Politics

Xenophobia of the worst kind

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

What we learn from xenophobia

You probably all have some idea of the story of Jonah who was swallowed by a great fish. One of the problems with the popular story is that it leaves out Jonah’s xenophobia. Though xenophobia was unlikely to be a word that he knew, the idea of it was thoroughly encapsulated in phrases such as the Greeks and the Barbarians.

I listened to a discussion recently between JD(elingpole} and Maajid Nawaz. It appeared to be in a quiet library or reading room setting at first, but very quickly it became obvious that the setting was a set (a fake) and this was not so much a discussion but a playing to the audience. The audience’s responses were important cues to the two actors who were engaged in the play. An interesting point was made toward the end of the discussion by MW to the effect that all of the Bible stories are to be found in the Koran. That was a little ingenuous of the man, as it would be difficult to fit all of the stories of a book with c.750k words into a book with c100k without some considerable concision or redaction. I do not recall any reference to the Levite’s concubine but I may be wrong about that. Perhaps the author was right to suggest that the scriptures had been corrupted, though not perhaps in the way that he meant at that time, but rather like Caiaphas who prophesied the substitutionary death of the Lord Jesus Christ for sinners by words that he intended for another purpose.

So, when we look at the redacted version of Jonah, like the popular version, the xenophobia is omitted. Why is this so? Well, it does not appear to be in an effort to photoshop Jonah. Perhaps it is more to do with the contrast that Jonah’s story provides between Jonah’s xenophobia and the Lord’s benevolence. Jehovah, the Lord, is the God of Israel and he pronounces a judgement against Nineveh, who are the enemies of Israel, that they will be destroyed unless they repent. Why would a xenophobic Jonah not want to deliver such a message that the enemies of Israel will be destroyed?

If you know anything about Nineveh of Jonah’s day then you might say it was fear that kept him away. The Ninevites were a violent people. We talk of war crimes today; but they are nothing but littles scratches compared with the behaviour of these men. Boy racers beware; the boy racers of Nineveh had scythes attached to their wheels.

But it was not that kind of fear that kept Jonah away. It was a much greater fear than that. He feared the Lord. You say then, if he feared the Lord why did he not obey him. That is to misunderstand Jonah’s fear. Jonah knew that the promises to Israel through Abraham which were derived from the first promise to Adam, said that through Israel all the nations of the world would be blessed. Jonah also knew that the Lord was slow to anger, and did not want any to perish but rather to repent of their wicked ways. It was this he feared, that in preaching judgement and repentance the Ninevites would indeed be granted repentance by the Lord and would be saved. The judgement would not, at that time, fall. Jonah’s xenophobia did not want the Ninevites to be saved.

Jonah learned a lesson when he finally did as he had been told to do as the Ninevites did indeed repent. The Lord spared them. Jonah, having complained about the death of the vine that protected him from the heat of the sun, began to understand that the goodness of God is for all men. The covenants and the promises belong to Israel, but the benefit of them to the whole world. As a later prophet with a similar name would say: Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.

There is a sequel to the story of Nineveh, which is to be found in the prophecy of Micah who lived about 120 years later than Jonah. We shall speak of that another day.

Part II

Now none of this is to say that the redacted version is not of use. But we must be careful. Redaction may be used in a variety of ways; at the extremes we may use it to obscure the truth by removing relevant details or to reveal the truth by removing irrelevant material, or for some other purpose. So which redacted version do we mean? Well, there is only one, which is probably the part that most of us remember, that Jonah was in the belly of a great fish, sometimes called a whale (be careful here too as our scientific categories for sea creatures may not neatly fit into the categories of another age), for three days. The importance of this version is that it is a sign, or picture. The Lord Jesus Christ gave it to us: ‘No sign will be given to this generation except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.’ Jesus spoke here about his death and three days in the grave followed by his resurrection.

This is important. Jonah’s disobedience provided the sign. It was after Jonah had been spewed out by the fish that he went to preach repentance to Nineveh. Ah, the Lord is good. He shows his kindness and willingness to forgive to all men in all ages. It was not until after the death and resurrection and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, after he had come out of the belly of the whale as it were, that repentance and salvation could be properly preached to all men. The sign of Jonah was necessary, because the death and resurrection of Jesus were necessary to procure the salvation of men.

Until Jesus had died, and paid the price of sin, men remained debtors to sin. But Jesus having died and paid the price men are free of debt. Before Jesus died for sin forgiveness was offered in the hope that another would pay the price as had been prophesied. After he had actually died the price had been paid. Justice had been done and God may now actually justify the sinner.

We do well to remember the story of Jonah for it tells us of the great mercy of God towards all nations, but even more the redacted version for it tells us that because of the death and resurrection of Jesus, God is just to forgive sinners, even those as wicked as you or me, and even those guilty of war crimes such as the Ninevites. If he will forgive the greatest of sinners, will he not forgive me if I come to him in the name of Jesus Christ to ask him?

