Categories
All in the Mind

Rethinking Autism – Assorted notes

What is Asperger`s Anyway ?

Were this personality type promoted as schizophrenia without psychosis, few parents or affected individuals would ever seek diagnosis, yet the history of the emergence of this social construct clearly demonstrates its origins in psychiatry. In little more than a decade, Asperger`s has become so instilled in the public mind in Anglo-Saxon countries that journalists and playwrights may use it as a byword for social ineptitude or mindblindness. Social workers, teachers, parents and psychologists have contributed to a stereotyped view of this condition. It may refer to a form of mad professor syndrome associated with eccentric habits and incessant lecturing on some niche subject, to extreme social anxiety or to emotional immaturity. Ironically the AS-diagnosed may be considered both extrovert, when lecturing others, and introvert when isolating themselves from social gatherings. These diagnostic inconsistencies have led to the co-diagnosis of more categories such as Semantic Pragmatic Disorder (mad professor syndrome), Social Anxiety Disorder (shyness), Tourettes, Dyspraxia and ADHD. The best definition in support of the orthodox extended Autistic Spectrum Theory concerns purported deficits in the Theory of Mind module and thus an inability to instinctively empathise with others. We cannot deny that many AS-diagnosed individuals, as they are known in the psychiatric literature, seem exceedingly wrapped up in their own micro-worlds and have considerable problems interacting with peers at school, work or in the neighbourhood, often falling victim to bullying and deliberate alienation. The Asperger`s label purportedly provides hope that all this perceived suffering is not the fault of the affected individual, his parents or even necessarily of his peers, but of a lack of awareness of the individual`s neurological difference and society`s failure to accommodate the other-brained. Thus not only mind blindness is equated with physiological handicaps, some see neurological diversity as worthy of same equal rights treatment or positive discrimination as applied to other disadvantaged sections of the community such as women or ethno-racial minorities. However, this hope comes at a considerable price, that of delegating control of one`s own life to external intermediaries. After learning that normal people often bend the truth to avoid offence to others, but also to gain greater social acceptance and personal advantage over others, we are expected to place our trust in nice neurotypicals who have our best interests at heart. As Asperger`s individuals allegedly lack presentational and negotiating skills, they are naturally excluded from representing themselves except under the guidance of professionals and activists in the growing autism sector.

Three Marketing Pitches

The autism sector presents ASDs in three divergent ways, depending on the audience.

  1. When addressing affected individuals the literature emphasises the positives of neurological difference and the need for differentiation from mainstream neurologically typical society. Problems are analysed in terms of aspies' alleged deficits in emotional intelligence, a concept as dubious as categorising people based on intelligence quotient.
  2. When addressing parents and teachers, both positives and negatives are highlighted, but usually in terms of people management and their responsibility to treat their aspie children differently.
  3. When addressing various social, healthcare and law-enforcement agencies, ASDs are presented clearly as psychiatric disorders.

A good aspie accepts not only his or her fundamental neurological difference, but also resigns to the fact that this puts him or her at a disadvantage in mainstream society requiring some form of advocacy. If AS-diagnosed persons were able to stand up for themselves, as some Internet advocacy groups would like to suggest, and form viable independent communities, the label would become meaningless with any perceived disability, stigma or social alienation removed. Yet such communities have never materialised because anyone diagnosed by a mental health professional has logically undergone a period of emotional distress and under-achievement in an important aspect of their life, meaning they are inevitably sucked into the mental health system with its focus on monitoring, medication, work placements and training schemes.

Emotional Intelligence

Clearly not all us show the same degree of emotional sensitivity to others. Some, notably Simon Baron Cohen, have hypothesised a dichotomy of systemising and empathising, with males generally faring better at the former and females tending to excel more at the latter. However, it is possible to construct an alternative explanation for these manifest differences, based more on experience, societal expectations and hormonal changes.

The Control Agenda

NB: Some may view any heading with the key word agenda as a sign of paranoia.

Since the inception of childhood in its modern form, the main institutions responsible for child development have been parents and the local community, with a key role played by religious organisations with a strong presence on the ground. Industrialisation saw the transfer of close-knit rural communities to towns and cities. Indeed to some extent the early educational gains of the renaissance as the growing British economy of the 18th and early 19th centuries demanded child labour. Children had little time to develop emotionally before they entered the tough life of work and assumed responsibilities we now only afford to adults. Some have hypothesised an end of childhood in the post-modern era, in which pervasive media reveal the secrets of adulthood (cf. Neil Postman) leading to earlier sexualisation and a blurring of the distinctions that for many centuries demarcated the key phases of our life. The late 19th and the first six decades of the 20th century probably represented the heyday of the family. Throughout that period a large number of children remained parentless as a result of precarious economic circumstances and migration to more prosperous regions, with many being either adopted by relatives in their extended family or sent to orphanages, run largely by the dominant religious institutions. Fifteen years after the official end of second World War and after a decade of continuous economic growth, by 1960 the vast majority of children were born into stable nuclear families with married parents. More important one parent played the role of primary breadwinner, while the other dedicated herself to multiple roles of house management, childcare, psychotherapy, learning support and public relations. As noted elsewhere, these tasks have now been professionalised. Before the word house-husband entered our customary lexicon, fathers were not absent from children's lives as progressively shorter working weeks and more generous holidays enabled families to spend more time together. By and large society expected mothers to postpone their professional ambitions until their children no longer needed their vigilance, emotional and logistical support. The breadwinner + housewife partnership had considerable flexibility, especially if the family had a small business, with the female partner becoming a key team player in the family's commercial dealings too. Until the late 60s most grocery shopping in the UK was still done in small family-run outlets. This model admittedly had many faults and inequalities. The primary breadwinner technically earned the family's income, purchased or rented the family's property and treasured belongings, offering his spouse spending money. In crude economic terms the housewife was an employee of her husband, but also a dependent in legal terms. For working class housewives without another source of income, low-paid part-time jobs remained the only option.

A number of economic and cultural changes have radically changed the domestic landscape in Western Europe and North America, and nowhere more so than in the UK. Even within a stable marriage, society now expects mothers to return to work as soon as their children start school. Indeed parents receive state subsidies for childcare if they return to work even earlier. Other European countries have lightened the impact of working mothers by extending maternity leave or even, as the case of Sweden and Norway, extending the same rights to fathers. However, for the first time in recent human history most children attend day institutions by the age of 3, with many starting as young as 6 months. If a mother wishes to pursue a career, that means the child spends 6-10 hours of his day away from her/his parents, home environment and often separated from an extended family or close-knit neighbourhood. On her or his return home, the child spends much of the potential quality time not interacting with her or his parents or exploring their immediate surroundings and treasured objects as in traditional households, but often glued to children TV or immersed in a kid-friendly virtual reality preparing them psychologically for a very different world to the one their parents knew. Again cultural comparisons reveal some notable differences among the the world's most prosperous countries. Although Southern European countries have undergone much structural and cultural change over the last few decades, this has manifested itself mainly in lower birth rates, with Italian and Spanish women only having around 1.3 children each on average, smaller family units, much later ages of marriage and more stay-at-home adult offspring. Indeed it is not uncommon for Italians to live with their parents well into their 40s until they marry or are compelled to move for work. Even the most cosmopolitan-minded Southern Europeans, often spending a few years abroad for work experience or master foreign languages, have firm cultural roots much deeper than a mere affinity with their country's number one supermarket chain, top TV shows, top video games or latest rock music. These phenomena are viewed as a superficial layer of international culture. Nowhere is this cultural affinity more embedded, by comparison with the UK, than in cuisine, usually simple with a healthy range of ingredients available locally. Few self-respecting Southern Europeans choose to save time with ready meals, replete with addictive additives. On three measures of lifestyle change, the UK stands at one extreme on an international spectrum.

  1. The UK has the smallest percentage of children growing up in stable families with both parents, with one parent dedicated to their upbringing in their pre-school years.
  2. UK children spend much more time watching television or immersed in other forms of electronic entertainment.
  3. UK children, especially from the lower social categories, are much less likely to eat wholesome meals at the table with the rest of their family.

However, within the British Isles we observe an additional social divide. The above trends are much more entrenched in the lower social classes. A recent survey showed that in the lower 25th percentile over 90% of the children had a TV set in their bedroom usually complete with a DVD player and game console, while in the upper 25th percentile this figure stands at just 50%. Needless to say, in Southern Europe with a much more outdoor lifestyle, even fewer pre-adolescent children have monitors or game consoles in their private space. Many family units with limited floor space do not even have a dining room table, but somehow make room for all sorts of electronic wizardry.

Some commentators view this metamorphosis of childhood as a sign of progress, focussing on other developments such as social disapprobation of corporal punishment both at school and within the family and a growing awareness or rather codification of children's rights. Indeed many look back at the 1960s and 70s as an era of child abuse and intolerance towards people with different sexual orientations or neurological profiles. Nobody can dispute that various forms of child abuse and neglect have existed throughout human history, but as a rule social stability and widely distributed prosperity without the extreme income disparity that we see in modern Britain and in the US tend to reduce the potential social triggers of such abuse. Thus the new orthodoxy maintains that greater social intervention, more psychiatric screening and tougher laws are the best means of preventing child abuse and building a society more at ease with itself. Others [cite] have observed that media preoccupation with abusive adults, antisocial behaviour and dysfunctional families generates a climate of fear and distrust, so even some of the best parents, trying hard to cope in a frenetic society, are referred to social workers or the police. While many desperate cases leave social care professionals with little practical choice, we would dispute that state intervention into the private lives of families is the best way to tackle problems that have socio-economic and cultural roots. However, if the emotional problems that hundreds of thousands of young people undoubtedly face are categorised as personality disorders with a significant genetic component, the case for psychiatric intervention seems much stronger.

It would be way too simplistic to conclude that any single socio-environmental factor, be it the breakup of traditional families, addiction to video games or artificial colourings added to popular fizzy drinks, directly cause any of the new generation of personality disorders. One needs first to analyse the case histories of those diagnosed and identify obvious biological factors, which in the case of the extended autistic spectrum would separate cases of Kanner's and regressive autism from the much larger group diagnosed on the basis of behaviour alone. Next we should reevaluate behavioural autism within the wider social context of early 21st century Britain. Not only do employers place a greater emphasis on teamwork and interpersonal skills, but to survive in modern public sector schools children arguably need to hone much more advanced social skills and adopt much more effective coping strategies if they wish to integrate within the mainstream social and learning environments. The diagnosis of Asperger's, Tourettes, OCD and Social Anxiety Disorder has risen in concomitance with a general trend towards greater atomisation of communities and more geographically distributed social networks, with wide-ranging effects on our sense of self. In such a fluid environment it is not hard to envisage that some individuals fail to fit in and begin to exhibit behavioural traits that teachers, parents and colleagues consider maladaptive and which inevitably lead to social exclusion, which in turn may trigger the onset of more problematic psychological complexes. We see a rise in many other types of labelled syndromes, eating disorders, self-harm, lack of concentration at school or work and various forms of obsessive compulsive behaviour.

Lower-cased social conservatives tend to view the current situation through a different filter, focussing on unruly behaviour, lack of respect and falling academic standards, at least . When criticism of personality disorder screening comes from those who would like to turn the clock back to the 1950s when children allegedly knew their place in society and respected adults , the mental health establishment dons its progressive and liberal coat, advocating greater awareness and tolerance of the neurologically diverse. In reality at stake are different means of social control. Do we trust parents and the local community to raise tomorrow's adult citizens or do we transfer this responsibility to myriad agencies run by the state or funded by large corporations? Media sensationalism serves to convince us that many parents, whether single or living together, are irresponsible and potentially abusive. Even teachers and community workers such as scout leaders or church activists often face allegations of child abuse. In recent years we have seen a huge decline in male primary school teachers, partly because the relatively low salaries on offer fail to appeal to this demographic, but also because many would-be school masters fear accusations of paedophilia. At a time when millions of ordinary children suffer from severe emotional neglect with parents often living apart or working antisocial hours and bullies rife at school, abuse has been redefined as specific acts in which only psychopathic adults indulge. Absent from this simplistic analysis, popularised by the red-top press, is the blurring of boundaries between adulthood and childhood, with both groups often treated as minors worthy of supervision, as noted brilliantly by Michael Bywater's satirical Big Babies. In a nutshell we may think of the old adage 'Treat people like monkeys and they might behave like monkeys'. There is certainly more than anecdotal evidence that the professionalisation of childcare and adult supervision infantilises both groups. Every mental health awareness raising campaign merely spreads the message that many adults cannot be trusted unsupervised. Far from combatting stigma this approach sows the seeds of distrust about conditions of which people were previously unaware, except in the more down-to-earth form of character and moods. A classic example is one busy mother's reaction to her daughter's tantrum in a supermarket car park. Most conscientious parents find such outbursts deeply embarrassing, but also need to prevent further occurrences and not succumb to the temptation to win their child's temporary favour by satisfying their every whim and fancy to avoid public embarrassment. Ms Ball of Luton chose to lock her screaming three year-old daughter in the car while she returned to the supermarket to get some essential groceries, only to return five minutes later by which time a member of the public had reported the incident to the police. A few hours later a police officer turned up at Ms Ball's doorstep. So what lesson did her daughter learn? "Naughty mummy, next time I want her to buy something I'll just scream louder". All too often child abuse is assessed by simplistic criteria such as smacking, shouting or temporary confinement, the latter being increasingly common as politically correct parents reject the former two options. Thus many parents not only have to hold down jobs, but often find themselves between a rock and a hard place when it comes to dealing with problem behaviour. An inability to assert their authority and win a child's respect early on can have catastrophic consequences leading to much more traumatic family rows than short-lived humiliation a child feels at the receiving end of traditional means of parental discipline. Successful and self-confident parents respected by other close friends and family and integrated into a stable community find it much easier to avoid either corporal punishment or extreme capricious behaviour. Many professionals responsible for setting parental guidelines seem unaware of the stigma many parents in precarious employment and personal situations find themselves. If you're under pressure at work, have just lost your job or been abandoned by your partner, you tend to lack self-respect with obvious ramifications for your relationship with your offspring. A child's behaviour and academic performance has been shown to improve simply because their breadwinner parent has secured more rewarding employment, has greater self-confidence and thus is more successful at winning his or her child's respect. In modern parlance a parent who lacks professional success and is isolated from the community is branded a loser, unworthy of respect. The media presents young minds with imagery of role model families with parents always keeping their cool, empathising with their kids by playing sport and indulging in youth culture and pursuing a successful career with plenty of spare time. Reality on the ground contrasts drastically with this rose-tinted vision of postmodern life. Few parents can hope to compete with those portrayed in 1990s American sitcoms, though many try their best often compensating for their failings in sport, dance, personal relationships and professional success by acquiescing to their children's material desires fuelled by a multi-billion pound advertising industry. As a multitude of pressures produces a heightened level of peer competition at school, college and work, it is not difficult to imagine that many would rather leave a cultural rat race and join one of their own making. Parents are often made to feel guilty if they deny their children of the chance to compete culturally with their peers, which often means adapting to subcultures targeted at vulnerable youth markets. In many working class neighbourhoods of provincial Britain to win in the cultural stakes a teenage boy might need the latest and greatest game console with the most awesome first-person shooter game, especially if he fares badly at sport.

