Cows, slags, moles and illegals: is this really modern day Australia?

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Why Republicans fear the influence of a dead woman

Katherine Burgdorf

...And so to the US Presidential election where, for a change, the male combatants take a back seat and a woman comes to the centre stage of influence and controversy. Her name is Ayn Rand and, while she died in 1982, her philosophy of Objectivism has been back in focus and causing some discomfort for the Romney-Ryan Republican campaign.

 

For months now the media has been guessing and second guessing who Mitt Romney would select as his running partner for Vice President. A couple of weeks ago he announced it would be Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan. As the press scrabbled to build their profiles of Ryan one particular anecdote kept floating up. In 2005 Ryan gave a speech in which he credited the novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand as the key reason he went into public service. He was a huge fan of her philosophy of Objectivism and insisted all his staffers read her novel Atlas Shrugged. Fast forward to this week and Team Romney has Ryan back-peddling furiously to deny much of Rand’s influence. So who was she, and why does it matter?

 

Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was born and educated in Russia and moved to the US in 1926 where she became a playwright, novelist and philosopher. She became famous in the US for the development of a philosophical system she called Objectivism in which there lies ‘the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.’ Rand was an aetheist and rejected all forms of collectivism or statism, having seen the suffering and damage unleashed by the Communist revolution in Russia.

 

In Rand’s opinion the only role of the Government should be the protection of minority. As she wrote, ‘The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).’ She believed the only acceptable political platform was a laissez-faire capitalism system and argued for the morality of that system. ‘Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values.’ Her beliefs were conveyed famously in two of her novels. The first was called The Fountainhead (1943) and the second was Atlas Shrugged (1957) - her best-known work.

 

Unfortunately for Romney, the connection between his campaign and an aethiest philosophy guided by capitalist morality has dawn massive criticism from Christian America. Ryan’s back pedalling has largely been focused on assuring conservatives that his high profile austerity plans are grounded in pragmatic localism rather than simply the punishment of those who cannot provide for themselves. The latter is probably a requirement of the Tea Party and no doubt mainstream Republicans will want to avoid getting too close to them in case they scare undecideds toward Obama. More practically, Romney’s own Mormonism will be frightening to many ‘mainstream’ Christians, which means it’s doubly important for Ryan to appear a straight-forward, gun- loving, anti-abortion Catholic. Ayn Rand was anti-God and pro-Choice.

 

No doubt Rand would have had more in common with Ryan than Obama but it’s still hard to see how Paul Ryan squares his ‘Rand influence’ with a Party that has, or will, allow states to legislate against individual consensual love (anti gay marriage) and individual rights (anti-abortion). States are still big ‘S’ States and they are not the ‘smallest unit.’ As Jennifer Burns wrote in the New York Times last week, ‘Years before Roe v. Wade, Rand called abortion “a moral right which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved.” She condemned the military draft and American involvement in Vietnam. She warned against recreational drugs but thought government had no right to ban them. These aspects of Rand do not fit with a political view that weds fiscal and social conservatism.’ I think we know what she would have thought of Todd ‘you can’t get pregnant being raped’ Akin.

 

It was Radio 4’s Women’s Hour this week that picked up on a particular paradox of Rand and her philosophy - her anti-feminism. Objectivism argues for Man’s achievement as the ultimate achievement, and sadly it does not mean ‘or Woman.’. This position was famously aired on a television interview with Rand in which she was asked whether she would vote for a female president. She said no, she would never do that. When asked, by way of clarification, if she would vote for a woman if she were better qualified than any man, she replied ‘If we had fallen that low, I might.’ She then went on to say ‘It is not in a woman’s personal interest to rule man. It puts her in an unhappy position. I don’t believe any good woman would want that position.’ Oddly, she said she would happily vote for women as Senators or judges or other leaders of high office, but not as Commander in Chief: ‘I think it’s unspeakable’ she said. You can watch that interview on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpzDdTrw5II

 

I wanted to read more on this subject to see whether we might be missing a link to modern feminism. Here is what she writes,  

 

‘For a woman...the essence of femininity is hero-worship—the desire to look up to man. “To look up” does not mean dependence, obedience or anything implying inferiority. It means an intense kind of admiration; and admiration is an emotion that can be experienced only by a person of strong character and independent value-judgments.

