thelogicalview.co.uk

Author: M.A.R.W.

  • Planet Earth in Orbit – the Vernal Equinox March 20th

    Far above the human activity on Earth, all is well in the celestial spheres and Spring comes to the northern hemisphere once again.

    This pagan blog is written within 54′-56’N, and the inhabitants of these lands and islands of Britain and Eire-land breathe a sigh of relief that the wet winter is behind, and from the security of Helios and gravity and the tilt of Earth on its orbit giving us the beauty of seasonal change at this latitude. Those in 54′-56’S of course have the equal and opposite because that’s what equations do, they have to balance, and Earth balances perfectly within the greater cycles allocated by Helios and gravity.

    Alban Eilir, or Ostara, the balance of Night and Day, when the Light of the Sun returns to our half of the Earth, is a cause for celebration for all us pagans in this part of the world, whether Norse, Celt or Irish, Pict or Manx. Happily, so far, the certainty continues, and the Light months lie ahead.

    On the Earth’s surface, however, all is not well. South of this blog’s habitat, down at 40’N, Naples is waiting for the cataclysmic eruption of Campi Flegrei, the neighbouring massive volcano to Vesuvius. We have all heard of Vesuvius, the eruption which buried Pompeii in 79CE, and from which the excavations have given us so very much information on life back in those times, preserved as it was in the sudden freezing of time under the mountains of ash and lava. Volcanoes are cataclysmic, the human society is gone underneath it.

    The last time the Campi Flegrei erupted it was 1538, when the population was not the 3 million humans that now live in the surrounds of the Bay of Naples.

    Italian tremors: Europe’s largest active volcanic caldera

    https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a24475/campi-flegrei-supervolcano As this article in Popular Mechanics by Avery Thompson in 2016 states, the massive eruption 35,000 years ago triggered an ice age and may have been the destruction of the Neanderthals. The 1538 eruption, its most recent, lasted for 8 days even though not the largest explosion in its history.

    In April 2010 the volcanic eruption on Iceland of the long name which for a dyslexic is too hard to spell, caused the immense disruption to air flights over a large area of Europe. Iceland is far to the north, 64’N of Reykyjavik, and the resulting ash and visibility affected that large area. If the Campi Flegrei were to blow, in the central Mediterranean position of the Bay of Naples, what would happen to all the human activity in the region, immediate, surrounding Mediterranean, Africa, Iberia, Germania, and the Middle East of present day Egypt, Israel, Jordon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait and Turkey?

    What Trumps what? Helios-Earth-gravity trumps all. With the beauty of liminal seasons comes the reality of physical life on Earth.

  • Top down governance – arm the police of Britain?

    How does a modern western society function?

    This blog is an observation on how human society lives on planet Earth. It asks how the functioning of a society measures to the True Facts. It is therefore not religious, is not a sect, which also has a person as the focus, but if any name is required it is purely pagan, referencing only the true facts of Helios, Earth, gravity, and human survival of water, food, shelter and procreation, if it wants to continue that is.

    The western world sees itself as the fulfilment of the point of civilization. Tribal societies, indigenous peoples, the still very few hunter gatherer wise humans would say otherwise. For the western world there are many complicated questions to answer, such as how it keeps law and order within a diverse population. The ‘UK’ has the added complication of Scotland being under Roman law and England and Wales under common law with Northern Ireland similar to England’s common law but with many distinct legal bodies. All three are under the UK Supreme Court.

    The bobby on the beat, the affectionate nickname from Sir Robert Peel’s forming the Metropolitan Police in 1829 for those not familiar with British history, is the front facing reality of law and order in ‘UK’ society, with the beat being the pavement. BBC TV’s Dixon of Dock Green, shown from 1955-1976, was in a world of largely continuous societies over decades, centuries, and in some regions of Britain, 1,000s of years. Cities were diverse, Birmingham in particular, Leicester, London, as trading cities are all over the spinning Earth, and rural and fishing areas were a strong network of local families, a central market town, seasonal knowledge, often with itinerant labour as required, just like France used to use foreigners to come and pick grapes when needed. Everything worked fine, enough for survival of a society, and back in the 1960s and 1970s that’s all most people were thinking of, and satisfied with that.

    Fast forward half a century and the ‘UK’ is the fragmented and chaotic system and society that it is. From bottom up, law and order is collapsing and that is said by the social sciences, the psychologies, the sociologies, the genders, the ethnicities, the welfare supporters, and in the social structures of schools and shops where now police and a social worker are on many school sites and shop lifters can walk into pretty much anywhere and walk out with an armful of £50 whiskey bottles, watched by many people but who would be prosecuted if they so much as laid a hand on her, and some him’s as well.

    In the ‘UK’ the police on frontline duty of being that link between law and order, the citizen and the government, do not carry guns. In France they do. The other countries, the few of them, on this spinning mass of rock in space called Earth who do not arm their police force are largely Norse lands where population is sparser and the people stronger so probably a simple fight sorts most things out, and some small islands like the Cook Islands, and a few other countries. All ‘developed’ western countries have armed police. Why is this? Well, in a nutshell, to enable them to keep law and order.

    The natural world keeps its order, because it knows resources are limited and the balance between predator and prey is carefully balanced between them to enable survival of all. In social science terms, the top down predator is bad, and even further, now is male, so altogether bad, in the modern view in the ‘UK’. However, this avoids the necessity to look at society itself. Violent crime is now everywhere, knives, guns, drug county lines having spread out from London and destroyed many young lives, all with police powerless to do much, because Dixon of Dock Green, dealing with the petty crime of the 1960s would look terrible with a gun slung over his shoulder.

    This human was passing through Birmingham New Street train station, several times recently, and on one occasion a group of policemen were out in high viz jackets, looking obvious and ready for action. Furthermore, two were armed with some sort of gun, this human is not familiar with armorment vocabulary, but it was a big gun, loaded, and ready for action if necessary.