The classic portrayal of an aspie boy reciting bus timetables, collecting coins and spending hours on end obsessing with model railway bears little relation the kind of severe emotional problems experienced by millions of young people today and probably belongs to a bygone modernist era in which such pursuits were met with general approval. Early interest in mechanics and numbers can pave the way to a future career in engineering. Indeed the UK has a woeful dearth of competent engineers, often importing human resources from far and wide for routine tasks such as as railway maintenance or road building.

Psychologists [cite] observed interactions between engineers from Germany, Britain and some other countries who collaborated on the design of a new Airship in 2002 [verify]. Language was not the main barrier as English served as the lingua franca for all work-related matters. While one might not expect the German engineers to understand the subtleties of colloquial native English and its myriad regional accents, the setting in Germany meant most adapted to a more standardised form of English. Instead the main barrier proved to be the engineers' attitude to teamwork. Anglo-Saxon engineers would thrive in technical meetings and at working in groups, while German engineers would thrive at creative autonomous work, often taking the initiative to introduce new features in line with their understanding of technical requirements and finding the endless technical meeting of their British and American colleagues a pointless waste of resources. Indeed the latter groups often proved unable to undertake any task without guidance or rather without the benefit of groupthink. Ironically this collective approach seldom reaches a consensus by considering the experience and views of all those involved, but rather tends to invite members lower in the pecking order to go with the flow. In any meeting of mind, some enjoy higher status than others and most participants, especially those more in tune with the teamwork ethos, would rather voice their creatively worded agreement than raise a contrary opinion or simply suggest new ways to implement collective decisions, but challenge those key policy decisions. Commercial organisations cannot afford to have large numbers of ambitious engineers or programmers working creatively on their own projects with conflicting approaches. In reality the teamwork ethos compels participants to adapt to the will of their team leader who in turn reports to a multi-tiered bureaucracy of project managers, who tend to view everything in terms of the allocation of human resources. Post-modern teaching techniques also favour a groupthink mentality. Most notably UK and US schools have a strong bias towards group work over whole-class teaching with extensive time reserved for homework, as practised in countries as diverse as Germany, France, Italy, Japan and Korea. The Anglo-Saxon models focuses on a child's ability to integrate into a team rather than adhere to a core curriculum, taught to the whole class, while developing more specialised skills independently. In a group teaching situation a child who has finds it harder than others to mingle with his or her classmates is at a natural disadvantage, often lacking motivation and inspiration to learn.

One cannot fail to observe the huge rise in the UK in the number of learning support staff. One often sees large classes with over 30 pupils split into a smaller groups of 4-6 with one class teacher and a lower-paid learning support assistant working alongside a pupil diagnosed with a behavioural disorder and/or learning difficulty. Indeed other children fail to distinguish naughty classmates, who need special help because of their behaviour, from thick kids, who need special help because they can't grasp key concepts. They all just receive the generic label of special needs, increasingly uttered on playgrounds in a derogatory manner. Learning support staff also seem equally confused, often applying the same approach to intellectually gifted children diagnosed with AS as to children failing to attain basic levels of literacy and numeracy for their age. However, rather than blame teaching staff for their lack of awareness of a growing array of personality and learning disorders, we need merely observe that children within the same diagnostic category exhibit a huge range of learning and behavioural patterns.

Autistogenesis

Social commentators have observed how the media treats the general population like children whose complaints and dissatisfaction are based on an incomplete or rather immature appraisal of the facts, i.e. they are simply not aware of the true complexity of the situation and are thus ill-qualified to judge tough decisions that politicians have had to take. This assumes, naturally, that politicians have a better grip on reality than average resident of a suburban sprawl estate commuting 30 miles to work everyday and witnessing first-hand the transformation of her or his country of birth. When someone cries wolf, simply stating the obvious, their opinion is often defined by leading political pundits as ill-considered or worse deeply prejudiced. A more rational analysis reveals that politicians tend to protect vested state or commercial interests, which may naturally not correspond with those of large sections of their electorate. This general establishment attitude has no unique qualities. For much of history the general populace just got on with their mundane lives owing due allegiance and respect to local leaders. With low material expectations most were content just to earn a living, so necessities like food, shelter and security mattered much more than abstract concepts like democracy. Indeed throughout much of its history Western democracy has really involved a consultation process with competing social and commercial forces with voting power linked either to one's social status or wealth. Universal suffrage is a relatively phenomenon, but to last without rocking any boats or challenging elite interests it has to be micromanaged. One may look back to heyday of two party politics in the UK in which the Conservative and Labour seemed to offer voters alternative policies with the latter championing reforms to bring about a more egalitarian redistribution of wealth with a wider social safety net. Fast forward to the early 20th century and the main parties differ little of any of the fundamental issues of the day. Indeed the social forces that have given rise to the new generation of personality disorders started under a Conservative government and continued unabated under a Labour government. So why do ordinary people not rebel and form their own parties more representative of their true feelings? Let us consider three possible answers. First people are simply too immersed in their busy lives of work and entertainment to spare a thought for political alternatives, so they merely respond emotionally to the rhetoric of mainstream politicians, often taking the lead of popular media pundits. Second when groups do offer policies outside the mainstream consensus, they are quickly deemed extremist, prejudiced or simply naïve wishful thinking. Third, the media invest billions dumbing people down diverting attention from the real issues at stake, spreading fear and fomenting reactions that effectively empower remote institutions, e.g. a food poisoning scare may lead to the closure of small farms and traders and consolidate the domination of large supermarkets as only the latter can afford to meet new food safety regulations. So adults are expected to vote, but are only considered mature or worthy of respect if they exercise their electoral power within the confines of mainstream political parties. Here we see a dichotomy between largely upper middle class political activists, who have the time and resources to engage in the democratic process, and the masses who are merely expected to place a cross next to their preferred brand of the establishment party. As long as dissent can be confined to a small politicised minority or denounced as the wild rants of ill-informed plebs, it can be micromanaged. Undoubtedly the political insight of individuals within the general population varies enormously. When an infamous big brother contestant, later accused of racism, erroneously claimed Margaret Thatcher was leader of the Labour Party, media pundits had a field day. How can we trust ignoramuses like this to determine our country's future direction, they wondered. That the then Labour leader, Tony Blair, followed very much in Margaret Thatcher's footsteps taking her reforms to the next level seemed irrelevant, today's youth are expected to know who plays for which team, but not necessarily to analyse their actions.

We see the same social dynamic at play in the management of any workplace. Some get promoted to managerial positions while others either specialise in technical roles or accept a lowly status. Presumably the skills required to rise through the glass ceiling relate not just to one's professional competence, but to one's emotional intelligence. If you lack people skills, you are effectively excluded from all client-facing or people-managing positions. You become a faceless implementer of requirements that others have set. The transition from a largely manufacturing and mercantile economy to a service-led information economy has led to a proliferation of sales representatives, project managers, advertising executives, consultants, public speakers and creative writers whose main role is to persuade others to buy products, change their working patterns or simply toe the corporate line. And they do so with increasing sophistication. Only a generation ago most workers had specific and largely methodical jobs. As long as they understood what was expected of them and could perform their assigned tasks to the management's satisfaction and did not rock any boats or break any explicit rules, little else mattered. To succeed an engineer of the modern area needs an obsessive interest in their chosen specialisation, requiring prolonged periods of analysis and research to the exclusion of social niceties. Let us consider a technical feasibility study on the conversion of an old warehouse into luxury apartments, experience in structural engineering and hard geophysical facts are required. An analysis based on social osmosis, seeking guidance from the perceived integrity of other qualified experts, may lead to disastrous decisions, such as investing large amounts of capital into a project doomed to failure due to underlying structural weaknesses or wasting valuable resources on demolishing a building that was structurally intact and replacing it with a substandard building. To obtain an objective judgement, based on solid experience, you need to consult someone with a clear focus on the matter at hand, but easily swayed by emotions and thus influenced by peer pressure. Within a relatively short time span social networking and an aptitude to assimilate into a hive mentality have to varying degrees become prerequisites for most jobs in a post-industrial world. Indeed in many organisations we a social stratification at play, in which talented technical staff deemed to lack social skills are micromanaged by project managers, often younger than their human resources, whose role is to smooth relations between different team players, but in reality enforce an agenda determined by upper management. On closer analysis this burgeoning people management bureaucracy serves purposes other than efficiency or worker-management relations. It effectively prevents individual teamplayers involved in a small technical aspect of a larger project from seeing the whole picture.

Key Points

  1. We should challenge the validity of the extended autistic spectrum theory (AST) as a meaningful diagnostic category, but stress that subgroups within it may have more consistent and identifiable causal pathways.
  2. Both psycho-social and biological factors may cause antisocial or even psychopathic behaviour. We can change the former by nurturing a more socially cohesive, egalitarian, sustainable and less stressful community, while the latter requires invasive intervention into people's private lives.
  3. We should stress the wide range of symptoms, behavioural patterns, performance and outcomes associated with ASDs. They need not have the same causal pathways, though of course the AST (as defined above) can only be understood in its social context.
  4. ASDs tend to be defined by behaviour, which in my mind says little about their causes. A closer analysis reveals that a high proportion of those deemed to have severe autistic symptoms from an early age have other medical conditions pointing to a biological cause. Rather than focusing on the neurodevelopmental consequences of the underlying medical conditions, which may result in behavioural patterns now considered autistic, autistic spectrum theorists try to link their problems with the behaviour exhibited by other categories of perfectly functional human beings, whose behavioural deviance may be caused by largely psycho-social factors and some minor biological variables (somatopsychic).
  5. Biological factors are both numerous and complex and not necessarily genetic. Genes are little more than a blueprint determining the more physical and mechanical aspects of our personhood. The efficiency and sensitivity of motor and sensory processing may be influenced within the same species by minor genetic variations, but also by diet, contaminants, radiation etc.
  6. Neuroplasticity may also explain how some deviant behaviours may become so ingrained that a person finds it hard to unlearn habits that others consider dysfunctional or fails to learn skills that to others is second nature, e.g. my father never learned to swim or the fact I'm so bad at ball games may partly be attributed a lack of rigourous training in key stages of childhood. A brain develops post-partum fine-tuned specialised logical modules (or circuits) required to survive in a given cultural setting, e.g. in hunter-gatherer societies acute hand-eye co-ordination and premonition would be essential skills, while mental arithmetic would be of limited utility.
  7. Psychiatry. Recently we`ve seen a blurring of the distinctions traditionally made between psychology, psychiatry, psychopathology and neurology. As I commented rather provocatively on my blog site, we don`t really need psychiatry, but this should not be interpreted as an offence against individual psychiatrists who have the best interests of their clients/patients at heart. Indeed in my recent experience many psychologists, social workers and autism/personality disorder professionals adhere much more to the psychiatric model than many real psychiatrists, well aware of the psycho-socio elements in the bio-psycho-socio triad. Nobody can seriously doubt that some behaviours are either immoral or antisocial and others very dysfunctional, the issue at stake is whether a large section of the general population has significant cerebral defects that require lifelong intervention of one form or another. It is my understanding that psychology is the science of the mind and neurology the science of the brain. Criminology is self-explanatory and psychopathology suggests some people`s minds may be so warped as to be totally oblivious to the psychosocial consequences of their actions on others. Where does this leave psychiatry? To me the psychiatric model supports the notion that all deviant or unacceptable behaviour is caused by a defect in the person`s brain. In my mind we need psychology and neurology. Criminologists, depending how society defines criminality, may then investigate the psycho-socio-bio causes crime.
  8. Mercury and MMR: It stands to reason that if the AST is invalid then not all cases on this spectrum may be attributed to a single cause. The diagnostic rise did start before the introduction of MMR, but sky-rocketed in the mid 1990s several years after its introduction. However, we can only seriously link bio-chemical contaminants with regressive autism, in which relatively normal progress goes into reverse gear at between 18 to 36 months of age. I can certainly vividly remember my children`s key stages of development in this period. In short, as you are probably aware, there are two hypotheses. The first relates to the live measles virus in the triple jab. Donna Williams, (born in the same year as me), suggested regressive autism may be immunoglobulin G deficiency, but still strongly recommended the MMR jab for everyone else. I was very much in favour of having my two kids vaccinated (too many of Michael Crichton`s bio-scare novels maybe), while Stefania had doubts, fuelled mainly by an Italian friend of hers who rejected all forms of vaccination. The MMR jab in Italy at the time was thimerosal-free, while the UK variant was not until 2001 I believe. More important because of large anti-vaccination movement and widespread public scepticism, its uptake was as low as 50% in many areas, yet despite the occasional outbreak of measles very few cases of measles-induced brain damage or fatalities resulted. Indeed I can recall getting measles and rubella myself (but failing to get mumps) when most just considered a childhood disease that would help build your body`s defences. If anything what concerns me most is the media`s manipulation of this scandal (first playing it up largely through the Daily Mail and a Channel 5 debate and then setting up Andrew Wakefield as a fall guy, vilified especially in the Guardianesque liberal press. Now citing a Danish study showing no significant difference in the prevalence of autism between MMR-vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, the establishment appears complacent in its desire to push ahead with new mass medication initiatives. This has to some extent confused the public with a false debate about the efficacy of vaccines, rather than the causes of severe behavioural disorders. The second hypothesis, much more credible IMHO, relates to mercury and other heavy metal poisoning, especially in combination with high levels of testosterone. Intriguingly Dr J B Handley, a proponent of this thesis, cites Simon Baron Cohen`s research revealing a higher levels of testosterone in subjects considered on the autistic spectrum. More important, vaccines are not the only source of heavy metals. Some research, cited by Dr Handleys, shows that amalgam fillings not only pass the blood-brain barrier, but can be transmitted to newborns perinatally. Also exposure to various forms of radiation may cause neurological damage. Currently most controversy relates to the links between mobile phones and microwaves in general and brain cancer, but let us not forget the good old X-Ray, until the 1980s often used during pregnancy. I did find this odd link http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/radiation.html from what I`d consider to be a pro-psychiatry source (namely favouring the genetic causation of psychosis).
  9. Epilepsy: A sizeable proportion of ASD individuals, especially those with more severe emotional withdrawal, learning handicaps and stims, have at some stage had epileptic seizures. Obviously millions of epileptics do not exhibit autistic behaviour, but the seizures may affect different parts of the brain and in some individuals the brain may be better able to reorganise itself after a seizure. I mentioned the case of a young man I had worked with on a council project. He too had been diagnosed with Asperger`s, but required 24/7 support and the permanent presence of a key worker. It turns out he had regular epileptic seizures as a teenager and regressed rapidly after the age of 7. These are case notes his employability advisor divulged to me in confidence. I also know of someone who had been erroneously given strong anticonvulsants for 15 years ending up in a day centre alongside people with severe learning disabilities. When his medication was withdrawn, his mental faculties returned. Could we not simply be classifying all sorts of diverse cases under one happy umbrella.
  10. Possible causal categories:
  1. Rare genetic deformities of the brain.
  2. Heavy metal poisoning and/or exposure to radiation causing varying degrees of cerebral abnormalities affecting language, cognition, perception and fine-motor control.
  3. Excessive cultural emphasis on the importance of physical perfection and dexterity in culturally significant sports and pursuits, i.e. the coolness factor (see below) to the detriment of otherwise perfectly functional human beings.
  4. Emotional neglect and/or cultural alienation inducing emotional withdrawal and depression with the onset of many features associated with Asperger`s Syndrome.
Trait

Overlapping psychiatric labels

Lack of eye contact

Depression, social anxiety disorder. In general a lack of eye contract results from lack of self-confidence either to due to one`s state of mind or self-image. The same person may exhibit widely different degrees of reciprocal eye-contact in different social situations.

