Stanislav Petrov

I did say that I'd be avoiding the constantly alarming news, but it's not entirely possible. I've heard the word 'escalation' more in the last three weeks than I have since the early 1980s, and the context in which it's used is maybe even more chilling now than it was then, probably because although I was reasonably well-read about politics and world affairs at the time, I didn't appreciate exactly what was going on. 

Much more recently, I've read a few books about the Cold War tensions that almost resulted in disaster in 1983. With the relationship between the USA and the Soviet Union already strained, a computer malfunction almost convinced the Soviets that the Americans had launched a massive pre-emptive nuclear strike. 

Almost, I said. Fortunately, a man called Stanislav Petrov was responsible for interpreting the faulty early-warning readings, concluded that the Americans would be mad to attempt such an attack, and decided not to initiate a response. 

I hope there are plenty of Stanislav Petrovs still around. 

My poem about it, below, appears in my second collection, hydrodaktulopsychicharmonica, from Nine Arches Press, which is still available as an e-book.

Stanislav Petrov

The hardest part? How to stay alive

(inside the bunker, remember,

there are no days or nights)

to a sight you'll only see once,

the screens suddenly flowering

with tendrils of light, taking hold

of the world as we always imagined

they would. For some, perhaps,

the danger is a mind that wanders,

to football, or vodka, or the legs

of Comrade Ivanova.

For me, only a waking dream

of days awaiting autumn in Fryazino,

and my wife asking, what did you do today

Yevgrafovich? Answering her

as I always do. Nothing, I did nothing. 

Shibboleths

Here's a straightforward question. What do you understand by the word 'shibboleth'?

I ask because, in the reporting of the Barry Gardiner story, two different versions have been given as the standard, contemporary definition, and one of them surprises me. Not that it makes a huge amount of difference to the story, I'm just interested.

Corbyn and the anthem

Good blogpost here on why Jeremy Corbyn should be applauded for not singing the national anthem - he'd have been a hypocrite to do so, he showed all the respect appropriate to the occasion anyway (which is more than some of the singers did), and thirdly, it's a lousy and absurd anthem anyway.

The real debate, of course, ought to be why we can't have an anthem that isn't offensive to Scots, Catholics and republicans, but I don't suppose we'll have that any time soon. The right-wing press, who have generally had a strange way of showing how much they respect the monarchy in the past, have their own very obvious agenda here. Incidentally, I wonder how many of their 'journalists' and photographers were singing? I wonder, too, how many of those who have criticised Corbyn could sing the anthem in its entirety?

People of Europe, rise up

Good post here by Alan Baker about the protests going on in Spain. I've heard various reports online, and through friends living in Spain, but it's been nearly impossible to find anything in the mainstream media in the UK.

Two election questions

I have a couple of questions that I'd genuinely like to hear some answers to. One's for any Lib Dems out there, the other for returning officers.

1 The Lib Dems have repeatedly said that a coalition with the Tories was the only real option open to them, other than trying to force a second election last year. Now I can understand that they didn't want to prop up a beaten Labour Party, but what was stopping them agreeing to support a minority Tory government on a bill-by-bill basis? It would have allowed them to temper the worst excesses of Cameron and Osborne, while remaining true to the principles still held by the majority of the Lib Dem rank and file. It might even have proved popular with the electorate, given that it would have involved actual debate and compromise, rather than Lib Dem MPs being used to steamroller ideologically-driven policies through Parliament.

OK, so the Tories might not have wanted it, but had they then forced a second election, the country could have drawn its own conclusions. As it stands, in return for an AV referendum they were never going to win (partly because even many supporters of electoral reform, myself included, can't see that AV is much of an improvement on FPTP) and a few cabinet posts for Clegg and his cronies, the Lib Dems are committed to supporting policies they never advocated. Individual MPs can still rebel, but it's much harder to do so inside a formal coalition. All I've heard from Lib Dem frontbenchers on this is that the country didn't need uncertainty. Oh yes, because the current arrangement is so stable, isn't it?

To argue, as Clegg and others have done, that their manifesto was for a Liberal government, not a ConDem one, and that they're not therefore breaking any promises, is a barefaced lie. They knew when they drew up the manifesto that the only situation in which they'd be able to implement any of its policies would be as part of a coalition, formal or otherwise. If any of them genuinely believed there was any likelihood of a majority Liberal government, then they're too deluded to be allowed anywhere near  any sort of power.

2 At every election - general, local, European, whatever - since I moved to my current home in 2000, I've been approached on the way into the polling station by canvassers from one or other party (the three main ones, plus the BNP), asking to see my polling card. On every occasion, I've asked who they are, and what business it is of theirs, and have been told "Oh, we're allowed to" (note that they don't answer the first of my questions).

Well, no, I don't think you are. I was under the impression that the law guarantees a secret ballot, so surely that means that whether or not you vote (until it becoms compulsory, which I'd have no problem with), as well as how you vote, should remain secret? A colleague has pointed out that it also creates the impression that you have to have a polling card to vote. You don't. It speeds things up, but you don't need it.