Part III

The sequel is not easy reading. The grandparents and great-grandparents of the Ninevites of that day had repented at the preaching of Jonah, but when Micah pronounces judgement, they do not listen. Their position is far worse than that of the people of Jonah’s day. Their grandparents had not previously tasted the goodness of God, but this new generation knew of Jonah and of God’s goodness, but refused to listen. Their grandparents had some little excuse before Jonah arrived, but this generation has no excuse. They reject the message that they know is true.

It was the same in Jesus day: ‘No-one has authority to forgive sins but God’, they said, ‘but here is this man, Jesus, pronouncing forgiveness’. Jesus’s response to show that he has authority to forgive sins was to heal the man he forgave. On another occasion a rich young ruler, who should have known better, addresses him as ‘Good Master’. ‘Why do you call me good?’ the Lord asked, ‘No-one is good but God’. They knew. But they conspired to kill him, and in so doing secured the very thing that they sought to avoid. Jesus was obedient to the Father’s will, and paid the price, death, for sin but not his own rather ours, so that he may lawfully and justly pronounce the guilty sinner justified and free.

Is it not the same for us? The good news of forgiveness of sins is preached throughout the world, but many wilfully ignore it. Nineveh did not listen when the second prophet came. Will we listen to the Lord today?

Republic?

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

When the heads are in the clouds

In many ways Coco prefers to stay out of politics, it is all too difficult and Coco rarely understands the arguments, but then so apparently does Republic. It is non-political. So, it is appropriate to comment then. One king was once told, ‘Obedience is better than sacrifice’. It is a word to which all kings, whether having the name king or some other epithet that is used to camouflage their aspirations to be king, should take heed. It was said of the Cretans that everyone of them wanted to be king, and of the Israelis in the time of the judges: ‘Every one did what was right in their own eyes. There was no king in Israel.’

When we look into the word of God we find that no form of civil government is approved by him than a monarchy, and even that was second best. Samuel spoke to them on the occasion of the coronation of the first king of Israel: ‘See .. your wickedness, which you have done in the sight of the Lord in asking a king for yourselves, is great, [for] the Lord your God was your king.’ The Lord gave them a king. Moses had warned them of the consequences of choosing a king for themselves, that they would groan under the burden of him.

But because of our condition which makes what Coco said in the first paragraph true, it is necessary to order civil society. How should it be ordered? Republic think it should not be a monarchy, but if you read what they have written, then it should become obvious to you that everything that they want, apart from one thing to which Coco shall come shortly, can be obtained simply be restoring to the Monarch that which parliament has subtly taken away over many years.

Why, and how have they taken away the very necessary powers of the head of state? By the very simple cry, ‘We have been elected. It is the will of the people.’ What then will we hear if, as they want, there is an elected head of state? ‘I have been elected. It is the will of the people.’ What sort of power grabs will we face then? We see it in many republics. Does Coco need to name any? They are in all six continents perhaps yet save one, but Coco is not sure where the border is between the fifth and the sixth (and Coco is not talking about the 49th parallel).

It is good that Republic raise the question, however, even though they have their head in the clouds. As Brecht said once: His economics is good, but he takes no account of human nature. And as he said it in German, it is impossible to say he has been misquoted, though Coco would accept a charge of producing a poor translation. In order to avoid the problem of our human nature, which makes us all want to be kings even if we are not Cretans, it is far better to have a head of state who is not chosen. He is king who was born to it, therefore he does not wield power because he has been given it by others for himself as so many so called kings and presidents do, but because he inherited it and having inherited it he must also pass on his inheritance to another to use for the benefit and good of the people over whom he rules, his subjects, with honesty, integrity, transparency and accountability.

Our monarchy may not be perfect, but then neither are you, nor Coco, are we? But it is better than many possible alternatives, and certainly better than their proposal. You see everything that they say they want can be obtained without an elected head of state. Does Coco suggest then that they construct their argument ingenuously simply because they dislike the idea of privilege? But it is the very privilege that they dislike that protects us from electing, inflicting upon ourselves, a man who only wants to be there for the power it gives him. Coco leaves it to you, dear reader, to answer the question.

To return to Israel, the first king was a failure. He thought little of obedience, perhaps it could be said that honesty, integrity, transparency and accountability were also absent in his rule, but Coco shall leave another to set out the theses and antitheses for that. The Lord then chose a king for them and promised that one of his line would come who would be the true king who would rule in righteousness, a man in whom honesty, integrity, transparency and accountability (yes, accountability too), would always be found and never not be found. That man came and they would not submit to his rule. His kingdom is not of this world he told the man who had power to condemn him to execution on a cross, but God confirmed that he is indeed king by raising him from the dead. One day we shall see him return in power, and all shall bow the knee to him and acknowledge that he is Lord, the true king. ‘Come to me all you who labour and are heavy laden’, he calls , ‘my yoke is easy and my burden is light’. This king came not to be served, but to serve, and whilst he is due all worship honour and praise, it is clear that his rule will always be for the benefit and good of his people: ‘Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.’

