Sunday, September 16, 2018

BREXIT: The Left Has Forgotten Its Business

In response to an avowedly left-wing blogger on the tenth anniversary of the Lehman-led Crash:

I was with you all the way until you started on the because-Brexit riff.

Surely you are aware that Cameron promised a referendum because (a) he didn't think he'd have to make good on it, since he expected to lead another coalition government and (b) he thought it would finally expose and shut up a vocal minority of fruitcakes and loons in check shirts and corduroy trousers - below-stairs people.

He then spent millions of public money to urge Remain, and brought over that poseur Obama to add his thumb to the scales. And when Cameron saw the result, he left, because it looked too much like hard work and Etonians do not labour.

Since then Theresa May has played a blinder, busting a gut to make sure that anything like a meaningful Brexit doesn't happen.


Because the EU is a model village of globalism, which has kept down workers' wages and hugely benefited the traders and large businesses you so rightly criticise. Why do you think that practically everywhere in England and Wales except for the rich South-East had a clear majority for Leave? Frank Field made the class-economic issue clear in a clip still circulating on the Internet, before the vote. And the late Sir James Goldsmith forecast the potential for growing inequality and social unrest, way back in 1994 when the GATT talks were on:

And then there's the matter of democracy. The more you look at the EU the more you will see how it is part of a move towards global managerialism and the silencing of the ordinary person. The sneerocracy acts as though it thinks the commoners should never have been allowed a vote in the first place.

I simply do not understand why the Left - not the I'm-all-right-jack Blairites - has not run up its flag for democracy and the interests of the working class.

Friday, September 14, 2018

FRIDAY MUSIC: The Ayoub Sisters, by JD

During a brief review which the Beeb showed of Proms in the Park, I saw the Ayoub Sisters performing on Glasgow Green playing 'Misirlou'. It was enough to make me find out more about them because they were excellent.

Sarah and Laura Ayoub were both born in Glasgow to Egyptian parents. They were classically trained, Sarah on cello and Laura on violin and Laura currently uses a 1810 J.Gagliano violin which is kindly loaned to her by Florian Leonhard, the London based violin maker and restorer.

 They began their musical adventure as youngsters playing in a ceilidh band. Further information can be found here -

Thursday, September 13, 2018

The Road To Damascus - Stopping Military Adventurism in Syria

Peter Hitchens is asking us to write to our MPs to avert war.

I have emailed mine, anyone else want to do the same?

Here is my effort, please feel free to copy/adapt if you think it of any use:

Would you be willing to ask a question at PMQs about false flag attacks in Syria?

I read recently that America was warning the Syrian Government that if there is another use of chemical weapons there then a military response will be launched.
Sample article:

This has been interpreted by some as an encouragement to IS and other rebel forces to stage or fake one so as to give the US a pretext for an attack on Syrian government forces and installations, so effectively helping terrorists. It is alleged that this has happened before:

A US Senator is now claiming that MI6 are involved in planning something like this for the near future.

Can you please seek a clear and unequivocal assurance from HMG that if a chemical weapons use happens or is alleged, the UK will send a team to obtain conclusive forensic proof of its use and the identity/affiliation of the perpetrators, before making any statement in support of further US intervention in Syria or offering any assistance from HM Armed Forces?

By coincidence, yesterday I came upon an extended illustrated BBC blogpiece by the documentary-maker Adam Curtis (essentially a plan of his programme):

The aggressive incompetence of the very divided UK intelligence community is certainly not limited to offloading a full pistol magazine into the face of a terrified Brazilian electrician. Reading Curtis, the scales fall from our eyes with the clatter of spent shells.

And now, as we see above, it is alleged that MI6 are helping lay the groundwork for another US air attack on Syria.

MI6 has form in this kind of caper - remember that two of their officers were found with a bunch of SAS men in Libya as the West started boiling the pot there:

And then there is the long history of governments exploiting foreign factions and forces for short-term advantage and as often as not, long-term disaster. Think of the King of Leinster inviting the Normans (not "the Saxon foe across the water") into Wexford in 1169; the Germans smuggling 50 million gold marks plus Lenin into Russia to help foment revolution there, so German divisions could be transferred to the Western Front in WWI; the British encouragement of Islamic revivalism in the Middle East in the early 20th century, to push back against Communist influence; and so on and on.

