Sport: tearing up the rule books

I had a very enjoyable day today half-watching the Hopi fund raising cricket match in which a team including the very cream of the Green Party's sporting elite thrashed the Labour Representation Committee in a game so friendly that rules were taken as mere guidance and the huge bribes paid to produce no balls were returned to their benefactors.

A good amount of money was raised for Workers Fund for Iran, and factory workers in Tabriz who are threatened with job losses had already passed on their thanks for our efforts - although their views on the dodgy LBW decision that saw Hopi's Ben Lewis knocked out undeservedly early are as yet unknown.

The day saw some particularly interesting bowling which seemed more inspired by modern jazz dance than Shane Warne, which got me to thinking about modern sport.

The other day I was eating my lunch next to a tennis court where two pairs were playing. The first couple were taking it all very seriously, keeping score and no doubt alert for chalk dust. The second pair didn't serve once, concentrated on knocking it back and forth and seemed to be having a much better time. Not only weren't they keeping score but they didn't seem too bothered about chatting during the game, how many times the ball bounced, where the lines were or anything else.

Now, unless the first pair were in training for a professional match (in which case I hope they have a good deal more time to practice) ruleless tennis certainly seemed to be the way to go if the objective is to run about and enjoy yourself with a friend.

The process of strictly codified rules for sport began to come into its own in the 19th century. This is the same time that prisons, work houses, schools with rows of desks and insane asylums became de rigeur. It was also the time when we became obsessed with synchronising our clocks... mind you its also when we started taking sewage systems seriously as well so let's not stretch the analogy too far.

My point being that as the industrial revolution matured all kinds of aspects of our lives became mechanised and regulated in a way they never had been before. There were often practical reasons for this. If you were going to bet on a match you don't want your pony resting on whether the players spontaneously decide to make it a best of three just as you're about to collect your winnings.

These sometimes arbitrary rules create a discipline that might not otherwise be there, which can be good, but they also transform a social activity into a regulated and reified (sorry) thing in itself, independent of the players. By reified (sorry) I mean we turn something fluid (social interaction, running about, laughing) into something solid (set time periods, scores, set numbers of players, etc.). I mean we turn the moments of our life into social objects.

It's not that modern capitalism defines us so tightly that we can't see any other way of doing things, but we do allow it to shape the way we see things. Of the tennis players I mentioned earlier we see one set as playing 'properly' and the others as being less serious.

Some people might even go so far as to say the ruleless players should have got off the court and made room for a pair who wanted to play 'real' tennis. I don't agree. People made those rules up in the first place, we're people, so maybe we can make up rules of our own - and then break those as well if we want to.

Wyclef Jean to run for President of Haiti

It looks like Wyclef Jean of the fabulous Fugees may well be running for President of Haiti - and he could even win. This seems the appropriate moment to look at his ready made manifesto.



Righteous.

Take the music back

Sick of the way the charts are dictated by those with the financial clout to shove anemic crap down our throats? Tired of how the race for Christmas Number One is just another way of advancing consumerism without content? Want to see a world where music isn't simply about 'units sold' but represents something deeper.

Well here is the grassroots campaign for you - thwart Simon Cowell's army of evil robots and give Rage Against the Machine the top spot this Winterval. I was initially unsure about this campaign but the more arguments I heard against it the more convinced I became that this was something worth backing, particularly as it led me to digging out my RATM CD's and leaping round the room in a most unladylike fashion.

This Radio Five interview with the band is interesting, not least because they cut the band off half way through the song because it contained the words "Fuck you I won't do what you tell me" - well, duh!

When asked about Cowell the band responded that "Simon is an interesting character who seems to have profited greatly from humiliating people on television. We see this [campaign] as a necessary break with his control."

After expressing how privileged they felt about being chosen as the anti-corporate anthem by the grass roots they rounded off the discussion by saying that it shows that whether it's a "small matter like who's the top of the charts, or bigger matters like war and peace and economic inequality, when people band together and make their voices heard they can completely overturn the system as it is."

Good stuff. You have until the end of Saturday 19th December (at 23:59pm) to buy your copy, which you can do for 69 pence here. Don't bulk buy - it wont count! The organisers of the campaign have also asked people to make a donation of a pound to Sony, sorry I mean Shelter, when you buy your RATM which you can do by clicking here.

Activism is good for you

Well, I'd say that political activism is good for society. An engaged and confident citizenry is able to shape society and hold their 'betters' to account in a way that a passive electorate that simply take the gruel their given without rocking the boat cannot.

Well, according to this little article, it's not just good for society its also good for the activists themselves. Researchers "recruited hundreds of college students and found that those who identified themselves as activists and who said they were planning some activism were happier and more fulfilled than non-activists."

