baldysblog.co.uk

I don’t normally do this but as it is Sunday, I thought that instead of taking one topic and trying to milk it or work it out, I would tilt at several windmills, briefly.

Minette Marrin who writes in the Sunday Times is often interesting to read but like some other sad hacks this week decided to write nonsense on the topic of the relics of St Thérèse of Lisieux, currently being toured around the UK, so what ? However and as I have already written on this, I will just reprise some comments I wrote in reply to someone else who commented on the same article…

God and Time

Your argument is flawed and nonsensical. Imagine for a moment that you accepted the idea of a Supreme Being; what major difference would there be between Him (?) and us ?

A Supreme Being would be omnipotent and unrestricted by time, all of creation would be simultaneous, we humans would live in a twinkle of God’s eye. For Him, there is no waiting for next week’s episode because he is not time restricted.

You might describe Him “creating the world in 6 days and resting on the seventh” but that is merely a description suitable for time limited human beings isn’t it? How long is a “God Day”, a million or a billion years ? Is there such a thing as a “God Day”, logically, there can’t be can there if He is not limited by time.

Education has really gone down in this country which likely is why Gordon Brown was often touted as an “Intellectual”, still in the Land of the Blind…

The EU – Yet Again

An amusing article concerning the fact that an EU Citizen cannot sue the EU Commission for wrongdoing, this one is worth a read because it contains a “Catch 22” called “standing” – well worth a read: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6841277.ece

Someone wrote in saying that if the UK had been a more enthusiastic participator in the EU, better rules might have been bought into being, an unlikely argument in my opinion given the vested interests of the French, Germans and Brussels. My reply below:

You may or may not be right but the simple fact of the matter is that we are where we are, the EU is broken beyond repair and loved by few in the 27 member states. We in the UK need to exit this mess and the ECHR asap. Being anti-EU is not being anti-European but the EU operates at the lowest common denominator and political deals done behind closed doors.

The worse example of this being the current Fisheries Policy which even the EU admits is a total nonsense and will lead to extinction of fisheries and their associated jobs.

The biggest favour the UK could do is to leave the EU and impose draconian rules (and a Navy to match), to protect the fisheries in British waters. After probably 10 years, it may be possible to start issuing strictly controlled licences so that Europe can enjoy sustainable sea fisheries once again.

Politicians Language

Dominic Lawson who is often an interesting writer wrote a piece about the type of obscure language used by politicians and whilst it is worth a read, it made me think a bit and in the end decide that I didn’t agree with him. However, the proposition was certainly thought provoking. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/dominic_lawson/article6841362.ece

Someone wrote in along the lines of “I have been travelling for 40 years and everybody else speaks better English than the British do…” I had to include a side swipe for this boring old fart…

Language

You are fundamentally wrong in saying that the English language is in any danger, its very vitality and survival is guaranteed by the very sources you mention, other Countries that speak it. Unlike France, we will never need to have an Institution to ‘protect’ our language, like a virus, English is out there in the wild, constantly mutating and reinvigorating itself.

As to the substance of the article, I challenge it. I agree that politicians obscure pretty much most things for most of the time but is that their fault or ours ? Labour won three elections by promising to spend more and more on public services, just what chance would Cameron have had 2 years ago in not saying that he would match Labour spending ?

At that time things appeared to be going well economically to the average punter, “Cuts” would just not have played well. Now the pooh has hit the fan, people are prepared to accept it, politics is the art of the possible, so too today is the language it would appear.

The other factor has been that people are no longer dedicated to one party or another, the principles of Labour or Conservatism, the majority that decide elections are a mass of “special interest groups” often very selfish that reflect their own current personal circumstances, whether they are young, old, bringing up children, first time buyers, live in cities or the countryside, “principles” have given way to current “convenience” and the language of politicians, reflect that, reflect us.

We likely get the politicians and language that we deserve I suspect, as for the politicians, timing is all I would imagine.