It seemed like a good idea at the time, obvious even; military bigwig speaking at the uni about tactical airstrikes, so we'll interrupt him. Simple, no?
It would appear not.
With activists dropping like flies our thirty strong band dropped to ten in the space of an hour and we headed in the direction of the lecture.
With cops outside we kinda didn't expect to get in but security and lots of ushers moved happily out of our way after checking our tickets and as if our lateness was irrelevant we were shown to our seats.
Details of what we did are not the reason I wrote this, illustrating the stupidity of those people put in place to stop us, is.

After performing our VERY revolutionary and VERY brave action we ran like wild dogs to our stated rendezvous point but before we reached it we lost one comrade to injury and one to capture. Scary stuff.
We regrouped in the pub, disposed of the evidence of our misadventure and discussed our next move. With the injured comrade packed off home and the captured comrade's whereabouts uncertain our somewhat condensed motley crew of leftists faced a choice - go home and wait or send someone back in to find out what the deal was.

Just call me Cameleon Heff, yeah? With the swiftest swapping of coats and a rearrangement of my hair I became an entirely new woman, boldly (and yet apprehensively) striding back towards the university incognito.

Being a ballsy poppet was the only way I could think of to approach this so my first post of call was the security office. The conversation went a bit like this:

Heff - "The lecture upstairs, what time does it finish?"

Security dude - "Seven thirty, if everything goes ok from now"

Heff - "Damn. Can I wait in here? It's freezing outside"

Security dude - "Yes, take a seat, who are you waiting for?"

Heff - "My boyfriend. He's in the RAF..."

So thats how it happened - RedHeff became RespectableHeff, loyal girlfriend of Mr-Token-RAF-guy, waiting patiently to suprise him after his return from Iraq (upon which his obvious first stop was a lecture about war). I sat there in the little reception bit with 5 security guards frantically chatting about the "incident" that had occurred during the first half of the lecture. I apologised for eaves-dropping then asked what they were talking about, and they began to explain that 8 "harmless terrorists" armed with "noise alarms" interrupted the lecture shouting "bad words" before fleeing "like scared children". I commented, looking hurt, that this was common in my life, that these people targetted my boyfriend with their vicious anti-war venom and it affected us negatively and I was sick of it, saddened by the attitude towards our boys in our fighting corp. So There it was. Weird sitch to find myself on the other side of the wall.

Security dude - "Don't worry love, they're just kids..."

*kneeling on the floor in front of my and placing his hand on my knee*

Security dude - "and we got one of them..."

*handing me the cup of tea, lovingly made with his own head-of-security hands*

Security dude - "and we know exactly what they all look like"


There it was. Mr Security telling me that they knew the identities of all the culprits, thereby including me. A moment of panic washed over me, suddenly thinking that maybe this whole thing had been them calling my bluff. Just at that second one of the cops came into the security office and looked right at me. The game was up. Or was it?

The cop's gaze brushed over me hardly at all before he turned his back to the room, presumably to readjust himself in his lycra cycling shorts, then headed back outside. I was safe. Half an hour in the lair of the enemy and I was safe. At 7pm the lecture kicked out at which point I thanked my new security chums for their emotional support and moved my grieving ass outside to wait for my man. Somehow I got mingled in the the RAF kids talking to the cop about the "incident" and the cop was very forthcoming to his young chums about what had gone down (proving my theory that the man is the man is the man). I took a phonecall and wandered slowly away from the scene knowing now that our captured comrade was safely stored away at the local charge office.

And so it went, my journey into unchartered territory and a true test of my skills as a clandestine agent for the Reds.

And the buzz, oh the buzz, of lies.

How I love it.

On August 11th in the park I grew up playing in, Sophie Lancaster and Robert Maltby were walking home from a night out together. The couple, together for three years and aged 20 and 21 respectively, were attacked, violently beaten and left to die in the park. Robert made a full recovery after weeks in hospital with bleeding on his brain, Sophie did not. Sophie was so badly beaten that when paramedics found her she was unrecognisable as a woman. Sophie was in a coma for two weeks before doctors told her family she would never wake up and they made the decision to turn off her life support. Sophie's murderers were aged between 15 and 17.

Why is this particularly brutal murder a reason to hate David Cameron? Well, Sophie, as you probably have heard, was a goth and since her death Cameron has used her name to boost his image as a tough guy on street crime. Cameron is famed for his hard-talking bullshit approach to youth violence but it really pisses me off that he's using Sophie as a tool to raise this issue. David Cameron is a Tory, the leader of the Conservative Party - now they are a lot of things, especially these days with their shiny new image brought about by their "young" media darling, but one thing they are not is open-minded. Have you ever heard Cameron (or any other Tory for that matter) mention goths before? Have you ever heard any of those suited twats pay reverence to alternative subcultures? Thought not. Being a goth isn't in Cameron's plan for British youth, it's probably not part of any of the three party's plan, to be honest, is it?

I know from my own experience as a participant in alternative culture that the people it goes down worst with (worse, even than the "hoodies" and "violent yobs" who killed Sophie) are conservative (small c) adults. Business people don't like goths, churchgoers don't much like them either, you don't see many goths in the BNP, or in the army, and I have yet to see a nose piercing and dreadlocks in parliament. Of course, most of those people (with the exception of perhaps the BNP) would consider beating goths to a bloody pulp to be the way to go about ridding society of these people, but lets face it - mainstream society is full of closed-minded, over-educated morons (like Cameron) that just plain don't like people who divert from "the norm".

To me, Cameron using Sophie's name to boost his public acceptablity is nothing short of disgusting. It is cheap publicity for his hatred of ordinary working class kids and it is shameless self-promotion. Are we supposed to believe that if the attack had been the other way round that he would be claiming that young people shouldn't be brutalised for choosing an alternative lifestyle? I am not going to fall for that. Tory tactics have always been the reproduction of fear and using Sophie to make even more people hate and fear the disadvantaged kids that are the breeding ground for isolated, abandoned and hopeless young people turning to crime as a get-out, is another reason to hate him.

I will not apologise for the people that killed Sophie - what they did is inexcusable but using her murder to prove a point of conservative social conscious is laughable.

Last night the Punky Monkey and I blew off a meeting that we totally shouldn't have in order to go to the cinema. All the way to the cinema I felt terrible about walking out on a meeting. If I believed in god, which I don't, I would know for sure that he had wanted me to see this film. Honestly. It was that good.

Now last week I went to see Knocked Up and dear god it was good. Quality film. During the opening trailers, however, the film I saw last night was promoted to me as a dull, formulaic romance story involving war and some form of betrayal. I didn't even watch the entire advert before yawning and turning back to my popcorn. But, for the sake of my punky comrade I gave it a bash and by god it was worth it.

In order to retain some kind of dignity in my critical (or not so critical as it stands) approach to film reviews I will tell you now that James McAvoy is one sexy motherfucker and during the film he appears wearing a white muscle vest, rescuing a child from drowning, speaking French, covered in dirt, crying AND in the bath. Not all at the same time, obviously, or someone like me may well have passed out. But yes, he is indeed worth the ticket price by himself. And I'm not ashamed to say so.

