[I shall be using the terms ‘soul’ and ‘divine’, which have a lot of baggage that I’d like to disown.  However, as words they are too convenient to avoid] Capitalism is only one of many viable systems of human organisation.  These systems arise and evolve for many reasons, but the most fundamental factor within each is human nature – common to all. Capitalism’s dominance of the world is a testament to its success.  Its success derives from its "laissez faire, laissez aller, laissez passer," (let do, let go, let pass) doctrine, which allows far greater freedom for human nature than previous, more idealistically oriented systems e.g. socialist, democratic, religious, etc.  In allowing greater freedom from self-imposed and artificial restraints, capitalism has enabled people to exploit those characteristics foremost in their nature.  Capitalism is, therefore, a mirror reflecting the soul of humanity.  Predictably, not everything we see is pleasant. The prime reason for this is that we are a dichotomy – our souls are divided between the divine and the bestial.  Currently the mirror (capitalism) shows us that the bestial-self is dominant.  This manifests itself in our behaviour: most people, most of the time, being concerned wholly with themselves; being reactive (motivated by immediate ...

Ideals e.g. Communism, Christianity, Islam, etc all fail due to one common factor – the nature of man.  Like other ideals, Democracy was born strong and beautiful, it had a glorious start but, like other ideals, has become dilute and corrupt with age.  Like other ideals, democracy now exists only as a dream, a memory, a fantasy for the naive to aspire to and defend; for the aware to lament. Today ‘democracy’ is a designer-label used as a sop to the masses – a beautiful illusion used to beguile people into quiescence.  Behind this label, the truth is that the democratic vote is dead because we no longer live in a democracy (more accurately, the blend of democracy has become very diluted).  We live in a capitalist society where influence over the course and nature of society is directly proportional to the resources one has.  This, however, is no cause for despair, quite the opposite. No system is perfect.  Moreover, no system can remain static.  Democracy has simply evolved.  The four-yearly vote for a limited choice of dubious and duplicitous candidates has been replaced by the dollar vote.  In a society governed by consumption HOW one consumes affects one’s society.  Therefore, every ...

Letter originally written to an MP’s aide as part of a longer correspondence. I don't believe that the 'democratic vote' means much anymore.  Blair, in particular, but leading politicians of every hue, do what they like irrespective of pledges and public opinion, thereby undermining any notion of democracy.  Also, as government power seeps increasingly into the hands of non-elected business, the relevance of government declines.  Thus, the value of the 'democratic vote' diminishes in direct inverse-proportion to the increasing value of the 'capitalist vote' i.e. the currency in one's pocket - each pound spent is a real and immediate and daily (rather than once every four years!) vote for the provision of more of that product, or service. In a society such as ours, that is only nominally democratic, the ability of the consumer to influence is greater than the ability of the 'voter' to influence.  Naturally, this does mean that the wealthier you are the more influence you have, but this, in truth, is the way it has always been under any system throughout history.  However, whereas the 'swinish multitude' were always at the mercy of the well-organised and motivated elite, they are now better educated and can pool their resources/co-ordinate/motivate ...

...AND THE SMALL PRINT TAKETH AWAY (a Tom Waits lyric). This was originally written on Sunday the 6th of February, 2005, after watching Peter Madelson, then Britain's European Commissioner, being interviewed on the ‘Politics Programme’ on BBC1. He was asked when the EU would fulfil its commitment to remove agricultural subsidies (see my related post written at the same time).  His bullshit answer, and the fact that the interviewer allowed him to get away with it, angered me and inspired the following. How does Peter Madelson, and his kind, get away with subterfuge on a daily basis? My train of thought ran thus: He (Peter Madelson) is a professional politician. His position gives him access to knowledge and lends authority. He is taking advantage of our ignorance and trust. Both allow him to lie (manipulate the truth) to us and get away with it. He lies because he knows we would not allow him to do what he is doing if we knew the truth. We would not like what he is doing because it does not favour us, either in the short-term or the long-term. So who does it favour? Preserving the status quo makes his life easier, but also ensures that patterns and conditions of trade remain in the favour ...

An old rant of mine - more to follow... This afternoon (Sunday 06 February, 2005) I watched the ‘Politics Programme’ on BBC1.  Peter Madelson, Britain’s European Commissioner, was being interviewed.  He was asked when the EU would fulfil its commitment to remove agricultural subsidies. These subsidies encourage EU farmers to produce more than is needed and then allows this excess onto the world market.  Being so heavily subsidised it is sold at a price far below what it cost to produce.  So cheap, in fact, that even the poorest countries cannot compete.  Not only can they not sell their own produce, but they find themselves either forced by law (World Trade Organisation), or economic necessity, to buy this foreign produce in favour of that produced locally.  Naturally, this means that their own farmers get poorer and that what little money they have seeps abroad. As mentioned above, the EU has promised to completely remove these unfair subsidies.  What hasn’t been stated is exactly when this will happen.  Asked ‘when’ the subsidies would be removed, Peter Madelson said that negotiations were complex, but ongoing.  He also made it clear that the EU would not act until and unless the USA made the same sacrificial ...

