A love story

Christmas day, nothing on the telly as usual, then I notice BBC 4 has Swan Lake. I amuse myself until eight o’clock, miss the deep and meaningful introduction as I raid the fridge and settle down just as the overture starts.

I enjoy a lot of jumping around, the sets and costumes and it’s not until the third act that a thought occurs to me. What is this all about?

The progress on stage is so seemingly slow that I have a mo to pick up my tablet and Google for a plot summary and the names of the characters. I realise that all this information is sat on the laps of the live audience in their programmes and is missing for folks at home! Anyway, it’s a fairly simple plot and I finally get what all the miming has been about (how about ballet with speech and singing!)

If you don’t know the plot then have a read on line as I don’t have space here.

Sometime in the night I wake up and run the plot through my mind again. It’s a fairy story, right? That means it’s about as real and as useful as fairies are in the twenty first century, right? Well wrong.

I realise that the story is considerably more profound than even the twenty quid programme lets on.

There is a lake full of white fluffy swans, about twenty four of them as far as I could see on the telly but they did keep moving around a lot so it could have been twenty eight. Anyway the lake represents the world (round world, round lake – please keep up) and the souls who have been turned into swans are us…that is humans, spending our short lives going around in circles and basically asleep. Only Odette is able to become human again in the night time. (Just like me waking up in the night and being profound). She represents the two states of being alive and being dead. She is dead when she is alive (an enchanted swan) and alive at night (a human soul in the spirit world).

The prince is unimpressed by the marriage proposals of the best beauties Russia has to offer because he is himself enchanted by the beauty of the Queen of the swan population, Odette.

Confusion and evil arise in the shape of the Von Rothbart who is keen for his own daughter, Odile, to be the object of Prince’s love. To achieve this he cunningly uses magic to make Odile appear as Odette. His only mistake is to give the baddy a black swan cossy and the goody a white swan cossy, just so the audience can see what is going on.

Here Prince Siegfried is exploring his own consciousness, which consists of his feminine Self, as well as the male. Since men usually have this repressed (darkened- black) in themselves, their inner journey is to bring light their own femininity. The black turns to white, good triumphs over evil ( in moral terms ) and the prince becomes a King.

In the final act the prince expresses his love for Odette and she forgives him for making what was a simple mistake. He has had to learn discrimination and wisdom to show his Kingly understanding of truth. The evil Von Rothbart and imposter Odile are returned to their true bird like (or reptilian ) forms representing the humans who live their lives on automatic pilot.

By returning to the lake and expressing his love for Odette, Siegfried pops the spell like a balloon. They both jump into the lake (something the less inspired may have been waiting for since the interval) and from their ascend into heaven. This represents the process of human spiritual evolution as attributed to great prophets but is accessible even to humble folks like us. At the point of ‘individuation’ or becoming a complete human being, the physical world (the lake) is no longer needed as a learning environment for the soul.

Well, there is my cranky interpretation of a wonderful story. Should something like this be in the programme? Do we really need to know about hidden meanings? Certainly not. These stories were developed and retold because they illumine the human mind without interpretation, just in the telling. In our modern times, thousands of people sit through what is on the face of things a load of nonsense (a fairy story) and go away thinking they know a lot better than the people of the past who used to believe that sort of thing. But they (and particularly children whose minds are more open to symbolism) will have been enchanted  by the whole thing.

That makes them members of the flock of enchanted swans swimming in circles on the lake of life. But fret ye not. Someday your prince will come and take you away, because that is what princes do.

 

Here’s another fine mess you’ve gotten me into,

Poor Oliver Hardy was curiously loyal to Stan Laurel given the chaos of their on-screen lives which Olly blamed entirely on Stan.

So you might add the same epithet to UK politics. As much as I dislike being ‘wise after the event’ I will indulge in this somewhat, because I said it before the event.

Firstly, you don’t agree to something before you know what it is you are agreeing to. There is an Aesop Fable about this human weakness where a pig is purchased whilst it is still hidden in a bag.

Any vote on whether to stay in or leave the European Union should have included the previously negotiated terms of such a deal. It’s like putting a label on the box.

Because this did not take place, the two sides were able to invent what would and what would not happen after Brexit. So whatever result the general populace wanted, such as uncontrolled immigration, could be promised to be solved by Brexit. The Home Office have had eight years to control immigration and only now are proposing a strategy to control it. And the fact all along, was that four out of five immigrants to the UK are not from the European Union.