Even more shocking (which isn't exactly difficult seeing as McAvoy being hot is hardly groundbreaking journalism) was the fact that I forgot, almost completely, that Keira Knightly was even in the film. Her portrayal of bitchy eldest daughter of upper-class privilege didn't make me want to rip my own eyes out. Her part was well written and simplistic. She didn't have to deal with any complexity in a major way and, lets face it, she can do sad and she can do monied, and she can cry, so she was perfect.

It wasn't even important for you to particularly feel for Cecilia (Knightly) because although to be in her shoes would be no doubt torturous, her role was laid bare - the man she loved was accused of raping a child, sent to prison and then sent to war and this damaged her beyong repair, estranging her from her family as well as the life she had known. One moment can change your life completely, and it does.

There was a danger, I knew, that the casting of Briony was crucial. I was worried that she might've been cast as an angellic yet misunderstood child, ignored and brutalised by her own mistake, but the girl in the role was almost terrifying, hinting at unseen depths of insecurity and even evil. Identifying Robbie as the attacker was a malicious act and you could see it in her face, she wasn't an innocent child making a mistake, she was a vindictive, prudish girl desiring to make a point.

The film takes you on a rollercoaster of misery; seperation, prison, leaving for war. You see Robbie and two comrades stalking the battlefields of France practically aimlessly as they have been stranded by their units whilst running from the Germans. There are Dunkirk scenes that completely destroy the romantic imagery of war films about the glories of war; stir crazy soldiers driven almost mad by the hopelessness of it all and injured and dead men being dragged around and left behind.

I'm not going to tell you anymore of the story because you should see it for yourself as I did, with the smallest of expectations. But let me say that on our walk home we found ourselves thankful that we didn't have to live through that war and that then men we love are not those dying in agony on some foreign soil for politics that are not even their own. This film is about class and about romance. It is also about surviving in any way you can and making the best out of the shit you are dealt in life. It is about betrayal and lies that ruin lives forever and how no amount of atonement will release you from yourself.

Go and see this film.

Feminist Fightback II - Saturday 20 October ‘07

Back for a second year, the Feminist Fightback activist conference is organised by a group of socialist feminists, including the Education Not for Sale student network. It aims to bring together feminists from a wide range of perspectives to debate ideas and develop practical strategies for fighting women’s oppression and exploitation.

Fightback 07 will build on the success of last year’s conference, attended by over 220 people, which gave rise to several activist initiatives, including the March 3 2007 Torch-Lit March for Abortion Rights.

This year we will continue our campaign to defend and extend abortion rights and our discussions will include…

- IS SEXY ALWAYS SEXIST? FEMINISM, LADS MAGS AND PORNOGRAPHY
- ECOFEMINISM
- FEMINISTS AGAINST BORDERS
- ISLAMIC FEMINISM
- RACE, SEX, CLASS
- THE GENDER PAY GAP, LOW PAY AND THE CLASS STRUGGLE
- WOMEN AGAINST SWEATSHOPS

Plus film showings…
- LOVE, HONOUR AND DISOBEY: A FILM BY SOUTHALL BLACK SISTERS
- A PLACE OF RAGE: WOMEN IN THE BLACK CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

Feminist Fightback’s supporters include the National Union of Students Women’s Campaign, the RMT Women’s Committee and the International Union of Sex Workers.

The conference will be held at the University of East London Docklands campus (see here for details and directions). For more information, or to register, ring 07890 209 479, or email feminist.fightback@gmail.com.

For even more information message me via my blog or visit www.feministfightback.org.uk

Ideas for Freedom 2007

Ideas for Freedom is a weekend of socialist debate and discussion
hosted
by the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty: from the evening of Friday 29
June
through to Sunday 1 July. Resource Centre, 356 Holloway Road, London
N7.

Our major theme this year is what it actually means to be on the left,
and
to be a socialist. As much of the left, from the SWP and Respect to the
Labour Party, continues to move ever further away from socialist
politics
and decay politically, we want to reassert the themes of human freedom,
consistent democracy and working-class struggle as the basics of any
socialism worthy of the name.

We will also be running a number of sessions "Introducing Marxism".
Ideas
for Freedom is a space in which young activists can come and learn
about
Marxist ideas in a friendly atmosphere where questioning and debate are
encouraged.

Sessions will include:

- "Introducing Marxism", including: Are revolutionaries violent?; Why
do
we need political parties?; 'Working class', 'multitude' or 'people of
good will'?; What does it mean to be left-wing?
- After Gordon Brown's coronation: how can workers win a voice in
politics? A panel on working-class political representation including
John
McDonnell MP, left challenger for leader of the Labour Party
- Workers' Liberty debates Nick Cohen, Observer journalist and author
of -
What's left? on "Does socialism have a future?"
- Anarchism and Marxism in the Spanish revolution 1936-7
- Newsnight journalist Paul Mason reads from and leads a discussion on
his
new book Live Working or Die Fighting: How the Working Class Went
Global
- How can we get the trade unions to fight? A debate with trade union
speakers and Sheila Cohen, author of Ramparts of Resistance
- Debate with the Aegis Trust on Darfur and the left's attitude to
humanitarian intervention
- Robin Blackburn, author of The Overthrow of Colonial Slavery, on the
real history of the abolition of slavery
- Priya Gopal, author of Literary Radicalism in India: Gender, Nation
and
the Transition to Independence, and Camila Bassi of Workers' Liberty
take
part in a panel on anti-racism and multiculturalism
- Sessions on queer politics and LGBT liberation
- Understanding Marx's Grundrisse
- Do Labour councils have to make cuts? Hackney RMT and tenants
activist
Janine Booth speaks about the lessons of the 1921 Poplar Council
struggle,
and an activist talks about the current anti-cuts campaigns in Lambeth
- A film showing and speakers on women and workers' struggles in Iran

Friday 29 June: film night and social, Bread and Roses, 68 Clapham
Manor
Street, London SW4, from 7.30pm-late. (Clapham Common tube or Clapham
High
Street rail)
Saturday 30 June and Sunday 1 July: at the Resource Centre, 356
Holloway
Road, London N7. (Holloway Road tube)
Saturday evening social with live music

Creche provided, free accommodation in London arranged. We may also be
able to help you with transport, depending on where you are coming
from.
Tickets are £25 (waged), £18 (students and low waged) and £13
(unwaged).
However, they are £3 cheaper if bought in advance. One day tickets are
also available.

More details about the event: email awl@workersliberty.org or phone 020
7207 3997.

Or you can register online at www.workersliberty.org/ideas

It’s the topic of the year, perhaps even the century, it is something so massively controversial, something that divides opinion, defies morality and escapes exact definition. It can be twisted, manipulated, fought for, fought against, covered up, yelled about, bought and sold. It is in what we buy, what we say, what we do; it is the reason we exist. Some people hate it whilst others can’t live without it, some people think it is irrelevant and some deem it to be the most important thing on earth. Some people think they can steal it, that it can be taken from another and some give it away as though it is worth nothing. What is it?

Sex is massive. No matter who you are and where you go in this world, sex is an issue. Whether you’re a celibate monk on the mountain ranges of some eastern sanctuary or a randy 13 year old boy from Birmingham sex is part of who you are.