A propos, like many others I used to think that the Allies hanged the German High Command at Nuremberg for their atrocities against Jews and others. No: it was for "Crimes against peace", as in:

i. Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
ii Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).

Will we at some point try neoconservative hawks, or shamefacedly and posthumously pardon Nazis?

UPDATE (16.09.18):

Mr Hitchens has repeated his call in his MoS column today. I fear that the plan is to arrange the false-flag attack before Parliament reopens so as to prevent opposition to Western acts of war on Syria.

Sunday, September 09, 2018

"Yet all shall be forgot": Brazil museum fire


The tribes have gone; the archaeological evidence has gone and their voices have gone; soon enough the memory of them will have gone.

Perhaps some scraps can be recovered, if the public helps:

I don’t think enough people really understand yet exactly how horrific this fire was. This was a loss to our world and species.

This is the kind of fire we think of thousands of years later as the deepest of tragedy. On the scale of the Library of Alexandria. It’s worse than that really. The Library of Alexandria kept copies of books in other locations so historically very little was lost in individual fires over the centuries.

This? We lost so goddamn much in one night.

If you want to help… if you have ANY vacation photos, videos, anything documenting the contents of the museum: You may in fact be the sole owner of a slice of humanity’s soul.

Please send a copy to:


Saturday, September 08, 2018

UK POLITICS: What We Did After Our Holidays

Political coincidences...

PM Theresa May's woeful weakness in EU negotiations has had the Tory membership enraged all summer and calling for her to go, so suddenly...

Our intelligence services have named two Russians who are definitely responsible for the Skripal poisonings, probably, you'll see, trust us, usual suspects etc...

Vigorous, thrusting young Jeremy Hunt announces approval for the NHS to use a massively expensive new drug treatment for child leukaemia, isn't it time he got an even bigger job?...

The Daily Mail print edition splashes a really important front-page story - "man has sex with woman", something like that - about Boris Johnson, once and future contender for the Premiership...

"The readers of the Boston Evening Transcript
Sway in the wind like a field of ripe corn."
- T S Eliot

Mathematics - the crumbling foundation of US wealth and security, by Paddington

Let's start with a simple syllogism:

Modern society requires cheap energy and lots of technology to function.

Technology relies on basic science.

Mathematics is the language of science.

Civilization requires large numbers of technicians to maintain our technology, engineers to solve problems and develop new technology, and scientists to do both basic and applied research to develop new ideas.

Most of the higher-paying jobs now require higher levels of both Mathematics and applied technology.

Therefore, it is good for society as a whole, and the individuals concerned, if we improve Mathematics education.

Our politicians have gotten the gist of this logic several times in my life, beginning in 1957 with the Sputnik scare. Most of the American public saw the resultant Space Race as a matter of US pride. Those able to think knew that the USSR had the one-sided capacity to launch missiles at the US. What was presented as a bold exploration venture was an exercise in self-preservation.

Today, the fear is on the vulnerability of our many computer-based systems. It is just as real a danger as nuclear war, but not quite as obvious. The attitude seems to be that, “if it breaks, somebody else will fix it.”

There is also the small matter of repeated studies showing that success in any higher education is directly correlated with performance in College-level Mathematics.

This awareness led to several rounds of attempts at Mathematics teaching reform, at least four of which happened in my career as a Mathematics professor. I was even involved in a couple of them, trying to do the right thing.

We had the 'New Math' of the late 1960's, which attempted to put the subject on a firm theoretical footing. Next was the 'lean and lively Calculus' movement in the early 1990's, to have students learn 'deeper', using more graphical methods and less Algebra. Then came project-based teaching, which had students working in groups to 'learn' Science, Mathematics and English. Most recently, we have had the push for 'flipped' classrooms, in which students watch videos to teach the lessons, then sit in the classroom while the teacher helps them solve problems.

All of these reforms shared a few features:

The instigators were energetic, enthusiastic, honest and delightful, and were absolutely convinced that they held 'the answer'.

Every such approach wanted to use technology, starting in the 90's with graphing calculators, followed by laptops. Later it was computer Algebra systems.

Every approach ignored human nature.

Each approach showed initial gains, in what is known by Psychologists as 'The Novelty Effect'
( ).

Each reform had an obvious flaw built into it.

The New Math failed in large part because the teachers didn't understand what they were teaching.

