In the big debate, we'll be asking:
- Is Harriet equal to Gordon? And if so, has she told him yet?
- Why does the government think religion and equality don't mix? Could God have had something to do with it?
- Who would have been worse off in olden times? A rich bitch with no right to vote? Or a penniless git with it?
- Is anyone equal to investment bankers? Or are they more powerful than the Harriet Harman and can tell her where to go?
- Are all women equal? Or do Jimmy Choos make some more equal than others?
- Is Victoria Beckham what Germaine Greer had in mind?
- Organised crime? Should there be more women running these kind of outfits?
- Eton. Is it just 'toffs' who go there? Or have they let 'new money' in?
- Money? Apart from buying the best start in life, does it really make a difference?
- Or rather... money. If I've got it, do I give a f*** about equality?
Tuesday, 9 March 2010
Monday, 8 March 2010
Protection for donkey voodoo.
(The Equalities Tsar, Baroness Harmony, summons her docile legal flunky, Willie, to her office. She plans to extend 'access to justice' far and wide and wants to run a few thoughts by him.)
Harmony: As you know, Willie, I am of the opinion that everything that can have rights should have rights. Right?
Willie: Yes, mistress.
Harmony: And if big government is about anything, it is about offering protection not just to the larger groups like women and gays. We want legal protection for the smaller groups, even the tiniest ones.
Willie: But, it must be groups, not individuals, right?
Harmony: Absolutely. Never individuals - they're out. Society has no reason nor obligation to protect those who are without some kind of social classification. This is about protecting groups of people, classes... collectives. And of course they must be people who together, who united can demonstrate their understanding and appreciation of our policies at election time.
Willie. Unite and rule, as they say. (She looks mystified, so he clarifies) As in, they unite and we rule.
Harmony: I see, yes Willie, very good... Anyway moving on. Religious groups. We're fine there, are we not?
Willie: More or less. It'll be illegal to discriminate against religious groups, but religious groups can discriminate against women and gays, as you know.
Harmony: Yes, not great of course. But, as we know, Rome wasn't built in a day. So don't you worry, one day there'll be a Lesbian Pope, you"ll see.
Willie: I can't wait, I really can't.
Harmony: Me neither.. Now who's next?
Willie: Vegans and teetotallers?
Harmony: Yes, vegans... So I assume we're saying it'll be illegal to discriminate against a vegan who applies for a job in a steakhouse... or against a teetotaller who applies for one in a wine bar.
Willie: Assuming they would want to apply.
Harmony: You never know. This is not about probabilities. It's about leaving no legal stone unturned, it's about sending out a message... Anyway, who else? ...
Willie: Pacifists, humanists, environmentalists...
Harmony: Cyclists?
Willie: European Court is probably taking care of that. Motorists will always be in the wrong - even when they're in the right.
Harmony: Good. Think we'll add cyclists to our group anyway... What about agnosticists, altruists?
Willie: Still seeking clarification on those 'ists'. I think that people with philosophical views such as pacificism and humanism will get protection from discrimination. But the Equalities and Human Rights Commission has suggested that scientific or political beliefs such as Marxism and fascism should not be covered.
Harmony: Good, so no protection for Darwinist evolutionary beliefs, or that other horrid phallo-centric concept - rationalism. Yuk!
Willie: Rationalism... who needs it, eh?
Harmony: Now the Swiss are considering protection for dogs and cats. Worth considering? I'm devoted to my purring beauties - my gorgeous Persian Blues. If anyone so much as considered calling them 'moggies', I'd want to throw them in jail.
Willie: Waiting to see how the Swiss referendum goes. But it's certainly on the agenda. Maybe other animals too - horses, donkeys and other beasts of burden. Anything that can be maltreated. Obviously the money to prosecute wrong-doers would need to come from somewhere. But then it also would for other groups.
Harmony: All we can do is give people the laws. Whether they use them or not is up to them...
Willie: You can lead a horse to water etcetera...
Harmony: Indeed... Right, that list covers a wide spectrum. But our political adversaries will not be protected, which is the most important thing.
Willie: Yes... no protection for conservative groups of any sort, even conservationists, NIMBIES etc... or, as you said earlier, rationalists. None for phallo-centric objectivists and scientists... but subjectivists and relativists will be okay - they're very personal views, you see. Oh, and of course, most important... solipsists will be covered.
Harmony: Marvellous. We really are going to build our new Jerusalem, our new 'solipsist collective'!
Willie: We are indeed, mistress.
Harmony: So, one last thing, Willie. Assuming that we might be a 'minority' after the next election - a minority government, that is. Could we also protect ourselves against discrimination?