Thirdly, there was the problem of the Northern Ireland border with Eire. The older politicians in the house of Commons will have lived through the so called ‘troubles’. They might have warned the younger inexperienced politicians that any attempt to replace border controls would be social and political suicide for Northern Ireland. Because of this alone, the referendum should have never been promised, until a solution to Ireland was obvious. This would have included the option of uniting Ireland. This is not an impossible outcome in the future now that the south is becoming more liberal and the majority in the north want to remain in Europe.

So what happened? How did politicians ignore the false promises, agree to something without knowing what was being proposed and before solving the Irish land border’s vulnerability?

Could it have been that the conservative party had a problem within itself that it needed to confront or face losing power? It has been the case for decades that European sceptics within the party were at odds constantly with those who believed the UK is more prosperous within Europe?

Is this in-fighting really the tail that was wagging the dog?

You would like to think that politicians act in the interest of the Nation first and their own party’s second. That is what they tell us but it is conceivable that this has not been so. Brexit was called by Cameron to force a direction, one way or the other. Confirmation of this is that the rules of the referendum permitted an infinitely narrow margin in the result. The rules did not require a sixty percent or two thirds majority, as they could have done.

Someone decided that the voting should be; whoever gets over fifty percent wins. That decision anticipated that there was no consensus within the party and to force change, a majority of one vote over millions, would be deemed representative of the people and logically no one could disagree.

In my view British politics has been brought to an all time low by the current set of politicians on both sides of the house. The only MP I have heard talk sense is Caroline Lucas – the Green Party MP. ‘Good on yer, Caroline’. Don’t forget that the voice of one person can decide the future of a nation, at least in the current nonsensical version of so called democracy.

Whoever can point out the elephant in the room and stop the nation accepting a ‘no deal’ will be a hero.

(acknowledging the Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band who used the same title)

A news team is set up in the front garden of the Prime Minister’s private home; a mid-terraced house in Richmond.

Well Prime Minister, this is a surprise. I don’t think any of us were expecting a garden party quite so soon, if at all!

Ye of little faith…

Well, you hadn’t really involved any of us in what you were thinking or negotiating or if you were drilling for details…

I don’t give away my plans…

Not even amongst friends?

I called a general election and I told the cabinet what I had decided at Chequers but both turned out to be a mistakes. I should have remained silent.

Like a stealth submarine?

Yes, exactly like that.

But can’t you see how worrying that can be? Would you like a vol-au-vent?

I gave plenty of reassurance to the British public and industry. I seem to remember saying ad museum, ‘I am getting a ‘good deal’ for Britain.’

Bit of a slip of the tongue that…

I’ll have a salmon one thanks. What slip of the tongue?

Well didn’t you mean the United Kingdom?

Pedantry will do no favours in your journalistic career young lady. I have the DUCK party, or whatever they are called, on my side. With them I have a complete majority.

(faces camera) Well, talking of sides, I guess we are all here today to admire the work you have done on your shared rainwater downpipe.

Yes, I have painted it pink.

Yes, but only one half.

…because pink is an optimistic colour and symbolises a rosy future for Britain and her allies in this war.

War?

Sorry, wrong auto-cue. I mean just Britain…that is…the United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland. Is that right?

So from your point of view standing here in your front garden, you can see just a pink downpipe?

Correct. Have you finished your questions now, because I prefer talking with someone who doesn’t ask questions?

I was going to ask Prime Minister, why you didn’t also paint the other half of the downpipe. It’s a kind of…grey.

I can’t see that. I honestly only want to get the best downpipe and that is what I sincerely believe I have achieved. I can’t understand why anyone should think differently.

Well I have spoke with Mr Singh, your neighbour, and he tells me he doesn’t like your pink colour and he wishes you had never decided to paint it.

Mr Singh? So that’s his name. I always wondered. No, in answer to his views, I don’t think he is in a position to say what I should and shouldn’t do with my half of the drainpipe. He can’t see from his front garden what I can see from my front garden.

Did you try to negotiate?

I offered to paint it all pink but he refused.

Did you offer to do nothing?

I asked all the May family about this and they voted to paint the blessed thing. I voted not to paint it but I have to go with the majority.

Even though you gave the cat the casting vote?

Animals have feelings…

So on a whim you have chosen to change a situation that was working perfectly into one where there is division and uncertainty.

Yes, because the alternative is unthinkable?

The alternative of doing nothing and keeping it as it was?

No, no…that is far too risky. I mean the alternative is to remove the downpipe and allow all kind of damage to not only my house, but this Mr. Singh’s house. I think that is a bad outcome for both houses.

Could you not have just left it alone?

I have ruled out asking the family again. I have ruled out a lot of things. This is what the cat voted for and in a democracy, ‘ the winner takes it all’. Ooh! I feel like dancing all of a sudden?