Deficiency in processing nonverbal communication, especially subtle facial expressions.

Semantic Pragmatic Disorder and to a lesser extent bipolar affective disorder. This deficiency is at best relative. Baron-Cohen and others have suggested a brain module responsible for processing nonverbal information often quoting research showing as much as 90% of information is conveyed through means other than mere spoken or written words. A classic example would be a weather forecast presented by an attractive scantily clad and soft-spoken woman on an idyllic beach. Clearly viewers would process much more information than meteorological data. Asperger`s individuals are considered literal thinkers. However, all aspies I`ve met not only respond to nonverbal cues, but actively use expressions and gestures to express emotions. The vacant expressions associated with a subset of the AS diagnosed can easily be attributed to a sense of alienation from mainstream social culture and in some cases to side effects of antipsychotic medication.

Encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus

OCD, except in this condition the obsession itself is considered dysfunctional or maladaptive while in AS it is just an all-consuming fascination that excludes interest in a broader range of culturally appropriate subjects. However, a more detached analysis would reveal that a high proportion of the population have obsessive interest in a narrow range of subjects, except they do so in an adaptive and culturally appropriate way.

Failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level

ADHD, Semantic Pragmatic Disorder. This really refers to the core reason many parents, teachers or social workers to seek to have their children diagnosed in the first place, a failure to fit in. AS-diagnosed children are often reported to be more at ease with teachers or

A lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interest or achievements with other people

Depression. As a rule a lack of self-confidence in social situations and a preoccupation with one`s own problems tends to exclude interest in other people`s lives and interests. My observations would suggest a huge range within the general population in the ability to empathise with other people`s lives. Those who succeed very well in this enterprise may find it easier to make friends and take on team-leading roles. However, the extent to which one can feign interest in all subjects or empathise with all predicaments is limited. Usually a socially adept person can empathise with a range of interests and emotions within the common experience of their culture. Thus this statement is simply a generalisation that holds true for most people diagnosed with AS. One reason some people may not seem so eager to share achievements is a general sense of inferiority in everything but their chosen specialisation.

Stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms

Depression, Bipolar Affective Disorder: This criterion really refers to severe autistics. However, tics are not uncommon within the general population as a reaction to a traumatic experience or way of coping with an inferiority complex. The kind of never-ending stims, such as persistent rocking, associated with Kanner`s and regressive autistics are rare in AS individuals, whose mannerisms match more closely the kind of nervous twitches common in depressed persons in general. That these symptoms can be observed in large proportion of AS-diagnosed individuals proves little about their cause. Of note, many psychoactive medications, both SSRIs and antipsychotics, have nervous twitches as known side effects.

Persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

Humanity: Obsessive interest in objects is characteristic not only of a depressed and withdrawn state of mind, but also of a phase of discovery and exploration. If someone had not fixated long enough on the tendency of logs to roll down slopes, the wheel may never have been invented. Most people fixate with a very narrow range of objects.

  1. The ADHD Connection: This condition has received more critiques largely because it is more readily diagnosed in the US, UK and other countries who follow the Anglo-American psychiatric model and because of the rather obvious role of large pharmaceutical multinationals in the promotion of this disorder, treated most commonly with methylphenidate. As most ADHD-diagnosed children show few signs of the kind of emotional withdrawal and obsessive interest characteristic of autistic spectrum disorders, including this category within the autistic spectrum would confuse parents of severely autistic children and the public perception of autism as a one-dimensional spectrum of varying degrees of introversion. However, on the ground hundreds of thousands of parents have their children first diagnosed with ADHD when they first encounter problems with social integration at school, only to have the diagnosis reviewed and changed to Asperger`s Syndrome when their child reveals a special academic talent and slightly longer attention span than previously feared. It certainly appears odd that the same child may first cause concern due to his alleged lack of focus and then due to his obsessive focus in one subject. Many social workers in the UK have observed that working class kids are more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, while children with better educated parents tend to receive an AS label. Whichever way, in an alarming number of cases, Ritalin is offered as an integral part of the treatment. Diane M. Kennedy wrote a whole book, the ADHD Autism Connection, with a forward by none other than autism celebrity Temple Grandin. The last two chapters are dedicated to treatment and it should come as little surprise that overall the book is very much in favour of medication albeit emphasising that misdiagnosis may lead to the prescription of the wrong medication. Ms Kennedy not only see links with ADHD, but with Bipolar Affective Disorder and Manic Depression. If we extend the autistic spectrum to cover people liable to be diagnosed with these labels, then we may soon reach as much as 10% of the population. The fact is there are no neat dividing lines between these categories. Rather than infinitely extending the autistic spectrum, we should reassess its validity. It may only make sense when severe developmental impairments are observed within the first 24 months of life, with all subsequent emotional problems down to a combination of environmental influences interacting with one`s physical inheritance.
  2. Autism as a State of Mind: So far we have considered two interpretations of this catch-all term, a pervasive cerebral disorder and neurological variable that one may have to varying degrees. However, there is a third perspective. Autism is simply a state of mind common to the whole of humanity. In a nutshell, we may think of this phenomenon as "being totally wrapped up in oneself and the immediate physical world to the exclusion of the wider social world". This is certainly our initial state as newborns. In the first days of life a baby can quickly adapt to surrogate mothers as long as her/his basic needs are met, but after a week or more of close proximity with a mother figure, her/his whole world becomes the mother figure and the fulfilment of her/his personal needs. To feel embarrassment, sadness, inferiority or alienation represents an awareness of, but an inability to integrate with, the wider social world. Thus a completely autistic person would feel no embarrassment or sorrow. At a party a genuine autistic, by this definition, would happily stand alone in the corner with tomato juice spilt all over his shirt playing a moronic video game on his portable game console, totally oblivious to the emotions of other human beings in the same room. By contrast a typical AS-diagnosed person would feel deep embarrassment and quickly sneak out at the earliest opportunity. The crucial variables here are our sense of self (cf. Kenneth Gergen`s Multiphrenia theory) and cultural influences on personal development (cf. Michael Bywater`s satirical book Big Babies).

Autistogenic Culture

I like this coinage, but it can logically only refer to psycho-social influences. Thus if autism, as a cerebral difference, may only apply to a miniscule percentage (0.2% by NAS statistics) of severely handicapped autistics, we have to move on to another definition of autism. If a person`s brain is unable to assimilate the full depth of recent cultural change, as in the case of many people with severe intellectual impairment, autism is an acultural phenomenon, but we take the above definition of autism as a state of mind culture may indeed induce autistic behaviour. Beyond the first few hours of postnatal life, nobody is completely autistic as defined above. Our subsequent development may lead us to exhibit various forms of awareness of and concern for other people`s feelings. Consider if you will the current craze among many urban teenagers to play load rap music on their mobile phones in buses and trains. This behaviour annoys a large proportion of passengers, though few complain. Do they simply want to enjoy the music, usually very distorted, without earphones or do they deliberately want to annoy anyone who does not share their musical taste? In other words to what extent can we define their behaviour as deliberately antisocial and to what extent are they simply unaware of other people`s feelings? We might define this as social autism, introversion not into oneself but into a small clique within a larger social group, resulting in total indifference to the feelings of those outside the clique. However, I'd dispute that in today's interconnected and media-saturated world anyone can be truly isolated from the wider reality of mass socialisation. We just integrate differently with societal expectations.

Many have observed the absurdity that in modern Britain some of us hardly ever talk to our neighbours, but thinks nothing of communicating with friends, colleagues or just vague acquaintances thousands of miles away, just because they share an interest or indulgence with us. The logic of globalisation has persuaded many of us of the need to conform with remote global norms as taught in leading educational establishments, broadcast on TV and popularised via numerous high traffic Web sites, leaving aside generations of familial culture and leading a general distrust of recalcitrant neighbours still wedded to the old ways. So while we may gain friends in remote locales, we lose friends in the geographic community. Indeed even the concept of community has morphed from a group of people living in close proximity and sharing resources, services and values to one of an amorphous collection of human beings who share some special interest. Thus we have the gay community, the Java developer community, the Star Wars fans community, the Halo gamers community, not to mention the Autistic Spectrum scene. (Of note some European languages such as German retain their native term for the geographic community, but use the English word for virtual community). Unlike close-knit geographic communities, none of these communities can exist in isolation. Members of the Java developers community may be gifted programmers but lack a sufficient diversity of skills and social cohesion to form a viable self-sustaining community. Traditionally most geographic communities have had to develop some degree of functional autonomy for the provision of essential goods and services. Each community would have its highly skilled tradespeople, farmers, builders, joiners, market gardeners, bakers, fishmongers, butchers and more recently plumbers, electricians, mechanics and engineers. Individual members of the community would respond largely to community demands, which may naturally stem from geostrategic and technological developments elsewhere, but nonetheless as perceived locally. Fast forward to modern Britain and we find over 90% of the grocery trade controlled by a handful of supermarket chains. Geographic communities have been replaced by housing estates, which may attract residents from a wide geographic area with diverse ethnocultural backgrounds and thus little emotional loyalty to their place of abode. Supermarket chains compete to win planning permission to meet local demand, which itself depends on remote macro-economic conditions. Supermarket staff seldom learn the trade from close relatives or choose to pursue this career path. Rather they are trained to work as part of large corporations and usually view their employment there as a temporary money-earner. With the exception of managerial staff, few superstore staff remain in the same workplace for longer than two years. Thus lasting loyalty to the family business is replaced by transitory allegiance to a corporate entity.

Categories
All in the Mind

Peddling Misery – Letter to the Independent on Sunday

I refer to your piece (IoS 20/04/08) about Depression Awareness Week. We all know Alastair Campbell sold his soul to the military-industrial complex by playing a key role in preparing public opinion for the Iraqi oil grab and acting as spin-doctor-in-chief for one of this country's most mendacious administrations, now apparently he has sold out to big pharma too. Depression Awareness Week will do nothing to tackle the root causes of the misery and lack of self worth millions of us suffer day in day out. It will, however, serve to instil in the public mind the illusion that emotional distress bears no relation to real life events or societal values, but is supposedly endogenous, somehow divorced from a wider reality. I also note the familiar tactics of the growing emotional disorder industry. First they categorise a set of behavioural symptoms as a disease in its own right and then promote it through media campaigns by hiring the services of celebrities who share some of these traits.

Emotions are part of the human experience and it comes as some relief that even Mr Campbell failed to cope with the strains of his professional distorsions of reality. However, rather than take pills to wish away these moral dilemmas and suppress our true selves, we should look at the real causes of people's woes in a highly competitive and image-obsessed society and not just the bio- component of the classic bio-psycho-social triad.

Your article mentioned Depression Alliance, co-sponsored by Eli Lilly and Boehringer Ingelheim. In 2005 they organised a "Pulling Together" campaign to increase awareness among physicians, patients and the media of a link between physical symptoms and depression. This soon earned a subtitle as "Consumer Media Campaign National Depression Week for Eli Lilly's and Boehringer Ingelheim's Cymbalta". Let us not forget the many victims of the numerous side effects of common antidepressants this campaign seeks to promote, such as insomnia, dry mouths (accelerating tooth decay), weight gain, sudden mood swings and suicidal thoughts.

Categories
All in the Mind

Dental Health Scandal: Playing Politics with Genes

Few empiricists would deny that both environmental and genetic factors determine subtle variations in the physical health, performance and behaviour of human beings. After repeatedly telling us that diet and lifestyle are largely to blame for the obesity epidemic, the popular media now inform that genetics plays a crucial role in our susceptibility to gaining weight, e.g. two different people eating the same intake of junk food may have very different weights. Our genes do after all provide us with blueprint for future development and as noted elsewhere determine largely physiological features. However, to pretend diet plays no role in our health would equally be a travesty of the truth. There are surprisingly few obese people in poor agrarian communities where most people get plenty of exercise in the course of their daily struggle for survival and have little time or resources to indulge in the wonders of convenience food, like microwaveable ready-meals or take-out pizzas, yet many of their genetic close cousins in the prosperous world would put on weight quickly. Often sensationalist media reports simplify our understanding of key issues like emotional well-being, intellectual performance, behavioural problems, dental health and eating disorders. It`s interesting how the establishment media highlight or suppress extensive research into the causes of very real human problems to promote their agendas or defend key interest groups.