May you find, in this year of Jubilee, find rest for your souls.

Proscription

~ admin ~ 1 Comment

Happy new year to y’all. Well, at least in the UK it is for corporation tax. Income tax customers have to wait another five days for their new year.

We are presently in a period of grace granted by the EU, so I understand, for green and blue. My step-grandfather was a seaman and had tattoos, the outlines of which were still discernible though quite shadowy or blurred by the time I was old enough to even take any notice of them.

The EU are rightly concerned about the injection of hazardous substances into the skin (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59871779), even the topical application of some substances, such as polonium, is exceedingly dangerous though no one has suggested that that is in common use. The EU are more concerned about alcohols like isopropanol. I had a look at the list here: https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach

I was interested to find creosote in the list. I can now either stop looking for it or expect it to reappear in the hardware stores; I am not sure which yet, it may become a totem of distinction from the EU or a sop at upholding their standards. I was rather surprised that polonium was not on the list, or perhaps I missed it.

You may have read, some years ago (I think it was late 20th century), of an alternative to tattoos which had been proposed by a number of French chemists who had worked with goldfish. They were looking into chemical substitution, a technique which was just becoming viable as we were discovering ways in which individual molecules could be manipulated. There were reports of some successful substitutions to produce blues, reds and whites but the techniques then were far too imprecise. It really was like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, except that the nut could not be seen when viewed in the same frame as the head of the hammer. [I really liked the idea of new simile, coined in January, of using a fighting elephant to crush a flea, used by a certain Eastern country of a Western one, but realised, having attempted to crush fleas myself, that the flea is likely to be not at all perturbed about being underneath an elephant’s foot. It will just wait for the foot to move and .. Ping! Back to work mate]. However, though the work was abandoned for a time better techniques, which were developed for the sequencing of biologic molecules, and the ability to model in 3D the structures of complex organic molecules, led to the ability to manipulate these. To be able to cut threads of complex polymers and insert alien modules was the step that was required, which led to genetic modification. I would like to enter into a discussion here about the differences between genetic modification and selective breeding for they are often conflated by some who have an axe to grind, but this is not the place to do so, so I shall refrain from following my desire to do so. The ability to modify living organic material revived the ideas of chemical substitution, but now not so much with the single atom in mind but rather a sequence of coding modules in DNA. Melanin production in the subcutaneous skin is controlled by the chemical responses of these biologic structures to sunlight. The question was asked whether this could be modified in some specific ways.

Research began, as always by giving PhD students the dirty work without telling them what the real end game is, otherwise they might get the academic credit instead of you. It was quite difficult, but slowly a picture began to emerge of the processes involved, the active regions of the genome and how the differences between racial skin types affected discolouration. The real work then began, can modifications be made to change the responses of the skin? This was all hidden under the guise of finding better protections for skin from UV damage, which then attracted significant funding, though not widely publicised for fear of damaging the value of their own products, from cosmetic manufacturers. There were some small successes; limited areas little more than spots could be changed, but any increase in melanin production may have beneficial effects, and if the changes were enduring may afford better protection from UV damage.

The work continued, with the cosmetic industry involved in this clandestine work it was rather harder to do what they really wanted to do, to see if patterns could be created firstly with melanin, but also could different coloured responses be produced – greens and reds perhaps? This required work not only into the production of melanin but other colourful organics like hæmoglobin and the non active elements of chlorophyll. Some of this was quite risky as it was well known that the really vibrant colours of arsenic green, cobalt blue, cæsium orange and lead red were quite toxic in the human body, but it was also understood that if these were firmly locked into structures that the body itself produced it was unlikely that they would be broken down thus releasing the toxic components into the body where they could do damage.

This was likened to the way that a tattoo remains in situ. The tissues that contain the tattoo are renewed and worked continually, but the tattoo itself essentially retains its structure undisturbed over many years. Would this sort of thing be possible with the modified tissues? It would take years to find out of course in real human subjects, and would they get permission to try it? So they had then to find an animal with a sufficiently high metabolic rate that what would take several years in a human body may only take months. Hummingbirds were an obvious candidate, but the plumage was a problem (not to mention a certain amount of a good dose of sentimentality over using such a pretty bird in this way), so a separate programme was set up to understand the elements of the genome that controlled metabolic rates, and consider whether the appropriate factors could be introduced into the rat genome to enhance it. This was a fascinating work, and they soon discovered much more about the interrelatedness of the body’s functions though not really understanding what was actually going on. The work was being done however not with a view to understanding, that could come later, but simply to engineer the genome in the required way. Eventually, they made sufficient progress and upon seeing one of the first successfully enhanced rats, that one of the team remarked that it was as well they had not been working on bats else the simile ‘like a bat out of..’ would take on quite a different meaning.