 

Hero-worship is a demanding virtue: a woman has to be worthy of it and of the hero she worships. Intellectually and morally, i.e., as a human being, she has to be his equal; then the object of her worship is specifically his masculinity, not any human virtue she might lack.’

 

Her view seems to be about equality with difference, but ultimately, I couldn’t find justification for her view as a feminist. If Objectivism says our own happiness should be our moral code, and if we are all due the right to steer our own bodies through our own personal moral maze then we must be capable of wanting and enjoying the same outcome / position / status as anyone as, and that includes men.

 

When I read The Fountainhead I was puzzled by the tortuous relationship between the protagonist – Roake – who chooses suffering and obscurity rather than compromise his integrity – and Dominique, who seems to love and loathe him in equal measure. Roake rapes Dominique in the novel. Rand, and I now know why, is a red flag to the modern feminist movement. Unkindly we could suggest that this alone might be something positive she could offer the Republican Party. Nonetheless, The Fountainhead is a page turner and well worth reading.

 

The credit crisis, with its massive shadow of bankruptcy, joblessness and shuffling economic recovery, will make arguing for a Rand-like system as controversial now as it ever could be. While the Republican Party will always argue to minimise Government it is a step too far for Romney’s team to argue that capitalism is a morality in itself, and that the titans of production be free from all regulation, support and oversight. There is very little stomach in ordinary America to let companies, savings banks and housing institutions to fail for the benefit of a handful of individual happiness. It is an interesting, personal footnote that in the late stages of her life, too, that Ayn Rand herself signed up for Government social security and healthcare benefits. But, no matter one’s support or repudiation of her views, this is a woman who has had a huge influence on many in business, the arts and in politics and for the moment again it is she who is the hero and influencer of the men who follow her.

A personal footnote: my husband was recently given a copy of Atlas Shrugged - not by Paul Ryan, but by Dominic Johnson, Chairman of the Conservative Party’s City and Entrepreneurs Forum. No one ever accused a politician of original thinking.

 

You can listen to the Radio 4 segment on Ayn Rand here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01m182q/ (available until 1^st Jan 2099 in case you’re a bit busy this week.)

BBC's responds to my sexism complaint ref Olympic coverage

This is the BBC's response to my suggestion Gary Lineker's interview with Nicola Adams was sexist on the basis of his remark 'well, you've got a lovely smile.' I would argue such statements reduce the stature of important and successul women to reseamble that of a two year toddler gurning at an ice-cream.

Obviously, the response is written to make the sender sound like a total, time-wasting weird. And so I am. I'll draft my counter response later in the week.

Dear Ms Burgdorf

Reference CAS-1624699-R3YC5D

Thanks for contacting us about our coverage of ‘Olympics 2012’.

I understand you were unhappy as you felt that Gary Lineker said to Nicola Adams that she has a lovely smile and you found this inappropriate.  I note that you found the statement to be sexist and believe that he would have never said the same thing to a man.

This was an off the cuff remark by Gary Lineker and certainly no offence was intended.  Nicola Adams had become well known for her smile during the Olympics with many media outlets referring to her as ‘golden smile’ or the ‘smiling assassin’. 

I can assure you that the BBC have the utmost respect for women’s sport and we believe this was shown throughout our coverage of women’s events in the Olympics.

However I appreciate that you found Gary’s comments to be sexist therefore please be assured that I’ve registered your complaint on our audience log.  This is a daily report of audience feedback that’s made available to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers.

The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.

Thanks once again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

Claire Jordan
BBC Complaints
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.

More than a Menschn

By Katherine Burgdorf.

And so to Louise Mensch, the high profile Tory MP who has announced her resignation mid-term to move her three children to New York to spend more time with her newish husband, Peter Mensch, whose job it is to manage rock band Metallica.

Now the British press aren’t quite sure what to make of this. They’ve lined up a whole load of other women MPs in the hope that they’ll open fire on their political sister and brand her an UNFEMINIST, capricious, media hogging, filthy rich pain in their sides and really stir things up in a girly fashion. Sadly for them that hasn’t really happened, and the papers have been left with a bunch of comments which basically say, ‘shit happens , it’s hard work juggling kids (they’re heavy), husbands (even heavier) and constituents (pains in the back bottom) and good luck to her.’ So that’s a bummer for the Fourth Estate. I would suggest, as others have (Allison Pearson), that you can make life a little bit more difficult for yourself by marrying someone who lives in another country, going on telly a lot, starting a social media business to rival Twitter while being an MP (called Menschn, get it?) and having three kids in the first place. But that’s a 'tomato/tomata/potato/potata' thing. We can all agree circumstances change. Incidentally Pearson also wrote about rumours that Mensch might be joining News Inernational. Certainly a few posts there have been made vacant recently.