Our intrepid researchers didn't stop there though because as yet they couldn't tell whether it was happier people who got involved in politics or the activity that perked them up. So they tried this little test "One hundred and twelve student participants were encouraged to write to the college cafeteria director calling on him to source food more locally and ethically. These students subsequently reported feeling more energised and alive than a control group of participants who wrote to the director calling for tastier food and more choice".

I suspect this is a load of nonsense, of course, and generally I would say that a lot of an activist's happiness may well come down to whether they are winning or not - but what about activists' spouses or children? Personal experience tells me that they are not always over the moon about their loved one being out all hours prioritising a residents' association over baby's first steps.

I'm definitely not in politics because it makes me personally happy but because I probably couldn't stop if I tried. A natural born busybody I guess. Maybe there is something in the idea that the more control you have in your workplace, your community, your local newspaper, whatever, must give you some feeling of satisfaction - even if your politics are definitely of the malcontent rather status quo kind.

Open Letter to the Met from Climate Camp

The Camp for Climate Action has issued this open letter to the Metropolitan Police as a helpful guide on how to ensure the camp is a healthy, safe, and community orientated place to be. Enjoy.

Not all occupations are bad

The anger that people always feel when their services are cut or their jobs threatened is combined with a sense of desperation when combined with the current economic situation. One of the fantastic new developments has been a whole range of occupations that have sprung up in response to attacks on working class people.

When Glasgow City Council proposed closing or merging 13 primary schools and 12 nurseries across the city parents were enraged. Glasgow Save Our Schools demonstrated, they lobbied the council they made their voices heard, but it wasn't enough and parents took their hearts into their mouths and occupied two of the schools under threat in an effort to save them from the axe.

This extensive video shot from within one of the Glasgow school occupations allows you to get a real flavour of how people feel about the closure of their services and why they have taken the action that they have;



But it isn't just the defence of public services - it's also the response to job losses that workers at the Visteon manufacturing plants have taken in Enfield and Belfast. Hundreds of workers, told they were to lose their jobs, took direct action to defend their livelihoods and staged sit ins. It's great to see.

Messages of support can be sent to steve.hart@unitetheunion.com or text to Kevin (Enfield) 07956 375 410, Des (Basildon) 07814 432 215 and John (Belfast) 07816 590 380.

G20 protest reports (updated)

Whilst things sound tediously status quo within the cloistered halls of the G20 summit there's been some splendid goings on among the protesters. I thought I'd try to give a quick summary (feel free to chip in with more).


My favourite way of following the action has been via this twitter feed where participants give up to the minute text reports. It's had a really exciting feel to it.

As you might expect Indymedia is following events closely with its team of embedded street journalists (which is where I stole this pic from). You might want to check out the newly revamped London Indymedia too.

Currently (midnight) the police say they have arrested 63 people and that RBS has been invaded (BBC video). Capitalism is a con claims man on Radio Four.

BREAKING NEWS: Man dies at protest... more info when I have it.

Bloggers;

• Big Green Factory on police provocation
  
• Sunny blames the cops for the violence.
• Owen says the ruckus was sponsored by Job Centre Plus.
• Vanessa Baird asks, were the protesters asking for it?
  
• Vicky asks whether the police are murderers.
  
• Ben Six tells the story in pictures.
• Anna Racoon focuses on the reporting but is unsympathetic to the protesters.
  
• Richard says make kettles illegal. Police kettles, obviously.
• James takes a look at kettling.
• Martin has some critical thoughts.
  
• Ecomonkey talks of the police imprisoning protesters.
• Leila is pissed off at the media.
• Journeyman says there was no riot.
  
• Noel Lynch is carrying a report on police tactics today.
• Lenin reports on police behaviour. Peope were "pounded with clubs and left covered in their own blood."
• Student Medic also reports on the violence
  
• One Telegraph blogger brings us the bizarre snap of one man smashing a window whilst surrounded by cameramen (including the one behind this camera I guess).
• Dave Osler on red scares around the G20.
• James at Two Doctors thinks the protesters are more important than the summit.
• Kemptown Ben is proud to have attended.
• Molly reacts to not being there.
  
• One banker is blogging at G20 London Riots - good pics, do visit!
• Harpy Marx pics and report.
• Jo Abbess on police provocation.
• Tres Lola gives a full report on her day.
• Richard calls it a police riot.
  

Reporters;

• The Telegraph says that RBS is being "looted"!
• Al Jazeera takes a look at these strange "anti-capitalists".
• Washington Post has some pretty sweet coverage.
  
• Paul Mason gives his thoughts so far (mainly of the summit itself)
• The Guardian on clashes with the police. They're also live blogging. Good pics too.
  
• The Independent on protests at the heart of the credit crunch. Setting up the camp.
  
• The BBC have some great pics and reports. Also on the camp.
  
• Billy Bragg in the NME on why he's protesting.
• The Australian on the "violent clashes".
• CiF reports on an alternative summit.
• What important to the Mirror? Which stars turned up.
  

