Tentative Teetering

          My neighbour has gone to Madeira and I have promised to take care of the plants on his balcony. It’s a reciprocal arrangement that works well but, although I can cope with the watering and dead-heading, his petunias (and mine) are infested with aphids and I’m not sure what to do about that, for reasons that I will explain.

          While he is away we are experiencing a heatwave, as is much of Europe. In fact, Manchester today is warmer than Madeira. Now, I am no fan of hot weather – one of the things I like about the North of England is its temperate climate – but this extremely hot spell could be useful if it makes climate-change deniers reconsider their argument. (Sorry, I’m forgetting that ‘denial’ is not actually an argument.) Expert consensus confirms that this is not a ‘blip’ on the charts but a foretaste of what is to come, a symptom of the looming, world-wide climate emergency. Which is why I am taking Extinction Rebellion (XR) seriously.

          Not as seriously as my partner, mind. She has actually ‘joined’ XR (it does not have an official register), in so far as she now commits a great deal of time and energy to its operations. It is in her nature to dive passionately into projects that she believes in, which is a wonderful thing: such energy is the driving force of change. Meanwhile, cautious characters, like me, watch in awe from the side-lines, where we consider carefully whether or not to get sucked in. It’s not that I cannot comprehend the urgency of the situation, but my allegiance is demanded by so many crises that I am reluctant to opt for just one: the homeless people on our doorstep; the idiocy of our political system; the failings of neo-liberal capitalism – it’s quite a list and I fear that if I fight exclusively for one cause, I will have no time left for the others. Nevertheless, I must do something.

          In order to reverse the damage to the Planet’s eco-system, governments around the world need to unite in enforcing eco-friendly economic policies. But this is not happening: although we have a world council, the United Nations, its record is one of individual nations plumping for their own interests above common causes. Our only hope is to convince every national government that ecological breakdown is happening, now, and that we will all suffer the disastrous consequences. Preaching and teaching are not sufficiently effective – the Green Party has been making its case for forty years – so direct action is necessary. Hence the likes of Greenpeace and XR, too often regarded as the preserve of extremists when, in reality, they are backed by ordinary, concerned citizens. Like me.

          Total immersion in a movement is not the only way to support its aims. There are many ways in which non-joiners can contribute, giving money being an obvious one. Yet another is to adapt one’s daily habits to incorporate some practical and effective boosts to progress. One small example would be my recent adoption of plant-based detergents for washing machines. It took a while to get around to breaking old habits, but the only difficult part of the process was locating stockists. Then there’s the determination to eat less red meat, which is eased by the knowledge that there might be personal health benefits as well. And if this sounds as if I am teetering on the edge of conversion to veganism, be assured that I will teeter awhile yet. Veganism is too ‘all-in’ for my liking (the clue is in the ism) and offers me no solution to my aphid dilemma. Yes, I’ve tried spraying them with soapy water, but they seem to like it – especially in this weather – and although I sympathise with Thoreau’s view that “every creature is better alive than dead” I’m not sure my neighbour does.

High Street Conversation

          On a bustling High Street, a passing stranger stopped me and said, “Excuse me, do you mind if I ask you a question?” One has learnt to be wary of such encounters – since begging, hustling, pickpocketing etc. often start this way – but she was a young(ish) woman, un-threatening, well dressed, well-spoken and perfectly polite, so my street-smarts told me it was unlikely that this would be anything more sinister than a request for directions and although it did cross my mind that she might have been a consummate con-artist, that was a risk I was willing to accept. “Of course not. How can I help?” I said, primed to point her to the station or some such facility. But her question was, “What do you feed ducks?”