But here’s the thing. I have an answer to all of this. Not the ‘life is crazy’ concept - I think we can wrap that one up by agreeing that some mothers are lazy toads, some are brilliant breadwinners and most are just plain-crazy/normal-getting-on-with-it. No, I’m talking about a solution for Dave in all of this. After all, Cameron's the one who’s been left high and dry, mid term, by Louise’s departure. His party is now forced to hold a by-election in the seat of Corby, which was only narrowly won by Mensch.

Instead of letting Mrs Mensch go to NYC why don’t they just get Mr Mensch to ditch Metallica and come and manage Dave? Think about it. The gig’s been left wide open after Steve ‘Blue Sky’ Hilton's departure to the US (is two a pattern?) earlier this year. It's not as crazy as it first might sound. Firstly, Mensch and Hilton are/were bald, so they have that in common. Secondly, and perhaps more relevant, Dave needs to appeal to middle-aged, conservative voters. Well, hang on. Aren’t they a) the only people who know who Metallica is, and b) the only people who can afford a ticket to a Metallica concerts? It’s the same fan base. Peter Mensch could practically guarantee Dave the next election. What’s more, the campaigners can take almost any Metallica song and build the ultimate media campaign. ‘Enter Sandman (only it would be ‘Enter Cameron’) could be played at the conference. ‘Better than You’ could be the general electorate message, and ‘Aint my bitch’ is the perfect song through which Dave could clean his hands of any previous political alliance with Cleggie. I barely need mention the song, ‘Hero of the Day’. No, there’s no analysis needed here. It’s the simplest and most perfect of solutions. Louise gets to stay on running her political nose to the ground, Peter gets to swap the Big Apple for Big Ben, and Dave gets to run the next election like 'Britain's Got Talent'. Rock on.

Addendum: Notice how it is possible to write a story about a female MP without writing about her appearance, or what she wears? It wasn't even hard. Readers might also like to know that Mensch published several novels under her maiden name 'Louise Bagshawe', before her time in politics. This has made her quite rich (or so the papers say). I suspect readers of this blog may not be familiar with her books. She also says she sampled several class A prescriptions in her youth which have caused some mental weather systems in her mind. You say el nina, I say el nino.

What a monstrous, degrading, disgusting idea

In 1948 the BBC's boxing commentator Peter Wilson wrote this in response to learning of Barbara Buttrick's intention to become a boxer: 'What a monstrous, degrading, disgusting idea! Would anyone like to go out with a girl sporting two lovely purplish black eyes? Would any sportsman, or sportswoman, relish the sight of tears, after a stiff punch on the nose, mingling with mascara?"
In 2012, yesterday in fact, the BBC's boxing commentator Steve Bunce wrote this: "Nicola Adams is the first women's Olympic boxing champion, but there is more to the fight than just her name. It was a quality fight, it was as good as it gets. That was beautiful to watch.'

So, while it's taken 64 years to get to the answer I think in summary Steve is answering 'yes' to Peter's question. I'm not sure if any mascara was worn by either fighter but since Ms Adams came out of the match with a gold medal, I think the answer to that is 'who gives a monkey's?'.

I've no doubt Adams continues to encounter jibes, bullying and general unease from the less evolved among us. Certainly Gary Lineker's interview comment last night 'you've got a lovely smile, Nicola' confirms the BBC itself is still wavering on the topic (I've complained to the BBC and will post their response when it arrives) but when the last woman on Earth looks around and makes a final tally of our wins and losses, I have no doubt the nuclear shadow of Nicola Adams will remain scorched, left hook first, in a room all her own.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/19202678

I made it! Meditating with monks - day 10

-->

Cassi, Sayadaw and me in Sayadaw's room

By Gabrielle Jackson

11.34am: There were times when I thought this day would never come. But I made it. I definitely feel happy, pleased with myself and like I’ve learned something valuable. I’ve learnt to slow down, to think about what I’m doing, take it easy – things that don’t come naturally to me. I don’t know if it will last, but I am determined to keep practicing and so we’ll see. Having said all that, I also feel in pain. Very, very bad pain.