Other sites;

• Official Green Party statement
  
• WDM banned from summit. Why?
  
• Monsters and Critics have a load of good photos.
  
• Socialist Worker outside the Bank of England.
  
• In Defence of Marxism has a report on the events overall so far.
• Climate Camp site is rather important if you're going down.
  

Youtube;

• Reporter getting hastled by cops.
• Sympathetic news report.
• Violence.
  
• Reports from Saturday. Includes Ed Miliband!
• Anarchists and leftists are cool, angry, angry and cool. With brass band music.
• Ugly scenes outside Banks of England
• Al Jazeera report where the reporter gets mobbed by police whilst talking to camera.
  

My favourite reports so far have been about the bankers taunting demonstrators by waving ten pound notes. Tenners?!? Feeling the crunch boys? Poor things...

Best quote so far on Radio Four report. Journo asks protester why he's there. Man seems surprised. "I don't believe in anything, I'm here for the violence." That's it - don't let THE MAN know your secret plans!

Pick of the tweets: Grimdotdotdot Protesters "let us on! It's a free country!" Riverboat captain "and I'm choosing not to let you on my boat. Now bugger off!"

Best photo of the day can be found here or possibly here. Weirdest is here.

All power to the people

Energy policy has never been more central to the public interest than it is today. It's always been at the heart of the economy and social equality, or lack of it, but today if we continue to use energy in the way we have been it will pose an existential threat to our glorious civilisation.

Yet, as a society, we leave almost every aspect of our energy production in the hands of private corporations, hampering our ability to direct and control this absolutely vital industry. Whilst there are snouts in the trough changing course on energy isn't just made more difficult - it's nigh on impossible.

Of course, I'm for the renationalisation of public utilities in general. Mainly it's the arguments around efficiency, democratic acountability and cutting out the middle man fat cats that I find most persuasive - but with energy there is something far more fundamental going on.

Climate change means we have to fundamentally change the way that we are using natural resources right now. Those with vested interests in the current structures cannot help but act as a conservative force on the radical reforms required. It's impossible for them, even when they agree in theory, to overcome their sectional interests, even when it might mean a loss of profitability in the long run (see Stern).

I genuinely believe that even with the most progressive board they will find it impossible to put the planet before their profits - even if it were legal for them to do so. We wouldn't leave the conduct of a war in private hands, and climate change threatens more lives than any war we've fought in to date.

The example of historic clean air acts proves that government intervention is essential to bring the self destructive tendencies of private enterprise to heel. But whilst robust government legislation would be more than welcome it seems to me that the problem is so urgent and the industries in need of such a comprehensive overhaul that we need to take things far further - to bring energy production in house through the nationalisation of the utility companies.

As we speak the first day of Green Party conference has just finished and I was pleased to see that they passed a motion recognising the need for more democratic control. The motion (on economics C01 amendment 2 for those who want to look it up in the conference guide (pdf)) states that we are for;

"Taking all energy distribution into public ownership and ensuring that energy production becomes a mixture of public and private enterprises... The distribution mains for electricity and gas will be brought into a fully accountable public sector. Energy production would be a mixture of public and private enterprises."

I think this is a very positive and pragmatic motion which, if enacted, would dramatically increase our purchase on what actually happens within the industry allowing energy to be more properly integrated into the wider strategy of saving the world.

Obviously, it talks about a mixed economy and I'd go further than that, but I accept there is a role for the social entrepreneurs (for example) who've set up renewable technology companies or micro-generation businesses and they aren't top of my list for bringing under the People's Commissariat for Power although I do think we have to recognise that they only exist because the government has refused to take the issue of renewable technologies as seriously as the situation has demanded.

PS: some of the attendees of conference are "twittering" follow them here over the next few days.

Electoral Reform

John Cruddas, the as left as you can hope for Labour MP, has been arguing for proportional representation today - which is good timing in the shadow of the European elections which were the first significant elections in this country to be conducted on a proportional basis.

Since the Euros we've seen other bodies like the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and London Assembly all created using at least partial forms of proportional representation - and in the case of the London Mayoralty a form of STV (where you can rank your first and second candidates). All of these new models have resulted in more collaborative style in politics, and have often led to the electorate being able to make powerful statements.

It's not that long ago that Ken Livingstone won an earthquake on an independent ticket against his old party (as well as the rest of them). He was undoubtedly assisted in that by voters being able to vote for him and Labour simultaneously. The Greens were able to use their own Mayoral candidate last time round to bolster both their assembly vote and advocate Ken for Mayor with some, but not enough, success. It's nurtured a more grown up form of politics that's been fairly alien to the British political system to date.

Likewise UKIP made significant gains at the last Euro elections helped by a system that attempts to represent the views of a region not just winner takes all. Whatever I think of UKIP and their shonky MEPs what is undeniable is that this result was a genuine reflection of the people's will. Compare that to the 1989 Euro elections (conducted under First Past The Post) where the Greens received 2.3 millions votes (15% nationally) but not a single MEP. Literally millions were disenfranchised.