It was the likeness to the tattoo that solved their second problem, though that could not be revealed at this stage. The result of the tattoo artist’s work produces an analogue design, but the tool is a needle inserted at discrete points. This pixelated approach could be used for the genetic modifications of the skin. They also realised that this greatly enhanced the variety of colouration that was possible. It was thought that they then needed to find three modifications that produced the tricolour of ‘primary’ colours (like RGB or CMY). A larger palette of colours would be more useful, but much more difficult to handle. The reduced palette however allowed them to, at least initially, remove the more potentially dangerous modifications for the really vibrant colours aforementioned.

The results on the rats were promising. The modifications did remain in situ over the rats, admittedly short and rather shortened lifetimes, and did not seem to have any adverse effects. Would the modifications endure in much longer living organisms? The programme would take five to ten years, and the subjects would be pigs. In the meantime work continued on the rats into production of different colours and patterns, mostly using simply blue, white and red stripes to check alignments and later some quite simple images where colours were mixed producing some remarkable results.

The researchers started to draw up business plans, but they new they would have to wait before going public for the work on the pigs to conclude, and for no epidemic of swine flu to break out in their subjects.

Leaving the laboratory, April, one of the team working with the rats, noticed that there was a new prominent notice on the tattoo parlour on the other side of the road. The notice declared in quite clear terms (as you might expect) their sentiments concerning the EU ink ban, and the devastating impact upon the ‘industry’ and artists who work in it, and then went on to announce a new service. They acknowledged that the vibrancy of tattoos would be damaged by the new rules, and that this may have a significant impact upon the self-esteem of those who wished to be painted. They also acknowledged that some of the substitute inks that they would be permitted to use had the blurring and shadowing issues seen in many older people who had been painted many years earlier. April thought that it was good to read such an honest admission of what is generally known but rarely acknowledged. The notice then went on to describe the new service. The parlour was going to specialise, and would become a post-mortem tattoo parlour for those who want a tattoo to look its best at the end, not just at the beginning. They knew how disappointed many people felt years after their tattoo that it was not what it was. The notice encouraged those who wished to be painted to wait. They could still book their slot and pay a deposit now, with the balance to be paid just before the work was done. They would be assured that the tattoo would be of the highest quality, and would not be subject to the EU rules limiting the inks that could be used. They were promised that cobalt blue, arsenic green, cæsium orange and red lead would be used if required with some even more exotic options of radium blue, promethium and tritium greens for those who wished to be seen in dimmer lighting. They would be provided with digitally produced images of the finished work to show to friends before the work had been done, and would have the guarantee that it would not fade, nor blur nor shadow. Provision would be made, in conjunction with the undertakers for the tattoo to be displayed in a most sensitive and respectful way possible, prior to cremation or burial as appropriate. A footnote informed readers that the use of radium blue would not be permitted where a cremation was to follow.

April was about to go into the shop to find out what they meant when she realised that that was some kind of joke and stormed off, annoyed that it was not the first time she had been fooled into wasting her time reading such things.

Monuments

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

The Paradox of Monuments

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’

Whenever I read these words I began to wonder what the Lord meant when he said them. There seemed to be an incongruity about them. Of course when you read on you understand what he meant for the scribes and Pharisees were about to do exactly what they say of themselves they would not have done. But let us think for a moment about the perspective that the scribes and Pharisees were taking.

They had built monuments to prophets. Why had they done this? They wished to honour the memory of those who had been mistreated by the forefathers. The prophets had in the main been rejected by the people. We would like to say that they had been fearless in their denunciation of the sins of the people, but we only need to look a Elijah to see that fearlessness was not a quality that was in abundant supply among them. We might also want to say that they were men who wanted to be prophets – how many today desire to be prophets and how many search them out, whether they claim to be of the Lord or whether they are nothing more than necromancers? But again, we find that the desire to be a prophet was in short supply. Jonah rather than do the job tried to run away to Tarshish (somewhere in or perhaps beyond the western end of the Mediterranean Sea). Jeremiah complained that what he had to say burned in his bones; it wearied him. A later prophet found that the words which were sweet in his mouth were bitter in his stomach. No, it was not so. These men were ripped from obscurity: Amos a shepherd from Tekoa. Even Ezekiel and Isaiah, priests, could have remained in obscurity had they not been made a prophets.