    Now, how much would society actually settle if the public facing police, or a few of them in each medium to large urban centre carried one of these? The response from the lefty soft supporting all people types is that it would be the quick way to ‘become like America.’ This blog seeks to disagree. The average household in the ‘UK’ does not own a gun, that is a fact. In the USA many individuals own a gun. A big gun like in this picture is far superior in power to most weapons that are carried, by those who carry weapons, and still most individuals in the ‘UK’ do not carry a weapon. If the police were armed, and had the confidence to know that their societal position from that would automatically filter downwards, as governance must do, how much better would British society be? How much more confident would the citizens be? Like the argument against ID cards, and strangely held by Reform as well who it would think are looking to restore some societal coherence, it is seen as just ‘not British’, but if it were acknowledged that the Days of Dixon of Dock Green are long behind us now, and the disintegration is happening at a gathering pace, whichever government is prepared to give the confidence to the police I am sure would get a lot of votes.

  • The successor to Sir Kier? Simple..

    This blog is a non-personal comment on how the human lives on the surface of Earth, the spinning mass of rock held in place by the gravitas of Helios. How the biology of one human, which by the definition of life had to exist from two humans, male and female, and how it is linked with other humans in a small grouping which is called a tribe or bigger to a society, is organised according to survival not greed is a genuinely fascinating subject.

    Survival means fighting when needed to defend your territory, from where does come food and water and in some parts of the world still does though the ‘UK’ departed from such logical principles a while back and food now comes from all parts of the spinning Earth and water comes through a very complicated processing system so logically where it exactly comes from is a matter of definition.

    Survival also means communication and ease of communication is a direct formula to the outcome for that society. How communication links with the physical survival of the network of humans down to their individual biology could be said and of course, to the land itself, (and obviously this blog is careful here with the current zeitgeist in the ‘UK’ being as it is) to fall into natural structural patterns reflecting both the actual biology and the sort of chemical interaction which produces different functions, leadership being one of them, or ‘leadership’ because the human has given this function a word yet in the natural world, of which the humans in the ‘UK’ are not now considered a part, the function – the function – of leadership arises from the land and whichever particular grouping of biology we are talking about. This could be earthworms, beetles, seagulls, rats, deer, spiders, crabs or wolves, ah no, not wolves now, so wild boar, again returned to native lands (illegally in the 1990s possibly by desperate residents of the Forest of Dean where human groupings go back virtually untouched to before the mists of time and experiencing the unhappy clash of C21 ‘UK’ policies).

    Having established that leadership is a natural part of any society, which is biology, and also, as an aside, where different biologies according to strength and gender and cognition have a natural spectrum, as observed by Aristotle, to fulfil a particular function in order for its society to survive and although he didn’t write in particular I’m sure he would agree that us autistic humans generally do work best in the male function regardless of biological man or woman but as he was in mortal form in the fourth century BCE then it was only the Earth, Helios (hot in the latitudes of Athens and Macedonia), the built environment of local stone and wood, and writing being on papyrus not the paper of modern times and long, long before the tip into the never-never land of digital tech so he observed the general categories of male and female, and how a society functioned according to strength and temperament. Of course society included slavery as a natural part of all ancient societies so his references to slaves and certain biology and temperament as part of society functioning, well, what he was meaning is alas far lost now in this world of the increasing individual as god.

    Whether there is no commentary and a biological society is just functioning, which hunter gatherer’s do just not have time to do, or whether there is commentary from when times had become much easier and there was both some study time, or leisure time maybe for others, and something to write on, it does not matter. The structure of a society must exist regardless, if it wants to survive at all.

    This brings this blog (totally inpersonal) to the subject of leadership with the ‘UK’. Obviously there is much debate going on in the present time, both within the governing Labour party and within the ‘UK’ as a whole. This blog is putting a solution to this quandry where questions of leadership came to the conclusion that unless a serious challenge is made (through administration processes these days and ballot boxes, not through the processes of strong arms) then the boat must not be rocked because all sorts of elections and events are coming up, and politics in the ‘UK’ is in such a precarious position that best just not to rock that boat.

    The suggestion put forward by this blog is that there is a natural successor to Sir Kier, someone who would be in a position to begin the process of realignment with the Truth, the real facts, the Logical state of affairs on Planet Earth. The requirements of a political leader in the ‘UK’ have been included by some to be that no one, absolutely no one, under the age of 40, and no one who has not had some kind of a real job, no matter where on the manual to manager etc., scale that falls. This is utterly sensible given the lowering age and that relentless race to the most individual and personal that can be of the Members of Parliament now. This is where that suggestion parts company with leadership before the British political system and leadership in the British political system. In the natural biological societies there have been many leaders under the age of 40, and if they can step up when needed, many young people are strong at 15. We do not know how old Boudica was but she was unlikely to have been over 40, and note the ‘she’ there, there are a few females who are capable of performing the true leadership function of reference to land not politics, and it is not possible to speak for him, but Aristotle would surely agree.

    But to continue the point, there is a natural successor to Sir Kier and curiously only came into Parliament from a newly created MP due to Local Government Reorganisation in Cumbria in 2023, so very new. Markus Campbell-Savours, the MP for Penrith and Solway is over 40 years old, though would be included in function of a leader, not age, and on a quick list of what is needed for the descent into political chaos, already his actions show him to be the man. He voted against the Government in the tragedy of inheritance tax being taken from farmers. His MP seat in the not just rural but far out rural lands of Cumbria where until recently many people had not gone further than their local big market town, because they were so busy on the land and fishing and from where such very strong and resilient communities existed over millennia. His voting against the ….er…. dictatorial government gained him the suspension of the whip. Markus C-S knows the biological reality of society on the land, and he voted accordingly. Alas the change of mind over the Assisted Dying Bill does not continue the Logic, especially from such a rural area where the few humans still able to farm and fish are still so aligned into the reality of life and passing between Helios and Earth, but such are the times. However, defying the urban government and speaking for the generations of farmers, most of whom have never had a holiday, never been abroad, eat by no air miles, see it as an honourable way of life if children continue the work instead of heading off to the ‘uni’, this is the sign of a real leader.