The core to Cruddas' argument is that under our current General Election system parties are forced to concentrate their fire on the 10% of the seats that could swing either way leaving the rest of the country essentially untouched by political campaigning, and unable to effect the outcome of the election. It's a postcode lottery as to whether your vote has any impact at all.

It's certainly the case that where the BNP have made local election gains it has overwhelmingly been in areas that are "safe" Labour seats and have barely seen a local politician in years. Likewise in Cambridge the Greens won their first councillor in a Labour safe seat that had been effectively uncontested for decades.

These are the rotten fruit that should have fallen from the bough long ago. Far from being areas that impudent new comers should be avoiding massive majorities will often indicate support that has been taken for granted and can be won by any alternative that takes the area seriously over the course of a few years.

As far as it goes I'm all for what Cruddas is saying although I think we need to go far further.

I'd be for a wide ranging democratisation of the country's institutions and, crucially, the economy. In terms of other government bodies I'd be for the replacement of the House of Lords with a new second chamber elected on a PR system, preferably open lists, the abolition of our current Head of State and let's not forget the lower rungs too - PR in local elections, with full powers returned to councils, is just as important in ensuring that the citizens of this country have a say over what happens in their local area.

We should also look well beyond representative democracy and examine how citizens can participate more directly. In Cuba citizens who collect a certain number of signatures have a right to address the government directly and to have their demands debated. In Venezuela they have set up fully funded local committees in parallel with councils, who have helped to shape education and social reform in a way that the community can have a direct, unmediated control over.

We need to bring an emphasis onto the role civil society can have in empowering ordinary people. Whether that's the trade unions, community organisations, churches or campaigning bodies there are pre-existing bodies that can be a valuable mechanism for democratisation as long as we go beyond the vacuousness of consultation and contentless inclusion of a couple of community members on some powerless quango.

I could go on - but my point is that we need to look outside of our current institutions in order to bring a more real depth to the word democracy. Yes, I'm very much in favour of the democratic reforms Cruddas is suggesting - but it's pretty thin gruel when you start thinking about how far we could really go before we even begin to challenge the fundamentals of twenty first century capitalism.

Shock news: the police are liars

Just to recap on police mendacity around the camp for climate action last year;

Confiscated weapons: toilet roll, camping equipment and board games. The weapons stash (as it was described by the BBC) is pictured right. It's like a game of Where's Wally isn't it - can you spot the WMD children?

Injured cops: top cops blamed protesters for over seventy injuries. Turns out that not a single one of those injuries had been caused by protesters. Boo boos include bee stings and heat exhaustion. The one I like the best was "officer injured sitting in car"... wtf? The BBC shakes its head in a disappointed manner.

Monitoring journalists: first they said they didn't target journalists, then they said it was okay, be cool, today Bobbies say it was wrong. I'm sure they really mean it, after all if it took them this long to come clean they must have thought about it long and hard, having a real change of heart.

The police tried to say they filmed journalists by accident - in the hurly burly of a large, complex protest. But the footage shows clearly that the police camera man knows exactly who he's filming and that they work for ITV, Sky and other broadcasters, taking great interest in the showing of press identification. In fact, he makes it clear his opinions on the freedom of the press to come and go from the protest and journalists are later followed to a restaurant where they file their reports using wifi.

It also appears that the Metropolitan Police may have lied in court about the practice which isn't just naughty - it's imprisonable. Well it would be if the courts cared about policemen lying to them.

Police targeting journalists for surveillance is not cool. Lying about it takes that not coolness and adds an extra pinch of tut. Do watch the Guardian's sample footage of the films the police took, fascinating stuff.

Is it cos they are horrid? Yes. But it's also because they want to justify their actions, and if you pump up the threat in the press - making out protesters are tooled up and are nasty to good, honest coppers by stinging them with bees it allows you to rough them up, intimidate them, make protesters life a misery and generally behave like arseholes.

The police have a material interest to lie because it gives them more scope to abuse their powers - which means we need to introduce a material interest for them to tell the truth - like sacking those who tell pork pies. Apologies really are not enough when it is clearly *policy* to lie to both Parliament and the press. The police can't be trusted to uphold the law until they are subject to it.

Climate campers can be found later this year giving it some to the city whilst the G20 is in town.

Gearing up for the G20

It's not long before the G20 is coming to Britain - here are a few events people have laid on to make them feel welcome.

STOP ONE: Jobs, Justice, Climate

On 28th March thousands will march through London as part of a global campaign to challenge the G20, ahead of their 2nd April summit on the global financial crisis.