The prophets were not popular men in their own day. Jeremiah complained that the words burned in his bones when he tried to keep silent. Isaiah who spoke his words openly in his early days, in later life had to speak more cautiously as the persecution grew and he spoke of the coming Messiah to the house churches before he was cruelly sawn apart by Manasseh’s crew.

They were honoured by the scribes and Pharisees of the Lord’s day, who said ‘we would never have done such things’, but in their hearts a cold December was waiting to be revealed.

What of today, we have statues and monuments to men, which men today find offensive. Those who pull them down say, ‘we would never have done such things’. Those who wish them gone say ‘We must change our practices’ and ‘Why is it such an agony to remove them’. But we benefitted from what they did, we are their descendants; they are our ancestors.

But are we any different than they were? Are those who pull down statues any different than the ones who put them up and the ones whom they represent? If they were slavers, are we any less so? Do they and we not buy at least some jeans, sandals, shirts, sweat shirts, t-shirts, track suites, trainers, trews, trousers, and whatever else men in these days wear from retailers who source at least some of their products from the sweat shops of south Asia made with cotton from the plantations of central Asia? Or are they the minority who go out of their way to discover the source of the materials in every item of clothing and refuse to do business with any who have any connection with slavers.

No, men are the same today as they were when they persecuted the prophets, as when they built monuments to them, as before slavery had not been abolished in the British Empire and as we are since that time. There may be external differences. Men may show their revulsion of certain things in different ways, but within the hearts beat in the same way, and the desires of those hearts are the same.

It is easy to throw stones at men of the past. They cannot answer back. Why do they not throw stones at the slavers of today or are the consequences too great to be contemplated? Ah, yes, I almost forgot, the Lord who said that those who build the monuments are no different than their forefathers who persecuted the monumented, also said that the one who is without sin should throw the first stone.

The people who are so vocal about the erasure of the memory of these things cannot throw stones at the ones who continue the practices which they claim to revile, for they are themselves as guilty as their ancestors. They continue to benefit from the things they claim to hate, not as a consequence of past actions, but of what they do in the present day.

The Lord goes on the speak of how those who built the monument will behave in contradiction of their words in the not very long coming after days:

Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers’ guilt. Serpents, brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell? Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

But he also weeps that they shall behave in such ways:

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate; for I say to you, you shall see me no more till you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!’

Men continue to reject the prophets of the Lord Jesus, and treat his people like this. Oh that they would yield to him and be gathered under his wings.

Finally, a word of caution before you tear what I have said apart, but if you wish to do so, then please do for I am willing to learn. It will help me to present the case in a better way next time round, but I am aware that it is possible to represent the prophets in a different way than I have done in the preceding paragraphs. I have chosen this approach deliberately in order to illustrate what I have to say but not to misrepresent them. I know that It is not a complete representation of the prophets. They, and we, are complex individuals. When we try to produce a line drawing of ourselves or anyone else it will inevitably fall short of providing a complete picture.

A shameful date

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

There was no interference

It was a news report this morning that suggested a song with refrain to Auld Lang Syne:

So then the police spoke this way:
We do not investigate
Historic breaches of the law
Regulations that you know.

There has been no interference
No political pressure
The choice is theirs, and theirs alone
As you heard from you know who.

An independent investigation
Then had to take place
We wait for its report to come
Before we judge the case.

There has been no interference
No political pressure
The choice is theirs, and theirs alone
As you heard from you know who.

Just as the report is about to come,
To be published as you know
The police begin to investigate
To start their enquiry.		There has been no interference
No political pressure
The choice is theirs, and theirs alone
As you heard from you know who.

Now the report cannot be seen
In full as it might have been
For that you know might prejudice
The police enquiry.

There has been no interference
No political pressure
The choice is theirs, and theirs alone
As you heard from you know who.

We must await the police report
On these most serious things
Our own report will silent be
On all but trivia.

There has been no interference
No political pressure
The choice is theirs, and theirs alone
As you heard from you know who.
©Credits:
Noteworthy Composer for scoring and producing the midi file
Melody Assistant by Myriad Software for producing the mp3
Virtual Singer for singing
Powerpoint for producing the mp4
BBC for reporting the new content that inspired the song with refrain
Tradition for remembering the music
Wikipedia for providing a low resolution image of Test Card C

Copyright notices:
The background image is believed to be a screenshot of what may be a copyrighted television programme which would then be © Copyright BBC & BREMA (British Radio and Electronic Manufacturers’ Association). It is further believed that the use of this low-resolution screenshot for illustration of its purpose, to demonstrate good quality, reliable reception without interference qualifies as fair use. This resolution of the image of Test Card C does not substantially affect the benefits, which belong to the copyright holder, and can be considered a fair use.
The words are © Copyright Stuart Moffatt 2022. Commercial use is expressly prohibited but otherwise they are hereby made freely available for use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Licence modified to exclude permission for commercial use. This exclusion may not be overridden.
☺With apologies in advance for errors of syntax, orthography and grammar which may be found embedded in this document whether arising from oversight, incorrect application of language packs or generally any other misadventure; and in general for any offence given inadvertently or inappropriately or both taken or not taken by those whose sensibilities, whether grammatical, orthographical, moral or simply personable, have been offended whether, not or if you have not incorrectly misunderstood the content, intent, meaning and purpose of this article, and to those whose copyrights may have been inadvertently or wantonly infringed, but never as to cause damage the copy holder’s rights, and, if you have managed to read this far, for any errors or omissions whether wilful, unintended, innocent or deliberate in the content of this polemic, and with thanks to you who have made it thus far for your patience.