Willie: I suppose it's possible. The apparatus would be there - Surveillance, national databases, identity cards - all things designed to ensure people have the right sort of rights, not the wrong sort of rights
Harmony: And let's face it, people like myself have convictions, principles, policies that need protecting. We can't have them being ridiculed and trampled under foot. It would be good if we could legislate against attempts to subvert, or even just criticise the government and its policies. Just think... the next time Fathers for Justice trespassed on my land, we could have them on two new counts - one, upsetting the Persian Blues and two, expressing opinions designed to cause offence to a cabinet minister.
Willie: It might be possible to extend the law in that direction.
Harmony: Could you do some probing, Willie?
Willie: Right away, mistress. Right away.
Harmony: Thank you so much, Willie. That'll be all for now.
Saturday, 6 March 2010
Coming soon - Will dogs, Gods and electronic lizards have rights?
Tomorrow's post will look at changing attitudes to legal rights. At a time when government is accused of eroding hard won human rights and freedoms, why is it lawyers are asking whether legal rights should be extended to domestic pets? And where will this lead? Could intelligent robots have rights one day? And could the government that introduced the 'Religious Hatred' bill one day try and argue that... even Gods, Saints and Icons have rights?
Faith Value
Following reports this week that public forums on the website, Dawkins.net, have been closed, there has been a swift response to one of the questions that had caused a problem: How do I persuade religious believers to believe in black holes?
Question - "This question has two parts. It's to do with your average, poorly educated member of society. He’s the kind of guy who could believe in anything and everything. But for now let's just say he believes in God. So first, how do I, a physics teacher, get that kind of individual to take on board esoteric ideas like "black holes" and "wave-particle duality", when - and this is key - the mathematical proofs behind those ideas are beyond the reach of ordinary folk? And second, if I ever do get this guy to grasp these ideas, how can I really be sure that his grasp is actually what we call knowledge?”
Answer - “Well, we all need faith in some things.”
Question - "This question has two parts. It's to do with your average, poorly educated member of society. He’s the kind of guy who could believe in anything and everything. But for now let's just say he believes in God. So first, how do I, a physics teacher, get that kind of individual to take on board esoteric ideas like "black holes" and "wave-particle duality", when - and this is key - the mathematical proofs behind those ideas are beyond the reach of ordinary folk? And second, if I ever do get this guy to grasp these ideas, how can I really be sure that his grasp is actually what we call knowledge?”
Answer - “Well, we all need faith in some things.”
Friday, 5 March 2010
Financial news in brief
Banker "gives back".
An investment banker has announced he'll stand for Parliament. This comes after the revelation this week that bonuses prior to 2008 could have paid for the entire - taxpayer funded - bail-out of the same year.
"I did a lotta soul-searching, and decided that after what Gordon Brown had done for us in 2008, it was time I gave something back. That's why I've decided to enter politics."
He was then asked: "In view of the fact you lot pocketed your bonuses but never paid a penny towards the bail-out, do you also intend to give your bonus back to society?"
The prospective candidate, who has "flirted with politics for some time", demonstrated that he is already familiar with procedure on such occasions and responded: "No comment."
EasyPrint
Robert Mugabe has corrected the statement he made yesterday praising David Cameron.
"I did say that I admired Conservatives like Mr. Cameron. But I neglected to say that it was Mr. Brown and Mr Darling who endorsed my economic policies when they rolled out "quantitative easing". Maybe I should now endorse their approach by hiding my print-run in scientific mumbo-jumbo."
An investment banker has announced he'll stand for Parliament. This comes after the revelation this week that bonuses prior to 2008 could have paid for the entire - taxpayer funded - bail-out of the same year.
"I did a lotta soul-searching, and decided that after what Gordon Brown had done for us in 2008, it was time I gave something back. That's why I've decided to enter politics."
He was then asked: "In view of the fact you lot pocketed your bonuses but never paid a penny towards the bail-out, do you also intend to give your bonus back to society?"
The prospective candidate, who has "flirted with politics for some time", demonstrated that he is already familiar with procedure on such occasions and responded: "No comment."
EasyPrint
Robert Mugabe has corrected the statement he made yesterday praising David Cameron.
"I did say that I admired Conservatives like Mr. Cameron. But I neglected to say that it was Mr. Brown and Mr Darling who endorsed my economic policies when they rolled out "quantitative easing". Maybe I should now endorse their approach by hiding my print-run in scientific mumbo-jumbo."
Thursday, 4 March 2010
Class Wear.