Sets off at noon Victoria Embankment by Temple tube station. WC2R 2 PP. Put people first


STOP TWO: Stop the war

April 1st and 2nd

The leaders of the world's most powerful nations will meet at the G20 summit in London on April 2. It will be Barack Obama's first visit to Britain. The G20 is a chance for us to demand a real end to Bush's war policies.

Our message will be 'Yes We Can'. Yes we can end the siege of Gaza and free Palestine, yes we can get the troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan, yes we can make jobs not bombs, yes we can abolish nukes, yes we can stop arming Israel.

* April 1st: march through central London on the eve of the G20, assemble central London, 2pm.
* April 2nd: protest at the Excel Centre London Docklands, assemble 11am.

Called by the Stop the War Coalition, et al.


STOP THREE: Because nature doesn't do bailouts.

April 1st in the evening... the sun has gone down, the sky is clear and stars are on view... instead of going home we get firewood from our backpacks, make tea and coffee on rocket stoves and then, just as the hunger pangs start, jacket potatoes! Yes, we are actually going to camp in the city...

Invite your friends to the event on facebook. You can check out climatecamp.org.uk as we get closer to Financial and Fossil Fools Day -- April 1st. The call out can be forwarded to your friends and email lists - it is here.

Download the postcard version for photocopying and get it out: here (pdf)


If there are more events (and I'm pretty sure there are) let me know so I can add them tot the list.

Greens and the left milieu

Apologies for the gratuitous "milieu", it's one of the posh terms that I picked up when I was in the SWP years ago - but I like it so I'm sticking with it! One of the appeals of the Green Party when I was considering joining is that it builds diversity into its constitution.

So, despite the Party having an electoral focus, it states directly that;

9. Electoral politics is not the only way to achieve change in society, and we will use a variety of methods to help effect change, providing those methods do not conflict with our other core principles.

and;

PB501 We do not believe that there is only one way to change society, or that we have all the answers. We seek to be part of a wider green movement that works for these principles through a variety of means. We generally support those who use reasonable and non-violent forms of direct action to further just aims.

It seems to me that the need to relate to other progressives outside of the Green Party flows from this in a very direct way. We need to be part of a larger "milieu" of activists in the anti-war movement, trade unions, and with other progressive campaigners alongside building roots and influence for the Party itself.

Progressive London

For example Ken Livingstone has launched Progressive London which will have its founding conference on January 24th - where a number of Greens will be on the platform alongside left leaning Labour members and others discussing how we work together over those areas on which we agree.

For me it seems like a good opportunity to build on the constructive relationship built up during the Mayoral elections but it will only come to any good if it produces something at ground level as well as a grouping of the "tops" who agree to smile at each other on approved occasions.

Convention of the Left

As it happens this is on the same day as a slightly different kind of left unity event in Manchester, the Convention of the Left, which many Greens will be supportive of. This convention is far more geared towards traditional grassroots activists, mainly of an explicitly socialist bent. Whilst not every Green will find this their cup of tea I do think it's important for us to support the convention that brings activists together and can produce useful initiatives and relationships for the future.

Trade Unions and Climate Change

In March the second trade union conference against climate change will be taking place following on from the unprecedentedly good launch last year. Possibly the most important of these events it is our chance to help one of the key social movements in this country take constructive approaches to tackling climate change forwards, building on the sterling work of those like MEP Jean Lambert. Not only because the unions have a key role in the workplace they could also be fundamental in shaping the direction of the left in the coming years, should they wish to take up that challenge.

G20 world leaders need counter summits

Left Labour MP John McDonnell, at the recent Hopi conference, was explicit in his call for progressives to be involved in the formation of a set of actions around the G20 meeting (in Watford) around April the 20th. This is a very important call as it can bring the Green Party into contact with a whole range of alternative activists that it often does not come across in its day to day work.

Whilst the G20 will be a summit of the world's top economic players we can counter pose the interests of the powerful with those who, like us, are looking for a better world. There will be a Stop the War demonstration but more importantly I think there will be the chance to put our vision of the world and learn from other "alternative" voices.
We need these opportunities to talk direct to many activists with whom we share many ideas - as well as disagreements - and I think if we are to build our role in this variety of movements and left field campaigns we need to take them as seriously as we would like them to take us.

It's not that every Party member needs to devote themselves to each and every one of these events, but that there needs to be some us playing a role in each of these important opportunities to rendezvous with co-thinkers, both before hand - making the events a success, and on the day learning from others and putting our arguments.

On yer bikes

Have you ever stopped to consider whether that bike ride you're about to take is legal? You have informed the police haven't you, you're not just thinking of saddling up and being away? Well let your confusion be at an end - the Law Lords have determined that the police do not need to be informed if you want to go for a little cycle. Whew.