We are led to believe that genetics plays a huge role in the determination of psychiatric illnesses, but only a minor role in dental health. We tend to be much more tolerant of severe acne, facial burns and balding than evidence of bad dentistry or bad oral hygiene. One cannot exactly shake hands, smile and discretely inform a new acquaintance that contrary to appearances one brushes and flosses one`s teeth twice a day. One has to have white teeth or hide one`s dental fixtures from general public view. As a result it`s easier to get a psychiatric diagnosis on the NHS than personalised dental treatment. Make no mistake, the consumption of sugary drinks and food, especially refined sugar and lactose, and poor oral hygiene, e.g. a failure to brush one`s teeth regularly and correctly, cause caries in the same way as eating Big Macs cause obesity. If you have a balanced diet, with plenty of vegetables, and consume the occasional hamburger made from premium beef, you may enjoy good health, but a diet of nothing but junk food, consisting mainly of carbohydrates, diary products and cheap meat, makes you extremely susceptible to all sorts of illnesses. However, that`s not the whole picture. The human body has evolved to cope with extreme variations of dietary intake. Our distant hunter-gatherer ancestors became omnivores as a survival strategy with a seasonally variable diet. Our teeth evolved in the pre-toothpaste era to cope with a diet of vegetables, fruit, nuts, fish and meat. In terms of human evolution milk and refined sugar were a very late addition to our diet. Indeed northern Caucasian peoples developed antibodies in order to digest cow`s milk. Later in the 19th century our diet transformed with advent of refined sugar and wider availability of tea, coffee (both served with milk and sugar in Britain), cakes and other confectionaries. Before the mid 19th century dentistry was a dark art confined to the aristocracy, who also happened to be the biggest consumers of sugary delights. By the turn of the 20th century (1900) most working class British adults had severe dental decay with many missing most of their teeth, but as films and photographs from the period can attest many actresses and models retained healthy smiles in age without toothpaste, fluoridation or artificial dental crowns. Dentures were a poor substitute for natural teeth that fooled no-one, but the toothless. In the early twentieth century the streets of British cities teemed with people exhibiting little shame in their visibly decayed, missing or badly patched gnashers. Abroad this became known as the British mouth. The masses could simply not afford restorative dental treatment and had not yet acquired the custom of brushing their teeth.

If we compare the smiles of post-modern image-obsessed young adults with a strict dental hygiene regime, regular dental check-ups and even tooth whitening sessions with Africa`s rural poor, we are struck only by the greater authenticity and relative lack of alignment of the latter group, for caries are exceedingly rare in black Africans with a traditional diet. Open your eyes in a busy cosmopolitan city and observe the huge variation in people`s mouths and dental structures. Some will casually and nonchalantly show the full splendour of their naturally white teeth, while others feel more at ease in more tight-lipped facial gestures barely revealing their teeth, but few of us react very well to an unashamed display of discoloured and crooked teeth. Yet, it seems illogical that we would have evolved in antiquity to suffer perennially from persistent tooth aches, that would inevntably result with the same diet, but in the complete absence of dentistry and toothpaste, with only tooth picks and water. The most critical age for dental health tends to be adolescence when our adult teeth have replaced our primary teeth, our wisdom teeth begin to emerge and we are less likely to care about diet and oral hygiene.

Letter to Ms Keen, Minister for Health

Dear Assistant of the Right Hon. Ms Keen,

In my recent correspondence about the state of NHS dentistry and my pragmatic, but costly, decision to spend over £6000 on private treatment, I stated quite categorically that I do not wish to be persuaded mercury amalgams are somehow safe. I`ve read and heard it all before. Believe it or I am an intelligent 44 year-old programmer, and have within the limits of normal human imperfection, taken good care of my teeth since early childhood. I did not eat excessive amount of sweets or chocolates as a youngster. Mars bars were a rare treat in my family and have not eaten hardly any chocolate since associating it with acne as a teenager. This was also the period when I has 10 mercury amalgams, only two of which now remain thankfully having had three removed in the last two weeks, others went with tooth extractions. If I had followed the advice of an NHS dentist, not only would I have retained two of these back teeth (one to be replaced with an implant), but it would have impossible to realign my teeth for what is today an essential cosmetic procedure so my front teeth can look vaguely normal. I do not have unreasonable pretensions. You are not addressing some mars-bar chewing, fizzy drink guzzling ignoramus who forgets to clean his teeth twice a day. There are only two reasons I have delayed this essential dental treatment. One financial and the second a psychological aversion to the practices of NHS dentists. I have a complex dental structure, crowded teeth in a small mouth. This makes restoration much more time-consuming. X-rays, of which I finally obtained electronic copies, quite clearly reveal the extent of bad dentistry. My back teeth were drilled and filled in adolescence with little regard to wisdom teeth that had not yet emerged and when two did emerge, they were promptly drilled and filled, and were thus gradually pushed to the left. Do I need lectures on oral hygiene? No I had those 30 years ago.

No amount of official denial of the adverse effects of this crude technique or reports from distant organisations, known to be under pressure from numerous lobbying groups, can replace what is for me a very personal experience. I may rely on remote scientific data to establish the mass of the planet Pluto, but the state of my teeth and my experience with NHS drill-and-fill conveyor belt dentistry are facts I can judge very well on my own.

The so-called evidence you cite is extremely selective. The name of the game is public relations and damage control.

It seems clear to me that your replies did not take into account the actual content of my letters, but were merely treated as another case of a humble subject unconvinced of the purported safety of mercury amalgams. As it is unlikely that you would have spent much time on one individual case, you simply recycle material prepared for other humble subjects. Don`t ever forget, in a democracy you are our servants and should not defend the vested interests of powerful lobbies who do not have the best interests of humble subjects at heart. So if we the people don`t want mercury amalgams because we refuse to believe your pseudo-scientific denials, provide us with alternatives. If those alternative don`t work, then we`ll look into something else. Mercury amalgams are technologically superseded. Currently the NHS wastes money on all sorts of things, overpriced proprietary software, where perfectly functional free alternatives exist, psychoactive drugs and Viagra. In this context the cost of alternatives such as porcelain onlays and inlays in back teeth would be minimal. We pay taxes and national insurance to receive medical treatment to meet our needs, not to be brainwashed by biased lobbying groups.

I also disagree fundamentally with your one-size-fits-all mentality, which underlies NHS policy making. I`ll take my family as a case in point. My mother lost her upper teeth at around my age and can never remember her gorging cakes, chocolate and fizzy drinks. She`d drink plenty of tea, but stopped adding sugar in the early 70s and as far as can recall always brushed her teeth. She now has none of her own teeth. My father on the hand retains all his own teeth to this very day, yet grew up in the same period with a similar diet. The point is oral hygiene and diet are only part of the story. Some of us are simply not blessed with a very resilient dental structure and hence will fall victim to caries much more easily than others.

If major dental associations such as the BDA admitted the neurological and physiological damage caused by mercury amalgams, it would open a can of worms with potentially millions of Europeans claiming damages. A beneficial side effect of the current obsession with cosmetic dentistry is leading all but the most underprivileged and misinformed sections of the European population to avoid mercury amalgams like the plague. As an aside, the downside to this obsession is that anyone with naturally crooked or stain-susceptible teeth (i.e. where enamel turns translucent rather than white revealing the dentin beneath) is likely to suffer from an inferiority complex. The only people I have ever heard defend amalgams are dentists and lobbyists, not ordinary citizens. Some are lucky with resilient well-placed amalgams, but so many others have experienced cracked molars and progressively uglier amalgam replacement fillings. Whenever a back tooth needs a new filling, patients that can afford it almost always choose white fillings, which are of course much larger than they would be had an amalgam never been placed at the outset. Why force people to go private, rather than provide this basic level of care on the NHS. In most cases old amalgams can be replaced with composites (in the case of small cavities), onlays, inlays or crowns. Only in the most severe cases would an implant be required.

Your latest reply simply regurgitates industry propaganda. That it has made its way to the highest echelons of the EU bureaucracy is of some concern but rest assured where democracy works at a local level mercury amalgams are on their way out. It has been completely banned in Sweden and Norway and is being phased out in Denmark and Germany with an absolute ban on mercury amalgams in under 21 year olds. In most of Southern Europe the state does not subside dentistry at all or not to the same extent and so when given the choice most parents will pay extra to have white fillings. In the UK the prevalence of mercury amalgams in adolescents is largely a class and ethnic issue. It is much more common among the white lower working classes, practically the only group with a high risk of dental decay (owing to diet and genetics) unable to afford private dentistry. The logic behind mercury amalgams is that patients will not take good care of their teeth.

"Only 300 studies published since 1996 had sufficient merit to be included in their report -- studies that analyzed mercury in urine samples as a marker for mercury exposure. Methyl mercury from fish is not found in urine samples, explains Karol."

The panel is wrong in using urine mercury levels as a measure of mercury exposure. Science has shown this. In fact, most studies on children indicate that the ones with the highest urine, blood or hair levels of mercury were the healthiest. That is because of those exposed to mercury, the ones with the highest urine, blood and hair levels are the ones effectively excreting the mercury. Three different research groups have shown that autistic children have much lower mercury in their hair, yet have higher body burdens of mercury. This implies that an inability to excrete mercury by a subset of the population represents those that will respond badly to a low chronic exposure to mercury.

I suggest this subset is much larger than the government would like to believe. Consider a simple analogy, many people get away with smoking 20 cigarettes a day into old age, so if we applied the same logic to smoking, we would conclude it`s safe except for people allergic to nicotine inhalation. Clearly absurd, but some smokers die early from lung cancer or heart failure, while others miraculously live into their 90s.

Apparently you cannot read your own Web site, the last place I`d expect to find evidence exposing the dangers of mercury in dentistry. May I refer you to http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Researchanddevelopment/A-Z/Primarydentalcare/DH_4002164, which states quite clearly.

"A pilot study conducted by ourselves has shown that reductions in memory functioning were measurable amongst a group of dentists using a computerised package of psychomotor tests."

Ie. in the subset of humanity that fails to excrete mercury efficiently (hence the reason why researchers should measure blood mercury rather than urine mercury levels) the neurological effects of low-level mercury exposure has long been scientifically attested.

Let`s be honest the only group that actively defends mercury amalgams is organised dentistry and its army of litigation-aware lobbyists.

Don`t waste another penny defending it. At the very least, let people have white fillings on the NHS if they pay a little extra. But best of all, follow other European countries and ban it completely.

Categories
Power Dynamics

Knee Jerk Hysteria

Most Sudanese citizens of all religious affiliations are desperately poor. As in most other African countries early deaths through malnutrition and disease are so rife that many just count themselves lucky to be alive, let alone benefit from the wonders of Western consumerism, fun culture and post-modern enlightenment (the kind of fuzzy thinking that endows us with some kind of moral superiority over all things ethical). But Sudan has a hidden jewel, the oil reserves in its Southeastern corner known as Darfur. Anglo-American multinationals are keen to gain the lion`s share of the oil extraction business there and more important stop the Chinese from striking deals with African governments bypassing Western multinationals altogether. While it seems improbable that a Chinese-led world would be any more humane than an American-led one, the lives of millions of human beings and billions of dollars of oil revenue are at stake. For more see:

Yet the media focuses on the plight of one woman, sentenced for letting her pupils name a teddy bear Mohammed. That she should endure a jail sentence is obviously absurd, but it is equally inconceivable that the Sudanese government could gain any propaganda advantage through a rigid interpretation of Islamic law.

Has everyone somehow forgotten the 1998 bombing of a Sudanese pill factory, manufacturing antibiotics badly needed in a country with poor sanitation and rampant malnutrition, causing an estimated 10,000 excess deaths through disease due to disruptions in the supply of life-saving medication (not the lifestyle drugs people take over here). Instead we let the liberal media dictate whose human rights are being abused by whom. In their simplistic model the Muslim government and its militias are baddies and a Christian minority in Darfur are the goodies. Hence we need Western intervention, Kosovo-style, to save the oppressed minority from near certain annihilation by fanatical Muslims. As usual, the human situation on the ground is much more complex, but the economics are wonderfully simple. On the economic front the Sudanese government in Khartoum would like to strike a deal with the Chinese for the exploitation of oil reserves in a distant corner of their fiefdom, whose borders were drawn by their former colonial masters, the British. Oil reserves extend into neighbouring Chad and the Central African Republic, both with close economic ties with France, but the former also has a special relationship with neighbouring Libya. What unfolds is complex chess game in which the human rights cause is just a strategic pawn in a propaganda campaign to win hearts and minds behind US-led intervention.

The BBC`s Have Your Say forum is moderated allegedly to guard against spam and hate speech, but most of my posts remain unpublished and 6 that were published only appeared several hours after my posting, while others more favourable to the US/UK establishment, appeared almost immediately. If the BBC really censored discussion to avoid hateful speech, this post would never have appeared at around 18:30 01/12/07:

If the government nuked all Islamic countries and gave lethal injections to all Muslims. The world would be a much better place to live. And you know it's true, that's why you won't show this comment.

Matt

Recommended by 21 people

This pretty much reflected the general flavour of the reaction. Now how should Brazilians have reacted when plain clothed London police officers shot dead an innocent Brazilian electrician, Jean De Menezes. Everyday the London underground is teeming with people carrying rucksacks, wearing unseasonal clothing and exhibiting behavioural oddities. The chance that anyone of these shifty characters, in the eyes of brainwashed antiterrorist officers, may be about to detonate a bomb is less than a million to one. More to the point if De Menezes were a genuine suicide bomber, which he was not, and had just wanted to kill people he could have detonated his explosives at any stage in his long flight down the escalator and through a tunnel. How many Brazilians reacted by suggesting their country nuke London or intervene to overthrow the despotic regime there?

1. I'd say stop feeding those idiots. Stop feeding them. Stop educating them. Stop helping them in any way.

2. Let's agree that Islam is the religion of hate. Islam teaches nothing but hate and intolerance. Stop being so PC, and admit it. They hate us, and they want us dead. There are no just "bad apples" in Islam.

daniil, Minneapolis USA

RECOMMEND

Recommended by 100 people

These brainwashed posters are totally convinced of the moral superiority of their ruling classes and totally mesmerised by a media spectacle that mixes news with violence-themed entertainment.

Added: Saturday, 1 December, 2007, 18:16 GMT 18:16 UK

Not OK to call a toy bear Mohammed but OK for the Sudanese government to massacre many thousands of innocent Muslims in Darfur.

Well, I'm glad that's cleared up.

Tony Fisher, York

I suppose we can just let over three centuries of Anglo-American imperialism, the last century of rapid resource depredation and the 1998 bombing of a Sudanese medicine factory go down the memory plug hole. The word that dare not speak its name in this whole media frenzy is oil. It ended up under their sand, but our enlightened supercool fun lifestyle needs it. That`s the hard truth. The Sudanese Muslim obsession with the abuse of prophet Mohammed`s holy name is as absurd as our obsession with celebrity deities, simulated violence. commercialised sex, gambling and gadgetry, except we use up more resources to sustain our enlightened lifestyle.