So the thing I am wondering is this; it is quite simply, why?

Why do we put so much emphasis on this one thing? I can kind of understand it in a world where sex is for procreation alone - under such circumstances I can fully contemplate the fact that maybe the act of sexual intercourse becomes something of a sacred ritual - the creation of children is after all nothing to be sneered at. But in today’s modern globalised world where sex sells and is literally everywhere we look, why do we still treat it as though it is golden?

I reached this question in my own debating into the question of the sex industry. I am fully in support of the unionisation of sex workers of all varieties, from pole dancers to prostitutes, and I do believe that the decriminalisation of such jobs is the only way to protect society’s most vulnerable people from the dangers of such work. By which I mean that by working together and by not facing the wrath of the police and the state these workers can improve the conditions in which they work and people who do not wish to be involved would not have to be. But where I get stuck is when people argue that sex work is not like other work, because sex is not like any ordinary manual task, it is something more. What I cannot decide is what is it about sex that we are so attached to that we cannot imagine beyond how precious it is?

The concept of social conditioning is one that is firmly within my mind - I am socially conditioned, for example, to expect to want to have children, I am a woman after all and that is what we do, right? But all the way through my political education I am being shown that social conditioning is not something that we have to except - to use the same example, the fact that I feel no maternal “pangs” or urges whatsoever is completely fine, I am not some oddity to be worried about - but that only makes me wonder if our attitudes to sex are part of that social conditioning.

Look at it this way; as socialists we think that monogamy is not necessarily the only way human relationships can work, we do not believe that a man and a woman should be made to promise their lives to one another for eternity in the bonds of legal marriage - there are alternatives, both heterosexual and not, that are equally valid. We think that sex is something you choose to do and that you can do it with anyone you so wish as long as they consent, as many times and in as many ways as you like. But I come across the argument constantly that selling sex is somehow beyond comprehension and far removed from any other physical work. It is a very over-used analogy but I like it nonetheless but working in a call centre can be mind-numbing, soul-destroying work especially if you’re cold-calling people and trying to sell them something that they really don’t want. You can’t tell me that doing that 9 to 6 every day for shit pay is better than getting paid to have sex? I know, I know, it’s not the same and a hell of a lot of people involved in the sex industry are not there because they want to be and they have it pretty bad whether it be because of drug addiction, violence or poverty so surely joining unions and working together with people in your situation is better than standing on a street corner risking not only arrest, but your life for a few quid? That’s what I think anyway.

I’ve digressed from my original point. Why is sex so sacred to us? Why do we put it on such a high pedestal that selling it (and lets be honest, it is still about the only thing we don’t like the idea of buying or selling - we sell babies with less fuss for god’s sake!) is so loathsome to us?

When I think about the sex question I always think of my ex boyfriend’s dad (not like that. Ew.) because he used to work in a factory that produced asbestos for the construction industry. Now, I don’t know the ins and outs of when it was discovered that asbestos was dangerous but he worked there for a long time and as a result he now spends his days in agony because he has asbestos literally growing under his skin. He is covered in these lumps and infected abscesses that he has to have removed and drained all the time. Basically he’s a big mess. What I’m trying to say is that work isn’t always pretty and not everyone has the luxury of working in a air-conditioned office on the 15th floor of some high-rise. People work in shitty places and for shitty money. People like fire-fighters, lifeguards, miners, cockle pickers, munitions manufacturers and builders do physically demanding and risky jobs, not to mention sewage workers, cleaners and such who work in horrible conditions every day but because they don’t have sex their work is somehow less terrible? Capitalism is exploitative, it’s a fact and there are literally billions of people in billions of jobs worldwide that are shitty, dangerous and physically demanding - so what makes sex work so different that some socialists don’t like the idea of decriminalising it?

I know lots of young people who have lots of sex with lots of different people and to a certain degree that is no longer taboo in our society (more so for men) and even less so with the majority of the left. Your sexuality is your choice, do with it as you wish. At our day school on socialist feminism on Saturday I was pleased to hear people calling for the legalisation of prostitution and for sex workers unions. People who have a lot of sex with multiple partners are not bad people and often I find them to be considered more liberated. It is true that there is probably only so far we can go with regards to “living communism within capitalism” - a communist world would look very different in almost every way and perhaps sexuality and sexual attitudes are one way we can have a piece of it now.

Sometimes, within the youth element of the left, I sense a pressure to subvert societal expectations of sexuality. I would class myself as monogamous for example, call it social conditioning if you will, but I’m not going to pretend that I want something that I don’t. I don’t think I’m wrong in wanting to be in a relationship with one person whether that desire is a social construct or not. I do not feel as though I have to act as a direct challenge to the monogamy forced down my throat by capitalism and it’s ideas of the family in order that I may be a better socialist.

If we did not elevate the act of sex to the level of some spiritual experience then we could not define sex work as hugely different from any other kind of work. I have yet to hear an argument beyond “sex is just different” that would go anywhere to convincing me that the sex industry is any different than any other. I haven’t made my mind up and this is just something that has been troubling me. I can’t help but wonder if our understanding of and attachment to sex is something that we’ve inherited from religion and the monogamous capitalist family. I just don’t know.

Today I received the following email. I'm going to leave out the sender's name because it is essencially irrelevant. I know that the sender reads this blog and I know therefore that they will get this response. I also know that it will be filtered to the "concerned friends and comrades" as referenced in the email.

"Darling Heather,

Usually I would not send this kind of email, but after conference I am concerned for you, your politics and our friendship.
You see, I think you have forgotten about Palestine.
When you got back from the middle east you were at your most alive and you admitted that; seeing the things that you saw breathed life into you, inspired you to act in a way that you'd previously abandoned. When you were a sabbatical officer you built your ideals and your politics around the suffering and great injustice that you had witnessed on your trip - you were an inspiration to us all, so I would like to know what has changed?
I remember sitting in Casa Mia with you passionately describing to me the way you cried at the foot of the seperation wall, how terrified you had been and the warmth and love of the people of Palestine. I remember fondly the conversations we had about the settlements and their effects on the landscape of the West Bank and how the children from that refugee camp ripped your heart apart because you were so helpless. I remember how you showed me your photographs and explained each one so in-depth that we were there for hours and I was so touched by your love for these people.
But at conference I learned that you have joined AWL, a group that holds Israel in such high esteem as to almost justify the occupation. I wonder what your friends in Palestine would have to say to that? I am sure your friends in Israel would be pleased to know that your mind was so easily changable and that your alliegience was so easily switched.
I am not even really disappointed in you, I am more saddened by this turn of events because I saw you as a great activist for the Palestinian cause as you spoke so much from your heart and with such conviction and passion. I do not know what to say to you about this any longer, if I am to be honest and blunt, which I know you would have me be. I wish that you would go back to the middle east and see the pain afresh and maybe realise your mistakes. You are an amazing person, Heather, so passionate and filled with so much love and your heart for the politics of poverty is one so strong as to intimidate the likes of me. I feel as though this is student scolding master.
I speak from a group of your concerned friends and comrades, the people who stood with you at Leeds to defend the Palestinians, who are now saddened by your disregard for them. I could speak of Iran and Iraq too, but I won't, because that is not the issue I wanted to address with you.
Please do not hate me for sending this in such a cold way, I am merely a concerned friend telling you the truth as I see it."