    Going further, his Icelandic genetics of mother would be so very useful at the moment as the desperate humans seek the last possible supplies of raw materials to perpetuate the world of tech, and the growing world of tech. To have a leader in place who would participate in the focus on the region of Earth now in the headlines, Greenland, Iceland, and the complications of needed resources and national governments, this would be very useful. Going even further, a very useful partnership would form if a whole new political party was formed, and which the practical leader of the Conservatives would surely join. The Practical Political Party of Kemi Badenoch and Markus Campbell-Savours would provide an alternative to the growing Reform party who is only there and growing because of the disjunct of leadership between Helios and Earth which has happened in the ‘UK’. It is only a suggestion, but a Logical one. Reform is on the rise, and there is no doubt about it, there is a bit of hype going with this, and the media excitement when another MP jumps ship and appears in Reform (not literally but that is a very old metaphor). If a Practical Party was formed to also counteract the increasing chaos in political leadership, this would give the voters two alternative options, one aiming for the headlines, and one aiming for survival on the land.

  • The Nobel Nuclear Peace Prize, a new award or a logical and noble amalgamation?

    The Will of Alfred Nobel, the Swedish industrial successful person who died in 1896 (130 Solar turns ago) shows he made enough money from manufacture of goods, amongst them armaments (weapons of warfare) to leave the Will substantial enough to set up global prizes for Chemistry, Physics, Physiology or Medicine, and Literature, and that 5th category of the Nobel Peace Prize.

    Now, 130 Solar years ago is a very long time. Not a long time in the history of Earth (45 billion solar turns), or the earliest evidence of humans, arising from previous hominid type biological creatures and which this blog must not get distracted into the geographical groupings of how these hominids survived in all the various astonishingly intricate and magical networks of life on Earth in hot, cold, coastal, mountainous, arid, delta, forest, desert, no it must not. But these hominids have been around a long time, and the humans who are industrialists and ‘scientists’ are only since the ‘Industrial’ revolutions of first coal and steam, then electricity. To be able to award a global prize at all, maybe Nobel was the first. Yes, just checked on Google, the 1901 start of the Nobel Prizes were the first international awards.

    Alfred Nobel in both inventing and manufacturing all sorts of things, amongst them weapons of war, in late 1800s was factually engaging with a very different physical society to 2026. And Norway and Sweden were a very different physical society to the Mediterranean latitudes and further on south through the Sahara to the Equator. Armaments were ground objects, air warfare did not exist. The Italo-Turkish war in 1911 had not happened, WWI had not happened, WWII obviously not, and so on, into the rapid collapse of all Logical scale to conflict.

    And in a logical progression, neither had nuclear.

    Because the Will of Alfred Nobel was left according to how he saw matters at the time, and possibly because even he saw a slightly Illogical direction of travel in western society and knowledge that he built in these prizes in the first place, what are the criteria for reassessing a past action according to present day reality? The answer is, it’s not done, because the original person had made the money and had the right to state in his Will that prizes of those categories be awarded.

    Mmm….difficult. What if Alfred Nobel himself would now worry about the state of affairs (state of human civilization on Earth) in 2026? His categories of chemistry, physics, physiology, all then were separate categories, each combining in the realm of the mysterious life on Earth, far beyond the ken or control of any one human. Literature is a recent human invention, or the modern book is, and peace there has never been on earth, nor goodwill to all mankind. Now with the arrival of a category of nuclear technology, of ‘the bomb’, where does this define the definition of Nobel’s world of late 1800s. Nuclear warfare is factually a combination of those chemistry, physics and physiology (not literature of course) expertise, and is now used as the ultimate Peace holder, that is, by having nuclear bombs then peace ensues because nobody actually wants to press that button.

    If it were a legal case with barristers standing up in court, would it be argued that Alfred Nobel’s original intention is now null and void because of the developments since? The arrival of nuclear which stands over and above all the previous categories (but not over Helios) and which is held up as the keeper of peace, can also be seen as the creator of the greatest conflict, in the pecking order of rights and opinions.

    If Alfred Nobel was alive in physical today, would he add a 6th Nobel Prize, that of nuclear negation? Apart from the confusion of some countries using nuclear for energy supply, and which John Swinney First Minister, is so against despite the precarious situation of Scotland, preferring instead to build 1,000s of giant wind turbines, but if there were a clear distinction drawn between nuclear technology used for a bomb and nuclear technology used for energy supply, amongst those countries in 2026 who have an active ‘bomb’, would he add that 6th Nobel Prize as a Nobel Nuclear Peace Prize? The first nuclear holding country who can lay out its component parts of what was once a bomb and prove it is dismantled gets awarded the huge gold medal of Nobel Nuclear Peace Prize.

    If that happened, and the resulting dismantling top down automatically dismantled all the other nuclear holding countries, down into those who wish to have one merely to counteract that top of the pyramid, and warfare was reduced to traditional (from 1911) air warfare, how much less confusion would there be on the surface of the Earth?

    Of course if time really were taken back to Alfred Nobel’s lifetime then neither would there be any air warfare, and how much less confusion would there be on the surface of the Earth from no air warfare (and no aeroplanes for leisure either)?

    As the Nobel Peace Prize was left to award from the Norwegian Nobel Committee and the other Prizes to the Swedish Nobel Committee, what if both those Committees (both far northern countries on the spinning Earth) were to have a good lunch together with plenty of Northern liquid refreshment, and decide either to disband all Nobel Prizes, to acknowledge that in the time since first they were awarded that alas, human society on Earth no longer represents the reality of Alfred Nobel, or create a new Nobel Prize of the Alfred Nobel Prize for Nuclear Peace?

  • 2 euros for the Trevi Fountain. Why not £2 for the British Museum?

    The government of Italy have acted, linking up geography, history, cultural management, civic bills for maintenance and repair, the link between governance and its jurisdiction, public safety, self respect, common sense, and Logic.