Politicians of all parties have been paying tribute to the former Labour leader Michael Foot who died yesterday. The great political orator and academic famously sparked off a class war in 1981 when he forgot to wear a designer suit to the Cenotaph.
One former Tory grandee recalled reaction at the time. "It was appalling. There we were trying to rebrand the Conservative Party - to make it appeal to the "loadsamoneys", the self made men. And then along comes this lofty old socialist, arrogantly wearing a donkey jacket - and not a designer label in sight!"
The grandee dismissed claims that the Queen Mother complimented Foot on his choice of jacket. "Well she would, wouldn't she? You're talking about someone who asked me on one occasion: "Tell me, what do you do, Signor Armani? Are you a novus homo?" I had to point out that the "Giorgio Armani" on my lapel was the man who'd created the suit that I was wearing, and that it was the current fashion for men like myself to display their designer labels. She replied by telling me how dreadfully vulgar I was and strolled off to talk to some other people."
He added: "People like Michael Foot and the Queen Ma'am had a totally different approach to the whole retail experience, I'm afraid... They were the kind of people who'd never be happy buying their own furniture for example - something about which I am totally relaxed."
One former Tory grandee recalled reaction at the time. "It was appalling. There we were trying to rebrand the Conservative Party - to make it appeal to the "loadsamoneys", the self made men. And then along comes this lofty old socialist, arrogantly wearing a donkey jacket - and not a designer label in sight!"
The grandee dismissed claims that the Queen Mother complimented Foot on his choice of jacket. "Well she would, wouldn't she? You're talking about someone who asked me on one occasion: "Tell me, what do you do, Signor Armani? Are you a novus homo?" I had to point out that the "Giorgio Armani" on my lapel was the man who'd created the suit that I was wearing, and that it was the current fashion for men like myself to display their designer labels. She replied by telling me how dreadfully vulgar I was and strolled off to talk to some other people."
He added: "People like Michael Foot and the Queen Ma'am had a totally different approach to the whole retail experience, I'm afraid... They were the kind of people who'd never be happy buying their own furniture for example - something about which I am totally relaxed."
Wednesday, 3 March 2010
Avatart
The Pundorans hear that a precious mineral called capitalium is abundant on Earth and send an expedition to investigate. Capitalium, it is said, circumnavigates the planet at the speed of light. It has immense value, making men powerful and societies abundant. It pays for cities and the vulgar new earth colonies called Dubai - which are naff, built on sand and uninhabited. It also funds 'wars' where humans dispense with 'virtual reality' and kill each other for real! And some even say that it can buy you love.
But expedition leader, Porker, is worried. He has heard of something called globalisation, and doesn't know whether it will help or hinder Pundoran plans to mine capitalium. Reconnaissance has hinted that globalisation might have made the earth stronger, because it means that the different tribes - called countries - now co-operate. Could the global business and capitalium flows benefiting the rich and powerful also mean a united front against the Pundoran expedition?
He calls in his trusted adviser, Kis'Inger who has been looking into this:-
Porker: Kis'Inger, I really need to know. Globalisation - is it a problem?
Kis'Inger: Not a problem, Commander. My research is exhaustive. It will not affect our mining.
Porker: Even though rich and powerful companies like Microsuck and Moregain possess more capitalium and more power as a result of globalisation?
Kis'Inger: Globalisation, it is good only for enterprises and not for wider cooperating between the countries. Example is this: Two years ago the 'banks' that move the capitalium caused it to overheat, nearly occasioning global meltdown. After this, globalisation might well have helped governments work together to harmonise tax and financial regulations. The banks and other businesses couldn't then have played all the countries off against one another. And this would ensure that the overheating never happened again. But certain selfish leaders rejected this, preferring to stay friends with the banks instead. Thus global agreement could not reached
Porker: That is illogical. This would be an obvious benefit of globalisation, surely?
Kis'Inger: Could be. But all it takes is one stubborn leader and the agreement falls apart. It proves that globalisation only really benefits enterprise, and is not much use when it comes to legislation. The leaders of the various countries prefer to be repeatedly sodomised by the bankers and the powerful business men, rather than make global alliance with other countries.
Porker: Prefer being sodomised, eh? I wonder why.
Kis'Inger: (Shrugs) Who know? Probably something in it for them.
But expedition leader, Porker, is worried. He has heard of something called globalisation, and doesn't know whether it will help or hinder Pundoran plans to mine capitalium. Reconnaissance has hinted that globalisation might have made the earth stronger, because it means that the different tribes - called countries - now co-operate. Could the global business and capitalium flows benefiting the rich and powerful also mean a united front against the Pundoran expedition?