Categories
All in the Mind Power Dynamics

Blaming the Messenger

Spiked Online are at it again, jumping at the chance to blame common atrocities on the spectre of green fascists. To the likes of Frank Füredi and Brendan O'Neill a green fascist is anyone who doesn't believe in their technocratic vision of unlimited human and material growth, if indeed they believe their own propaganda. More is always better and anyone who says otherwise opposes progress.

A couple of weeks ago a school shooting in the Finnish town of Jokela captured the imagination of the European and North American media. A loner with the Internet pseudonym of NaturalSelector89 who had published a gun-toting video on YouTube, advocating the culling of much of the world's population, shot dead six fellow students and then completed his cleansing of the human race by turning on himself.

Although the importance of school shootings pales numerically in comparison with the slaughter taking place in countries ravaged by foreign occupation and civil wars, they form a regular part of a media spectacle obsessed with violence. Over the last few weeks the British popular media has entertained the gullible public with the latest on the murder of a female English student in Perugia, revelations of sex fiend responsible for the murder of Vicky Hamilton over 16 years ago, more on the Madeleine McCann story and, if that did not sate the appetite of necrophiles, the copycat accidental throat slitting during a sex game by the daughter of a wealthy businessman, now two-timing as a New Labour MP. Once you've consumed the appalling tales of shock and horror violence in the tabloid press, you can switch on the telly or game console and consume yet more, always portrayed as the acts of psychopathic individuals or justified revenge by their victims or their saviours. Indeed the two genres of media violence are often interpolated with ads for violence-themed movies alongside news stories and gory titbits of domestic news in the break between segments of a Hollywood blockbuster.

Whoever may be directly responsible for these atrocious acts, the media guides us subtly to the conclusion that we need to grant the state even more control over our lives. If Madeleine McCann had had an RFID chip implant, we might know her whereabouts by now, and if a CCTV camera had been installed in her bedroom we would have video footage of her abductor or killer. So why not go ahead and implant RFID chips in all children and CCTV cameras in all bedrooms. Honestly, it will not be long before child abuse awareness raisers make such absurd calls. Without thinking some of us are letting the authorities turn this country into a police state way beyond George Orwell's wildest imagination, all because law-abiding citizens have nothing to fear from a freedom-and-democracy-loving establishment. Yet the very same establishment that purportedly wants to protect us against psychopaths also promotes a lifestyle that breeds insanity and extreme disillusionment. Few of us can meet the high expectations set by a combination of the mass media and peer pressure. 'I must have a Wii gadget because I'll be the only person in my class without one and if you don't buy one you're a child abuser'. We can hardly claim that many Europeans lack the financial means to acquire essentials like food, water and shelter. Indeed malnutrition nearly always takes the form of eating disorders amid an abundance of readily available junk food and anorexic supermodels.

I can think of many problems that afflict today's youth, but somehow over-intellectualisation is not one of them. This should not come as a surprise to the author of 'Where have all the intellectuals gone?' and the founding father LM Mag group, Frank Füredi. Most youngsters are either too immersed in pop culture or wrapped up in their own personal issues to worry about the wider world. I don't see green fascists roaming the streets at night mugging innocent pedestrians or developing 3D simulations of a depopulation campaign to save mother nature from the curse of humanity. Instead, I see disenchanted youths joining gangs in inner-city ghettos and millions more alienated youths totally enraptured by virtual reenactments of fighting. One buys a 40-inch plasma screen in order to view gory scenes in their true glory, not apparently to view a documentary on climate change.

As Paul Flynn, one of the few critically thinking Labour MPs left, notes in his blog 'No British coverage I read mentioned anti-depressants, yet that have been a factor in 28 school shootings and stand-offs including the killing of 10 students in Columbine and 5 in Minnesota . The website www.ssristories.com/index.php has published the full lists.'

Now let us just briefly ponder on Brendan O'Neill's thesis. He claims that Pekka Erik Auvinen was somehow inspired by Finnish fisherman and ecofascist intellectual Pentti Linkola. The extreme pessimism and politically incorrect support for eugenics and authoritarian rule to bring the population down to more manageable numbers suits the arguments of technocratic polemicists fine. Pentti honestly believes humanity is doomed unless we urgently cull most of the world's human masses, but we should at least distinguish warnings from extreme reactions.

Tale of the Titanic

Consider the infamous Titanic ocean liner as a metaphor for planet Earth. The ship has a revolutionary new unbreakable hull and is heading full steam ahead for iceberg-infested water just to the south of Greenland. Like the global population, the ship contains a huge economic disparity of passengers, some occupying the upper decks with luxury cabins, private bathrooms, dance halls and room service. Others occupying the lower decks packed like sardines. As nobody expected the unsinkable ship to go down, lifeboats could only save a small minority of passengers. As it happened they did not even suffice to save all the first-class passengers let alone those in the lower decks.

Now, what would you have done if you had spotted the infamous iceberg in time? In hindsight, most humane people would have done everything possible to alert the crew so they steer the ship clear of the iceberg and alerted as many passengers as possible so we could make the best use of available resources to save as many people as possible. So what would the position of the Spiked sect be? In a nutshell, don't panic! Place your trust in the wonders of human technology and enjoy the cruise. Those who claim the ship will sink and kill off 90% of the ship's passengers are misanthropic green fascists. Now the likes of Pentti Linkola, a rare specimen indeed, might advocate shedding excess passengers even before we hit the iceberg and might not attempt to steer the ship clear of the near-certain calamity, but most environmental realists would accept the harsh truth that we'd better adapt in time or face high excess death rates. If I advise you not to cross a busy motorway on foot because you might die, that's a warning. But if I drive my car at 70mph (112kmh) through a quiet village and run you over, that's called murder. Whichever way, Pentti Linkola's musings represent the mind of melancholic cynicism that can appeal to alienated individuals with an axe to grind. If you are bullied at school and treated as an outcast, you can hardly be expected to have a very optimistic view of humanity, a subject to which I'll return in my next piece 'Is another World Possible'. But let's be clear Pekka acted as a paranoid pushing innocent passengers off the upper decks of the Titanic long before the ship had approached icy waters. The analogy might not be perfect, but we still have time to avert disaster and the likes of Pekka and those killed by his deranged shooting fell victim to technocratic means of mind control.

Population Pessimists

You see the position of population pessimists, as we call the likes of Paul Ehrlich is quite simple to summarise. Human population took thousands of years to climb gradually with ups and downs, from a few hundred million (estimates for global population circa 0 AD average around 300 million) to 700 million at the dawn of the industrial revolution. It then took another 150 years through famines and widespread ethnic cleansing in the epoch of colonial expansion, to climb to around 1.2 billion, circa 1890. All subsequent growth in little more than a century can be attributed to the petroleum revolution that significantly boosted agricultural yields and enabled regional specialisation through global distribution. So if this age is about to come to an end for hard scientific reasons, we may be in dire straits and thus need to adapt to lower aggregate consumption, an equation with two main variables per capita consumption and human population. Does that mean killing surplus people? No because if the pessimists are right, nature will take care of all human culling measures required to restabilise the ecosystem. The pessimists are merely predicting disaster. It's up to us to apply centuries of collective experience to avert this disaster or, at least, minimise the catastrophic consequences. Death and destruction are precisely what we want to avoid, but as I've pointed out in many other articles, will happen on a much greater scale if we fail to readapt to a post-petroleum age by consuming less and planning smaller, but viable and cohesive, families. So what if the population pessimists are wrong and, as the 1999 Channel 4 documentary, Against Nature, claimed the earth can genuinely support 32 billion human beings all with private motor vehicles, fridges and washing machines? What if hidden somewhere below the earth's crust are trillions of cubic metres of abiotic oil and we will soon develop the technology to tame Mars's environment? Well in that unlikely scenario, we still have plenty of time to grow and fill the void. It's planning for continued growth that's so drastically wrong.

Upside-Down Thinking

In my humble opinion neither the extreme pessimists, those who claim the earth can support only a few hundred million, nor the extreme optimists, those who claim we can happily embrace billions more human beings into our mass-consumer lifestyle, are right. Personally, I'd rather see a significantly lower consumption in the opulent world than significantly higher mortality through disease and starvation in the poor world. I kind of think on a purely pragmatic level we need to set priorities. We are already so interdependent that a prolonged power outage in a large city like London could kill thousands within days. Hospitals would shut and soon run out of supplies for emergency generators, refrigerated goods would rot, supermarkets would shut as would most places of work and education. Water pumps would fail and all supplies of bottled water would run out within hours. The whole place would grind to a halt and millions unable to flee. Indeed a tragedy could only be averted if other large organisations intervened promptly with a huge expenditure of resources. Just consider the fate of New Orleans in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina in times of plenty. The first victims are always the urban poor. If the United States can spend upwards of 400 billion bucks on invading and occupying Iraq, surely it could have devoted a small fraction of the quantity to saving its own citizens in its own territory? Apparently not, US multinationals need more oil to continue their addiction to economic growth at all costs. They don't really need 10,000 poor Louisianans as there are plenty more potential consumers and workers elsewhere. Their disappearance can be written off as unfortunate collateral damage of natural events beyond our control and possibly bad planning. You see as the human population becomes less sustainable, individual citizens become more expendable. Conversely, the more sustainable the economy is in the long term, the more valuable its citizens. This is why the blind optimism of perpetual growthers relies so much on upside-down thinking. If, like me, you loathe the prospect of mass famines, internecine warfare, an encroaching police state and widening rich-poor gap, you'd favour powering down, consuming less per capita and stabilising population by lowering the birth rate. If, however, you don't care, are too concerned about your private high consumption lifestyle, taking cheap flights and one car per adult for granted, and would rather buy into the notion that a finite planet can support unlimited growth, then expect the worst. But high-profile pseudo-intellectuals like Brendan O'Neill should know better. They know green activists abhor violence and the multibillion pound mass entertainment business is controlled by a tiny elite wielding enormous power over consumers. While Brendan O'Neill probably reads the Guardian and Independent and pretends to see elements of fascism in the likes of George Monbiot (in reality a very conformist moderate), the masses consume a diet of the Sun, Sky TV, Ryanair and online gambling with plenty of boozing and video-gaming opportunities. Indeed the very unintellectual masses are deluged daily with Shop-Until-You-Drop propaganda, so much so that UK consumer debt has reached 1.3 trillion pounds. Are we seriously to pretend that Rupert Murdoch, a key supporter of Thatcher, Blair, GW Bush and Howard as well as the tyrannical Chinese regime, has the best interests of ordinary working people at heart. Yet it is in his media outlets that we hear the most outspoken Growth at any Price propaganda. Has Spiked Online offered Jeremy Clarkson a column yet? Your average gas-guzzling motorist doesn't want to personally kill innocent Iraqis, Iranians or Venezuelans, but is perfectly prepared to believe a warped version of reality, in which they are victims of evil dictators whom our benevolent leaders have always opposed. Europeans driving across the wilds of Tanzania in their 4x4 Landrovers may wish car-less African villagers all the best, but are seldom prepared to admit that their lifestyle relies on resources that others are denied. Africa in the early 21st century has become a battleground between Chinese, European and Anglo-American energy and commodity corporations.

Remember when you could smoke on the London Underground?

The first time I travelled on the London underground, sometime in the mid 70s, passengers smoked nonchalantly. This was just before separate smoking and non-smoking cars had been introduced and would be unthinkable today for two reasons. First, because the non-smoking majority no longer tolerates tobacco pollution, but more to the point, because attempting to light up on most tube lines anytime between 7:30 and 9:00am could very easily ignite other passengers as the mean gap between standing persons is seldom more than an inch. Banning smoking on public transport led to a temporary improvement in air quality, soon offset by a higher density of passengers. You see if I don't have to share the same room with you, personally I don't care whether you smoke. Indeed if we share a large hall, I might tolerate your smoking fairly well, but if we have to share a metaphorical phone box, I might object. Spiked Online's panacea would have even more people happily choosing whether to smoke. We'd need to quadruple the London Underground network. First, we'd have to double it to cope with the current volume of passengers and then double it again to have separate networks for smokers and non-smokers. More people means subjugating ourselves to greater control over each others' lives. If you live in a small close-knit community you don't need extensive databases of sexual predators and potential terrorists, because everyone knows other members of the community and has time to vet occasional newcomers, but when people move house at the drop of a hat and few residents have any roots in the neighbourhood, we have to rely on the police, social services, CCTV cameras and RFID chips to defend us against dangerous individuals in our midst. Whether you like or not overcrowding not only reduces individual freedom and rights, but also tends to impact negatively on community relations.

Ironically the Spiked ' Sect tells would have us believe we can have our cake and eat it, i.e. we can continue to increase our burden on the ecosystem by relying even more on remote impenetrable technology and still enjoy personal lifestyle freedoms. Yet as sure as night follows day, technocratic elites take away our freedoms and put in their place a totally controlled fun culture.