It took me a while to digest the whole thing really, my main issue being that this is from someone I care about, someone I would consider a friend. Yes, I ask for the truth from my friends and as such I am glad they felt they could tell me how they felt.
They are wrong, but I'm glad they told me.

Since joining Worker's Liberty one thing has been brought up almost constantly by my friend on the left - "how could you change your politics so much?" - the answer of course being that I haven't changed my politics, I have defined them. The thing that confuses me is that people who know me, people who REALLY know me have suddenly decided that what they think they know about AWL has trumped what they actually know about me. It worries me that my friends have so little faith in my strength of character that they would assume that I have been somehow brain-washed into Trotskyism and forgotten all of my motivation for my opinions. For me, joining this group was all the pieces slotting together - it took me a while to get there but when I did, I did it because it's the right thing to do not for any other reason. Why do these concerned friends not think the way I would and assume that maybe, just maybe, I'd been wrong about the group and that my good friend whom I trust has joined this group means that they cannot be what I thought them to be... Would I be wrong? These people that have such high opinions of me, people that think me to be "an amazing person...so passionate and filled with so much love" and a "heart for the politics of poverty...so strong as to intimidate" just assume that I have betrayed my politics for the sake of a group? Um...clearly they don't think as much of me as they would have themselves believe.

The few months in question, after my return from Israel and the West Bank were some of the hardest of my life. I do not know how people put those things behind them - maybe it would be best if I could emotionally detatch myself from the things that I experienced but that is not the way I work and I'm certainly not going to start apologising for that. Children being shot at, maimed, killed by Israeli soldiors, streets and towns under seige, young border guards charging Palestinians to pass through gates to get to the shop/mosque/school, Knesset ministers admitting intentional racism and defending racist policy, the constant bombardment of anti-Arab propaganda, unmanned road blocks just to make life difficult, raw sewage pouring down hillsides from settlements into rivers, polluting water supplies and killing crops, the annexing of water and electricity sources into Israel and the complete disregard of the 67 borders. Oh and did I mention the 13ft concrete wall that seperates children from their schools, families from their mosques and businesses, cuts familes in half, prevents students from getting to university and destroys local economies by running through the middle of thriving markets? No? Well I have now.

My politics on the Middle East have not changed. Not even a little bit. On 14th August 2005, I was sat in an internet cafe in Al'Ain near Ramallah. I wrote this:

"I was supposed to come out here agendaless, and I did. I was supposed to spend my time here being as open as I possibly could be and listen with an approach to understanding to the highest possible level, questioning at every step. This I have also done. So why then is it that I feel that I cannot possibly walk away from this situation with a modest and balanced view of the conflict I am witnessing? The truth is, as I see it, that there is no room here for balance. Balance would mean bias. It is true however that both sides make a valid case and the value of human life must be placed at the highest of these arguments. In Israel there have been numerous attacks on human life, people, more often than not innocent people have been killed for the sake of making a political point. And no matter how much I can believe in that point I can never accept killing innocents as an answer. I cannot describe myself as a pacifist, this view conflicts with my politics and belief in the right and need for a revolution of the working class, but killing is not my way and it certainly isn't right. So what can I take from this? A security wall, erected around the area known as the West Bank, an area containing two million Palestinians. I use the word containing for a reason - these people are prisoners in their own land. Whether you agree with the wall or not, whether you are a Zionist or not, whether you are sitting on the fence politically, a lover of Dubya, a lover of Arafat, Sharon's biggest fan or not...these people are imprisoned. In order for a Palestinian to leave the West Bank he must get to the border, face rigorous checks on his I.D. card, his luggage (even his/her handbag), his pockets and his person and only then if he is deemed worthy (if his ID card is the right colour) then he will be allowed through. To get into the West Bank from the outside, if you are on foot, you must merely pass through an unguarded turnstyle. The Palestinians who hold the right kind of I.D are those who for one reason or another work on the outside must go through this everyday, those who do not (the majority) will be simply turned away at best. This is not an exaggeration, this is not something I read in a book that told me Palestine was a bad place to visit, this was what I did twice today."

and this:

"What the news doesn't like to tell you are the stories that make the wall ok, the stories like those we were told by the British Israeli Group about a good friend being killed in a suicide explosion on a bus just outside their home, our government does not want to be seen to be condoning these horrific acts and yet it does not bother to explain the impact they have. To many Israelis the wall is a good thing, soething that means they no longer fear allowing their children to go to the shops alone, get on buses and shop in shopping centres. This wall to them is the freedom to exist without the troubles they have had in the past. Step (or drive) a metre (10min) to the other side of the wall and these poeple are staring up at this wall, a wall that stops them working, stops them seeing family, stops them travelling, trading and feeling like human beings. The physical difference is astounding; litter lines the streets, arab children are always visible and varying degrees of Islamic dress can be seen mingling together. People here are poorer and yet often friendlier, a lot more wary of us crazy westerners, wondering why in God's name we are wondering around this shit hole when we could be somewhere better.
When I was in Isreal I was constantly being moved by the stories I was hearing from people from all walks of life. My arrival in and growing passion for Palestine is not diluting those stories - life on both sides of that 13ft concrete wall have been severly affected and an end to this conflict would be of benefit to everyone, regardless of race or religion. There is a delicate thing hanging in the balance here, and you can feel it on both sides. I hope you will see on the news over in Britain as we do here on Al Jazeera that there are the so-called Ultranationalists that are refusing to leave their homes in the Gaza Strip - Isreali's fighting Isreali's over land - this is the result of trying to patch up a huge wound with a tiny plaster.

The way I see it is all Israel are doing by building a wall to reduce the number of suicide attacks is making those that are so inclined wish to do it more. This is not a solution to any of this areas problems, it is merely delaying a reaction, and by delaying it, making the inevitable so much worse"

I can provide a whole journal full of examples of how I felt then, seeing it all for real, in the flesh, that would prove to you (if you bothered to talk to me about it) that my politics haven't changed. You assume that AWL loves Israel and hates the Palestinians. This is the biggest lie of them all. How could you think I'd join a group like that? I'm genuinely offended that you would think so little of me.

Worker's Liberty is a group motivated by and dedicated to class struggle and as such it looks at the situation in Palestine the same way as it looks at the rest of the world. If people believe that the issues faced by Palestinians and Israelis have nothing to do with class struggle then you'd be completely wrong and I would urge you to look at the groups within Israel that are refusing to play a part in the occupation and the workers who are striking and marching. Why is it so easy for so many to lump the people of Israel with their government? Why is it so easy to dehumanise them as you accuse them of dehumanising the Palestinians, to rob them of their independant voices within their country and the world? Why do you stand in fierce opposition to the leaders of our own country and assume that the Israelis are incapable of doing the same? Does Blair represent what I think? Does his foreign policy reflect my own feelings towards the people of the world? No. So why is it so difficult for you to understand that anti-semitism is wrong, that crushing Israel is not the answer and that Hizbollah and Hamas are not your friends merely because you have an enemy in common?