He calls in his trusted adviser, Kis'Inger who has been looking into this:-
Porker: Kis'Inger, I really need to know. Globalisation - is it a problem?
Kis'Inger: Not a problem, Commander. My research is exhaustive. It will not affect our mining.
Porker: Even though rich and powerful companies like Microsuck and Moregain possess more capitalium and more power as a result of globalisation?
Kis'Inger: Globalisation, it is good only for enterprises and not for wider cooperating between the countries. Example is this: Two years ago the 'banks' that move the capitalium caused it to overheat, nearly occasioning global meltdown. After this, globalisation might well have helped governments work together to harmonise tax and financial regulations. The banks and other businesses couldn't then have played all the countries off against one another. And this would ensure that the overheating never happened again. But certain selfish leaders rejected this, preferring to stay friends with the banks instead. Thus global agreement could not reached
Porker: That is illogical. This would be an obvious benefit of globalisation, surely?
Kis'Inger: Could be. But all it takes is one stubborn leader and the agreement falls apart. It proves that globalisation only really benefits enterprise, and is not much use when it comes to legislation. The leaders of the various countries prefer to be repeatedly sodomised by the bankers and the powerful business men, rather than make global alliance with other countries.
Porker: Prefer being sodomised, eh? I wonder why.
Kis'Inger: (Shrugs) Who know? Probably something in it for them.
Tuesday, 2 March 2010
"F*** the Rich!" - says senior politician.
A high-ranking politician has proclaimed that, despite "flirting with the filthy rich" for some time, he now believes that they are in fact parasites who exploit society, who assume that all politicians are for hire, and who have totally shafted this nation over the past decade.
The politician, speaking strictly off the record, said today: "When I started out in politics, I viewed the rich as greedy bastards who exploited the masses. But I soon realised that they had to be understood if we were ever to achieve power. I went to great lengths to see the world through their eyes. I moved in their circles, ingratiating myself as I went. I even accumulated my own moderate cash pile, just to get a sense of what made them tick. And I liked what I saw. These guys were cool. They had yachts and houses and all kinds of fabulous possessions. They were the new "rock and roll". And I wanted to be a part of it.
But sadly all was not quite as it seemed. After the financial meltdown, it was obvious what had really occurred: They had cleverly persuaded fawning politicians to turn this country into their playground, promising in return that they would provide jobs, stability and a monetary 'trickle down' to the rest of society. Then they proceeded to bleed the country dry, spirited their cash away and left the rest of us to pick up the bill.
The politician made this announcement against the backdrop of the non-dom row that has embroiled both Labour and Conservatives of late. Lord Ashcroft yesterday resigned his post as Conservative Party Chairman after admitting that he had held the post despite his non-dom status. Labour is similarly coming under criticism for its colourful array of donors that includes Lord Paul and Ronald Cohen.
"Politicians like myself feel used, you know, rogered. I trusted these guys when they said that wealth would trickle down. But instead they buggered up our economy with their financial voodoo, hid their ill-gotten gains in off-shore bank accounts, and when the balloon went up, were nowhere to be seen. And so where do I, a conviction politician, now go from here? Well, lets hope its a well paid job - for services rendered - with one of these complete and utter bastards."
The politician, speaking strictly off the record, said today: "When I started out in politics, I viewed the rich as greedy bastards who exploited the masses. But I soon realised that they had to be understood if we were ever to achieve power. I went to great lengths to see the world through their eyes. I moved in their circles, ingratiating myself as I went. I even accumulated my own moderate cash pile, just to get a sense of what made them tick. And I liked what I saw. These guys were cool. They had yachts and houses and all kinds of fabulous possessions. They were the new "rock and roll". And I wanted to be a part of it.
But sadly all was not quite as it seemed. After the financial meltdown, it was obvious what had really occurred: They had cleverly persuaded fawning politicians to turn this country into their playground, promising in return that they would provide jobs, stability and a monetary 'trickle down' to the rest of society. Then they proceeded to bleed the country dry, spirited their cash away and left the rest of us to pick up the bill.
The politician made this announcement against the backdrop of the non-dom row that has embroiled both Labour and Conservatives of late. Lord Ashcroft yesterday resigned his post as Conservative Party Chairman after admitting that he had held the post despite his non-dom status. Labour is similarly coming under criticism for its colourful array of donors that includes Lord Paul and Ronald Cohen.
"Politicians like myself feel used, you know, rogered. I trusted these guys when they said that wealth would trickle down. But instead they buggered up our economy with their financial voodoo, hid their ill-gotten gains in off-shore bank accounts, and when the balloon went up, were nowhere to be seen. And so where do I, a conviction politician, now go from here? Well, lets hope its a well paid job - for services rendered - with one of these complete and utter bastards."
