like the supermarkets did with plastic packaging?- but have we also noticed that even that simple ad-hoc game of park football or cricket has now fallen under the hammer? "Kick around in the park, sonny? Can I just check your permit?" The fine art of repackaging and reselling specific access to mown grass, right back at us!

Christmas now both contradictorily sustains certain sales, whilst partially consuming other retail? When The Spirit of Christmas graces those retail spreadsheets is there really no longer any room at all for 'The Spirit' part, outside of those seasonal liquor sales?

So, even where this neoliberal thing seems to be sowing the seeds of of its own demise, any viable alternatives are still deemed to be wholly unpalatable, are they? Currently we are being reminded ad nauseam that "the people have spoken," consequences be damned!

In order to sustain neoliberalism we will need to also consume neoliberalism? In the revamped image of Christmas (then) will we have time, in this hectic season- an extra 5% 'free' this year- to notice the high street chrysalis being consumed by the on-line butterfly? 12.5% more plastic that we won't have to worry about until when is it? 

Recyclable? Of course it is, partially, some of it, sort of!

And, if we can push home the zero-hour advantage, maybe we can ease another 14.5% into the pockets of the 1%. Those spreadsheets must be an absolute nightmare to project! Or to justify.

Turnover

"Humanity isn't destroying the natural world. We're changing it. And, in many ways, our changes are creating richer and more vibrant ecosystems," it has been claimed. Yet still this ideology will have to factor in the 50% (60%, 70%?) loss in retail potential, by which I mean the dying natural world. Is this process euphemistically termed, 'squaring the circle?' Something about a glass ceiling? Are envelopes involved... somewhere?

The gambling cartels are hungrily feasting where there's almost nothing left to feast upon! The guns are turning in upon themselves! We're wrapping the globe in plastic! Is this why it's becoming so much more sweaty down here, do we think?

But, just how is it going to be possible to find or to conjure enough stuff for 1% of the people to spend that 40% of global wealth in order to sustain this neoliberal dream? How expensive are cars and yachts going to have to become at that 'top'-end? Will the elites tolerate their own built in obsolescence? Precisely what is it that's going to trickle down to the minions? Is it far more likely that it's going to be some sort of toxic seepage? And what about the 90+% of the population(s) that can't realistically afford to consume 1% of what they actually produce? How are we going to justify another 'top'-end tax cut- always assuming they actually pay any- for those who already have far more than they can possibly imagine? So much so that others are constantly having to 're-imagine' ever more to possess on their behalf's.

Zero-gravity flights? Super-super-yachts? Kill a snow leopard with your very own manicured hands and hand-carved personalised bullet, why not? There're only so many islands to go around- perhaps we could start building new ones- out of plastic? Will that work?

Hair implants? Anus bleaching? Personal sleep manager? Can we interest you in a new smile, whiter implants guaranteed! Flawless quality diamond cutting edge science? I think we can manage that! Something with which to smile at the chap squatting in the doorway? Contour that nose? Contour that fender? Contour that land promontory? Contour that taxable income?

Why would they turn off the lights? They want this stuff to be noticed by others, there simply isn't the time for busy-them to drive/sail/use/see it all for themselves!

Is it neo(liberal)progress, or merely socio(economic)evolution, when those being spat out at the bottom are beginning to utilise the spiralling numbers of defunct properties in order to keep the remaining targeted parks looking fresh? Is there any way that we could start charging, do we think?

So, I think we'll probably have to go with 'All Trumped upon!'

Are we nearly there yet?