The graphical/Algebra-light Calculus left students able to generate (sometimes) correct answers, with no understanding of where they came from, and no ability to interpret them. In extreme cases that I experienced with some top students, they could no longer tell the difference between subtraction and division.

In the project-based models, students rarely learn anything significant, but get the impression that they have learned everything. That makes them ready for management, not so much for productive work.

The flipped classroom model ignores human nature. We learn by mimicry, for the most part. In teaching martial arts, I have noticed that, if you give verbal instructions, and do something else with your body to demonstrate, most students will attempt to do what you did, not what you said. Except for the most talented, people learn Mathematics in that way, by watching a teacher solve a problem, then solving several just like it, with numbers changed, then having more of the concept explained.

Every single reform ended up with worse results than when we began. Even more depressing is the fact that, instead of returning to the original ideas, the system just tried the next new model. When I started teaching in 1978, students either mastered their Algebra in Calculus I, or they failed. Now, the bad Arithmetic and Algebra has penetrated as far as Differential Equations (Calculus IV in some systems), because the bad habits are just so ingrained. I once had 2/3 of a class of Honors Calculus III end up with the equation '2x=3', then write 'x=3-2', so 'x=1'. And these were the select of their year.

Meanwhile, the Asian systems are churning out Engineers, while we busily criticize their education systems as not 'inspiring creativity'. There is some justification for this, and many in Asia agree. Students there are taught by rote, and not allowed to stand out. On the other hand, the successful have actually learned something. By contrast, I have met many students who have been labeled as 'creative' who consistently generate ideas and solutions which are as practical as oars on a spaceship.

There is a way to generate more people with talent in Mathematics and the subjects which rely on it: Select them at say age 12, and put them together in special schools. It reduces bullying, and their natural competition will drive them to succeed.

Friday, September 07, 2018

FRIDAY MUSIC: How Tango Took Off, by JD

"The tango is a direct expression of something that poets have often tried to state in words: the belief that a fight may be a celebration. " 
“El Tango es la directa expresión de lo que comúnmente los poetas han tratado de definir en palabras como: la creencia de que la lucha puede ser un festejo”
- Jorge Luis Borges.

Tonight, Sept 7th, on BBC4 is the first ever Tango Prom. It is to be a celebration of the music and dance which came out of the low life bars and brothels of Buenos Aires.

In reality the tango began in Montevideo - Tango is a rhythm that has its roots in the poor areas of Montevideo around 1880. Then it was extended to other areas and countries. As Borges said: "...tango is African-Montevidean [Uruguayan], tango has black curls in its roots..." He quoted Rossi, that sustained that "...tango, that argentine people call argentine tango, is the son of the Montevidean milonga and the grandson of the habanera. It was born in the San Felipe Academy [Montevideo], a Montevidean warehouse used for public dances, among gangsters and black people; then it emigrated to underworld areas of Buenos Aires and fooled around in Palermo's rooms..." This also implies that different forms of dance were originated in the neighborhoods of Montevideo, Uruguay in the last part of the 19th century and in the early 20th century that was particular from that area and different from Buenos Aires. It consists of a variety of styles that developed in different regions of Argentina and Uruguay. -

I listened to the concert on Radio 3 on Tuesday night and it is a chronological presentation of the evolution of the styles of tango down the years including a little known side-track into Finnish Tango which proved to be one of the highlights of the show. The final number is the well known tune La Cumparsita (you will know it as soon as you hear it!) which was written by Gerardo Matos Rodríguez in Montevideo in 1919. Montevideo has a Tango Museum as does Buenos Aires.

I am looking forward to seeing the Tango Prom, it is difficult to see the dancers on the radio!

Meanwhile here is a selection, some of whom are featured in the Prom and some not. There was a comment beneath one of the videos I looked at which said-

1. Carlos Gardel
2. Astor Piazzola
3. Gotan Project

Can't argue with that assessment: Gardel was the first tango 'superstar' who added song to the music and dance, Piazzola revolutionised the music with his Nuevo Tango in the 1950s and wasn't immediately popular, the Gotan Project has brought the form right up to date for the 21st century by adding electronic/techno to the music but without losing the essential 'duende'!-

"hay milonga de amor
hay temblor de Gotan
este tango es para vos"

THE SELMAYR SCANDAL: Straight and Crooked Law

'I'm a very qualified lawyer, that's why I feel very confident. The European Commission has broken no laws.' That was Mr Selmayr's response when doorstepped by the Daily Mail about his controversial nine-minute double promotion on 21 February this year, first to deputy Secretary-General of the European Commission, then to Secretary-General.