A Note On the Spiked Sect

  • For those unfamiliar with Spiked Online, I'd better explain where it comes from. Posing as trendy progressives on the cutting edge of intellectual debate, the sect started life as breakaway faction from the old International Socialists, now Socialist Workers' Party, back in the mid 70s. They formed a far-left clique called the Revolutionary Communist Party, which took, shall we say without fear of contradiction, extreme stands on burning issues of the day, chiefly the civil war in the North of Ireland, steadfastly supporting the IRA and Sinn Fein even through some of the most indefensible atrocities against civilians. You name the issue and they tried to trump the rest of the radical left by assuming a more absolutist stance or dismissing more mainstream struggles as pointless syndicalism (like industrial action) or misguided counterrevolutionary revisionism. By the mid 80s they had honed their identity as the ultimate defenders of Marxist progress, seen purely in the simplistic terms that socialism represents not so much an alternative to the current world order but the next logical step in humanity's relentless progress from nomadism, through feudalism to capitalism and onwards to the dictatorship of the proletariat, guided by a vanguard party. Their vision of the future clearly reflected the prejudices of cosmopolitan Anglo-American elites. Rather than challenge rampant consumerism and large multinationals taking control of each and every aspect of people's lives, they embraced globalism as the ultimate humankind's destiny. Their focus moved away from the working class cause altogether as they attracted mainly upwardly mobile ambitious media studies students. However, they persevered with their role as the left's Devil's Advocate, especially when the left swallowed emotive humanitarian rhetoric on complex international crises such as the 1994 Rwandan democide, providing a semblance of radical anti-imperialism that appealed to small but influential clique of students.
  • By the late 1990s they had shed any pretence of competing on the far left, still dominated by the small neo-Trotskyite SWP. Their magazine, Living Marxism, became LM Mag and they began to campaign on largely lifestyle issues.
  • Just consider a selection of the Frank Füredi's clique's stances:
  • The human potential is boundless and thus any attempts to cut consumption, oppose technological solutions or plan for gradual population reduction should be opposed as reactionary opposition to progress itself. In any debate with RCPers on the environment sooner or later you'll be accused at best as a misguided opponent of progress and at worst of green fascism bordering on genocidal neo-Nazism.
  • Humanitarian disasters are often a figment of Western propaganda. The RCP campaigned vociferously to challenge media bias against Serbs in the Balkan Wars and against Hutus in the 1994 Rwandan tragedy.
  • We live a culture of fear, reluctant to embrace the technological solutions that could enable billions more human beings to enjoy the wonders of post-WW2 Western consumerism.
  • The adverse effects of modern consumer products, whether drugs, food or electronic devices, are hugely overstated and, with rare exceptions, greatly outweighed by their benefits. Here the latter-day RCP can appeal to many disillusioned with establishment control freakery over issues like smoking bans.
  • All regulation is bad. No nuanced position here as to whether we should call on the state to regulate us as private citizens or them as large corporate and state organisations. This stances places them in good company on the left on issues such as deregulation of cannabis or free speech, at one with the likes of Noam Chomsky. So they defend the right of racial supremacists to voice their scientific interpretations, but also dismiss the influence of mass entertainment on the minds of ordinary working people with little time to access to alternative media. So they say no to a ban on smacking, but also no limitations of the widespread prescription of psychoactive drugs. Ironically this stands in contrast with LM Mag's efforts to challenge media bias over Northern Ireland, Rwanda and Yugoslavia as your average Guardian reader would be depressingly unaware of the countercurrent perspectives that the RCP once championed. It would certainly appear that the new corporate-friendly Spiked Online brigade seem much concerned about defending the right of bug business to intoxicate and brainwash the masses through junk food and moronic electronic entertainment than they do about the freedom of genuine dissidents whose ideas are being silenced. Increasingly in the US and UK we see censorship of dissidents through an overload of mainstream disinformation and, where dissident ideas gain some currency, media belittling and bullying of all those who fail to sing from the right hymn sheet.
  • We have the universe to conquer. I recall this rallying cry from an RCP event I attended in 1985. Should appeal to Star Trek fans.
  • Multinationals are good and pave the way for a new borderless internationalism.
  • The Chinese and Indian economies are booming and poised to overtake Western European per capita consumption in the near future. Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your life's savings.
Categories
All in the Mind Power Dynamics

The Persuasion Industry

In one way or another a growing percentage of workers in the UK are engaged in various sectors of the persuasion industry. Call it new media, education, publishing, marketing, sales, customer relations, call centres, advertising, entertainment, legal services, lobbying, consulting, advice bureaux, research institutes, awareness raising charities, they are all in the multi-billion pound business of persuading. These businesses try to persuade us to buy products, borrow more money, adapt our lifestyles, seek diagnosis for some previously unheard-of medical condition, support a political party, place our faith in large corporations, support government policies, panic about media-fabricated problems. Even those of us not directly involved in the media sector service it by providing its infrastructure in the form of satellite dishes, computer hardware and software, catering, cosmetic surgery, hairdressing etc.

Let us have a look at some representative team players in the 21st century persuasion industry:

Public information officer:
With various titles such people impart filtered information on behalf of their clients, the key word here being filtered. Far from redressing bias, they merely serve the highest bidder making sure the only opinions available through trusted establishment media outlets reflects the interests of their clients. Many such public information officers work for organisations that are technically charities, but in reality fronts for big business. Consider the moral universe of a mental health information officer working for a research institute funded in large part by pharmaceutical multinationals. Such a person may dismiss the organisation's spurious funding as corporate benevolence and deceive herself that her work is actually helping sufferers of emotional disturbance overcome their problems, when in reality she is promoting drugs to mask people's problems. People like to be do-gooders and greater conformism tends to suppress any critical analysis of the adverse side effects of our jobs.
Personal loan advisor:
They sell you the myth that we can keep expropriating resources from the rest of the world as long as we let banks create virtual money out of thin air, but to repay your debt you have to be a good team player within the system. An indebted person is usually a more docile conformist person.
Teacher:
As a front-line propagandist, a teacher is responsible for moulding tomorrow's loyal workers, but increasingly focus not so much on encouraging children to teach themselves, but to learn acceptable behaviour. These days good self-confidence and team-playing are considered more important than trigonometry or critical analysis. Children are trained to be good project managers, but not to create the things we really need unless that is part of larger enterprise. For more read the writings of John Taylor Gatto.
Project Manager:

They smile, converse and write reports to co-ordinate and motivate the people who really do the actual work. As such they have no particular concrete expertise other than excellent people management skills, but despite their apparent empathy they are trained to consider the real human beings who implement their projects as mere resources, expendable in the same away as computer hardware. Their real task is to hide the real purpose of a project from the various resources involved in different stages of its implementation. The ideal project manager is thoroughly brainwashed with a special talent for subconscious denial.

In some firms these account for 25% to 50% of office staff. Project managers are required to talk the talk, but with a few honourable exceptions seldom have to walk the walk. All PMs, often recentgraduates, have bosses, essentially project manager managers, who impart instructions on how to manage the human resources to whom they allocate the actual work that needs to be done. The whole American business management model is based on the notion that technical staff tend to lack the so-called social skills needed to negotiate with irate corporate clients. However, some megabuck clients may not be pleased to learn that at least in the world of commercial software development PMs account for a sizeable slice of the human resources budget. Typically a PM in the IT sector graduated in computer sciences and tends to know an awful lot of theory infused with corporate propaganda. The need for best practices in project management soon becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as consultants routinely attribute the failure of projects to bad project management.

Categories
Power Dynamics

Blair concedes Iraq Lies

Information Clearing House recently republished extracts from the late Robin Cook's diaries, in which Blair concedes that Iraq could not strike the West or even nearby Israel with weapons of mass destruction. It also reveals how the initial scepticism of some New Labour Cabinet ministers in the run up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq soon turned into loyalty as Blairite rhetoric morphed into crocodile tears over the human rights of oppressed and disenfranchised Iraqis.

Some analysts insist the likes of Blair, Brown and Bush remain happily oblivious to their serial mendacity over foreign policy. Only recently Seymour Hersh, noted for exposing the criminal activities of his government at home and abroad, reiterated his belief that Bush and, by implication, actually means what he says.

Consider a human resources manager imparting the news that owing internal restructuring your services are no longer required, but thanking you nonetheless for all your hard work during your tenure at the company and appearing very concerned about your future. By their nature HR managers have excellent skills of self-deceptive false altruism. Their job is to manage a situation, ensure a trouble-free transition from one human resource to the new one avoiding any ill-feelings or recriminations and maintaining a façade of good employee and public relations. This is especially important with key technical staff who are likely to find employment elsewhere with one of their competitors. The last thing they want is for word to get out that they routinely stab loyal workers in the back. For the duration of the private meeting the HR manager may temporarily believe her own rhetoric, but deep down knows that only an hour earlier her line manager had told her to sack you and replace you with a less experienced, but more manipulable human resource. Indeed if the HR manager ever met you after your dismissal, she'd probably feign concern about your wellbeing and appear genuinely delighted that you've found a new job or devastated that you're still between jobs. The same principle applies to politicians. They're little more than project managers with excellent client-facing skills.

Categories
Power Dynamics

On the Wrong Track

A good way to dispel concern about an emerging trend is to set up a phoney debate pitting the views of social conservatives rejecting cultural change against progressive change enthusiasts, e.g. only paranoid Daily Mail readers could possibly oppose the growing encroachment of war-themed video games in mainstream life. Progress is by default associated with trendy young culture with little regard to its key disseminators, while negative reactionism refers to recalcitrant opposition to progress. We thus have a false dichotomy of progressives against reactionaries, simplified into a classic goodies against baddies fight. But who sets the parameters of debate and then defines woolly concepts like progressives and reactionaries in a given socio-political context? This is a classic technique deployed in change management, the art of persuading first key opinion leaders and decision-makers and then the general populace of the need for some far-reaching cultural change already agreed upon by the powers that be. The media often asks us to consider whether public opinion is ready for a given policy that the establishment considers progressive such as a smacking ban or adoption of identity cards. Public opinion has to be prepared first, which is why in a nominally consultative democratic system the persuasion industry, whether through the mediums of advertising, entertainment, awareness-raising or staged debates, plays such a key role. If large sections of public openly dissented from the implementation of policies essential to the stability of the ruling elite, they would either have to impose a more openly authoritarian regime or change policy. However, often a semblance of intense debate can be created by pitting die-hard traditionalists, often with religious associations, against enlightened progressives.

Consider the news this week that all girls in England (and Wales and Scotland will no doubt follow suit) will be given the new Gardasil vaccine to protect them against the carcinogenic human papillomavirus, which is usually sexually transmitted. The BBC's Have Your Say fully moderated forum had a handful of messages opposing the move and a deluge not only enthusiastically supporting it, but lambasting naysayers as religious nuts. Indeed religious nuts prove useful tools of the establishment, only last week I had a conversation with a born-again Christian recruited by some obscure US-based Church (Potter's House, I believe), absolutely convinced that Biblical creationism is more scientifically valid than evolutionism as well as describing abortion as worse than the Nazi Holocaust. Of course, I support his right to believe such nonsense, but suspect they are being set up fake dissidents, eager to recruit millions of vulnerable humble citizens who have rightly lost their faith in the neo-liberal intelligentsia. So basically if you oppose mass medication of all 12 year old females, you're equated with religious zealots who advocate chastity until marriage. Indeed even if you just voice concern about the safety of the new vaccines, you are still associated with those who oppose mass medication for religious reasons. Whether or not the purported benefits of the new vaccine outweighs its known side effects or indeed whether or not it will curb the incessant rise of cancer despite much lower smoking rates, unthinking conformists are just expected to channel their anger against extremists opposed to progress as defined by Glaxo Smith Kline and Merck. Yes, the very same companies that profit enormously from drugs like SSRIs and childhood amphetamines. The goodies side with the NHS, the government and big pharma, while the baddies condemn teenagers to abstinence and fear of contracting diseases from promiscuous partners when the time is right.

Last week the BBC also ran a report about the benefits, a key word in the art of neuro-linguistic conditioning, of first-person shooter games in developing business management skills. Only a few days later the Daily Mail reports on the findings of a study by Dundee's Abertay University into thebenefits of video games in stimulating concentration in school age children. The aforementioned BBC article correctly noted the pervasiveness of the pastime among teenagers and adults alike, but failed to present the dark side of this pursuit. Here we have a public service broadcaster trivialising the trivialisation of simulated mass murder and echoing the entertainment industry line that it's just harmless fun. Apparently not, otherwise big business would not be promoting it so enthusiastically. If addiction to these games changes the way we think, i.e. reprograms our minds to become more goal-oriented and be better team players, it soon becomes obvious who the main beneficiaries are, large corporations and potentially military organisations. In corporate jargon goal-oriented does not mean steadfastly pursuing a goal, but staying focussed on a goal that someone else higher up in the organisational hierarchy has set. In an increasingly high surveillance society, only complete idiots would unleash their violent dark side in public, but many would seek authorised outlets for their inner aggression, especially when presented as cool pursuits. Judging from conversations I hear at work, and as a contract programmer I regularly change workplace and come into a contact with a broad range of young adults, most avid gamers are down-and-out conformists. So what useful people management skills would they learn by spending hours navigating virtual mazes, often dark dungeons and inhospitable desert scenes reminiscent of the terrain soldiers might expect in Iraq, Iran or Sudan, and fragging their mates? Is this some kind of metaphor for beating the competition or betraying one's colleagues in pursuit of greater glory, pandering to the virtuous powers that be. Nobody can pretend that the psychology of electronic can be simplified as a dichotomy between good and evil, but these games appear to be empowering their makers more than their players.

Back in 1994 we learned that the infamous Radio Les Milles Collines had instigated a genocide by urging the Hutu majority to slaughter their Tutsi neighbours. This may be a highly biased and partial account of what really happened Rwanda ( see Revisiting the "Rwandan Genocide" - Resurrecting Ghosts, or Exorcising Demons?) but if rudimentary audio media could incite a bloodbath when participants believe they have an official carte blanche to unleash generations of pent-up revenge, what potential does much more sophisticated interactive electronic media have to control the actions of millions of addicts? The question is seldom posed in these terms. Instead we witness a rather dull debate between trendy conformists and not-so-trendy conservatives about the immediate effects of playing these games. Indeed entertainment industry propagandists are probably correct in claiming violent video games have cathartic effects in some individuals, as anger that might otherwise be vented against the ruling elite in a coherent and rational way is channelled against fictitious enemies who often bear an uncanny semblance to our ruling elite's official enemies du jour. The real importance of video games to the establishment lies in their power of psychological conditioning. They need loyal conformist citizens with suitable outlets for their pent-up anger created by extreme competition.

Categories
Power Dynamics

A Numerical Paradox

If we want to strike a sensible balance between individual freedom, self-realisation, social cohesion, democracy and good community relations, we should be aware these noble aims can only coexist and thrive in optimal socio-environmental conditions that have stood the test of time. For too long we have worshipped the abstract world of economics rather than the concrete world of ecology that ultimately determines our real quality of life. If history has taught us anything, it should be that all predatory empires come to an end sooner or later and only those civilisations that live within their means survive more than a few generations. The American dream, on which the current hyperconsumption model is based, may well prove to be one the shortest-lived empires in global history, lasting little more than century.

I've corresponded with a friend about the biggest paradox facing humanity, scarcity and numbers. While well informed and sincere, he insists that latter-day Malthusianism is ideologically driven by misanthropy. For the ruling elite we are just numbers of human resources who can be manipulated as workers, soldiers, managers or consumers. We all know the feeling after travelling in the overcrowded public transport system of a bustling metropolis, only to witness on a quiet break in the country vast expanses of greenbelt serving as little more than the private playground of the new aristocracy escaping the social pressure cooker we call a city. We may then contrast the conspicuous waste of food in wealthy countries reliant on imports to sustain their standard of living with the near famine conditions of much of the world's poor still reliant on local produce. If only these resources were shared more equitably, we could all live happily ever after. I don't know how many times I've heard or read that the world produces four times the food its population needs, a figure pulled out of the hat way back in the early 70s. As most of us have long ceased to have any direct involvement in the harvesting or production of the goods we consume, our whole concepts of abundance and scarcity are manufactured. In post-industrial Britain few of us can remember the time when small close-knit communities would provide most of life's essentials. Such attempts to recreate a self-reliant past are parodied in TV sitcoms like the Good Life of the early 70s or dismissed as the pipe dreams of New Age communities. Some experiments in ideal conditions have met with some success. The Findhorn community near Inverness, Scotland, comes to mind, but that's in a relatively sparsely populated region that is surprisingly fertile for its latitude, but unpopular owing to Scotland renowned dreich weather. The whole of the UK population would not survive if everyone joined a similar commune.