Do you think you have much longer as prime minister?

Of course I do. Who else is going to run my house? I like to form an idea and carry it through to the end. Whether it works or not I should get a Peerage for being strong. That is why I shall continue to say I like my pink half of the drain pipe. Pink is not only a good happy colour but it’s a nice colour and I am going to keep it, whatever other people say.

And if one takes a few paces this way….to the boundary between the two houses, you can see that it really does look quite ridiculous from here. Can you see there is another view point…?

Yes, I wonder?

So can see the problem how other’s see it?

No, no, young lady, I wonder if I chose the right shade of pink? In this light it looks a bit, Salmon.

Who is in Charge?

When it comes to trying to work out the rules of life, you might expect religions to help. But I have just given up on reading a book (called Home Deus by Yuval Noah Harari) in which the author dismisses religions on the grounds that they teach fatalism.

It is true that many adherents to various religions believe in ‘Divine Judgment’ or ‘the will of God’. You know which religions I refer to.

And yet I would argue that this belief is due to, at best a neglectful misunderstanding of scripture and, at worst a willful misunderstanding of scripture. Because, if you are the type of person who likes to sit on the sidelines and watch the football match rather than play football, this is a view that fits your attitude to life. The car will not start in the morning as you leave for work, because ‘God has willed it’, not because you neglect your car. Or on a larger scale, the sea opens and the Israelite s escape the Egyptian army, because God has the power of miracles.

To me, this view of life denies one’s own power and responsibility. It has given permission for the ‘blame culture’ of today.

This ‘blame culture’ view, also means that an individual does not have to take responsibility for their actions. At it most extreme manifestation it gives permission for the horror committed by terrorists in the name of God. Even disciplined armies fight wars with ‘God on our side’. The fact that both sides claim this right is a contradiction ignored, perhaps because it would make war and sacrifice a nonsense, such as in the first World War.

I have to wonder what are the priests and those who preach within religions thinking? Perhaps two hundred years ago the ‘fire and brimstone’ and ‘you will go to hell’ threats were of a time when understanding in the sciences, arts and humanities, was not as sophisticated as today. Which implies that the ‘you don’t have to take responsibility because God is in charge’, philosophy is still preached. Even when people ask why good people are murdered or run over by a bus, (how could a benign God have allowed this to happen?) the priests reply is an empty echo of  the dogma they learned in the seminary.

In between the philosophical positions of ‘the will of God’ and ‘the freewill of man’ is a belief in ‘fate’.

I once asked a work colleague, whose daughter was born severely disabled and whose plight was the centre of a charity, how he handled such a situation. His reply was two words; ‘shit happens’. Whether this referred to his daughter or to his family life or both was unclear but what was clear was a ‘fatalistic’ view.

In this philosophy, no person or external power is to blame for anything. It’s a way of life explored by the dice man in the novel of the same name. The dice man sets out to make all his important decisions by throwing a die. Whatever the result, good or bad, moral or immoral, he did it. But fatalists walk with the same crutches as those who attribute causes and consequences to Divine influence. The crutches of ‘nothing to do with me.’

The more realistic answer, in my view, is the opposite. Everything that happens is ‘to do with me’. We have been given free will and as a result are in charge and fully responsible for our actions. I believe this because I am able and willing to take responsibility for my actions and able to learn from my mistakes. In my view this is the only way (and the gift to humanity) to learn and eliminate the karma with which we are born.

In this way my thinking is different from those religions that preach of a hell awaiting sinners. I think we are already in hell because that is what the world is to many, even or especially today. Heaven is not a place for eternal retirement playing x to the power n rounds of golf. Heaven is here on earth in every moment of time, when we use our freewill to see it.

Free will is a wonderful gift when used wisely. In it’s most powerful manifestation it gives human beings the power of miracles. Jim cured himself of cancer and Joy refused to get on the plane that would later crash. These are not people being crushed by a vengeful God or an indifferent fate; they are the autonomous creations of God.

Everything is up for negotiation in life, even when and how we are going to die. That is how the Zen Masters of the past have predicted the exact time and day of their death and written to their pupils informing them.

Time to get a grip.

When a report hits the television screens of a computer driven car being involved in a collision on a public road, suspicions are levelled at the computer driven car.

Little consideration is given to the possibility that some idiot drove into it.

There was an advertisement for a German make of car where the other road users are stereo typed as clowns. The driver of the car being promoted had to avoid the foolishness of bizarre drivers of other cars, dressed as clowns. Both were of course up to the job.

Nothing opens the lid on the workings of the human brain as well as studying driving habits, prejudices, self opinion, assumed level of skill, courtesy, un-controlled emotion…well probably the whole spectrum of human mental and emotional behaviour.