A Striking Image

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Sometimes Coco’s posts are far too wordy, so he thought he would keep it simple today. See, there are already far too many words!

Explanations of art work flow quite readily from artists these days, Coco supposes in part it is because the art cannot speak for itself, but Coco hopes that what he presents here requires no explanation and that you will all fully understand it. It is, with a little thought such as you might give to a cryptic crossword, completely self explanatory. Coco had noticed that the BBC had presented some striking pictures from around the world today, so he thought to present you with a striking picture also. He was going to give it a name but that is entirely unnecessary, it shall be left simply with the adjective that has already been provided.

© Stuart Moffatt 2022

Blame

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Why look for a scapegoat when the answer is obvious?

Putney High Street
Congested traffic near the Post Office on Putney High Street, London, February 1910. (Photo by Topical Press Agency/Hulton Archive/Getty Images

The BBC reported it, and no doubt others, but why look for a scapegoat when the answer is obvious?

London congestion: Cycle lanes blamed as city named most congested

Coco thinks they are talking about motor vehicular congestion which is surely caused by motor vehicles. If there were not so many of them there would be no congestion.

Sometimes we look for blame where there is no blame.

Another article reported: Racism: Vaughan Gething (a Welsh government minister) talks about everyday prejudice, saying that he was often asked if he is a member of staff at restaurants because of his skin colour. And followed up with an astonishing remark: ‘If I were a white man relatively smartly dressed going to a place like that, that isn’t what people would ask.’

Is it indeed a terrible thing to be approached as if you were a member of staff. It is something which happens to Coco also, often in large, largely empty stores. Coco would apologise that he was not; then learned that sometimes you can just go along with it, after all Coco might know the answer to their questions, and members of staff are like policemen there is never one around when you want one; then finally settled on the reply: I’m not a member of staff, but what is your question? After all customers can help each other.

What was Coco’s ‘crime’? It might have been the colour of Coco’s skin, but no, the most common reason given was the white shirt and tie.

To turn the minister’s words around: [As Coco was] a white man [relatively] smartly dressed going to a place like that, [that is precisely] what people would ask.

There are many reasons why we may be identified as staff members. It is not an insult, neither is it racism. It is a misunderstanding; and when the other person does not know you from Adam, who can blame them?

So when you go to a smart restaurant, please remember it is not the beach, nor is it a sports arena, then we shall all look as tidy as the waiters do.

The Lord said: When the king came to see the guests he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. So he said to him, Friend how did you come in here without a wedding garment? The man was speechless. Then the king said to his servants: Bind him hand and foot, take him away and cast him into the outer darkness where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

The king I am sure had made provision for the robing of his guests as he had previously sent his servants out to gather people from all over and bring them straight to the feast. There would be tailors and carpenters, butchers and farmers, merchants and servants, candlestick and carpet makers none of whom were allowed home to dress properly. Our king, Jesus, has made provision for his people to be at his wedding feast. We can never be good enough (clothed in righteousness) to sit at the feast, but in his death on the cross he took our filthy work clothes off us and gave us a robe of righteousness fit for the wedding feast of God. (Matthew 22)

The High Street after road improvements were put in place

African slavers

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Slave catchers galore

In Nigeria, I remember my grandmother saying that when she was a little girl her great grandmother always said, ‘be careful how you’re behaving, if you’re naughty I’ll give you two the slave catchers’.

That must have been a terrible, terrible thing to tell a child…

Coco also remembers being told: ‘Watch out or the bogey man will get you’, though who ever said it I do not now remember. It may even have been on my own lips to one of our many cousins. I suppose such things have often been said to little children to bring them into line.

These words were reported by the BBC being on the lips of professor who by reason of her provenance and vocation really should know better.

You see these words were said in connection with the Atlantic slave trade which was abolished by the United Kingdom over 200 years ago. Now it may have been possible that Coco’s grandmother’s great-grandmother may have been born before the act of abolition, but I think it hardly likely that the speakers’ grandmother would have heard her great grandmother saying these words to her before then. We must understand then that the slave catchers referenced here are not the same category of slave catcher that was involved in the European sponsored slave trade which we had long before then abolished, but perhaps they were; let ius see.