If they're so convinced they're allowed to do this, why do they do it in such a shifty fashion, without first identifying themselves (there have been one or two honourable exceptions)? In almost every case, it's done by someone wearing no party rosettes or similar, and in a manner that suggests they're election officials.

So, perhaps someone with experience of election administration could explain why canvassers are allowed to continue doing this? In the meantime, I'll continue telling them to mind their own business.

Cynical opportunism

It’s not often I touch upon politics on this blog, but having spent most of the last 24 hours listening to endless analysis on radio and TV, I feel compelled to comment on David Davis’s resignation as an MP to “defend British liberties”. And yes, this is the same David Davis who served as an MP under Thatcher and Major. In fact, he was a Government whip; his distaste for parliamentary deals and so on evidently didn’t weigh so heavily with him then.

It’s hard to know where to start. What about the claim, by various of his friends and colleagues, and some in the media, that this is a brave and courageous decision? What definition of those words are they using? Because as far as I can see, Davis is risking next to nothing. At the very worst, he might lose his job (I have no idea whether or not he, like many MPs, already has a second job – it’d be nice to see a few of them get upset about that, too), in which case he’ll have to kick his heels, maybe while accepting a few well-paid directorships, for a couple of years until he gets selected for a safe Tory seat at the next General Election.

Except that he made sure to get the agreement of the Liberal Democrats NOT to stand against him in the forthcoming by-election. Given that they are the only realistic threat to him in the constituency, where’s the risk? He also knows full well that whatever he might say, people in Haltemprice and Howden will not vote purely on their views on the 42-day detention debate. They’ll vote, as they always do, on a whole range of issues, not least of them Davis’s own record as a constituency MP, which by all accounts is very good.

What about Davis’s so-called principles on this particular issue. He’s been keen to mention Magna Carta at every opportunity, but as far as I know, it didn’t make provision for holding prisoners for 28 days without charge. Davis has made no objection to that shorter (but still very long) period, just the 42 days. He’s no more an upholder of the principles of Magna Carta than Gordon Brown is. The inescapable conclusion is that what he’s doing has nothing to do with political conviction, and everything to do with opportunism and an ego running out of control. He realises, I suspect, that by losing the Tory leadership election a couple of years back he lost his only real chance of ever becoming PM, and now he’s making a last-ditch bid to grab the political spotlight – this is the act of a desperate man.

Finally, where was he in the 1980s, when the party for which he was and is an MP was trampling over all sorts of civil liberties in the UK, including press freedom and, more than anything, workers’ and union rights? Engineering strikes in order to use the police as the paramilitary wing of the Tory Party and crush the unions (the court actions that followed the 1984 Battle of Orgreave are very instructive) isn’t what you’d expect from a party concerned to uphold the rights of the individual. Strangely, the Tories, including Davis, don’t plan to repeal a single one of the anti-union laws should they come to power (and it’s to Labour’s shame that they’ve done little in that regard, too). We faced a very real terror threat then, too, but Davis and the Tories showed none of this new concern for civil liberties in Northern Ireland.

Personally, I see no reason to have 42 days detention, any more than I do 28. There are far easier and more transparent changes that could be made, if the security situation demands it. But even if I did share the same view as Davis, his position would stink to high heaven of hypocrisy of the worst kind.

Mystery versifier

Rogue 'poet' on the loose in Downing Street - except, isn't that verse just an updated version of one long since penned about somebody else, by somebody else? My memory fails me, so maybe someone out there can help out with the details...

Poetry and the presidents

I've only just come across this article. Interesting stuff, not least that description of the Gettysburg Address as one of the finest prose poems in the English language. Hard to disagree.

Dark days

I'm still in a state of shock over the fact that two BNP councillors have been elected to my local authority, North West Leicestershire District Council, including one representing my home village, Whitwick (it's a three-member ward). When you look at the results, it's easy enough to see how he managed it, as Labour, the Liberals and the Tories put up three candidates each. Their votes were accordingly split, and he made it in, but I still find it astonishing that 900+ people actually voted for such a party.
I'd find it pretty astonishing anywhere, in fact, but Coalville and Whitwick are hardly obvious BNP territory. They've both fought back pretty well from losing their main industry - coal mining - in the 80s, and although the jobs that have come in aren't so well paid as the pit was, there's low unemployment and a general feeling that the area is on the up. There's certainly nothing even approaching racial tension, which the BNP usually try to stoke and feed off. So how have they done it?
Apathy, I suspect. Apathy on the part of the local mainstream parties, who have been content for years to carry on playing party politics in the council chamber, rather than really tackling local issues (thus allowing the BNP to mount an intensive 'we care' door-knocking campaign), and apathy on the part of mainstream voters. You can bet that pretty much every BNP voter in the ward DID vote, and it proved just enough.
I'm clinging to one ray of hope. I've never believed in gagging or outlawing the BNP, because that would just give them the martyr status they want. So, now they have two councillors, whose work and every public utterance is hopefully going to be reported, I'd like to think the emptiness, dishonesty and downright unpleasantness of their true nature will emerge.