Monday, 1 March 2010
A-Z of Sexual Allusion
In this article, also published in the Journal of Sexual Hermeneutics Vol.4, we will demonstrate how economic events can be rendered in terminology more readily accessible to those with little understanding of economic theory. The sexual allusion is a useful one, as most people, irrespective of class, race or gender, will encounter sexual activity, perhaps on more than one occasion, during the course of their lives. We will start with a phrase on many peoples' lips nowadays:
End to Boom and Bust -
Throughout the last decade, the Chancellor of the Exchequer claimed that he had "put an end to boom and bust". Of course, we now know that he had not. The bust was simply delayed. And when it did occur, it was far more severe than anyone had imagined
How do we understand this set of circumstances without the usual recourse to financial or economic modelling - i.e. retail prices index, credit bubbles, Monetary Policy Committee etc etc? Well, using our preferred sexual allusion, we will say that these events are akin to the occasion when two lovers choose to delay orgasm in order to heighten the very quality and range of the climax - an approach that anyone familiar with the Kama Sutra will recognise.
Now applying the sexual references to the aforementioned 'Boom and Bust' this will give a fair picture of events:-
During the period of the activity the participants chant a mantra - doesn't have to be yogic - for example, "End to boom and bust, end to boom and bust." The mind will detach itself from what is actually happening, to avoid reaching climax too early. It will concern itself with the mundane, with dreary detail - such as economic activity, interest rate policy and inflation. One of the two lovers, often the male, might even find himself talking freely and openly to his lover about the latest MPC decision to keep interest rates on hold. This can continue for some time.
Eventually the lovers will return to reality. They recognise once again that they are dealing with the forces of nature and that they can hold on no longer. They now yield to the climax and the proverbial 'bubble' bursts. The participants will lose themselves in the ensuing maelstrom of raw animal passion, before crashing into a state of inactivity, recess, and even mild depression sometimes referred to as post-coital tristesse.
End to Boom and Bust -
Throughout the last decade, the Chancellor of the Exchequer claimed that he had "put an end to boom and bust". Of course, we now know that he had not. The bust was simply delayed. And when it did occur, it was far more severe than anyone had imagined
How do we understand this set of circumstances without the usual recourse to financial or economic modelling - i.e. retail prices index, credit bubbles, Monetary Policy Committee etc etc? Well, using our preferred sexual allusion, we will say that these events are akin to the occasion when two lovers choose to delay orgasm in order to heighten the very quality and range of the climax - an approach that anyone familiar with the Kama Sutra will recognise.
Now applying the sexual references to the aforementioned 'Boom and Bust' this will give a fair picture of events:-
During the period of the activity the participants chant a mantra - doesn't have to be yogic - for example, "End to boom and bust, end to boom and bust." The mind will detach itself from what is actually happening, to avoid reaching climax too early. It will concern itself with the mundane, with dreary detail - such as economic activity, interest rate policy and inflation. One of the two lovers, often the male, might even find himself talking freely and openly to his lover about the latest MPC decision to keep interest rates on hold. This can continue for some time.
Eventually the lovers will return to reality. They recognise once again that they are dealing with the forces of nature and that they can hold on no longer. They now yield to the climax and the proverbial 'bubble' bursts. The participants will lose themselves in the ensuing maelstrom of raw animal passion, before crashing into a state of inactivity, recess, and even mild depression sometimes referred to as post-coital tristesse.
Sunday, 28 February 2010
'Uncle Bernie' endorses quantitative-easing joke.
The much loved 'investment artist' has been discussing his 'savings plan that didn't deliver'.
"There wouldn't have been a problem if they'd only changed the law to make what I did legal. Lets face it, depositors with banks like RBS would have lost all their money too, if the government hadn't stepped in and bailed them out. And remember: the government did it with your money, folks!
"What a klutz I was. These politicians sure know a thing or two. Listen boys and girls, don't make the same mistakes as Uncle Bernie. If you want to part a fool and his cash, do it the traditional way. Seek public office.
"Government - it's a licence to print money."
Elsewhere in the news - One of the architects of Enron endorses the IMF! More later
"There wouldn't have been a problem if they'd only changed the law to make what I did legal. Lets face it, depositors with banks like RBS would have lost all their money too, if the government hadn't stepped in and bailed them out. And remember: the government did it with your money, folks!
"What a klutz I was. These politicians sure know a thing or two. Listen boys and girls, don't make the same mistakes as Uncle Bernie. If you want to part a fool and his cash, do it the traditional way. Seek public office.