Allow me to explain. There's a thing called Critical Mass, which is essentially a celebration of the bicycle through the medium of a mass, random ride and has been taking place every month in London since 1994. But the Met Police don't like it and have been leafleting the event (oh the joy, you get all sorts handing out leaflets at protests these days don't you?) which said that the impromptu rides were contrary to "section 11 of the Public Order Act 1986 and organisers needed to notify them about the date, route and participants' names and addresses. "

That's right - Sir Ian Blair's progressive coppers wanted the name and address of anyone and everyone who takes part. Pfft, I should cocoa.

The Law Lords begged to differ saying that Critical Mass had no leaders and no planned routes so nobody was responsible, which in this case is a good thing apparently. On the Critical Mass website they ask "Who are we and what are our aims?" To which they reply, faq style "We are not sure, opinions seem to differ." Bloody anarchists, no wonder the cops wanted their names.

In a statement Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers (God I hate this backwards fucking country) said "anyone proposing similar processions with no predetermined route for the first time elsewhere in the country would be acting within the law"... "It is inconceivable that Parliament could have intended, by a sidewind, to outlaw events such as Critical Mass."

So there you have it. Fun Day Out 1. Heavy Handed Policing 0. Well done chaps.

RBS "What to do if confronted by an environmentalist"

Sort of via People and Planet. RBS' guide to what to do if you get confronted with an environmental protester (click the image to enlarge).Notes of interest:

• Royal Bank of Scotland "guilty" of environmental crimes. [1]
• Friends of the Earth statement [2]
• RBS corporate responsiblity page [3]
• Ditch dirty development [4]
  

A convention of the unconventional

Sadly, I've not made the Convention of the Left taking place in Manchester - posing itself, in a modest way, as an alternative to the Labour conference elsewhere in the city. I'd had every intention of going but I've been rushing about quite a bit of late and it seemed like my life needed a bit of a space in it - so I've stayed at home and caught up on my sleep. At least I have the good grace to feel a bit of guilt, if not actual regret, about the decision.

Anyway it sounds like it's going very well and the various texts and emails I've had from participants have all been very encouraging - and these are by no means the most positive people on the planet saying these nice things! Although having said that I've had mixed messages about how worthwhile the anti-war demo was, so it's nice to know there's always something to moan about.

As an initiative the convention is a very welcome step trying to create non-aligned spaces where the left can come together and actually build up proper working relationships with each other without having to defend entrenched organisational points or give up their own perspectives. To get members of the hard left, peace movement, the Greens and Labour Left (for instance) in the same room together you really can't start by saying the purpose of the exercise is for everyone to give up their current grouping - even if that would be a welcome end point.

The Red Pepper blog devoted to the convention has some really interesting pieces, like enough of elections already which makes the point that the left needs to be able to co-exist in the same room as each other before contemplating more formal alliances. I'm all for a process that brings left wing, progressive activists together but I doubt that the time has come for a set of motions that sound good on paper but simply are not going to happen in reality.

One suggestion to come out of the convention is the setting up of independent, unaligned forums in every town where the left can come together and talk to each other like civilised human beings. Now, that shouldn't be a radical idea - but in the context of the UK left it's essentially something that has rarely happened without these spaces becoming battle grounds for various tediously dogmatic agendas. Personally, I put more faith in building up relationships without the need for worthy motions and that this can lead to the possibility for more structured cooperation later on, where appropriate and possible.

Whether that's in the electoral field, on joint campaigns or simply by producing more fertile ground for interesting political discussion it seems to me that all those to the left of Labour could benefit from a healthier, less ideologically pedantic atmosphere. I know some see the point of the exercise to create a new Marxist Party (thereby excluding most left wing activists), or the refound the left of Labour (thereby wasting good socialists' time and effort) or to promote their own organisation (which rather goes against the spirit of recognising that different parts of the left have a valuable contribution to make) but for me I think more modest aims might well sow greater rewards in the long run.

Alliances formed without genuine agreement on crucial issues are doomed to die early deaths and quite possibly produce long term divisions within the left. Far better to develop a political friendship that lasts than a rushed marriage that ends up with sterile and stupid arguments about who gets to keep the cat.

Selected posts I've spotted elsewhere; Salma Yaqoob, Scribo Ergo Sum, Liam Macuaid, Derek Wall, Serge's Fist, Lenin, Infantile and Disorderly. I'll add more when I see them, if they add something to the debate.

Rewriting the apocalypse

I'm finding it difficult to express my disgust in a calm and rational manner, but I will do my best. Plodding across town about an hour ago I came to the site of some long standing graffiti (pictured) "Apocalypse now" plastered in bright white paint on an obscure factory chimney.

Part of the joy of it is that it's tucked away and is even complete with a crossing out where the "artist" had set out but then made a mistake and started again. How often do you see that? Pretty rarely. It probably doesn't look much from this picture but it's been there for years and always brought a bit of warmth to my heart every time I saw it.