I am a realist. I do not kid myself that the destruction of Israel by an Arab army is a good thing. Neither should you.

Ah, school days. Don't you just miss them? Erm, no, actually, I don't. My teenage years were very much like a very bad US teen made-for-tv movie, and I was lucky enough to be one of the people that got into shot once, maybe twice. Woe is me, yeah, lap it up. I was miserable at school, for bloody good reasons too, but I won't bore you with that.

Anyway, last night, I figured I'd watch Skins; it's been super-hyped from Channel 4 to Myspace, from the Metro to the Guardian so I thought I'd better check it out.

Aside from my own issues with watching teenagers awkwardly pashing in grotesque detail (it's like trashy suburban porn) I found myself entirely sucked in. I knew guys like Tony - the looker, the smart-mouthed but oh-so-lovable protagonist; wild and yet well turned out. You know the sort. But it wasn't him that made the program so good, it was the rest of the cast. Sid. Ah, Sid. The cute little geeky one, desperate to lose his virginity at almost any cost, and his rather unlikely pairing with Cassie - posh, OCD'd to the max, living in a world where everything is lovely, struggling with eating disorders - it was like being back at uni (small campus full of actors). She's amazing. And the party was so well done! The posh private school girl had me roaring with laughter - again, she was the epitomy of all the things that I hate in people and therefore a wonder to see on tv being all bi-lingual and shit. Ace. There certainly weren't girls like her at my school. She would've been eaten alive, poor thing.

Casting Harry "I hate you" Enfield to play Tony's tormented father? A master stroke. Harry storms in to yell at Tony and I'm expecting a Kevin-esque "It's not fair" but instead it was like watching a middle-aged and miserable Kevin taking out his own angst on his son. Genius. It is only right that the adults in the program are projections of their kids futures - it makes their "individuality" and "rebellion" all the more bittersweet by juxtaposing it with an enlightening sense of realism.

Skins is the kind of program my parents wouldn't have wanted me to watch but I'd have found a way - just like I did with Eurotrash before sex and nudity stopped being funny. I thought it was bloody brilliant and honestly, I can't wait til next week!

Ok, so they are bad role models, they suggest an unhealthy, unobtainable "ideal" that makes "normal" girls feel bad....right?

Well, I don't think that is strictly true.

I think that the media has a hell of a lot to answer for when it comes to unrealistic aspirations for women and their bodies, a hell of a lot, but banning skinny models from fashion?

Now I am against bans, generally speaking. I do not think that banning is a very logical way to deal with things. The "out of sight, out of mind" school of thought just doesn't sit right with me. It is, afterall, not a solution to anything. Making the nasty things go away does not actually do anything of the sort. It's the same with skinny models. If every catwalk designer in the World said no to anyone smaller than a size 8, all people who were that size would not disappear and shops like Topshop wouldn't immediately cease production of size 6 pants. Thinking that they would is insane. Blaming skinny people for low self-esteem and negative body image is no better than blaming fat people; it's not exactly shocking to find that your skinny mate hates her thighs just as much as your fat mate hates hers, is it?

I think there is a demographic that people tend to neglect in the world of highstreet fashion, and that is skinny girls. I've been shopping loads of times with many of my (sometimes very) skinny friends and had them chew my ears off about how they can never buy trousers that fit or their legs are too long or styles that are supposed to be tight are not etc etc, and it's depressing, because girls like me are supposed to moan about that stuff, right?

I'm apparantly quite rare in my general dismissal of body-image as a whole; if the trousers I want don't fit me, you're not gonna find me in Maccy's blubbing into a McSalad...get me? I'm just not that kinda girl. That isn't to say that I am any better than those girls (or boys), I have my issues, they just aren't in New Look and Topshop.

At the end of the day, fashion is bollocks and it is yet another industry that feeds on our innate fears of how we are percieved. If you buy this bag you will be cool, if you wear a belt here you will look slim, if you wear this bra boys will fancy you....it's all built on lies and myths. But we all know this, right?

So I'm a feminist, and I say don't ban skinny models from the catwalks. How much fuss would you be kicking up if it was suggested that anyone above a size 14 should be banned from fashion (I realise that not many size 14 girls are in fashion, but that isn't the point) because they portray an unhealthy size? Yep, you'd be pretty pissed. So all you crazies who are screaming like banshees about skinny women, just think about what you are trying to do. Skinny girls are people too, y'know.

Positive body image begins at home, girls and boys. It's not something you can buy on your plastic, it's something you find. And as always, education is the key.

Think about it.

x

Simone Clarke is a ballet dancer and, no matter what your opinion of this particular art form, the fact that she is employed as a lead role in a production by The English National Ballet, she is very good at what she does.

So why was there an angry mob of 50 people protesting her presence in the performance? Well, she's a member of the British National Party.

Now, here's the tricky part. Unite Against Fascism are calling for her to be sacked from the company; standing outside the theatre shouting "ballet not bigotry" and "stop the BNP". And yes, of course, I am every bit as against the BNP as the next person who finds racism abhorrent but should we really be screaming for this woman to lose her job?

Simone claims she is a member of the party because of her views on immigration, and she is hardly alone in holding those views; there are considerable amounts of UK citizens who hold those opinions who aren't in the BNP. Of course, I disagree vehemently with her on immigration - I am a socialist, after all.

My problem lies in this; if Simone worked in a bank, or in Asda, would we be standing outside waving banners demanding that she be fired by a global corporation? Or glad that she was working somewhere that she was probably being exploited in one way or another? Is the problem here that this particular fascist has invaded our precious arts?

One UAF campaigner, Donna Guthrie, is quoted as having said "There is no place for fascist ideas in the arts, we're calling on her to resign from the party or leave the company."

No place for fascism in the arts? Are we going to start burning books? Ripping down paintings in the Louvre? Boycotting the theatre?

This is a matter of great importance to me and I find the idea of imposing limits on what, or whom, can be a part of "the arts" frankly worrying. I am an advocate of free speech. REAL free speech and REAL freedom of expression. Sure, you're going to hear and see some things that you don't like, things that make you sick, things that make you scared, but if we put such a harness on art then we are only asking for trouble. What, for example, is stopping someone deciding that transsexuals have no place in art, or women, or left wing politics?

It brings me right back to the argument against asking the government to put a ban on violent pornography - I do not want anyone to have control over the things I see, the things I read, watch etc. Although I might think that a world without violent pornography would be a better world, what is to say that someone in power might think that the world would be a better place without me, my politics and my ranting blog? Freedom is freedom.

Does Simone Clarke believing in nationalist bigotry prevent her from being an amazing dancer? Does Joe Bloggs' BNP membership stop him fulfilling a service to you when you want your cash out of the bank? If you don't want to see a woman that subscribes to nationalist bullshit dancing as the lead in Giselle, don't buy a ticket. It's that simple. Protesting in favour of an individual to lose their job is not the answer and sweeping claims about fascism and the arts is no more of a solution to the threat of the BNP than sending them your own finger in the post.

The fight against fascism does not begin with asking those in power to ban it or pass laws against it - we do not need the state to tell us that fascism is wrong because sooner or later they'll do the same to us - and as Nick Griffin happily showed us, the fascist scum can use their own illegality to win support and sympathy.