          Sometimes, a question leads to more questioning. Did she mean what do I feed ducks or, what does one feed ducks. Assuming the former, I told her that I don’t feed ducks; as far as I know, they feed themselves. She clarified her meaning, however, by explaining that she was planning to take her child to the park later, to feed the ducks, but that she was clueless about what food to take. It seemed, to me, unlikely that she had never before been to a park or seen people chucking chunks of bread at ducks but, if this was the case, she clearly needed advice. So I volunteered my opinion that, if I were to feed ducks, I certainly would not give them bread as this is not part of their natural diet. “No, I suppose not,” she said, looking concerned. By now, I was beginning to think she might be mentally disturbed or on drugs and that I had better tread gently. So, when she asked what I would recommend, I said, “Seeds, perhaps?” “What, like birdseed?” she said, perking up. “Yes,” I said, confidently and hopeful of a conclusion. She looked pleased, thanked me and went off to find a stockist. I hope birdseed is suitable. Ducks are a species of bird, aren’t they?

          The incident may seem trifling, but it continued to occupy my thoughts for quite a while. Had I been sharper, I might have asked her a few questions. Why did she not prepare for the child’s outing by consulting Mumsnet? Why did she leave it so late that she had to ask a random stranger, when she could have Googled it earlier? Well, she may be one of the few humans left who is unfamiliar with the internet but, why pick on me? Do I look like someone who hangs around duckponds? Or like a walking encyclopaedia? Or do I just seem, as she does, unthreatening and approachable? If so, does that make me a mug, someone susceptible to being conned? And was she, after all, a con-artist, one who gets their kicks out of asking silly questions of strangers and then posting their silly answers on Facebook? Was she laughing behind my back as she set off down the street, looking for someone else to torment? Does she even have a child? But then, on the other hand, she might have been one of the city’s alienated, lonely people, desperate for some interaction with other human beings. The possibilities are numerous: nothing can be taken for granted.

          In the end, I like to think that it is normal, natural and desirable for people to engage in public, sociable interchange – if it falls within the range of politeness and sensitivity that is the accepted norm. We should not have to rely on our institutions alone to inculcate tolerance – the antidote to divisive, destructive sectarianism. Viewed on that level, the duck-food enquiry was far more affirming than a prosaic exchange about the weather: and it got me Googling.

School's Out

          It is common, in the city, at this time of year, to see schoolchildren of mixed racial heritages being shepherded along the street on their end-of-term outings. But the one I saw yesterday caught my attention because there was only one white child among them – and both teachers wore hijabs. This got me reminiscing about my own primary school, where the full extent of diversity was the separation of the two religions, Catholic and Protestant, for R.E. lessons. Our society is certainly evolving, but is our education system keeping pace? As an education outsider, I cannot claim to know much  beyond what is apparent to all – that politicians keep tinkering with it according to whatever is their ideological bent – though I know there has been at least one important addition to the curriculum since I was at school and that is the introduction, in 2001, of lessons in citizenship – which includes politics.

          The teaching of politics is long overdue. Consistently low turnouts at the polls indicate lack of appetite, poor understanding, or both – which is lamentable, considering that the issues at stake are crucial to everyone’s well-being. To some extent I suspect that those in power are inclined to protect their positions by keeping the rest of us in ignorance of their machinations and that one way they do this is to ensure that ‘education’ is about learning stuff that reinforces the status quo rather than questioning its legitimacy. I came late to an understanding of and engagement with politics and I put this down to a lack of stimulus at school and at home, where the emphasis was on passing exams in order to become fodder for the jobs market. But jobs are not what they used to be, and the evolution of society requires expansive not regressive thinking. Can our schools provide it? One of our most influential liberal thinkers, John Stuart Mill (1806-1873), was educated at home, not within the system, and he was taught never to take anything at face value without questioning and scrutiny. By this means, he advanced causes, such as female suffrage, long before they had entered the public consciousness. Many years later, others advocated shunning education by rote: “Just think of the tragedy of teaching children not to doubt.” *

          Lately, I have become infuriated with the paucity of debate around even the biggest geopolitical issues – such as Brexit, for example – where arguments have been reduced to slogans and MPs have adopted positions based on contorted logic in order to protect their prospects for re-election. A more analytical approach to actual policies and issues might lead to an outcome that brings populations and nations closer rather than fragmenting them with jingoism, xenophobia and chauvinism. But politicians have learned that argument is a way to bore or befuddle electorates – especially if they are ignorant – and that the easy route to election is to campaign with slogan-based soundbites and photo-ops. In this, Boris Johnson has learned well from Donald Trump.