To whom is the reference made? We know that the slave trade continued in Africa long after we had renounced, and repented of our part in, it, for despite [colonial] efforts to do so in Nigeria it continued until the middle of the twentieth century. In effect we had to (perhaps were forced to) live with it. We also know that the slave catchers for the trade in which our ancestors had been involved was fed by the ancestors of those who today live in West Africa, and many Africans also made themselves rich on the proceeds of the trade.

Coco can only suppose then that the slave catchers of which the lady’s grandmother heard were those African slave catchers who refused to give up slavery during the twentieth century. So why bring them up in connection with a discussion about whether to retain statues of and monuments to men who were involved in the Atlantic Trade? We perhaps need to consider that the monuments may not be there because of their involvement but despite their involvement.

At least it is a little bit of an acknowledgement that without the willing co-operation of African slave catchers the Atlantic trade would not have been possible. Perhaps it is also an unwitting acknowledgement that the lady’s own ancestors, and perhaps even some of the close relations of the grandmother’s great-grandmother, were themselves slave catchers. The tip of the iceberg has been revealed, but when will the remainder of the iceberg of African involvement be exposed? I guess it is easier to transport an iceberg intact to Cardiff, Edinburgh and London than it is to Calabar and Bonny; to Birmingham than to Abuja. Coco doubts that reparations shall be required of the descendants of the real slave cacthers.

I love, I love my Master. I will not go out free, for he has paid the price for me. He has set me free (Frances Ridley Havergal alt.). I have referred to this before, but it remains true: ‘God has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their pre-appointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. ‘ From one blood, or from one man, means we of all nations have one common ancestor. We are all cousins, and it is his intention to gather his people from all of the many nations into one family.

Let us seek the Lord through the Lord Jesus Christ in whom alone we shall find salvation.

Slavery: ‘Time for decisions’ on slave owner statues and street names

Pizza or Tennis: a diplomatic incident?

~ admin ~ 1 Comment

A warning to Wiebo users: do not share this. And yes, Coco does know that word this is miss-spelt as Coco does incorrectly spell ohters.

Freckles are apparently a diplomatic matter in one oriental country. Well perhaps Coco is overstating it, but apparently pizza is, which not being Italian Coco would not of course understand. We begin with the BBC in 2018 Dolce and Gabbana cancels Shanghai fashion show amid racism accusations:

‘Another user adds that a wave of companies and individuals have been smeared over “insults to [Seres]”, noting that the D&G incident was “raised to diplomatic level”.’

which was about an apparently entirely inappropriate pizzese incident.

This in 2019 then becomes a freckles incident Zara advert gets China asking: Are freckles beautiful?:
Some said that Ms Li’s appearance looked “ugly” to them.

Others have gone further, questioning whether Zara was “insulting” or “defaming the [Serenites]”, with one saying: “such pictures featuring an Asian model with freckles and an expressionless pie-shaped face mislead Westerners’ impressions about Asian women, and can lead to racism against Asian women.”‘

And then the small eyes incident [Sinæ]: Photographer sorry for ‘small eyes’ Dior picture:

In an editorial by the [Peking] Daily, the model in the Dior photo was described as having a “gloomy face” and sinister eyes”.

“The photographer is playing up to the brands, or the aesthetic tastes of the western world,” the editorial said. “For years, Asian women have always appeared with small eyes and freckles from the Western perspective, but the oriental way to appreciate art and beauty can’t be distorted by that.” Meanwhile, a commentary by [] Women’s News said that the image of the model with “swollen single eyelids” made people feel “uncomfortable”.’

Well, a face is a face, whether it is a freckly face or not is not your choice, but photoshopping a photograph of a face is the real distortion. In most of these extracts from the BBC articles quoting comments, by Coco assumes orientals, we could substitute references to orientals with occidental, perhaps even accidental, references or references to any other racial stereotype.

However that is not Coco’s point. If an advert is capable of going up to diplomatic levels, as has been reported, why is the disappearance of Peng Shuai not a diplomatic matter?
Peng Shuai: China says tennis star case maliciously hyped up

Perhaps the question should rather be, in the light of the deliberate malicious hyping up of photographs in advertisements of absolutely no consequence, why does that country suggest that the controversy, which does have consequences, surrounding tennis star Peng Shuai has been maliciously hyped up by others?

Of course, Coco hopes that Peng Shuai is well and free, but in the face of obstruction and obfuscation, by a government that hope has little on which to hold, which perhaps brings us back to Wuhan.