Instead we rely on technology and trade to feed over sixty million UK residents, now projected to rise to over 75 million by 2050 as per capita oil, gas, coal and potable water resources dwindle. This means not only the widespread use of petrochemical to boost agricultural yield, but huge economies of scale. Last year nearly a billion animals, mainly chickens and turkeys, were slaughtered to meet the country's insatiable demand for meat, most of it sold through a handful of supermarket chains. Although the pastures of much of Scotland, Wales and Northern England are dotted with characteristic sheep, most food-grade livestock is raised in buildings, transported to large abattoirs possibly over 100 miles away for slaughter, prepared and sold in bulk to large retail chains. Without refrigeration and/or preservatives such a food distribution would be impossible and we'd have to eat produce originating from a relatively small radius with the exception of low-volume non-perishables such as spices.

Anyone Been To Inner London Lately?

Take the 266 bus from Acton all the way to Cricklewood as I had to the other day owing to a strike by low-paid Silverlink workers (London's inner city overground rail network). It took over an hour to travel 8 miles (13km). Not only was the bus laden with an underclass recently imported from Eastern Europe and various Asian locales, the streets were lined with newcomers, many towing suitcases, and a never-ending parade of Internet cafés, pawn shops, betting shops, pubs, mobile phone shops and buffet bars, in short more reminiscent of a bustling third world metropolis and a society in moral decay than the cultural and economic hub of the civilised world. One cannot escape a foreboding sense of ephemerality, with the social fabric teetering on the brink of civil war. Contrast this reality with recent events held in London's Earls Court Exhibition Centre urging Brits to buy property to Spain, Bulgaria, Cyprus and even Berlin and the globalist tendency to break up traditional communities becomes apparent. What is obvious is the near total absence of wishful-thinking Guardian and Independent readers on London buses outside some trendy central districts. Sadly most just vote with their feet, wallets or automobiles, while subconsciously denying the incipient disaster, framing it in media-filtered terms of global warming or blaming foreign dictators. If so many Poles are unemployed at home and urged to migrate to the UK, might it be because in the post-Stalinist era foreign multinationals like Tesco have moved in to take control of the labour market. Yet those who deny the disastrous socio-environmental effects of overcrowding are as myopic (or short-sighted as non-Guardian readers might prefer) as those who choose to deny the human role in triggering climate change.

Today's shrink-wrapped Independent leads on the Italian government's purported intolerance for immigrants, discretely slurring even the mildest critics of globalisation as xenophobes. Ironically the countries we associate most with tolerance, such as Sweden or Finland, are those that attract fewer desperate migrants and have more available land and resources, while former bastions of open-door immigration like the Netherlands and Denmark have seen a huge backlash from their native populations. Contrary to popular misconceptions the debate is not between freedom of movement and harsh immigration controls, but between market-driven driven migration, as favoured by neoliberals, and sustainable communities able to control their own destiny within limits imposed by nature and non-destructive technology. You cannot have it both ways by letting big business exploit cheap labour and letting ordinary citizens have a say in the country's migration policy. No-one can deny the untold human suffering and human rights abuses all over the planet from Iraq, to China, the US, Nigeria to humble old Blighty. Yet the neoliberal media entertains us with the illusion that only foreign politicians are to blame and encouraging more overpopulation and more overconsumption is the answer rather than the problem. With around the same surface area and population as the UK, Italy has witnessed a huge influx of newcomers and is simply unable to cope with the inevitable structural and social difficulties that result from migratory pressure caused by a failed economic model. If the Balkans had not been destabilised, if Eastern European economies had not been taken over by Western multinationals, if oil-rich Middle Eastern countries were in control of their own destiny, if Africans could reap the benefits of their own resources and be left to develop within the constraints of home-grown technology, none of these migratory pressures would exist. A mass exodus from the world's trouble spots is a direct result of the globalist policies that the neoliberal media promote in an endless self-reinforcing cycle of social and cultural transformation.

One wonders where Independent editorial writers and other advocates of massive economically driven immigration live. On a parallel planet would seem a good answer, but more realistically they live in a Bohemian bubble where wealth generated largely by the propaganda industry meets a plentiful supply of cheap labour. If you earn £200K per annum, as many in the media business do and most neoliberal pundits get much more, and can afford the mortgage on your four bedroom townhouse, then the availability of cheap labour brings many benefits in the short term. Housemaids, child-minders plumbers, gardeners, painter-decorators, general handymen, hairdressers, massageuses and purveyors of sexual services, once offering their services at a premium are now very easy to recruit and replace at the drop of hat. They moneyed classes enjoy eating out and discussing their media projects amidst a vibrant café culture, staffed predominantly by new immigrants. This is what economists mean by a flexible labour market. Of course, it is absolutely true that many indigenous Brits are either unwilling or simply unable to perform these tasks, but this is largely because a culture of instant gratification has persuaded them that they should aspire to cushy careers rather than real jobs where they might get their hands dirty.

The most absurd argument that the Independent has used to justify the government's immigration policy is that an ageing population needs more carers and presumably young British workers are simply too busy to take time out of their new media careers to care for their elderly relatives. As life expectancy is almost the same in the UK and Poland, but lower than in Italy, France, Spain or Greece, one wonders who is going to look after elderly Poles and Ukrainians, if their offspring are busy serving work-shy, disabled and ageing Brits.

Carrying Capacity

No rationally minded empiricist (and I see no conflict between empiricism and rationalism) would deny a finite planet imposes limits on growth. Just in case you fantasise colonising Mars or some more hospitable earth-like planet in a distant solar system, please bear in mind the huge logistical problems in taming an environment millions of miles or scores of light years away from our home planet, something that may take millennia even when we acquire the technology. For the time being we'll have to make do with planet earth whose human carrying capacity depends largely on two factors, our per capita consumption and diligent use of technology to reduce our impact on the ecosystem that provides us with vital oxygen, water and nutrients. Currently we rely on a technocratic elite, whether under state or corporate auspices, to provide the majority of the globe's inhabitants with sustenance. Whether you're a Chinese factory worker or a French office worker, you use high-tech tools you could not conceivably make on your own and act as one small cog in much more complex industrial machine, even where the purpose of your job is clear. You might know how to assemble the components of your tools, but extracting and processing the raw materials is beyond the means of most of us. To co-ordinate numerous micro-specialisations and achieve sufficient economies of scale, we need a large and disciplined organisation, able to delegate responsibility for implementation of its business objects to lesser minions. Suppose a large retail chains wishes to offer European consumers affordable mp3 players, to cut costs it outsources production to a Chinese manufacturer, who in turn decides how to maximise its competitive edge over European rivals. In this case the European retail chain merely dictates the price and lets the Chinese manufacturer decide how to deliver the desired goods at the requested prices. Thanks to the logic of globalised trade, if the Chinese manufacturer raises prices to pay its workers better, the European buyer can simply source the same products elsewhere. Logically we may also argue that if the Chinese workers earned more, they'd be able to buy more consumer products, but then if the price of consumer products rose beyond a certain level in the opulent world workers would buy less affecting something we call consumer confidence. More important it is unlikely that all the raw materials required for the budget mp3 players (petroleum, silicon and aluminium) could be sourced from China alone.

If your idea of utopia is based on the more affluent neighbourhoods of the USA's sprawling suburbs with their double or triple garages, water sprinklers and easy access to large road network connecting residents to the centres of work, leisure and shopping, the world has almost certainly long surpassed its medium term carrying capacity. Just consider the futility of driving twenty miles from a plush gated neighbourhood to an office building for the sole purpose of writing reports and attending meetings whose concrete purpose few participants comprehend. The only reason these tasks are not conducted remotely is the crucial role of people management in the modern corporate bureaucracy. If people worked from home, they might not only lack motivation, but might start to unleash the kind of creativity that corporate control freaks can ill-afford. They need workers to be fine-tuned to a hive mentality and all, metaphorically, bat for the same team, hence the importance of bonding rituals such as drinks after work on Fridays, conferences or weekend breaks. Only a fortunate few highly skilled freelancers can choose for which masters to serve and on what terms and even they have travel far and wide to socialise with their corporate clients. While short-term fixes such as tele-working with the wonders of broadband and Web cams, may save some fuel, the Suburban lifestyle still requires us to travel long distances to procure food, clothes and other wares, drop the kids at numerous activities and participate in a leisure culture, the alternative often being exclusion from real flesh and blood social life. The incessant drive to suburban bliss in much of the prosperous world has not only fractured traditional communities, but driven millions to depression as they feel unable to compete on new terms dictated by media role models. A quick tour of many lower middle class housing estates in the UK soon reveals the stark reality that most residents are engaged in some form of virtual reality with home cinemas, game consoles, Internet access to gaming and gambling sites or even just busy bidding or selling on ebay. When it comes to actually replenishing supplies, off we go to the nearest retail chain. When life at home gets the better of us, we might splash out on some form of mass-marketed entertainment. Dunfermline, the ancient seat of the Scottish Royal Family with a proud history, now offers its residents little more than four large supermarkets (two Asda outlets, one Tesco and a smaller Somerfield) and a new retail park with an Odeon multiplex cinema, fitness centre, bowling alley, bingo hall and the usual array of chain restaurants. The town has no greengrocers and only one butcher's. If you don't like mass-marketed fake individualism, you can either migrate to remote rural retreats relatively untouched by corporate Gleichschaltung or as it is known today, cultural harmonisation, or return to the cosmopolitan urban heartlands long abandoned by the indigenous working classes, but where there is usually a critical mass of human beings interested in some form of alternative lifestyle and where ironically it is still possible to live a varied life away from the country's dominant cultural institution, TV. However, only a select few can afford the exorbitantly priced properties in the gentrified inner urban locales of London, Manchester, Edinburgh or even humble Cardiff, leaving only substandard crowded accommodation for those unable or unwilling to commute.

Richard Heinberg ) has considered the changes required to reduce aggregate human consumption while saving as many lives as possible. While mainstream politicians may pay lip-service to the challenges presented by climate change or rising crude oil prices, they are completely incapable of considering any alternative to the dominant mantra of our times, the need for constant economic growth and greater globalisation. Critics of economic migration and outsourcing are routinely lambasted as reactionary isolationists with little respect for the world's poor or wonders of ethnic diversity. That mass migration at historically unprecedented levels destroys genuine cultural differences and exacerbates social inequality to the detriment of the poorest and to the benefit of the moneyed professional classes hardly occurs to many wishful-thinking Independent or Guardian readers, as they contemplate ads for a Volvo people carrier or a cheap European city break. Waste-reducing initiatives are seen as dialogues between positive-thinking citizens and large corporate institutions. We may asked to consider whether Tesco should reduce packaging, charge for plastic bags or sell sturdy reusable carrier bags, but not whether we should rely on multinational grocery chains for life's essentials. We entrust our future in distant experts whose importance only large corporate or state media outlets may determine. Instead to power down, we need to rethink the whole concept of progress by relocalising agriculture, production and distribution. Rather than appealing the Tescos and Walmarts of the world to source more of their produce from local providers, we should switch to an alternative network of local independent farmers, retailers and manufacturers to drastically cut food miles and plan for a more sustainable future, but in large cities like London such reasonable solutions would only be feasible with radical depopulation. Instead the powers that be seem hell-bent on permitting the construction of three million more homes in the Southeast of England, already Europe's least sustainable province in terms of fending for itself.

Get a Grip on Reality

Before you read another Independent shock horror story about the imminent deportation of a small number of Zimbabwean asylum seekers, consider the real victims of globalised insanity. Zimbabwe is a nation founded, moulded and thoroughly exploited by British colonialists. When the country finally gained independence and majority rule in 1980, 7 million people could be fed by a self-sufficient farming and the proceeds of tobacco plantations and minerals. 27 years later with around 13 million inhabitants, the flight of many white-owned businesses, previously the country's prime source of the hard cash it needed to import technology only available abroad, and vast tracts of former farm land laid barren owing to the effects of soil erosion and climate change. The British media, including the liberal lefties, conveniently blames Robert Mugabe and mismanagement of land reform. The harsh reality on the ground is that any government that doesn't toe a line dictated by the IMF and the the World Bank will, unless it has vast reserves of natural resources like oil or uranium and masters the technology to exploit them, be compelled to power down, and in the case of most so-called developing countries with a rapidly rising population, have to cope with rapidly declining per capita resources. Thus is just two decades Zimbabwe has transitioned from a net food exporter to a net importer. Had its population remained stable, land could have been redistributed more equitably and bought itself time to develop the technological infrastructure required for long -term sustainability, but the myth of material progress divorced from environmental reality, ironically shared by Marxists and neoliberal capitalists alike, has condemned the country to dependence on international trade. However, Zimbabwe's neighbours have profound structural problems of their own. The US and South Africa have long funded civil wars in Mozambique and Angola. Zambia has swallowed a bitter IMF-administered pill condemning much of population to starvation conditions with a dramatically lower population growth estimates, and South Africa with 40% of its working age population jobless has struggled to accommodate refugees from the rest of the Africa. Unlike the peoples of the British Isles in the late 18th century Zimbabweans have nowhere else to go, so why not accommodate them all in London, England. In my 1999 visit I was rather taken aback, after spending a couple of weeks in South Africa, to meet so many well-educated unemployed Zimbabweans. Despite horror stories of Mugabe's autocratic rule, the country's education system resembled that found 1950s Britain with little attention devoted to literacy in either Shona or Sindebele and plenty to English-medium basic education, reading, writing and arithmetic. Despite all the Pan-African rhetoric, the new African ruling elite has by and large attempted to emulate the model of development pioneered by their former colonial occupiers, which is hardly surprising as most graduated in European or American universities. You have cars, we want cars. You have home cinemas, we want electronic gadgetry too. Now if we had the technology to let millions of Indians, Chinese and Sub-Saharan Africans enjoy the same high-consumption lifestyle, that would, at least in theory, be exceedingly good for our economy.