          But my ranting at the TV, radio, and newspapers is to no avail when swathes of fellow citizens are necessarily preoccupied with making a living, while remaining uncomprehending of the ways in which economies are controlled – and to whose advantage. School budgets are being squeezed – right now – to the detriment of children’s future prospects, while very rich individuals and global corporations avoid paying taxes by every means they can dream up. But my complaint is nothing new: “The tax which will be paid for the purpose of education is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests, and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance.”  (Thomas Jefferson, third US president). I just hope the schoolkids on their outing get to see the big picture one day.

* Clarence Darrow, lawyer and author (18 Apr 1857-1938)

Lament for Latin

          You can learn a lot on a train. While on an evening journey from Manchester to London last week, I read that the Finnish public broadcasting service has, after thirty years, decided to call a halt to its regular news round-up in Latin. It seems a pity, even though not many people speak the language (my own grasp of it is schoolboy rudimentary), because Latin is a conduit for our past and history has many lessons to teach us. Nevertheless public service broadcasting, for all its educational potential, is low down the list of governmental priorities, even in rich countries.

          The train was crowded with India cricket fans who had just watched their team beat the West Indies at Old Trafford. They were remarkably subdued, considering their ‘victory’ (how I dislike the vocabulary of war being employed in sporting commentary), which may be because they had taken for granted that they would win. If so, that might also account for the fact that there were no Windies supporters in the carriage. Why would they go out of their way to watch certain disappointment unfurl? But when a young black man, wearing sports-branded clothing, took the seat next to me, I assumed – among other things – that he had been at the match. In a polite and genial exchange, however, I learned that he had not: having just graduated from Manchester University, he was travelling home to South London and thence to celebrate with his mates. And no, they were not going to Glastonbury to see the Grime rapper, Stormzy, but to Amsterdam to take in the art ‘culture’. And no, he had not graduated in performance arts, but investment banking, a career in which he expected to prosper in the City of London – where else?

          I have been thinking about switching my current account from the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (especially after China’s latest attempts to quash the remnants of HK’s democratic system) to an ‘ethical’ bank but am unsure whether ‘ethical banking’ is an oxymoron. There are not many banks that make the claim, anyway, and the pioneer in the field, the Cooperative Bank, lost its halo when it was bought by a hedge fund, the most rapacious beast in the menagerie of financial institutions. I would have raised this topic with my graduate neighbour, but he soon became involved in phone communications which absorbed his attention. Coincidentally, a few days later at a street-side community book exchange somewhere between the City and Canary Wharf, I unearthed a couple of volumes that may have been on his reading list: Equities, an Introduction to the Core Concepts and Futures and Options for Dummies. They are subjects I know very little about – as, it seems, did most of the people responsible for the financial crash of 1980: the books, though published in 2006, were in pristine condition – as if unread.

          Nevertheless, my research into the possibility of ethical banking continues. If I must have a current account, then let it be with an institution that shares its customers’ concerns and preoccupations with societal issues, such as recovery of the environment, the health and safety of populations, the eradication of poverty and the availability of education for all. If such institutions exist, they should be encouraged to wrest power and influence from the incumbents, whose established methods lend succour to the demagogues and plutocrats who threaten liberal democracy with their backward-facing policies and protectionist warmongering. In other words, let us learn from Rome, where democracy was replaced by tyranny because its citizens failed to take preventive action and opted, instead, for pane et circenses – bread and circuses. This much Latin is all we need to know.