Selmayr is almost certainly right correct, but I shall come to his point later.

Dutch MEP Sophie in 't Veld  - featured in Daily Mail and Daily Express online editions - may splutter -

- but it merely shows that many who work inside the EU system do not understand how it operates, and to what end. They think that the EU stands for justice, brotherhood, democracy, openness and so on and expect its governance to reflect their illusions. One day it may; but not now.

The European Union is about power - not because its intentions are evil, but because it is trying to bind together very different countries into a single State. Such a project cannot succeed in a factious democracy. So in the European Union directives and legislation come from above and their Parliament is largely a talking shop and rubber stamping operation.

In some ways it is like Germany in 1871. Prussia - the permanent leader of the federation - centred power on the Kaiser, with the aristocratic Herrenhaus naturally inclined to support him. Representation in the lower chamber or Landtag was skewed towards economic power: one-third of seats went to representatives of the very richest and another to the middle-class; the last third gave a feeble voice to the masses - 82.6% of the population in 1849. Bills were proposed by the Kaiser - or, if it suited his purposes, not proposed; but certainly not by the commoners. The Constitution of Germany was, said Wilhelm Liebknecht, "eine fürstliche Versicherungsanstalt gegen die Demokratie" - a princely company providing insurance against democracy.

The EU manages its people in a similarly autocratic manner, and the chart below shows the flows of its power - and the source of its proposals:

As with Newton's Third Law, antidemocratic force creates democratic reaction. The semi-suppression of the people fostered the development of the German Social Democrats; when the old German order fell apart in 1918 the new Weimar Constitution addressed the unfairness of the voting arrangements with a system of proportional representation. It was a disastrous solution: little could be decided among the squabbling factions, so that by 1933 the Chancellor could seize control in an "emergency" - tragically undefined by the Constitution and therefore open to his own judgment.

We are now seeing similar tensions between centre and periphery in the EU. If matters cannot be rectified within the system, it will ultimately face extra-systemic reactions and possibly end in tyranny, as the organisation seeks to preserve its existence.

Martin Selmayr is a lawyer; in German, a "Rechtsanwalt" - an authority, a manager, an advocate in law. The German for law is "Gerecht", its root "recht" or in English, "right." The soul of law is a sense of what is right (whose opposite is "wrong", a word rooted in the notion of twisting, like other "wr-" formations - wrist, wring, wry etc).

But law is also law as arbitrarily issued by the ruler ("le Roi re veult"), law that is written down and codified, law as procedure. So, technically, Selmayr's promotions by Junker (ratified by Commissioners attentive to their own advantage) were allowable within the letter of the EU's law; but not right, not straight.

Yet those rules have been fashioned for a purpose, one quite alien to the British sense of what is right, and also (it seems) coming as a surprise to some others in the EU who have misunderstood the destination to which they are heading. It is a rough and crooked road, leading to the termination of government by (and possibly one day, also of government for) the people.

Whereas the EU Constitution, like Prussia's, was designed to give power to the executive, the British Constitution - learning from centuries of bloody internal conflict - has evolved to restrain it. This is why we should leave the Union and should never have joined it in the first place: there is a total incompatibility between our respective political philosophies and habits.

Did Macmillan, Heath and the other conspirators who manoeuvred us into this federation not understand?

Thursday, September 06, 2018

One nation?

I'd like to suggest a topic, word it how you will: does the Labour Party actually work for the interests of the labouring person?

A genuine question - is there a plan for a thriving British economy rather than getting votes for benefits (and soft jobs for professional pols)?

Can Labour get away from the infighting and present a manifesto that is a credible alternative to the globalism foisted on us by both Conservatives and New Labour? Democratic and therefore not EU, and aiming at a sustainable economy, increased self-sufficiency in essential food and power, as the world heads for a long slump and peak cheap energy has passed?

Or is it just a case of either:

(a) one lot popping in when the other pops out, like the little man and woman in the weather house?

(b) Tweedledum and Tweedledee ripping the country into two, instead of saving it?