    2 euros is not a lot of money. Folks who now traverse the world in search of experience have many costs. Travelling to an airport maybe £30, an air ticket anywhere from a cheap budget ‘UK’ airline of maybe also £30 to £500 maybe if coming from afar (this writer stopped taking to the air 10 years ago and now only train, ferry, bus and foot so is a little out of touch). A hotel possibly £50 upwards from the real budget to £350 maybe, a meal with drinks maybe £25 if you’re lucky and upwards from there, each, and the once daily coffees of equivalent of 75p or £1 in the franc or the lira of the Mediterranean which so many of us knew before mass tourism and the digital age, watching the Mediterranean world go by, possibly now 4 or 5E for the tourists who don’t read the menu before buying that coffee. So 2 euros is not a lot of money, something like just £1.70 in British pounds.

    The Italian government acted. BBC Radio 4 quickly aired opinions, comment, discussion, with the undertone of ‘is this fair? is this right?’ Action such as this at the Trevi Fountain put into stark relief the difference in how a society aligns under Helios, human society, onto geography, and relief in that sense is not breathe a sigh of relief but relief as in making something visible, and not just visible but sharply visible, highly focused, and from that perspective it is possible to view the wider societal picture.

    Italy has a strong leader. Yes Italy is in the EU and for this decision on the Trevi Fountain the culture guardians of Italy did not go through any lengthy process of consultation, data collection, scrutiny of possibilities, public opinion polls, either at EU level or within Italy or down to Rome civic level. It was not a national political issue, just a practical civic issue, and it has just been done. Enacted. Acted upon. Fact. Practicality. Now the mass of tourists have no option but to pay 2 euros to stand close to the Fountain, which is a wonderful sight, this writer has been there several times itself, and to throw the coin in for the time honoured honouring of time and place. Those tourists who choose not to pay 2E can still see it from a little distance. By making that distinction, and at the tiny amount of money of 2E, the Italian government have made a masterful statement and which puts a comparison onto all other overcrowded and under-respected tourists attractions all over Europe and all over Earth (the spinning mass of rock held in orbit by Helios).

    Italian governmental culture does not have the same philosophy as the ‘UK’ government in how much ‘the world loves us.’ Italian police are able to do their job, different regions protect their food and drink, and from top down this action of a mere 2 euros for the tourists who have already spent a lot of money for the Rome experience shows that stark relief of different in outcome when an alignment is present and when it is not.

    The Tony Blair government of New Labour in 2001 made all national museums free. A long time ago they were free entry, but that was a long time ago when society was very different, demography was very different, and the population was very much smaller. Visits to museums were once educational, and school children visiting would have a lot of hard work to do on projects and discussions, so back then, somewhere in the mists of political time, a free museum which was balanced in every way in society, the economy and the government was useful all round. In 2001, along with the destruction of higher education, Tony Blair opened the doors of the national museums for anybody to enter without paying even 1p.

    Fast forward two decades, and even more recently to the post covid expansion (explosion) of locked down humans seeking experiences, thrills, travel, and there are a zillion people shoulder to shoulder in places where once upon a time not so very long ago the out of season months were very, very quiet and just for the locals, with the regular business and activity over tourist months, before everything settled back into local life again.

    If the Labour government of Westminster at the present time wanted to raise income without crippling and destroying the vast swathes of industrial, tradesmen, small scale manufacturing, catering, pubs, restaurants, and all the other sectors it is bringing to their knees (leaving the public sector comfortable and complaining the wage rises aren’t high enough) then Rachel Reeves and Lisa Nandy could look to follow Rome’s example. They could reverse Tony Blair’s catastrophic public policy of those ‘free museums’ and mandate – not impose – mandate a £2 entry fee for all adults, with children free. Mandating is the sign of a healthy government, impose is the word used by humans led to believe by the Labour party that everything should be free.

    The queues of tourists waiting to enter the British Museum go round the block and the annual total is about 6.5 million people. Double that is 13 million, so a £2 entry fee would raise £13 million a year. With the general dismantling of cultural institutions over the time since the New Labour it’s a general pattern of a major museum subcontracted out its cafe and bookshop, with the now fixation of humans on expensive coffees and cake now bringing in much money for the cafe contractors, while the BM and the other once honoured museums get nothing but huge bills for electricity, water and heating. 6.5 million people use the loos, hand basins, electric operated doors, wish the building to be warm, clean, light. The British Museum lays off its experience staff as it just can’t afford them, takes on younger and younger staff, temp contracts, cuts its costs in every possible way, worries over what is going to happen, while the 6.5 million visitors come in, don’t have much space to do anything, see a few things, have an expensive coffee and cake, and leave for the next free attraction on London’s Must See list, before flying off somewhere at the cost of £100s or probably £1,000s of pounds.

    The BM has the most visitors of any site in the ‘UK’, and this writer is also familiar with WC1 libraries and museums for reasons of study over a long period. But it is not about one place, and the 2E enacted so clearly in Rome is about something much more than 2E and the Trevi Fountain. Those smaller and specific independent museums, of which there are very many, have to charge an entry fee, usually only a few pounds, and for that payment the experience and learning is focused and memorable. The large national, and historic, museums, yet which are operated by the State, they are the ones stuck in the middle of this awful impasse in the ‘UK’. This writer was talking to an electrician in Birmingham New Street last week, just one of those random chats, and that small company owner said the imposition of taxes and raising of minimum wage is costing him £40,000 a year. Making not a lot more than that anyway, how long before it is just not possible to operate anymore. And same for thousands and thousands of people who have no secure backup other than their own hard work, and who are being literally crushed by the combine harvester of this Labour government.