The answer to the BNP is a real working class alternative - a political party that offers the housing, the jobs, the health service and education for all WITHOUT the racism and nationalism!


Let Simone Clarke dance. Don't grant the BNP another social martyr!

Strip clubs & planning permission:

George is challenging the apparently enabling attitude the council’s planning department has to strip, lap and pole dancing clubs which are currently operating in Tower Hamlets without appropriate planning permission. The council’s attitude, which seems to be that there is nothing they can do even when planning permission has clearly been flouted, is in contrast to that of Greenwich council which recently stopped a lap dancing club opening an hour before it was officially due to do so because it lacked appropriate planning permission. George is enthusiastically pursuing a campaign to rid Tower Hamlets of these dens of iniquity especially in residential areas and areas close to places of worship.

(taken from: www.georgegalloway.com)

Well. There are so many ways in which this is wrong. I could debate until the cows come home about the problem with socialists requesting that workplaces be shut down, I could probably argue for even longer about the use of the term "dens of iniquity". As for Galloway attempting to justify his actions using the old "they don't have the right planning permission" line when this is clearly more of a tactic to suck up to the religious zealots he so relies on in his "political" career, well, that is just plain amusing.

I have heard people attempting to justify his actions - genuinely attempting to convince me (or themselves?) that Gorgeous George is in fact trying to follow a Marxist agenda rather than a religious one. Dens of Iniquity? Come on! He should spend more time reading the bible and going to church - then maybe he'd realise that he's trying to shut down the wrong thing! Even my dad, a Conservative ex-police officer can see more merit in shutting down the churches than shutting down strip clubs!

I find the entire thing so utterly offensive.

The IUSW press release;

International Union Of Sex Workers calls for decriminalisation of sex work to increase worker safety

The confirmed murders of three prostitutes in the Ipswich area and concerns for a missing fourth highlight the desperate need for decriminalisation of sex work, states the International Union of Sex Workers (IUSW).

“Sex workers are currently forced into dangerous working situations by the illegality surrounding their profession, and do not feel able to report offences or concerns to police for fear of arrest,” says Ana Lopes, President of the IUSW. “ASBOs and proposed laws to criminalise clients are forcing them into increasingly vulnerable situations. Decriminalisation would allow them to work safely and be protected by European labour laws. It is also an essential starting point to reducing stigma against sex workers which leads to their being even more vulnerable to attack.”

Prostitutes need safe areas in which to work, be that safety zones on the streets or brothels where they can work together indoors. “Sex workers are part of the community and should be treated as such, not as a public disorder problem,” Lopes states. “We believe ways can be found to manage street sex work through cooperation with workers so that any inconvenience to the community is minimised. Police forces need to develop strategies to decrease violence in cooperation with workers, groups and unions such as ourselves, and the local community.”

The IUSW supports the English Collective of Prostitutes’ calls for a police amnesty to allow prostitutes to come forward with possible information about the murders without fear of arrest, but urges that this be extended into a new framework through decriminalization whereby sex workers are always free to report concerns to police. Financial support and cooperation is also needed from government and police forces to support sex work projects running Ugly Mug schemes (early warning systems about violent clients for sex workers).

International human rights and workers rights laws, already in place, must be applied to sex workers as much as to other members of society, the IUSW states. The Declaration of the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe, endorsed in the European Parliament in Brussels in October 2005, identifies human and labour rights that sex workers are entitled to under international law. These include: the right to life; the right to liberty and security of person; the right to be protected against violence, physical injury, threats and intimidation; the right to equal protection of the law; and the right to work, to free choice of employment and just and favourable conditions of work.

The Sex Workers in Europe Manifesto, endorsed at the same time, represents the voices of sex workers from across Europe. It states:

“We condemn the hypocrisy within our societies where our services are used but our activities are criminalised and legislation results in our exploitation and lack of control over our work and lives.” The Manifesto calls for the establishment of designated areas for street prostitution to enable those who work in public places to do so safely.

Lopes comments, “December 17th is the fourth International Day To End Violence Against Sex Workers, the marking of which will be particularly poignant in the light of recent events. These murders highlight how urgent the need is to reassess the law and society’s view of sex workers to ensure they enjoy the same rights as the rest of their communities. ”

For further comment please contact:

Rose Conroy, GMB Press & Media for London Region, on Rosie.Conroy@ gmb.org.uk, tel. 07974 251823

IUSW President Ana Lopes on ana@iusw.org, tel. 00351917162817

The Declaration of the Rights of Sex Workers in Europe and Sex Workers in Europe Manifesto can be found at www.sexworkeurope. org





Press release from the English Collective of Prostitutes a few days ago, about the killings of three prostitutes in Ipswich;

When prostitute women are not safe, no woman is safe

Gemma Adams and a woman the police believe to be Tania Nicol, have now both been found tragically murdered in Ipswich. We pass our deepest condolences to their loved ones. A number of women also working as sex workers have gone missing in the area in recent years. In order to save lives and not to repeat the horror of the Yorkshire Ripper, who was allowed to continue killing until 13 women had been murdered, the Suffolk police must not use the criminality imposed on sex workers by the prostitution laws as an excuse to deny women the protection we are
all entitled to by law.

We demand:

* an immediate temporary amnesty from arrest for prostitute women and clients so that anyone can come forward to give information to this inquiry without fear of criminalisation or harassment; (Previously, women with outstanding arrest warrants either couldn’t contact the police or when they did were arrested. (See Criminalisation: the price women and children pay, English Collective of Prostitutes response to the government’s review of the prostitution laws, December 2004)

* an end to street sweeps, arrests and ASBOs against prostitute women and clients which have forced women into darker, more isolated areas making them more vulnerable to rape, violence and even murder. Women working under increased pressure are less able to look out for each other, have less time to check out clients and are forced to take more risks;

* a change in police priorities; money and resources being used to prosecute women and clients for consenting sex must be re-directed into vigorously pursuing violent men and protection of all women

following the example of New Zealand, decriminalisation of the prostitution laws, which by criminalising sex workers signal that women’s lives are not worth much. The police and courts don’t protect women and violent men think they can get away with attacks.

The police are telling women to look out for each other and come forward with information. But whatever safety systems that women have and will work out among themselves, they can never substitute for the police doing the job that the public overwhelmingly wants them to do – protect sex workers from rape and other attacks.

Over 70% of prostitute women are mothers. As poverty, homelessness and debt go up and women’s wages go down, more women (especially with Xmas round the corner) are forced into prostitution to support themselves and their families. Every woman is some mother’s daughter, someone’s sister, aunt, beloved friend . . . Every life is of value.

The subheadline on the front page of the Guardian website today is Police urge town’s sex workers to stay off streets as fourth prostitute is reported missing. .

Sex workers in and around Ipswich now have a choice - stop being able to support themselves and their families, or risk being murdered. The police reports would have us think these are the only two options; where prostitution isn’t legal, it’s not like sex workers are going to be given police protection to carry out their work when under the threat of attack. Any abolitionist feminists want to defend that?