Daniel provides a commentary one who outgrew his boots: “‘Is not this great Babylon that I have built for a royal dwelling by my mighty power and for the honour of my majesty?’ While [this] word was still on the king’s mouth, a voice fell from heaven: King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken. The kingdom has departed from you. They shall drive you from men and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field…until you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever he choose.’ … Nebuchadnezzar was driven out .. and ate grass like the oxen. His body was wet with the dew till his hair had grown like eagles’ feathers and nails like birds’ claws. “

Blacklisted

~ admin ~ Leave a comment

Carpenters, Cleese, Cambridge and Christmas

Coco was not sure what was the most astonishing the Carpenters, Cleese or Cambridge and Christmas.

The carpenter stretches out his rule, he marks one out with chalk; he fashions it with a plane, he marks it out with the compass, and makes it like the figure of a man, according to the beauty of a man, that it may remain in the house.

He cuts down cedars for himself, and takes the cypress and the oak; he secures it for himself among the trees of the forest. He plants a pine, and the rain nourishes it. Then it shall be for a man to burn, for he will take some of it and warm himself; yes, he kindles it and bakes bread; indeed he makes a god and worships it; he makes it a carved image, and falls down to it. He burns half of it in the fire; with this half he eats meat; he roasts a roast, and is satisfied. He even warms himself and says, ‘Ah! I am warm, I have seen the fire.’ And the rest of it he makes into a god, his carved image.

He falls down before it and worships it, prays to it and says, ‘Deliver me, for you are my god!’

They do not know nor understand; for he has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, and their hearts, so that they cannot understand. And no one considers in his heart, nor is there knowledge nor understanding to say, ‘I have burned half of it in the fire, yes, I have also baked bread on its coals; I have roasted meat and eaten it; and shall I make the rest of it an abomination? Shall I fall down before a block of wood?’ He feeds on ashes; a deceived heart has turned him aside; and he cannot deliver his soul, nor say, ‘Is there not a lie in my right hand?’

It is good to see that Monty Python is as effective as it ever was in challenging the assumptions of society. I would have liked to see what sort of sketch the team would have made of the words of Isaiah about the carpenter, but I think they did not address that particular topic, though they did tread on many a sensitive toe. It seems that Blacklisting himself was a very effective weapon, subverting all expectations in true Monty Python style ‘Oh no! Please, not the comfy chair!’. It precipitated a very rapid climb down from Cambridge, which perhaps indicates that they too could not see the lie in their right hand. In the face of the loss of an opportunity to meet with the great man, they decided that to play with trifles, to turn Rommel’s words on their head, they would have to over turn their own principles.

So Cambridge does not have a black list. Well that is encouraging, but Coco suspects that that is simply another form of whitewashing. To call the list black after all might impugn a certain section of the population who may take [unnecessary] offence just as Cambridge did at a certain art historian, doing what all historians do, quoting the words of the past. So in ungood 1985 style, they do not have a blacklist, nor indeed a list of any sort, it is simply a list. or one might say a Platonian (rather than Platonic, which might incorrectly in these days of gross word abuse suggest harmless) list, but Coco wished to avoid any form of adjectival qualification of the meaning of the word. On the other hand, just as an aside, as a Platonian list is the idea of a list without any qualification as to purpose, style, or any other quality which may be possessed by a list, it is the ideal list, it serves to show that those who indulge in philosophical, semantic or logical discussion to justify themselves will find themselves contradicting the very thing that they sought to prove. Leave such arguments to the mathematicians, who will quickly find that they fall into the trap of infinity or zero if they make such a mistake. We should note however that to say ‘An ideal list is an unqualified list’ is in Plato’s world both true and untrue apparently at the same time. Schrödinger may have been able explain that. For the ideal list is, in modern expression, the null list from which all other lists are constructed, but the ideal list, in original expression, is the idea of a list as it exists in the mind. Now Coco contends that the idea of a list without any content can exist in the mind of an infinite being but in the mind of a finite being a list only exists when it has content, hence when the modern world speaks about the ideal list it means the list drawn up for the Germanic (not Germanian for that would be silly) World Cup squad. Notwithstanding these discussion about the Ideal World then Coco now wishes to return our ideas and thoughts back to Cambridge.

It seems to Coco that for Cambridge to say ‘I misspoke’ is simply a euphemism for ‘I have a lie in my right hand’.

Isaiah is not being negative by the way, he continued:

Remember these, O Jacob, and Israel, for you are my servant; I have formed you, you are my servant; O Israel, you will not be forgotten by me! I have blotted out, like a thick cloud, your transgressions, and like a cloud, your sins. Return to me, for I have redeemed you. Sing, O heavens, for the Lord has done it! Shout, you lower parts of the earth; break forth into singing, you mountains, O forest, and every tree in it! For the Lord has redeemed Jacob, and glorified Himself in Israel.

These are the words of the Lord, who has blotted out our transgression. Our lies, our offences have all been covered by the blood of the Lamb of God, whose birth shall be remembered in a mere six weeks.

A happy Christmas to you all