4.03pm:  Today I was having real trouble concentrating. I kept thinking about home, which I guess is natural since I’m moving back there tomorrow after more or less 10 years abroad.  I guess it’s natural for my mind to wander a bit today, and even though I didn’t get the full body shivers, I did get in two good hours of meditation, after which I felt good. 

--> -->

The retreat went for 52 days in total. Some people came for the full stay. Weirdos. Other people came for 10 days, which is the minimum, and others stayed for varying periods. While we’ve been here, there are about 17 monks, three nuns, eight laymen and almost 30 laywomen. The nun who helped me is from Vietnam. There is another nun from there and another from Malaysia. The nun from Malaysia wears pale lavender robes like they’re a fashion statement. She is bald, of course, but the way she moves with such grace makes you think she could have stepped off the pages of some high-end fashion magazine. She does everything so, so slowly, but also with such elegance. The way she moves and how she changes position while sitting without showing any leg or foot from under her robe is just incredible. I thump around, knock my water bottle over at least twice a day, have to lean on my hands for support and generally behave like an elephant. She’s so beautiful. Maybe meditating will teach me to be more graceful. But I doubt it. I like the nuns, especially the one who helped me. I always catch her talking and having a giggle. I think she’s a bit naughty.

Cassi told me something Sayadaw said to her. She asked, ‘Don’t you ever have ups and downs?’ He replied, ‘We don’t call them ups and downs. We call them reality.’

I am pleased I’ve done this. I have moments where I want to cry with pain, and then joy. It has been hard. Very hard. But, as Sayadaw said, ‘No pain, no gain.’

I am looking forward to a wine and a massage, but I will never regret my 10 days meditating with monks. 

DAY NINE

Did you see the full series of Meditating with monks? Start at Arrival day

Meditating with monks: day nine

-->

7.03am: It rained again last night and the stench of manure is so pungent that I had to spend a fair amount of time smelling the frangipanis this morning. Is it really worth it? I mean, the smell is so repugnant and overbearing that you can’t even smell the flowers it’s supposed to be fertilising. I don’t like it.

What I also don’t like is opening my door to find a colony of ants dragging a dead caterpillar up the inside crevice. I swept them all away with a broom. How disgusting. Why are there so many ants here? When you’re not allowed to kill ANY beings, you are left with a lot of creepy crawlies.

5.29pm: Today is the last Dhamma talk, aka torture session. I’m a bit relieved. My body is aching all over. However, as well as the rocking and the lights, today I got a tingling all over my body, then I saw a dark tunnel and it was drawing me in. I was mesmerised while it lasted and completely free of all other thoughts. I really thought it was trying to show me something, but I couldn’t figure it out. It felt good. Then I got a shiver all the way down my spine and a tingling sensation everywhere. No wonder the monks don’t have sex – they don’t need to. (Do monks have sex? I’m not sure actually.) And then, when I was doing the walking meditation, that floating feeling stayed with me and my legs just moved without me making them. I felt this incredible lightness and I could feel my knees rotate as my balance shifted from one foot to the other. It was as though I could feel every bone and muscle in my legs and feet working. I felt like I was floating, or in water or something. It was amazing.

I had another interview with Sayadaw. He said I have a happy presence and invited me to come and do more study with him in Myanmar. It’s very tempting. I haven’t told him I don’t believe in God or religion but I don’t think it matters to the Buddhists. 

9.45pm: I have just realised that I am looking forward to getting into my wooden slat bed. I don't know whether to see it as an achievement or to be seriously alarmed.

Did you miss DAY EIGHT? 
And you can catch DAY 10 here

Meditating with monks: day eight (and still in pain)

-->

 By Gabrielle Jackson

Don't miss Day seven's entry 

12.25pm: In my euphoria last night, I did not realise how much pain I was in. But I did notice it when I got into bed and my knees were throbbing in pain. I was in agony and could not sleep even though I was exhausted. So I got up, did some stretches and went back to bed. No luck. Still pain in my knees and all the way down the front of my legs. So I got up again and took two Paracetomol. They worked and I fell into a deep sleep. I didn’t hear the bells chime at 3.30am even though they chime very loudly for at least a minute and then the dogs howl too. Cassi saw my light wasn’t on when she was passing and came and knocked on my door.