But. When I passed the factry what do I see? It's been "improved" with an additional "If not now when" with the rest of the original blanked out. Moralising tossers. Why go over part of the hidden history of Cambridge? Why not find your own spot? I just don't understand what they thought they were adding to the sum of the world's knowledge through this pointless bit of tat.

It reminds me of a wonderful bit of graffito in Ipswich on the bridge just near the train station. "Troops out of Vietnam" it proclaimed in five foot high letters. Faded but still beautiful thirty years later. What does some dimwit then go and do? Paint "Iraq" over the word "Vietnam".

Just so we're clear - in this context Troops out of Vietnam is a better anti-Iraq war slogan than Troops out of Iraq because no one, but no one, would have failed to draw the parallel themselves and it allows people to think for themselves about half a century of American wars. We don't need to be hectored. This was the act of a misanthropic philistine(s) which treats us like morons.

Obviously the council removed it all, once it had been defaced. What a shame. A real piece of modern history buggered up by some ignorant muppet.

I know some of the left think that shouting slogans at people is an effective form of politics, but frankly, for me, this episode shows that some people are unable to distinguish between politics that makes you think in an undirected way allowing for real depth - and politics that directs us to limit our thinking to shallow, pre-approved cliches that don't have a chance of persuading those outside of faithful.

Unexpected crumbs of justice - from Italy!

Bringing the police to justice is a rare and beautiful thing. Bringing them to justice in a state that is moving ever closer to fascism is still rarer, but it's happened. There is good news from Italy - and you haven't heard me say that for a while.

Mark Covell (right) was one of a number of activists who travelled to Genoa to protest against the G8 summit in 2001. Like many there he was an unashamed anti-capitalist. He wanted to see a world run for the millions not the millionaires - to coin a phrase. In Genoa there were literally hundreds of thousands ready to fight for a better world.

Mark was acting as an online sub-editor and editor of a printed bulletin for Indymedia working full time from their site in the city, sending out coverage of the protests and especially the police actions. Their response was absolutely brutal and was targeted across the movement, physically assaulting pacifists and anarchists alike (and everyone in between). Hundreds were arrested and/or beaten as they attempted to breach the "red zone" that surrounded the summit. Carlo Guilani was shot dead.

When the police raided the school Indymedia were set up in there's little doubt that they hoped to stop their role in telling the world what was happening in Genoa. They didn't want video footage of beatings and brutality being broadcast across the world. Whilst a continuation of their violence during the day this was also a no holds barred attack on the media.

The riot police set on Mark outside the building. At the time he described how a line of fifty police entering the building each gave him a kick in turn as they passed. When they were finished "He was left with eight broken ribs, a shredded lung, a broken hand, 16 missing teeth and was in a coma for two days." He's lucky to be alive let alone seeing some justice done in court.

Forty five policemen were on trial for their parts in the torture and assault on this independent journalist. Berlusconi had hoped to suspend the case (as well as the case against him) in order to focus on "more serious crimes" but he wasn't able to get his way and fifteen of those on trial have been convicted of far from trivial offences.

"The stiffest sentence was handed to camp commander Antonio Gugliotta who was given five years, while the others received between five to 28 months." The judge had hoped to give stiffer sentences but lamented the fact that there were no laws against torture in Italy.

My best wishes go to Mark on this happy occasion, and whilst seeing some of those responsible being held to account may not be everything we could hope for, this kind of ruling comes along so rarely it can't be seen as anything but a stunning victory.

Get Foxy

Yesterday saw Firefox, the open source web browser, attempt a download world record with its final release of version 3 (the beta version has been around for a little while but this is the "finished" version). Apparently there is no current record holder so I'd say it was reasonably likely that they've won that title.

Being the good citizen I am I complied and downloaded the new version which seems slightly slicker and feels a bit faster than my previous version. Which is nice. No problems so far.

The Guardian reports that they had so many downloads that it overwhelmed their servers, which is hardly surprising when you're talking about 14,000 downloads per minute.

It was an excellent stunt to help increase the take up of Firefox which, although it is the leading open source web browser, is still well behind Internet Explorer. 18.4% of browsers worldwide use Firefox against Microsoft's 73.8% - despite the fact that Firefox is free and IE is part of the dark machine.

Open source software, like Firefox, Thunderbird and Linux, use the principle that if something is collectively owned, open to all and free it actually turns out a more secure and effective system than one that is hidden behind tight security where benign users cannot point out problems, fix bugs and make cool new suggestions. That principle certainly seems to hold true and Firefox is a far better system than IE and Ubuntu is more secure than its Microsoft mirror image Windows, which is consistently vulnerable to viruses and the like.

Funnily enough when the developers first started on Firefox the logo was copyrighted which prompted hardliners to create an exact copy of Firefox (with identical updates) called Ice Weasel where even the artwork was free. I keep meaning to transfer over but never get round to it.