Purdue students are fasting to get their school to sign on to the Designated Suppliers Program (DSP).
The DSP is the culmination of over a decade of student-labor solidarity activism and we've got to get it off the ground now!
While this is a struggle at Purdue, the fight is really an international one, and Purdue and other schools are at the frontlines of the next, major advance for our movement.
Last week, many of us gorged ourselves to show Thanks. This week, lets take this step to show real thanks for those workers and students who are changing the world.

How to help?

1. Check out: www.perduehungerstrike.org
2. Organize a solidarity hunger strike and let them know
3. Contact Purdue Admin.

Below is a message from one of the fasting students, please help out in any way you
can.

Read this. It’s important. I’m hungry.

As many of you know Purdue is in the midst of a hunger strike for DSP adoption. It started 10 days ago and people have been continuously joining in. Right now, we’re at 15 participants. It’s getting pretty big and serious here, so time to roll out the national announcements:

1. www.purduehungerstrike.org

The website is a one-stop shop for information on the strike and the campaign at Purdue. We’re going to be updating it many times a day with fancy things like video, so check it early and check it often!

2. What can I do to help??

Lots!! Take a gander at the list below:

- Organize a day-long solidarity fast with your local group: It’s a good action for a local group, helps spotlight the sweatshop issue on your campus and helps bring us closer to getting national media about the campaign. So far a number of schools are going to be doing solidarity fasts and the more the merrier.
Email mark@usasnet.org and we can start planning.

- Fast a day yourself and write us: If you’re able to, fast a day and email us at purdue_ole@yahoo.com. We’ll pass along your name and the time you’ve fasted to our President, plus you’ll be put on the list of participants on the webpage.

- Sign the online petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/nosweat/petition.html - We’d like to get ~2000 signatures on this thing so sign and get your friends to do so. Next week we’ll be presenting all of the real and electronic signatures we’ve accumulated.

- Join the facebook group: http://purdue.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2220276342 For you facebook users out there, please join the group and invite everyone that you know! Updates and things you can do will be periodically sent along.

- Spread the word: Let as many people as you can know about this, in whatever creative ways you can think of.

- Send words of support: Hearing from USAS people is always
a big morale booster, so please write to purdue_ole@yahoo.com



If anyone would like to contact us about the strike or anything else feel free to send an email to purdue_ole@yahoo.com, or respond to any of the emails that get sent out. Thanks for your support everyone.



‘til we win,

Mark F.

Purdue University

I'd heard it existed, this mythical documentary where Russell Brand meets Mark Collett, but I'd never seen it. I watched it just now and its bloody good viewing, despite my general dislike of both its main protagonists.
What did I learn from it? Well, probably nothing, I've met Mark Collett myself and he does, admittedly, come across as a relatively nice bloke, I might even go so far as to say that I'd go for a pint with him to the Original Oak, that is, of course, if I didn't know who he was.

Mark Collett is a graduate of Leeds University, of my university. Mark Collett is the main reason our student union adopted its No Platform policy after using his rights within the union to drum up trade for his nazi-business and spouting his pro-national identity bullshit. He is a man for whom I have no sympathy and his use of the working class as a leg-up to an all-white Britain is beyond sickening.

In case you were in any doubt of the depth of Mark Collett's politics, this "less-than-professional" film sees Collett faced with two, rather tame and rather jolly (post England v Argentina) adversaries who question his policies with shock and disbelief. Collett, of course, being the big man, makes a hasty exit stage left and advises his good friend Chris not to sign the release for the film. Brand gets visibly angry, and quite rightly, sending up Collett's ability, or rather, his will, to stand up in the face of criticism. This isn't anything new. People like Collett do really well when they are stood on soap boxes surrounded by people who agree noisily and clap and scream in his praise, but as Brand so eloquently puts it "bring Hitler himself...you have nobody that can stand against the truth".

Watch it here, in three parts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxweGVGQRTQ

Did you know that there are 74 million credit cards in the UK? Think about that for a second and consider the 60 million people that live in the UK. How many credit cards do I own? None. You? My mum has 3, my dad has 2 and my sister has 3. The world, it seems, has gone mad. "Live within your means" That is what my mum told me today when I handed over my bank card for safe-keeping (so I wouldn't spend any money) as she tucked into her purse between her credit cards and store cards. I got the original figure from a program called "Your Money or Your Wife" which is a rather hideous conceptual show where a person's horrific financial issues are revealed to their other half. The episode I watched showed a 22 year old woman reveal her £91k debt to her boyfriend and soon-to-be business partner. The result being that she had to sell ONE OF her convertible sports cars, SOME OF her £900 handbags and live on just £6 a day. Wow. It hurt me as I watched her suffer the loss of her designer gear and a little bit of her pride. £6 a day...how on earth did she manage? After 6 weeks of £6 a day and the sale of one car and lots of designer shit, how much did she hack off her debt? Less than £15k. Off £91k. Poverty rations for the rest of your life love? Ah well, that'll teach you to be a materialistic shit then, won't it?
Probably not.

So, yeah, credit cards are shit. But hopefully, you knew that.

And onto Islam. I love talking about Islam you know, because its a "current affair" don't you know. And current affairs are good topics of discussion. People don't like to talk about Islam because people are scared of saying what they mean. I say "religion is oppressive" and people say "steady on love, you can't go making sweeping generalisation like that" but the truth is, I can. Islam, like Christianity, is homophobic. Islam, like Christianity, is sexist. Islam, like Christianity, is based on a book that was written thousands of years ago, the majority of which, I think, has very little relevance today. I do not think Islam should be banned. Nor do I think Christianity should be banned, but I do think that we should call a spade a spade. Why is everyone jumping on the Pope for criticising Islam? He's the freaking Pope for christ's sake (pun intended), he's the head of the Catholic church! He's supposed to be against Islam in the same way he's supposed to be against Judaism for missing the point and Buddists and Hindus for barking up the wrong tree! Can a Rabbi not say that Christian's worship a false messiah? Can Muslims not say that Christian's stopped paying attention and missed the last prophet? OF COURSE THEY CAN! I may not be in agreement with Mr Pope-pants but he should have the right to say what he jolly well likes without some poor nun paying the price. I watched part of the Dispatches debate "Muslims and Free Speech". I only saw part of it because I turned it off because I was bored and it was frustrating me that it was all so calm and structured. I saw a few people who's heads I would happily have banged together, mainly people who were saying "Free speech is brill and of course it must be protected, but insulting Islam just takes it too far"...

I could rant all day about this but I won't because I'm bored of the sound of my own voice (in my head). I am an advocate of free speech. I believe that nothing; no belief, no person, no religion, no idea, no ideology is beyond criticism. I believe that in order for society to develop in any meaningful way, arguments must be had and criticism must be taken. By everyone. I'm bored of this topic now so I will move on to coffee...