By Karim Attia, 21st May 2009. With many MPs sure to lose their seats, and with public emotions running so high, it had occurred to me that the current events offered opportunistic characters a once in a lifetime short-cut into the House of Commons.  Anyone capable of mustering some eloquent anger coupled to a message of reform/vengeance, ought to do well, even (or especially) on an independent ticket. Sure enough, on my commute the other day, I read (p.5 Metro, 19th May 2009) that Esther Rantzen was sniffing around the Luton South seat.  With her years of media experience she would certainly be a competent performer but something about her has always jarred... At work, later that day, I overheard someone who had also picked up on the same news.  They commented on how ironic her ambitions were given the stunning misuse of expenses she made while working at the BBC.

by Karim Attia, March 2008.  Written in fifteen-minutes as an exercise that was part of a day-long seminar on the art of public-speaking, organised by the Labour Party.  This is the first and only speech I've ever written, or delivered...went down well.  The title was fixed by the tutor! TORIES, NEVER AGAIN Good afternoon.  My name is Karim Attia. For the three-minutes of your time that I am about to take, my sincere thanks.  So, how will this three-minutes be used?  Our loveable friends, the Tories - who are they?  What do they stand for?  And why must they never again dominate British politics? I don't know the answers to any of these questions!  I'm not even sure that they have much relevance.  I don't come to these questions as a political activist, I do not 'do' politics, I have it done to me and, for the majority of my life, I have resisted and resented politics and politicians.  9/11 changed that.  I finally, begrudgingly, conceded that I could not close my eyes like a child and hope that the fools running our world could be ignored.  I finally realised that, if I didn't pay attention to these fools my life and my world ...

by Karim Attia; November 2004. A lot's happened since I wrote this.  Pretty good forecast although the actual journey we've taken is different - it's been an amazing four-years! The USA Therefore, four more years of aggressive and divisive policy.  Therefore, global political instability. Therefore, inability to plan ahead confidently. Therefore, less risks taken vis-à-vis investment. Therefore, future capacity for growth reduced. Therefore, economic slow-down. Therefore, global recession. Therefore, pressure placed on politicians to act. Therefore, efforts to stimulate the economy and/or stabilise the political environment. Political stability would be achieved by reducing international barriers/increasing international co-operation. Stimulating the economy would be achieved by reducing interest rates, reducing taxes, increased government spending, removing barriers to trade – unleashing money. Oil Oil (and gas) is a strategic energy and raw material.  Its supply is critical to the world economy.  Oil reserves have already peaked and are now in terminal decline.  Oil is steadily running out.  As a result, oil will only continue to escalate in price as its scarcity becomes ever more evident.  This, plus the prospect of continued and additional political instability resulting from America’s policies, will drive global energy costs ever higher [1]. Increased energy costs will hit the poor and manufacturing hardest, but all ...

by Karim Attia. This is a fragment of a rant: ...it doesn't mean that we're not very interested in politics - we just don't believe that the 'democratic vote' means much anymore.  Blair, in particular, but leading politicians of every hue, do what they like irrespective of pledges and public opinion, thereby undermining any notion of democracy.  Also, as govt power seeps increasingly into the hands of non-elected business, the relevance of govt declines.  Thus, the value of the 'democratic vote' diminishes in direct inverse-proportion to the increasing value of the 'capitalist vote' i.e. the currency in one's pocket - each pound spent is a real and immediate and daily (rather than once every four years!) vote for the provision of more of that product, or service. In a society such as ours, that is only nominally democratic, the ability of the consumer to influence is greater than the ability of the 'voter' to influence.  Naturally, this does mean that the wealthier you are the more influence you have, but this, in truth, is the way it has always been under any system throughout history.  However, whereas the 'swinish multitude' were always at the mercy of the well-organised and motivated elite, they are ...

by Karim Attia.  Essay written in the first-year ( 1997) of my degree.  Professor said it was 'publishable quality'.  Enjoy. One’s first reaction on seeing this image is to be titillated by the exuberance of the style lavished on the central figure. Flowing, curling, billowing licks of flame and smoke, as hair, append the rushingly animated figure of ‘Death’ rampaging on his mighty white steed. On his brow sits a crown dedicated to ‘DESTRUCTION’, in his right hand he sweeps down with a flaming sword and in his other he has hold of a fanged and winged serpent. Clutching his emaciated and naked body a grotesque familiar rides behind him. Like the huntsman that he is ‘Death’ pursues his quarry despite obstacles, overleaping men - dooming those passed to painful collapse. The game is not ‘fox’ this time, but ‘swine’ who rush ahead in their multitudes, squealing or are left dead underfoot. The smell of the blooded flares the nostrils and lends the eye a terrible aspect - both rider and ridden alike impassioned by the cull. Like greyhounds in the slips ‘Deaths’ attendant demons follow their master, bringing with them the destructive flames and vapours of ‘Hell’. This image of ‘Death’ and ...