The dawn session was hideous. I could barely walk, let alone meditate while walking. I was sore and grumpy and having great difficulty maintaining the effort of focusing on my breathing.

I was like a zombie at breakfast and then came back to my room, lay down and fell asleep immediately for almost two hours, thereby missing the first one-and-a-half hours of the morning session. And that wasn’t much better.

9.29pm: Today was disastrous. I could only sit for 15 minutes at a time by the end of the day. But something amazing happened nonetheless: I started having these visions and then my body jolted. Very weird.

10.34pm: Cassi just came in and we’ve been talking for an hour. She says ‘having visions’ and then ‘jolting’ is called dreaming and waking up, not reaching some higher plane of meditation. Damn.  

Did you miss Day seven? 
Also see DAY NINE

It's a cruel Olympics for some...

 

Meditating with monks: day seven

-->

By Gabrielle Jackson

6.59am: At breakfast just now, there was an ant on my table. I picked it up and put it on the floor. I ate too much again and now I will have to sleep and miss the first hour of the next session, like I have done for the past two days.

12.30pm: I’ve taken a step backwards on the pain management front. Today my left leg hurts. Yesterday it was the right. The front of my leg throbs. When I lay down on my bed, also known as a wooden slat, my muscles around the sacrum spasm like crazy.

The good news is that I think I’m getting better at being mindful. The bad news is I’m getting worse at concentrating during standing meditation. I really want it to be over now.

4.26pm: I’ve had a breakthrough. Thank God for my interview with Sayadaw, even though I didn’t want to go. I told him that I was in so much pain most of the time that I was having great trouble focusing. He said that if I was in that much pain I could move ‘with mindfulness’.

So I went back and when the pain got too much, I just moved, kept breathing and observing the rise and fall of my abdomen. It was great. Just brilliant. Because I wasn’t waiting for the 15-minute chime – because I could move when I wanted – the time passed ever so quickly and I was able to concentrate. Yipee!

9.29pm: OMG, I’ve gone all zen. In this evening’s session, usually the worst of the day, I hardly moved in the Dhamma talk. I started out thinking that it might be some kind of joke and that Sayadaw was just up there repeating the same thing night after night as a trick to see if anybody is listening, since the only thing I ever understand is something about yogis ‘coming and go’. I felt like I should be the one to stand up and say, ‘Haha, busted!’ and that I might get some prize for it. But just at that moment I heard him say, ‘The yogi might see lots of blood. The yogi might see his head off his body’ and so it went. I’m pretty sure I’d never heard that before, and decided not to be the one to call him out after all.

After the talk, I helped two ladies tie their mosquito nets to the cord hanging from the ceiling because they were too short to reach it. Then, although I had to move twice in my sitting hour, I did so with mindfulness and felt a kind of euphoria. My head was spinning and at the end, when the bell chimed, I’d completely forgotten about meta chanting, which we do at the end of every day. How is that even possible? I felt so happy and calm and realised that this Buddhist calm and peaceful thing is not at all put on. It felt liked I’d just smoked some really good weed.

My euphoria lasted throughout the chanting, which I generally don’t like. It’s a bit like praying and with everyone sitting around chanting together it just feels like too much of a religion. I realise I’m on a Buddhist retreat, which is a religion, yes, but let’s face it, the Buddhists don’t cause much trouble, do they? You don’t hear of Buddhists blowing things up in the name of being peaceful. They can’t even kill an ant for crying out loud. So I didn’t really see it as a religion when I signed up. But now I’m here, I see it is clearly a religion and I am innately distrustful of religion, so the meta chanting usually gets on my nerves.

While what we chant is well meaning – we chant for pretty much every living thing to be free from physical and mental suffering and to be happy and able to look after themselves. Oh, and that we be free of aging and death. I mean, really, isn’t all that aiming a bit too high? And isn’t it proof that the prayers don’t work? Because I’m pretty sure there are a few people suffering and I haven’t heard of anyone living forever yet, although apparently there’s some guy who’s about 200 living in a Buddhist monastery in Japan. Anyway, these Buddhists are pretty hard to dislike and they’ve been graceful enough to allow us to come and learn meditation with them and nobody’s even mentioned us becoming Buddhist, so I might give the chanting another chance. 

See also: DAY SIX and  DAY EIGHT