"Government - it's a licence to print money."
Elsewhere in the news - One of the architects of Enron endorses the IMF! More later
Saturday, 27 February 2010
The funny side of quantitative easing
The anniversary of Weimar Germany seems as good a time as any to rehash an old joke about an old joke. This one is set in ‘recessionary times’ during the middle ages. People are desperate for new ways to drum up business. In one village the goatherd, Bob, isn’t very happy. He sold a goat to Bill, who is licensed to print money. He walks into his office.
Bob: I want my goat back. You gave me ‘One Goat Pound’, and I believed that this pound really was worth one goat.
Bill: Well it was at the time of the exchange. So, what’s the problem?
Bob: Well, you then printed more ‘Goat Pounds’ without any goats actually passing hands, and then you used them to pay off your debts to Jim, who you ‘ad two chickens off of, and Ivor who had given you his entire turnip crop.
Bill: And very pleased they were too. Business is moving again as a result. Ivor and Jim have been out buying bread and the like, and Ed the baker bought more flour. And so on… People have money in their pockets again.
Bob: And you are doing very nicely out of it too, I bet. But our pound notes won’t buy goats anymore…What if I’d done the same to you and started printing goats? You wouldn’t have been happy.
Bill: Well, you can’t print goats, so piss off.
Bob: Bill, I took your ‘Goat Pound’ on trust. And you have broken that trust. And now I have lost my goat.
Bill: Well, you know what they say, don't you? Easy come, easy goat.
(Please note, this is not the anniversary of Weimar Germany. If you are approached by anyone claiming otherwise, please call our hotline and leave a message after the tone.)
Bob: I want my goat back. You gave me ‘One Goat Pound’, and I believed that this pound really was worth one goat.
Bill: Well it was at the time of the exchange. So, what’s the problem?
Bob: Well, you then printed more ‘Goat Pounds’ without any goats actually passing hands, and then you used them to pay off your debts to Jim, who you ‘ad two chickens off of, and Ivor who had given you his entire turnip crop.
Bill: And very pleased they were too. Business is moving again as a result. Ivor and Jim have been out buying bread and the like, and Ed the baker bought more flour. And so on… People have money in their pockets again.
Bob: And you are doing very nicely out of it too, I bet. But our pound notes won’t buy goats anymore…What if I’d done the same to you and started printing goats? You wouldn’t have been happy.
Bill: Well, you can’t print goats, so piss off.
Bob: Bill, I took your ‘Goat Pound’ on trust. And you have broken that trust. And now I have lost my goat.
Bill: Well, you know what they say, don't you? Easy come, easy goat.
(Please note, this is not the anniversary of Weimar Germany. If you are approached by anyone claiming otherwise, please call our hotline and leave a message after the tone.)
Friday, 26 February 2010
Exclusive extracts from "The Devil and Downing Street."
The Prime Minister and Lord Mandelson have been interviewed by broadcaster Nicky Campbell for an edition of The Heaven and Earth Show, now being dubbed "The Twilight of the Gord". The extract below says a lot about the mood at No.10
Campbell: So, Prime Minister do you pray before going to bed?
Prime Minister: Yes I do, Nicky. In fact, as someone who has always championed diversity, I pray to a number of deities - although normally just God and the Devil.
Nicky Campbell: (Shocked) The Devil, Prime Minister? You're kidding?
Prime Minister: No, I'm not. I am the Prime Minister and my task is important enough to justify it. Every night I pray to God and the Devil. I ask: Help me destroy my enemies and rule this nation with a rod of iron.
Nicky Campbell: I see...
Lord Mandelson: (Looks worried) If I can just step in... Gordon was not saying that he prays to the Devil as such. More that he has some tough calls to make in this job. Sometimes he must be merciless. Put it another way: The end justifies the means. Isn't that right, Gordon?
Prime Minister: Yes, indeed. Matters not to me whether it is God or the Devil. Just that they crush my enemies. And of course, they both have form in this area.
Nicky Campbell: Perhaps. But people will be a little shocked that you pray to the Devil, won't they?
Lord Mandelson: Listen, we shouldn't be getting hung up on this Devil business.
Nicky Campbell: Frankly, Lord Mandelson, I think that most Christians might get hung up.
Lord Mandelson: Gordon was simply using a turn of phrase.
Nicky Campbell: Were you, Prime Minister? Sounded like more than that.