    If Rachel Reeves and Lisa Nandy took matters in hand, observed the collapse of cultural and public life in the ‘UK’, didn’t take a fact finding tour to Rome but did a quick doodle on the back of an envelope listing all the national museums in the ‘UK’, a rough adult visitor numbers for all of them, times that by two, got a figure of many, many millions of pounds, and started to rebalance the economy by requiring a level of respect for buildings and collections, how would that shift a little of the despair in the heart of the citizen of 2026? Lisa Nandy is the Culture Secretary, so presumably it would be a case of announcing on the Monday morning meeting that from next week, that’s how it will be, £2 for every adult visitor. Contrary to what the Labour government believe, it creates more respect and more interest and more concentration when in a museum, morale for staff, and a sense that the government has at least one foot in the real world.

  • The ‘UK’ prepares for war

    This book, Early Armoured Cars by E. Bartholomew as Shire 209 Album, (Shire Books being a publishing list of true knowledge of Britain in context of history, geography, society, all things Logical and true, and which get purchased very fast off second hand book stands at archaeology conferences for that reason) was purchased by this writer from an Oxfam second hand bookshop between 55’N-56’N.

    Is a bicycle a car? No. The picture above does look more like a bicycle but there must be a tiny engine to be a car, though if it has pedals as looks like then it is a bicycle. Maybe it is a hybrid.

    Fast forward through decades going into a century = 100 years, and how has warfare changed? Flying military changed warfare horribly with the ability to drop a bomb from above after the ground level of millennia (yes millennia because warfare is as natural a part of life and death from possibly everything above amoeba level though at amoeba level there is no doubt some localised rivalry but we will never fully know and never fully get the data on that). Fast forward through the decades of developed amunitions, through nuclear bomb through western global politics (that’s the ‘west’ opinionating on global politics) and amunitions and nuclear and social media totally fused, not entwined but fused. Where is the ‘UK’ in this global state of affairs in now 2026?

    When it comes to actual physical fighting, which is what war is actually, sorry social media inhabitants but war is actually physical, how is the measurement within the ‘UK’ in the preparedness of its government for real war? The government itself, as in elected representatives, are not the ones who are under discussion for how does the ‘UK’ raise an army, it is amongst the mass of citizens from which an army will need to be raised, over and beyond the existing beleagered troops (beleagered by their own government now), and beyond the existing army it is proving very difficult to find a way of raising that army to equal the level of opinion on global matters which comes from the ‘UK’ government.

    So Logically, how different is the ‘UK’ level of defence from this picture of the bicycle/car/hybrid to February 2026?

  • The British Parliamentary system in a civil war

    Multi directional civil war, what happens next?

    2026 in UK politics and the wording is getting violent. The inewspaper 26.01.26 described the manoeverings between Andy Burnham and Sir Kier Starmer as civil war. The general definition of civil war is different factions within a jurisdiction fighting full on fight to seize power in opposite to one country fighting another in the modern nation state, and different to straightforward tribal warfare because the tribes form a different grouping by ethnicity and language even if in close geographical proximity and however subtle compared to the whole of human groupings on Earth (the spinning mass of rock with a tiny life zone around it, contained within the atmosphere and held in place by Helios). A civil war is amongst citizens within the same administration and used to be pure physical normal fighting, and not at all civil.

    The general tone of media and observation is that politics is getting more heated, more complicated, more personal, and with more at stake now with global definitions and actions instead of local or regional, and bigger and bigger projects like HS2 or strange projects like building a vast AI data centre, and the scale of the trouble is looming equally tall with more blame from party to party. Party to party warring talk could never be described as civil war because the different political parties form a different jurisdiction, no different to a state in that sense because the boundary is clear that one political party is not another, even if a politician changes party, the party definitions stay the same.

    It struck this writer a while ago when the Deputy Leader of the Labour party was up for vote, because that is already a division within the same and you would think that the leader of the Labour party would be wanting to appoint his or her deputy, or rather his, because there has not been a female leader of the Labour party to date (and possibly everything could descend into a fine emotional mess if there was). But the leader has to work closely with someone elected by another process other than leader perogative.

    A mayor of Manchester and a Prime Minister in the House of Commons in such heightened speculations and possible conflict if the present Mayor of Manchester does indeed want the throne, Parliamentary throne that is, is beginning to sound like the centuries olde way of doing business which was by power, physical action which produced a clear result, and which more closely resembles the natural world than the modern British political system. Use of the term civil war for the political system is reasonable – and reasonable in that sense is fair, relevant, apt. Trying to build a political administration on reasonableness is not really reasonable and it is all looking like something is about to unravel, not just within the Labour party but across the political groupings in the crumbling and leaking Palace of Westminster, House of Commons to you and me.

    Over the question of the Assisted Dying Bill, at present being held up by every possible toe and finger hold that the Lords and Ladies who are so personally against it can find, yet which has been voted through twice – twice – in the House of Commons for part of the ‘UK’ of England and Wales, that could also be seen as a civil war, one Parliamentary institution fighting another. And set against the strange assumption of power again by the House of Lords to state that the ‘UK’ must ban social media for young people, like Australia is doing, is an equal and opposite war against the Commons. If the House of Lords can set out to block a legislation where their only power it to work on it to get it passed, and at the same time set out their own statement that a law should be passed on social media, what does this say constitutionally? Do the House of Lords want to change places with those in the Commons? That is what civil war means, a fight for the top power of which only one person or party can hold.

    We have no written Constitution in the ‘UK’, no wish to return to pre the welfare state days or big State providing much of life, and no court of philosophy over and above all the state institutions. So if the system does fragment and a civil war between the Lords and Commons does bring down the credibility of the Commons, as seems the Lord intend over the hold up of the Assisted Dying Bill for Terminally Ill Adults, what on earth happens? The Earth will not change, but society in the ‘UK’ only references human made systems and such a situation has no framework for a governing system which collapses in on itself. One year on, just into 2027, what of governance in the ‘UK’? It is a really serious impasse.