What is beyond dispute is that millions of Africans live in very precarious conditions and are denied rights we take for granted, such as easy access to potable water, safe shelter and a cooked meal every day. Never mind whether they are locked up in jail for daring to criticise their local line managers, let us look at what our multinationals are doing, yes the same friendly institutions that via lobbying firms like Price House Cooper or KPMG shape our government's policies. Well Exxon, Texaco and BP Amoco, key supporters of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, consider the Angolan exclave of Cabinda their personal fiefdom, paying kickbacks to the former Marxists now in technically charge of Angola. The civil war in former Zaire, now affectionately known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with its at least three million excess deaths, largely concerns control of mineral resources. As for Darfur, has anyone noticed the copious reserves of black gold in a region extending into neighbouring Chad. To understand the real intentions of the globalist British elite we need look no further than historians Niall Ferguson and in, more overt terms, Robert Cooper, former advisor to multimillionaire keynote speaker Tony Blair. Roberts unashamedly advocates the recolonisation of Africa, but cunningly adorns his greedy intentions with humanitarian waffle. The lobbying efforts of many professional political advisors close to the New Labour establishment have not only helped large corporations secure lucrative PFI contracts or forced health and education services to waste tax payers' money on expensive proprietary software solutions, but have also secured state funding for multibillion pound military hardware projects such as the Eurofighter, which have never been deployed in defensive operations and whose only conceivable use would be in wars of resource appropriation. More important they have represented private security firms such as Blackwater supplying mercenaries to war zones like Iraq. Unlike many new army recruits, hardened mercenaries often boasting experience in Africa's forgotten wars (indeed many were raised in Apartheid era South Africa), have few qualms about shoot-to-kill policies. As

Stephen Lendman notes ()

The Bush administration believes anything government can do private business does better, so let it. And that applies to the military as well with Blackwater and SandlineUSA's powerful emergence Exhibit A. Author Jeremy Scahill portrays the company as "the world's most powerful mercenary army" in his frightening new book about it. It describes a "shadowy mercenary company (employing) some of the most feared professional killers in the world....accustomed to operating without worry of legal consequences....largely off the congressional radar." It has "remarkable power and protection within the US war apparatus" with unaccountable license to practice street violence with impunity that includes cold-blooded murder.

The numerical paradox is that immigration proponents who claim human rights abuses as a reason to let in more newcomers grossly understate the problem and evade their responsibility for human suffering. If Britain's population grows, as predicted, by a further 15 million over the next 40 years, mainly through immigration as the indigenous people count is actually declining, this is but a small drop in the ocean compared to the hundreds or even thousands of millions who may meet early deaths as a result of the failure of the current globalised high-consumption model of development. 15 million is but 1.5% of the Indian population or 2% of the Sub-Saharan population. More important current migration policy depends entirely surplus wealth generated by large corporations who produce little of what we really need. Besides banking and media, the three biggest UK industries are now the defence (read attack), energy and pharmaceutical/biotech sectors, all engaged in controlling access to vital resources and undermining economic autonomy. We could add other arguments such as the inevitable brain drain of countries of net emigration, but the most important fact is when the temporary economic boom that drew so many to the centres of wealth accumulation bursts, we will face social and environmental disaster.

Many of us aspire to noble aims such as social cohesion, democracy, tolerance, good community relations, plentiful and essential resources and more important breathing space for each individual. Before you think of the vast expanses of inhabited land in North Africa, Siberia, Northern Canada, Central Australia, Antarctica and the Pacific Ocean, just remember only a small fraction of the earth's land mass lends itself to comfortable human habitation. With oil extraction now past its peak and with alternatives sadly much less feasible than many of us would hope, we will have to readapt our lifestyles if we are to salvage the best of what humanity can offer. That means powering down everywhere, less consumption beyond that essential for sustaining life, less migration to high consumption areas and more economic incentives to lower the birth rate in proliferous nations. A stepping stone to a more sustainable world is to make each community responsible for its own actions. Globalisation lets wealthy communities export pollution and import food and cheap labour. If a community can sustain itself autonomously balancing material exports and imports, then nobody has a right to dictate their behaviour. But if a community depends on global banking cartels, handouts from remote governments and patented technology only available from a handful of multinationals, it has no freedom and any remnants of democracy are a mere illusion.

Many leftists don't like any talk of population simply because that might mean eliminating many of those already blessed with life on this planet. It's hard to imagine a society more obsessed with slaughter and destruction more than our own, though usually only through virtual media and possibly because we are largely shielded from its immediate human consequences, but the earth's carrying capacity is not moral issue, but a scientific one. By blindly placing our faith in the power of human ingenuity to cope with an unprecedented rise in our population, we are merely sowing the seeds of our own destruction, but by reversing gear we will actually allow more people to live more peacefully, more fruitfully and over more generations, just not all at the same time and in the same place. To survive as species we need to refocus our attention on the quality of human existence rather than quantity of potential consumers.

Categories
Power Dynamics

Straight from the Horse’s Mouth

"I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil." Alan Greenspan in his memoirs.

Why did the US and UK invade Iraq? Theories abound, but here are the top four:

  1. To get rid of weapons of mass destruction.
  2. To overthrow an evil dictator and extend democracy to the Iraqi people.
  3. To aid Israel in its quest for global domination.
  4. To secure control of strategic oil reserves.

If you've read any of my previous musings, you'll know which I think is the correct answer. The real question is why so many liberal lefties and antiwar activists choose to believe variants of the first three theories. Let us suppose Iraq did have deployable nuclear missiles, as Iran might have and Israel certainly has, would this not prove the first theory right? Never mind the failure of inspectors to find little more than remnants of past chemical weapons projects in a country devastated by sanctions, that is not the primary reason why the US administration has spent over US$ 200 billion invading and occupying Iraq. If they cared about the WMDs of other countries, then presumably China, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Brazil and North Korea should be of greater concern and let's not forget the nuclear arsenal of France and UK that the US usually deems friendly countries. Not even UK government ministers believe WMDs were the real reason for Britain's support. It served as a mere pretext to secure a UN rubber stamp for Anglo-American geostrategic aims.

However, many pundits have lent credence to the second excuse. Some would have us believe that even if the US and UK did it for their own self-interest, the Iraqi people benefited through their first multi-party elections and greater freedom of expression. This version of events assumes democracy can exist without any effective control over the economy of the country over which the elected officials nominally have jurisdiction. From a psychological standpoint I'd suggest most leftists who pretend Iraqis have somehow benefited from the invasion are simply in a state of denial. While they criticise the neocon elements behind the Bush Junta and Brown/Blair subsidiary in the UK, they somehow believe the US and UK are progressive forces for good, largely because they see progress in terms of the value system prevalent in trendy upper middle class circles of San Francisco, New York, London and Sydney. I can just see the likes of Peter Tatchell lecturing Iraqi students on sexual politics in a newly opened Starbucks in downtown Baghdad with Bono's U2 music in the background. Bono and Tatchell may have voiced their opposition to the invasion, but their idea of progress is very much the consumerist dystopia that made Bono rich or bankrolled Peter's lifestyle campaigns.

The third reason has certain appeals both on the hard left and within the Muslim community. To entertain this theory, we need to distinguish three groups, which many critics confuse, the Israeli government, the Israeli people and anyone with Jewish connections. The three are not the same, except many in the third category will tend to sympathise with policies and actions of the first, but that is not a given. Beyond doubt many of the key instigators behind the US/UK invasion had close ties with the Israeli government. I need not name names as this ground others have covered extensively. I'd consider this alliance little more than a marriage of convenience, but the inevitable Iraqi insurgence and growing instability hardly benefit ordinary Israelis of any faith. Not only does the conflict lead to greater migratory pressure to Israel's neighbours, but it fuels the civil war against Israeli occupation of the Palestinian terroritories. Some variants of the "They did it for Israel" theory claim Israeli business interests have their eyes set on acquiring vast quantities of real estate in a dismembered Iraq in alliance with Iraqi Kurd leaders. Now why would Israel want to extend its borders to include territory inhabitated by a largely hostile population in which Jews would be a very small minority? More likely is the thesis that Israeli military and business ventures acts a proxy for a wider axis of US, UK and other global interests. That Kurdish and Shiite distrust of the traditionally Sunni-dominated Iraqi regime has been manipulated is beyond dispute, but to extend its borders Israel would need an army much larger than the 200,000 odd US and UK troops currently stationed in Iraq. Israel is currently one of the most dangerous places in the world for practising Jews. Indeed many Russian Jews prefer Germany and most Iranian Jews have turned down large financial incentives to relocate to the Promised Land.

There are two ways to analyse power structures. One is simply to look at the ethno-religious composition of the world's elite and assume they act in the best interests of poorer members of their respective groups. However, a quick look at the world's leading bankers, oligarchs, multinational CEOs, corrupt politicians and other power brokers may reveal the over-representation of some groups and the other under-representation of others, but the gulf between this group and the rest of the world is several orders of magnitude greater than that between middle class Western Europeans and ordinary Ethopians. This elite comprises both the likes of Alan Greenspan, cited above, and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia as well as the CEO of Russia's Gazprom, Japan's Sony Corporation and India's Mittal. They owe no more allegiance to their countryfolk than is strictly necessary for public relations purposes.

However, there is another reason some prefer this Israeli connection theory to the much more obvious oil motive. They fail to believe the resources on which our high-consumption economy with a record human population are becoming scarcer, thus threatening civilisation as we know it. Many politcally correct utopian dreams rely on continous growth to accommodate unrestrained immigration to high consumption countries while others countries catch up with Western European living standards. Currently such a lifestyle depends on fossil fuels and the only realistic alternative that could hope generate anywhere near the same capacity remains the nuclear option. Faced with hard ecological facts, many leftists enter a state of denial, which in its extreme form may even lead them to refute the evidence linking human activity with climate change. Why? Because if we have to rethink our model of development and adapt to much lower levels of aggregate consumption, then, as Richard Heinberg puts it so succinctly, the party is truly over. While it's easy just to urge a reduction in consumption in wealthy regions, the obvious consequence is that the earth record population of 6.5 billion human beings risks rapid implosion. What is certain is that the more the wealthy few continue to indulge, the greater the resultant die-off.

Another analytical error common on the wishful-thinking left is the notion that the US/UK invasion of Iraq has somehow failed. This could only be true if we assume they wanted to bring about a stable and notionally democratic Iraq. They need the spectre of a civil war between rival ethno-religious groups, of an emboldened Al Qaeda and of the involvement of a Islamic Fundamentalist Iran to justify their continued presence. Indeed with the passing of the Petroleum Act and agreements for permanent US bases on Iraqi soil, the US presence there is very much for medium to long term.

They didn't do it for oil, but....

That leaves just one theory. It comes as no surprise that in BBC and CNN discussions on Iraq, oil is seldom mentioned in this regard. The Israel theory suits them fine, because they can then paint opponents as paranoid antisemites, who'd blame Israel for everything from global warming to cultural decay. They no longer entertain the first theory, preferring a mix of ill-defined geostrategic (national security) motives and selfish altruism. Many intellectuals in the public eye have long recognised this reality, but tend to qualify any oil motivations in terms of strategic control, i.e. "They didn't invade Iraq because of oil, but o gain a foothold in the Middle East so they stabilise the region in line with interests of US and UK multinationals." This is like saying "My wife doesn't work as a nude model for the money, but to stabilise our joint financial situation.". However clever such obfuscatory reasoning may appear, gaining control of oil producing regions is the same as grabbing oil, even if you do not use it yourself, but sell it to your competitors. Right now the US economy can source most of its oil from Mexico, Canada, Coolombia, Venezuala and Nigeria, but sooner or later without control over Middle East and Central Asian fossil fuel reserves the US economic model will flounder. Believe me if they could solve the problem by converting thousands of square miles to rapeseed plantations for bio-diesel or 4 metre tall Miscanthus elephant grass, they would. What peak oil deniers fail to recognise is the concept of EROEI or Energy Returned On Energy Invested. If you need to invest immense energy and reallocate vast swatches of farmland to grow fuel crops, it becomes little more than a temporary fix. The same applies to the nuclear option, it requires huge investment and hard-to-obtain uranium. It may be feasible for advanced countries like France with cosy deals with Uranium exporters like Niger to generate 80% of their energy this way, but if we used atomic power to replace fossil fuels we'd soon run out of uranium that can be easily isolated, all this without considering long-term storage, radioactivity, security and potential catastrophic accidents.

What if the US hadn't invaded Iraq?

In the short term the invasion of Iraq has cost the debt-ridden US economy dear. An estimated 250 billion US bucks squandered on one military venture could theoretically save millions of lives if diverted to third world aid. With over 300 US soldiers dead and certainly hundreds of thousands more Iraqis slaughtered, the left falls into the trap of considering this venture a failure. It may seem odd that just as the US prevented Iraq from selling its oil in Euros, the US dollar has fallen from €1.30 in 2001 to just €0.71 in September 2007, while the currency of resource-rich and sparsely populated Canada has gained significantly and for the first time in 30 years is about to overtake the nominal value of the US dollar. At the same time Russia is rising from a financial abyss. Suddenly world leaders from China, France, India to the United Kingdom, are courting Vladimir Putin and turning a blind eye to his government's human rights abuses, which actually pale into insignificance when compared to the true horrors of recent US military crimes or those of the former Soviet Union. What's more former Russian Oligarchs are fuelling the artificial property boom in London with their untold billions. Why? what's going on? How can supposedly advanced countries like the UK and US be at the mercy of Russia, Canada, Venezuela, Iran and Saudi Arabia? Could it be because the immense financial wealth of the City of London and New York Stock Exchange will soon be worthless unless it can be translated into the commodoties we need to drive our high consumption lifestyle? Just think by 2010 Russia will be the primary provider of gas to UK homes. These countries hold the keys to the survival of the global economy because they are only ones remaining with a substantial surplus of material resources, but they comprise only a tiny fraction of the world's population. The big consumer nations, China, India, USA, Japan and the European Union will vy for these prized resources. If the US had not acted promptly to prevent its competitors from striking favourable deals with Iraq, it would have lacked the necessary military might in the region to prevent Saudi Arabia and Iran doing the same. The mounting chaos in Iraq provides a pretext for the long-term presence of US troops next door to Iran and Saudi Arabia with troops already stationed in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Uzbekistan. Anyone denying the oil motive is guilty of the worst pedantry to avoid admitting the obvious. The US and UK have killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians to acquire control of liquid black gold to maintain, at least temporarily, their economic power. That makes New Labour politicians not just liars, but as they were no doubt aware of the true reasons for the invasion, guilty of greed, death and destruction.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qcc2YXY-COc

Bird and Fortune couldn't have put it more succinctly