Alas, whilst it's nice to have alternatives to software tied into the corporate machine, you can't actually step outside of the capitalist model altogether. So, if you look at the world map, you can see that of six and half million downloads of version three just one of them is in Chad. Yes, that's one person. In fact the map looks pretty much like any other map of statistics related to wealth. The richer the country the more people are downloading FF3.

One note of caution on the map by the way: it doesn't have anything built in to account for the population levels in each country so it can give a distorted picture if you're not careful. For instance 145,000 people have downloaded FF3 in China (at the time of writing) which puts it in the darkest colour on the map - but please remember that proportional to their population they "should" be getting around two million. But the map's very interesting none the less.

"But it's free!" You cry, "surely poorer nations would have a higher take up." Sadly whilst it may be in the interests of third world countries to step out of the pockets of the big players - the very fact that they have less economic leverage has left them more, rather than less, vulnerable to that system. Whilst some development projects have aimed to promote open source it's actually been difficult to compete with the industrial might and prestige of Bill Gates and his epigones.

It's also the case, and this probably doesn't need stating but I will anyway, that with limited funds, computers, bandwidth and electricity it's probably going to decrease the number of people in poorer nations using any software at all in comparison to richer countries with a high technological penetration.

That doesn't mean letting up on promoting this sort of thing because it can't solve every problem of inequality all in one go. It just means that there are no magic bullets that can sidestep other social, economic and political factors. If bullets can step that is.

Every new society grew in the womb of the old so we can't just discard these alternatives as inadequate (which they are taken alone) but we should use them to help promote the idea of a more equitable world - where technology is available to anyone who wants it not simply rationed by wealth and kept secret for the sole purpose of expanding the riches of the powerful.

Mill Road Social Centre up and running

Excellent meeting of just over fifty in the new Mill Road Social Centre last night. Far less shambolic than I'd expected and the atmosphere was rather open and lovely. Plus there was only one dog which is always a bonus.

Over an hour and a half we discussed how to make the place more attractive and welcoming to the community, what to use it for (events already booked include a tango night TONIGHT lesson from 8-9 pm, women's only female roller derby for women, martial arts classes, poetry evenings, and an acoustic band night) all of which will no doubt help prepare people up for any argy bargy with the law and the approach revolution.

People seemed to be optimistic that the centre could be sustained at least until August, although we'll see what happens next. One amusing moment involved the author of a rather surly note that had been pushed through the door a few days ago.

The highlight of the note was "why don't you f*** off somewhere else, your graves hopefully, you c***s." What the note lacked in grammatical purity it more than made up for in, shall we say, clarity of purpose. Anyway, the guy who wrote the note turned up to the meeting and apologised to everyone and said that we were doing a grand job improving what had become a derelict site. That took some guts in my view

I think this shows the way forward. The more people get a chance to see the centre for themselves, rather than viewing it from afar, the more people will get won over by it. I'm currently considering what event to arrange as part of my contribution to making the site a happening, inclusive experience. Suggestions?

It's the twenty first century so, of course, there is a website. More importantly there is a calender which you can use to peruse the burgeoning community activities, or even book the space for your own events.

Tesco don't mean squat

A while ago I brought you the happy news that Tesco's had failed in their planning applications for the old Wilco store on Mill Road. They couldn't accept that their hopes and dreams had been crushed, so they've persisted in trying to over turn the decision. My opinion is, of course, that Tesco should not move into Mill Road, a view that happens to be shared by 95% of the local community.

Well, I've just been down to the site where an intrepid band of squatters have nipped in and occupied to see if the space could be used for something a little more useful. They're calling it a 'social centre' and they plan to turn the site into a community resource.

Whilst Tesco had let the site turn to filth, when I poked around today the whole place had been cleaned out, the walls were being painted, and the premises were on the road to becoming usable again. It looked really nice and I think that it's important to recognise setting up kids spaces, an ad hoc cinema, teas, coffees and just a place to sit and meet each other is a social good.

The No Mill Road Tesco Campaign has already issued a statement explicitly stating that they do not support the squatters, which is quicker than the Cambridge Evening News, who don't seem to have noticed them yet. In fact they go further and, publicly at least, express regret at this turn of events. "The fact that squatters could occupy the building is further, unfortunate evidence of Tesco’s failure to properly secure and maintain the back of the site, which has been allowed to deteriorate over recent months." But actually the fact that these socially conscious squatters have moved in has meant that deterioration has been reversed. Which is good.

It's a shame they've taken this position but hopefully the campaign will come round when they realise we're not talking about heroin city but a worthy attempt to help the community flourish.

For further thoughts on why Tesco is rubbish see my guest post at Ellee's place (Oct '07) or this set of thoughts that make it clear that it isn't parking problems or traffic that make Tesco a -bad-thing- and we will not have won until the last Tesco is a stinking, smoking pile of slag with one dented tin of economy beans poking through the ruins.

On Friday at seven there's a meeting to help move the project forward. If you're in the area why not pop along?