  • Fighting at the final of the 2025 African Cup of Nations: it’s just not cricket

    So what is cricket? Everyone knows its the large green grass pitch, way larger than a hockey or football pitch, with the focus on bowler and batter in front of 3 little upright poles with one perched on top, and several fielders around the edge to run fast and get the ball before it hits the perimeter and scores 6, throw it back for team mates to try and get the batter out. The players wear white, the umpires wear a smart sort of coat and a brimmed hat and several of them because of the size of the pitch, and the spectators sit around the edge good humoured, often with a book in hand to read a few lines during the times of changeover of end, or the bowler making the long walk back to the start of another run, a little jump, arms circle around like a windmill, and the leather ball flies towards the batter, thwack, the batter’s wooden bat hits leather ball, and another brief burst of activity erupts, before repeat, eyes to book, and general peace and goodwill amongst all.

    For interest this writer looked up the history of cricket more specifically than just general knowledge and because of its distaste of cut and paste when IP is not clear, the website of the ICC gives a potted history of cricket as from the gentle Weald lands of SE England, and the fact of 1745 the first recorded Women’s Cricket, thereby negating the modern feminist narrative of being excluded from everything in the public realm. Men, ladies, umpires, regular spectators and the Barmy Army, only a tongue in cheek army, all formed a settled part of local and national life for a very long time and which ticked along very happily. It still does for some, but like everything slow and concentrated is not possible for the i-phone generation and who don’t read books, cricket is also falling to the one-day quick knock out, but so far the real full game over several days still exists and so still cricket is cricket in every sense of the word.

    https://www.icc-cricket.com/about/cricket/history-of-cricket/early-cricket

    If something is not cricket it could be any other sport like football or tennis or hockey, because cricket is only cricket, governed by the ICC, unless it is French cricket and that still is cricket-like but does not have, or need, any international governing body.

    If something is “just not cricket” then that’s a whole different thing altogether. It leaves the physical fact of a particular sport which like a national territory cannot be another territory, and goes into the realm of metaphor. It is not that one-day exciting cricket is just not cricket, it is not referring to cricket at all. And it could be referring to anything at all, that something is being done in a way which slightly demeans the original. What it actually means, this writer has just looked it up, Cambridge Dictionary, ‘it’s not fair, honest or moral,’ Wikipedia, ‘unsportsmanlike conduct in sports, business, or life in general,’ and Collins Dictionary, ‘unfair or unreasonable behaviour.’

    Scenes of fighting between just about everybody at the Rabat African Cup football final provide a very useful viewpoint onto the world of sport itself and the now global organisations. The Daily Mirror – link below to avoid any IP cut and paste – has some photos of what it describes as the crazy scenes, and lists 11 stages of the descent into chaos – the match descended into chaos, Senegal staged a dramatic walk-off, controversial refereeing decisions sparked fury, Sadio Mane acted as peacemaker, a missed penalty left a star in tears, Morocco used ‘dirty’ towel tactics (i.e. stealing), Pape Gueye secured the dramatic victory, press conferences collapsed as coaches clashed, clashes erupted in the stands, official condemnation from CAF and FIFA, illness outbreak decimated Senegal’s squad.

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/afcon-final-chaos-senegal-morocco-36575576

    It could be said that the African Cup of National 2025 final, played just into 2026, was “just not cricket.”

    If the scenes are taken according to an internationally accepted standard of football then a localised scrap is expected, with the possibility of a player being sent off or getting a red card if it was just too much intent to fight, but its a physical sport (the men’s game) and what is fighting or just giving a shove is a fine line, and expected. So events in Rabat did not meet the internationally accepted standard of behaviour under FIFA.

    Government relations between Senegal and Morocco, which do not share a geographical border, are very good, very good. The two governments keen to move above the scenes in Rabat have launched the 15th session of the Morocco-Senegal Joint High Commission to take place on January 26-27th in Rabat, with an economic event held alongside to further strengthen business and culture ties. The last Joint High Commission took place in Dakar in 2013 and at governmental level the ties are strong.

    As the 2030 World Cup is scheduled to take place in Morocco, the international FIFA and the higher echelons of the football organisations have 5 years to get their heads around the recent scenes and the arrival of global football onto the violence strewn pitch, images and memories of January 2026. Not an easy task.

    But at ground level, literally and metaphorically, amongst humans with no government role or ideal to uphold, behaviour does not adhere to internationally recognised standards. The regional nature of violence does not really fit into United Nations global standards and definitions, or the FIFA organisation. The centuries old game of cricket the slow way, over a few days, with generally similar cultural norms of players and spectators, including the Barmy Army who would never engage in towel stealing, possible poisonings, umpire hat stealing, etc., would never have to get the head around how to explain localised events with the ICC.

    Events in Rabat could not be clearer on the disjunct between global organisations and local cultural norms. Violence in west Africa is a cultural norm in both acceptable levels of violence within family groups, adult on children (women and men), male on female and female on male, the level of cultural violence is high. Someone would say, how insulting, prove it. But it does prove and anyone knowing anything about west African society and culture knows that. Also in Africa (the huge land mass which has no one identity other than the name extended from either a Yemenite chieftain invading north Africa in C2 BCE or the Romans applying Africa Proconsularis to what is now Tunisia, or probably from both) are still the distinct tribes with distinct territories and languages, with the western national lines of ‘nation state’ drawn across complicated tribal lands. With such reality of society having been long supressed in the ‘UK’ and any public violence put swiftly in prison by Sir Kier Starmer, such general scenes as at Rabat are rarely seen because of the disjunct between global organisation and politics, and the ordinary societal behaviours of biological humans on physical Earth.

    Climate and culture – two very obvious facts that global organisation has reached its limit. Climate of sports events which were never played out of their climatic region and relevance before the last few decades, and cultural levels of acceptable, and normal, behaviour are two very clear evidences that human behaviour on Earth is far from logical. Or is there three? Sadio Mane acted as leader, not a democratic vote or consultation or forum, but one person acting as leader in charge. From that something was salvaged, and the western media makes him a hero. But the function of leadership is shown, the action and the outcome, yes, this event in Rabat shows three very clear evidences that human behaviour on Earth is far from logical.