...and this Starbucks vs Ethiopia stuff. Starbucks are a shitty corporation that sucks the life out of people in the name of profit. We know that, it's kinda in the job description of being a corporation. So why are we suprised that they've blocked a copyright application that will lose them money? And why are we appalled that the International Coffee Federation or the Federation of Coffee International or the People's front of Judea or whatever are supporting them?? Um...£80 billion is spent annually on coffee worldwide. Starbucks sell Ethiopian coffee in a shiny little bag for £4.98 and it is Fairtrade so the farmer gets a whopping 5% and he isn't happy? What the fuck more does he want? Fucking greedy bastard. Poor Starbucks. They are the victims in all this if you ask me. They could lose...like...I dunno...a million...or summat? I ask you! What is the world coming to when we are asking a billion-dollar mega-corp to sacrifice its well earned profits for some little farmer Giles in Ethiopia. You lot should be ashamed of yourselves. Which brings me nicely to my next topic of...

...ASBOs.

The Anti-Social Behaviour Order, the brainchild of our socially conscious labour government. "Kids are wearing their ASBOs as a badge of honour" the newsman told me today. I have to say, I did wonder what all these kids were doing with sheets of formal print pinned to their trackies. Now I know. But why are the government suprised?

"I have been a proper pain in the arse, ya know, I am fucking this place up" said Kevin

"Yeah man, I'm with you on that Kev" chortled Wayne

"But I ain't got no ASBO action yet so I'm not a cool as our Nicky. She got one for smoking pot outside the offy" retorted Kevin, excitedly.

Both children sighed as they thought about their role model, Nicola, a drunken, pot-smoking, loitering mother-to be, from the estate.

Hello?? I want a fucking ASBO! I'm a rational (well, kinda), educated adult (supposedly) and I want an ASBO! Of course its a badge of honour! The kids that this anti-social behaviour crap is aimed at want to be gangsters and think that smoking pot, getting wasted and dropping out of school is cool...

ASBOs are yet another example of the government failing to take an interest in the roots of the problem. They don't like "chavs" and "hoodies" and such but they fail to see that it is poverty, elitism and poor education that fuels anti-social behaviour. Working class kids have fuck all hope in this country and so they get pissed, get stoned, loiter and play with fireworks because there is shit all else to do until they join either the army or the dole queue.

Speaking of the dole queue, in my recent state, i.e. being devoid of employment, I have signed on to recieve job seekers allowance. In order to claim the £45.50 per week to which I am entitled, I have to visit my local job centre. I like going to the job centre. People speak very softly at the job centre and it often reminds me of a library with lots of school councillors in. There is always a slightly patronising tone and although I am in the unfortunate situation whereby my personal advisor is a girl who went to 6th form with me (and was always much cooler) and therefore adds an extra pinch of patronising salt to rub into the open wound of my injured pride, I think its how they are trained. Now, upon my first visit, I met Janice, a woman who reminds me of the receptionist from Monsters Inc, complete with hair and lipstick, and the weird thing was, Janice knew EVERYTHING about me. From tapping my National Insurance number into her little computer she was able to tell me everything I had done since I was 16. (She even knew about the job I had for one night that landed be in court as part of an attempted murder trial) And it scared me a little bit. She said she needed my help to fill in the blanks but they were literally my degree title and grade and my A Level results. Watching the news today and someone has discovered that we are the most watched nation on earth. I'm not really very suprised, I watched a lot of X Files as a kid and it has prepared me for a lot of shit. So the way I look at it, who the fuck needs ID cards anyway? They know everything about me from my National Insurance number so chuck in my medical records and mobile phone and I'm screwed. There's probably some fucking police dog reading this right now to see if I make any reference to blowing up parliament or whatever (there you go Rex...do your worst..."and she went to Palestine too...bloody terrorist bitch"). Its the main reason I don't have a credit card, or a store card, or a "targetted marketing" card like those from Matalan or Tesco (did you know that after 9/11 Walmart handed all their customer info over to the FBI without even being asked? There's a trolley contents profile out there for terrorists you know, they eat more brown bread you see...), I don't do internet banking, sell or buy stuff on eBay or amazon with my own name...I am one paranoid motherfucking bint.

I wanted to end this mammoth blog on a high note and so I chose to leave the Amnesty Secret Policeman's Ball to the end. Those people in Guantanamo Bay must be relieved to know that Eddie Izzard, The Boosh, Richard E Grant, Seth Green, Chevy Chase, Natalie Imbruglia et al are all on board for the cause...

...ok, I'm a sarcastic bitch and I watched it an laughed so hard I almost puked and did a wee at the same time and it raised awareness...rah rah....blah blah.......

Its saturday night, I'm in a restaurant with a nurse and two biochemists, we're having dinner, like you do and also talking. We got onto the subject of the best and worst meals we'd ever had and as the conversation progressed I mentioned the cafe we stopped at in Qalqilia, the West Bank. One of the biochemists said:

"You went to Palestine?"

"Yes, last summer"

"Isn't there a war on or something like that?"

Now, to be honest, this could have a lot to do with the fact that I am most often surrounded by what I would describe as "politically active" people but to hear a comment like that from someone I hold in high esteem as an intellectual? It shocked me. But I was willing to let it go, for now, until my nurse friend piped up with

"They're fighting over some land or something aren't they? Is it the Holy Land?"

Now this nurse, she's Christian. Shouldn't she be slightly more aware than most about the situation in the middle east, in the land of her Saviour?

Maybe I'm wrong for being shocked, maybe this is perfectly acceptable and I've just had my head buried in politics for too long but its not as if I was talking about the Western Sahara or Congolese child soldiers...I thought this topic was pretty standard "News at 10" type dinner conversation for people in their 20s. Apparently not. I tried my hardest to not adopt a patronising tone as I gave a brief rundown of the situation but I lost them somewhere around 1967 to some mango chutney.

It got me thinking though, if these people; two of which are active in their students unions, all of whom work in hospitals, are unaware of the politics of the Middle East then what else don't they know? Am I being a snob by assuming that people know even the basics of world issues?

This entire dinnertime trauma only fed my already nightmarish fear that I may have become part of that most elite and degrading club: middle class intellectuals. My fear, I suppose, stems from the fact that when it comes to working class politics I often feel isolated when surrounded by ordinary working class people. I live in a village in a valley that is built on its factories, quarries and cotton, practically everyone I know is working class and yet when I talk about socialism I get blank looks. How is it that in everyday life the politics of the working class are being overlooked by the working class themselves.

I had an argument a few days prior to the restaurant conversation with a friend of mine who accused me of being a snob. His line was that I read a lot of books and go to conferences and meetings about working class struggle and yet I do not have a job; that I have adopted a vocabulary that ordinary people find alienating and ignorant. So yes, I'm worried. My friend suggested that the left should compile a basic guide to socialism that could be easily understood by "the common man" and do a massive campaign by post. "Everyone hates the bosses" he said "its just that nobody think of that as a political perspective". I think he might be onto something (the last bit, not the posting thing unless anyone happens to know any millionaire working class fighters?) but where to go from here?

Maybe if we started a campaign with wristbands? You know, those delectable rubber ones that come in a plethora of colours. Ours could say "Sack the Boss" or "Fight the Power" or "Class War" or "Hug a Commie" or "I love my mum" or something...

I'm ranting, and this is less political and more narcissistic than I wanted it to be so I'll stop.

The idea of this is for me to play my part in the "blogging revolution" so here-in lies me: my thoughts, ideas, moans, celebrations...

Enjoy.





And comment. Always comment.