Lord Mandelson: (Interrupting) Look, Gordon has a tough job running this country. Sometimes you have to crack eggs to make that omelette, yeah? Fine, so we know that God can be pretty mean, when he wants to be. But Gordon just wants to make sure that he has every weapon he can in his armoury. In other words, every possible er,... contender. Understood?
Prime Minister: Right, Peter. Absolutely. I will, if needs be, slash and pulverise those who stand in my way, I will torch the opposition front benches, I will grind down those politicians and journalists who brief against me and scorch the earth on which they tread. I'll show no mercy as I flatten and...
Lord Mandelson: OK Gordon, that's fine for now. (Whispers) Some of those tasks are mine, remember.
Prime Minister: Yes, of course, Peter.
Lord Mandelson: (Still whispering) Why don't you try accentuating the positive? You know, dish out a bit of positive spin, positive gloss. Tell how you saved the banks, why don't you?
Prime Minister: Saved the world, Peter. Saved the world.
Lord Mandelson: (Wearily) Yes, Gordon. Saved the world.
Prime Minister: Yes, Nicky, on the positive side, I scraped together what little wealth this country still had and with all my courage and determination, I chucked it all on red.
Lord Mandelson: You bailed out the banks, Gordon, don't you mean?
Prime Minister: Yes, of course. I bailed out the banks. And in doing so I saved the world. Now, on that particular occasion, I prayed to the Devil and to Mammon. I'm not saying, by the way, that bankers do the Devil's work. Or Mammon's for that matter.
Nicky Campbell: Even though in fact they probably do.
Prime Minister: Yes, even though they probably do. And yes, as a Labour Prime Minister I had reservations about the bail-out, I can tell you. But then I had a revelation: Bankers were also doing my, I mean, God's work.
Nicky Cambell: How so?
Prime Minister: The banks were in a position to prop up an ailing Labour government, create the illusion of wealth, the semblance of activity, and, most important of all, they could redefine, rebrand, hide our debt. They reinvented the balance sheet for New Labour. They let Labour achieve goals that once seemed impossible. We could spend, spend, spend like there was no tomorrow, whilst appearing to be prudent. And that is why I prayed to the Devil and Mammon... and, as always, God. All three of us working together in harmony.
Lord Mandelson: And if that isn't synergy, if that isn't win-win, what is?
Nicky Campbell: But, isn't that really a case of the ends and the means becoming indistinguishable?
Prime Minister and Lord Mandelson: (Together) We'll worry about that kind of detail. Nicky. You ask the ethical questions.
Nicky Campbell: I thought I was, actually, gents... Anyway, I must say, this is a revelation. We'll have to see how our viewers respond. Praying to the Devil... (Pauses, then addressing Lord Mandelson again) And turning to you Lord Mandelson. You kindly agreed to come on this programme alongside the PM. You're clearly interested in the ethical dimensions of politics. So... Who do you pray to, to help you perform your vanquishings, or conversely, your win-wins? (Chuckles) Do you also pray to the same Pantheon, to God and the Devil?
Lord Mandelson: Nicky, you've seen me making things happen, both in Westminster and, before that, in the European parliament? You have seen the respect that I command both here and abroad, have not you?
Nicky Campbell: Of course.
Lord Mandelson: So, don't you think that it is a bit of a strange question to be asking me? WHO do I pray TO?
Nicky Campbell: I'm sorry, I'll re-phrase it. To whom do you pray?
Lord Mandelson: (Shaking his head) Oh dear, oh dear. Nicky. Wakey, wakey? Do I pray? To anybody? Hello?
Nicky Campbell: Oh, I think I see. You don't do the praying?
Lord Mandelson: I should hope not.
Nicky Campbell: Sorry, I should have asked: So,who prays to...
Lord Mandelson: (Cuts in swiftly) Nicky... I don't think you really need to ask that question anymore, do you? I think we know the answer.
Nicky Campbell: Yes, I think we do, Lord Mandelson.
Prime Minister: (Glum) I think we do.
Campbell: So, Prime Minister do you pray before going to bed?
Prime Minister: Yes I do, Nicky. In fact, as someone who has always championed diversity, I pray to a number of deities - although normally just God and the Devil.
Nicky Campbell: (Shocked) The Devil, Prime Minister? You're kidding?
Prime Minister: No, I'm not. I am the Prime Minister and my task is important enough to justify it. Every night I pray to God and the Devil. I ask: Help me destroy my enemies and rule this nation with a rod of iron.
Nicky Campbell: I see...
Lord Mandelson: (Looks worried) If I can just step in... Gordon was not saying that he prays to the Devil as such. More that he has some tough calls to make in this job. Sometimes he must be merciless. Put it another way: The end justifies the means. Isn't that right, Gordon?