  • Weather warnings and ‘UK’ takes leave of its senses, requiring SAR (Search & Rescue)

    In the last few months with several named storms (big storms meaning huge waves, 80 mph winds, heavy rain, ice, etc.) and the Christmas period and the New Year period there have been quite a few deaths of humans who inexplicably went into the sea. The media does not report it as a suicide or a crime of neglect of a minor with one of them being under 16, but as a massive hype of drama and action, and in one event in Devon, a man rescued by a passer by was given much air time by Radio 4, high as a kite on the events and how he was rescued, yet two other people at the location were missing and found drowned, but the Beeb reported it from the high as a kite drama.

    After Storm Goretti was announced, severe weather warnings, damage to property and infrastructure expected, the mountain rescue teams in Cumbria’s Lakes & Peaks, and mountain rescue in Scottish high-land locations were called out to humans stuck and injured in difficult terrain – after a severe weather warning had been publicised so well that no one would be in doubt of what was coming. And it did come. And in stormy weather over those last few months, the RNLI and local rescue services were called out to pull humans out of heavy seas – after a severe weather warning had been issued.

    On the gov.uk website under Search and Rescue in ‘the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland’ the following Introduction is made (and the below is cut and pasted from the gov.uk website and this writer is not clever enough with the tech to put it into italics):

    “Search and rescue (SAR) is variously defined across organisations and authorities but in essence it is an activity, normally co-ordinated by a rescue co-ordination authority, where available personnel and assets are used to locate persons in distress, potential distress or who are missing, and recover them to a place of safety, providing for their initial medical care and other immediate needs as necessary.

    The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) provides a comprehensive search and rescue service for persons reported to be in distress or missing on land, on the sea or in the air. The integrated organisation of search and rescue co-ordinators and search and rescue assets, using a comprehensive communications infrastructure, provides a well-developed search and rescue model which also supports the UK’s wider civil contingency arrangements.”

    The gov.uk website lists the various International Treaties under which SAR services in the ‘UK’ must rescue those in difficulty:

    Obligations

    The UK organisation for civil maritime and civil aeronautical search and rescue is derived from the UK Government’s adherence to the following international Conventions:

    There are no International Conventions governing land search and rescue. However, legislation governing Police activity places an obligation on Police Services to protect life and property, and the provision of land SAR services derives from the legislation set out below.

    Legislation

    There may be additional legislation or obligations that impact search and rescue in the UK.

    Scope of search and rescue in the UK

    The UK responsibility for maritime and aeronautical SAR likes within the UK Search and Rescue Region (UKSRR) which covers approx. 1.5 million square miles, Annex A. Inland SAR in this context is that which occurs above the Mean High Water Spring tides (MHWS) on UK land masses.

    The key function for search and rescue in the UK is to ensure a co-ordinated response to SAR emergencies to search for, rescue or recover those missing, or in distress or potential distress on land, sea and shoreline areas including tidal and inland waters, and to co-ordinate those actions. This includes supporting, monitoring, and advising aircraft, vessels, or persons, who may be in difficulty but not distress, until they reach a place of safety, often unaided.

    The above also, cut and pasted from that gov.uk website. Now, the dates of all those various international and national obligations are between the date range 1925 – 2012 and 100 years is a long time ago but so is 2012. Since 2012 society in the ‘UK’ has changed out of all recognition, societal practices have changed out of all recognition, and since covid lockdown a new madness has taken hold that citizens seek thrills and hypes and media glory, and trust the iphone will get them safely up an icy mountain and down again in their plimsolls and as dark has come in.

    100 years ago if a human went into heavy seas after a weather warning had been issued and stressed, well, it probably wouldn’t happen. The healthy and hearty groups of sometimes very old humans who swim every day off the pebbly south coast would never be so stupid to go in heavy seas, because the point is healthy cold water and some of their ages prove that, not to drown themselves and some passers by preferably as well. Never would they do anything which was a high likelihood of an air and sea rescue, never would they treat other humans like that. 100 years ago, or even in 2012, humans were not en masse going up mountains in Cumbria and Scotland and north Wales at all, or international tourists driving the 500 around the top of Scotland, many places had no one around in winter months, now 365 days a year, and apparently 24/7, the humans are acting contrary to nature, society and any shred of common sense.

    What if the government – who has the responsibility of governance of a people and to ensure services run well and systems work well – was to impose a news black out on the now dramatic BBC Radio 4 that in the next storm which will soon be here or next Christmas and New Year for the festive fun seekers there will be no mention of those who have died in the sea or up mountains?

    What if the government – who has the responsibility of governance of a people and to ensure services run well and systems work well – was to issue an edict, or a rescinding of all those international treaties which are made for situations of accidents and unforeseeable events, not for the ‘UK’ of 2025/2026, and to mandate to all SAR services, the official and the voluntary, that a call out to someone in the sea during a storm or up a mountain after a weather warning had been issued and not a farmer getting a sheep or a cow, that call would just have, ‘Sorry mate, not possible, you made your bed, you lie in it (or rather, die in it)’.

    It’s easy to tell who is stuck while in the course of a job, like farmers, or a nurse, or a long distance lorry driver, or a fishing boat, and 24/7/365 the government’s edict would of course make SAR available and put all resources behind that. For those who have taken the choice to act against all advice and which often results in a passer by dying as well, and sometimes a mountain rescue severely injured for life which has happened in Cumbria, the SAR is simply not available.

    For a start the gov.uk website could announce that apart from those doing their jobs, all the international treaties are now n/a, unilateral detaching, there is no SAR for anyone in the sea or off ground level flat paths in rural and mountain areas between Autumn and Spring Equinoxes, when Helios is at the lowest half of the turning year (on this mass of rock spinning in space). It could also announce there is no chance of sueing – suing? that spelling doesn’t look right – a local council, local police force, local highways, local coastguard, nobody. And with the government mandate to the hysterical BBC Radio 4 news programmes, there is no reporting and absolutely no ‘voice of the survivor pulled from the waves,’ having their moment of glory. Furthermore, bodies will have to be retrieved by those who want to, otherwise they go the way of all the natural world.

  • The Assisted Dying Bill: House of Lords kills the Commons

    …. in attempt to block the humane Bill to allow a peaceful passing of those with a terminal illness facing a bad end.

    It’s a complicated matter this process of the Assisted Dying Bill currently passed by the Commons on 20th June 2025 by the 314 in favour, 291 against. Sure, this is a pretty close vote but still a clear vote for the Bill, but Parliament is not the population of the ‘UK’, England and Wales, Britain, however that is said. This Bill is for citizens in England and Wales, and the same Bill content for Scotland is currently at Stage 3 in Holyrood, where again MSPs are not the population, only the representatives of the function of governance. Within the citizen opinion, including Christians, medical staff, vets of course because with animals that is considered the kindest and most obvious course of action and how barbaric it would be otherwise, some hospice staff, some like Markus Campbell-Savours MP who started as opposing the change in law and then looked at the evidence and the facts and changed his vote, and the so many people who don’t quite know how it would work because it is a change but who have witnessed awful and prolonged scenes of someone they know very well and simple biological normality says that is wrong to prevent someone passing out of hell on earth and into a peaceful passing on to avoid the hideous suffering and forced medical applications and leaving their loved ones traumatised for their own remaining lifespan.

    Those against the Bill use a lot of air time and press space and Parliamentary time and now the House of Lords time to give their own personal opinion. Amongst the general public, the overwhelming percentage is for this facility to be available, and it is through the Commons, just required to be scrutinised in the Lords (and Ladies), but under the umbrella of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, the role of the Lords is only to scrutinise what is moving through, not to take hijack.

    If anything has shown up the strange state of affairs in the ‘UK’, the devolved ‘countries’, the power that ‘medicine and science’ now has, the departure from realities of a biological human being, the new power of the individual opinion over the power of an individual to say they’ve had enough suffering, and the question of governance in where does that yes or no exist in practice, then this Bill has it all.

    You’d think that any MP, MSP or HoL member on the left of centre (that’s how ‘UK’ politics is defined) would be very against this Bill because the State now has full control over an individual and is kind and prevents all suffering etc., and it would be the ‘right’ who still understand functional processes who would be on block behind it, but this Bill has had every cross reference and juxtaposition possible. Lord Charlie Falconer, with the solid government legal career and the long time brains and philosophy behind the Parliamentary processes of this issue and Kim Leadbeater MP who has succeeded to at last reach this common sense of the Commons and a vote For, both are in the Labour camp. The Conservative Leader of the House of Lords has said, ‘Peers are entitled to scupper the defective Assisted Dying Bill,’ and the usual vocal range of individuals who are dead set against it for religious zealot or ‘disabled protectors’ are not looking at the function of scrutinising a Bill to make implementation as well worked as possible, but the opposite, no matter what the Parliament Acts say, now matter what the majority of citizens want, no matter the vote in the Commons June 2025, the House of Lords are declaring they are not part of the parliamentary process but their own empire. How bizarre a juxtaposition is that. Because in trying to find every blocking move possible, from time to objections to fake questions on more clarity, to make this Bill die a quiet and low key death (just what the Bill wants to give genuinely suffering terminally ill people), the Lords are killing the parliamentary process itself, and even if this Bill does make it through the hijacking of the Lords, still the parliamentary process will be shown now to be made up of individuals out for their own agenda.

    This perilous situation could show a constitutional crisis if really scrutinised, which is probably not a good idea to do, the evidence and reality is too awful to contemplate. The Island of Man in March 2025 completed its process, with citizens, both Houses of the Tynwald Parliament all pretty much on the same page. After years of debate yes, but the process was smooth, the upper house agreed some amendments, the Bill had been brought by a GP himself, and good clarity is written in and all ready to go. Ready to go that is for the folks of the Isle of Man, but go that is for final assent because the Isle of Man is a Crown Dependency therefore the Crown of the ‘UK’ is going to be granting the final permission for what has already smoothly moved through the Tynwald.

    Furthermore, the approval of Assisted Dying law in Jersey’s State Assembly in May 2024 and a draft law published last September 2025 and which is now undergoing the usual scrutiny and discussion which is the job of those in governance, and hardly likely to have the same scenes of the House of Lords, Jersey also will be waiting patiently with their large parchment, waiting for that Royal Seal of Approval.

    How curious is this under constitutional law. The Crown has power over Crown Dependencies in matters of military and international relations, and Assisted Dying for somebody pretty much there already is you would think hardly a military matter and definitely nothing to do with international relations. Quite the opposite really, it is the most domestic, most basic, most biological and natural thing possible, way below politics or the bigger picture of society. So what a curious situation that the smooth passage of the Isle of Man Assisted Dying Bill is just waiting for King Charles to give his assent, while the famous Palace of Westminster and the House of Lords are in this difficult political balance, and the Scottish Holyrood Parliament have also the individuals who cannot think outside of their own heads and lives and would very much like the Stage 3 to be killed and not become law. What a strange situation.

    If King Charles signed the document and gave it a great big wax seal, pressed his ring into it and said, ‘Well done guys, you’ve done a great process there, lucky citizens in the Isle of Man,’ what would happen in the House of Lords and in Holyrood opponents? It would highlight the really really tenuous historical basis within the ‘UK’ and in these times of the collapsing ‘world stage (only a Shakesperian fiction and yet another fiction the ‘UK’ built its modern framework on) the governance of the physical land area of Britain in the general sense and those 3 Crown Dependencies of Isle of Man, Guernsey and Jersey.

    King Charles, and his late mother, are people who understand the natural world, despite the royal birth both understand biology and the practicalities of running rural life and the inevitability of birth leading to passing on because that is what existence is within this atmosphere on the spinning mass of Earth, so what would happen if in this bizarre stand off, King Charles was to seal his great Seal on that straightforward legislation in the Isle of Man, and have the wax warmed ready for Jersey to present their parchment? For the sake of the present confusion in the ‘UK’ this would be a very simple solution to end the impasse and to show the facts.