Prime Minister: Yes, indeed. Matters not to me whether it is God or the Devil. Just that they crush my enemies. And of course, they both have form in this area.
Nicky Campbell: Perhaps. But people will be a little shocked that you pray to the Devil, won't they?
Lord Mandelson: Listen, we shouldn't be getting hung up on this Devil business.
Nicky Campbell: Frankly, Lord Mandelson, I think that most Christians might get hung up.
Lord Mandelson: Gordon was simply using a turn of phrase.
Nicky Campbell: Were you, Prime Minister? Sounded like more than that.
Lord Mandelson: (Interrupting) Look, Gordon has a tough job running this country. Sometimes you have to crack eggs to make that omelette, yeah? Fine, so we know that God can be pretty mean, when he wants to be. But Gordon just wants to make sure that he has every weapon he can in his armoury. In other words, every possible er,... contender. Understood?
Prime Minister: Right, Peter. Absolutely. I will, if needs be, slash and pulverise those who stand in my way, I will torch the opposition front benches, I will grind down those politicians and journalists who brief against me and scorch the earth on which they tread. I'll show no mercy as I flatten and...
Lord Mandelson: OK Gordon, that's fine for now. (Whispers) Some of those tasks are mine, remember.
Prime Minister: Yes, of course, Peter.
Lord Mandelson: (Still whispering) Why don't you try accentuating the positive? You know, dish out a bit of positive spin, positive gloss. Tell how you saved the banks, why don't you?
Prime Minister: Saved the world, Peter. Saved the world.
Lord Mandelson: (Wearily) Yes, Gordon. Saved the world.
Prime Minister: Yes, Nicky, on the positive side, I scraped together what little wealth this country still had and with all my courage and determination, I chucked it all on red.
Lord Mandelson: You bailed out the banks, Gordon, don't you mean?
Prime Minister: Yes, of course. I bailed out the banks. And in doing so I saved the world. Now, on that particular occasion, I prayed to the Devil and to Mammon. I'm not saying, by the way, that bankers do the Devil's work. Or Mammon's for that matter.
Nicky Campbell: Even though in fact they probably do.
Prime Minister: Yes, even though they probably do. And yes, as a Labour Prime Minister I had reservations about the bail-out, I can tell you. But then I had a revelation: Bankers were also doing my, I mean, God's work.
Nicky Cambell: How so?
Prime Minister: The banks were in a position to prop up an ailing Labour government, create the illusion of wealth, the semblance of activity, and, most important of all, they could redefine, rebrand, hide our debt. They reinvented the balance sheet for New Labour. They let Labour achieve goals that once seemed impossible. We could spend, spend, spend like there was no tomorrow, whilst appearing to be prudent. And that is why I prayed to the Devil and Mammon... and, as always, God. All three of us working together in harmony.
Lord Mandelson: And if that isn't synergy, if that isn't win-win, what is?
Nicky Campbell: But, isn't that really a case of the ends and the means becoming indistinguishable?
Prime Minister and Lord Mandelson: (Together) We'll worry about that kind of detail. Nicky. You ask the ethical questions.
Nicky Campbell: I thought I was, actually, gents... Anyway, I must say, this is a revelation. We'll have to see how our viewers respond. Praying to the Devil... (Pauses, then addressing Lord Mandelson again) And turning to you Lord Mandelson. You kindly agreed to come on this programme alongside the PM. You're clearly interested in the ethical dimensions of politics. So... Who do you pray to, to help you perform your vanquishings, or conversely, your win-wins? (Chuckles) Do you also pray to the same Pantheon, to God and the Devil?
Lord Mandelson: Nicky, you've seen me making things happen, both in Westminster and, before that, in the European parliament? You have seen the respect that I command both here and abroad, have not you?
Nicky Campbell: Of course.
Lord Mandelson: So, don't you think that it is a bit of a strange question to be asking me? WHO do I pray TO?
Nicky Campbell: I'm sorry, I'll re-phrase it. To whom do you pray?
Lord Mandelson: (Shaking his head) Oh dear, oh dear. Nicky. Wakey, wakey? Do I pray? To anybody? Hello?
Nicky Campbell: Oh, I think I see. You don't do the praying?
Lord Mandelson: I should hope not.
Nicky Campbell: Sorry, I should have asked: So,who prays to...
Lord Mandelson: (Cuts in swiftly) Nicky... I don't think you really need to ask that question anymore, do you? I think we know the answer.
Nicky Campbell: Yes, I think we do, Lord Mandelson.
Prime Minister: (Glum) I think we do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)