Like actors in an ancient Greek tragedy who’s personality is refracted by a mask, drivers on modern roads change who they are. An alternative ego takes over prepared to face risk of being one of the ten people who die on the roads of the United Kingdom each day. Ready to take part in, not play, but real tragedies.

Few would say, when asked, that they are bad drivers. In fact there is almost an inverse square law where the worse the driver, the better they think they are. For instance, the young 18 year old showing off to his or her mates squeezed into the back seats, and the front suicide seat, will demonstrate the rally driving skills acquired in their imaginations. Clearly rally driving is not part of the driving test. This divergence between imagination and reality accounts for a large number of tragic deaths.

At the other end of the scale are the elderly. As old age takes away their reflexes and eyesight, their imaginations and determination to remain ‘independent’ reinforces a fantasy that they are very experienced and therefore safe drivers.

And everyone between these age extremes, has some wolf clothing or other that they put over their woolly fleeces when driving. I can say this with some certainty, because I watch drivers on public roads. At any given moment, I would say that between 8 and 9 out of ten drivers are exceeding the speed limit.

I drive at the maximum legal speed limit when safe to do so, which makes me a ‘slow driver.’ I know this because most drivers are desperate to overtake me. This is especially on motorways where there is a dedicated lane for driving stupidly fast which many drivers never leave.

I read on the internet a driver criticising what he termed, ‘slow drivers’ and this started me thinking. What is a ‘slow driver?

Am I one of those drivers that infuriate him because I do not cross the maximum legal speed limit?

The rule of thumb used to be ‘keep up with the traffic’, but with speed cameras on duty, why go with the sheep to the slaughter? If you wish to obey traffic laws, you will be an unpopular driver.

I expect there is a particular type of slow driver who the motorway police sometimes encounter. It’s characteristically the elderly lady in a small car wearing ash tray glasses and limited by a fear of moving from second into third gear, especially on motorways where the traffic is ‘going much to fast’ in her view.

I don’t think I have ever encountered such a person in my driving years. But I will encounter a fast driver exceeding the speed limit, taking unnecessary and futile risks to his and other’s lives, for the sake of arriving somewhere a few minutes quicker.

I have to share what I now know about arriving at one’s destination early or on time. I have practised it for years and am rarely late. I even have time to park, check my emails, collect my stuff together and remove valuables from my car. Do you want to know how I beat all the ‘fast drivers’. I leave five minutes early and arrive five minutes early.

And I am fairly convinced now that driving fast has little effect on one’s arrival time. To any observer of traffic, it can be seen to travel, only as fast as the slowest vehicle. True, you can overtake, but that is a skill not all drivers have, preferring to tail-gate and in this way causing one in eight collisions in the UK. And even if Mr. Toad can find a length of empty road to put his webbed foot on the gas pedal, he is most likely to reach the next traffic jam or red lights, stop and be caught up by the ‘slow drivers’ he thought he had left behind. Traffic in computer simulations resembles a caterpillar in it’s bizarre determination to rush and then wait. Having noted this, traffic controllers reduce the speed of traffic on motorways, such as the M25, to keep volume of moving traffic at it’s maximum.

If we pursue an abstract idea and imagine an empty motorway ( say on the dark side of the moon because I have never seen one ) – even on this motorway where there are no other drivers and no speed limits, driving fast will arithmetically gain very little time. Do the maths if you don’t believe me!

A philosophical way to view travel is as speed, distance and time. All are relative to each other. So for instance if you want to arrive earlier, fresher and more cheaply; don’t go so far. Yes, I mean it! Forget the two hour commute to work each morning and evening and move house! Or consider time as a piece of elastic rather than a series of regular ticks and tocks. Stretch yourself out a little and enjoy driving, being where you are; taking pleasure in the views, watching the people and places or at least allowing your passengers this pleasure since as a driver you are only concentrating on staying alive.

I think we need to begin to change our expectations around getting places quickly by private transport, because hyper-loops and fast trains will make long journeys by car obsolete. We will use hybrid fuel cell / electric Poodle cars which drive themselves and are unable to go over the maximum safe speed limit, even down hill with a tail wind. Driving stupidly close to the car in front to make it’s driver break the law, will not be an option. You won’t even involved in a collision again because if there are only Poodle cars there is are no human X-factors. People who might have died, will not.

Come in Mr. Toad…you time is up!

When I was at school my parents wanted me to study science subjects. My artistic passions were reserved for ‘a hobby’.

I wasn’t very good at Maths but I liked Physics and I emerged with a clutch of mixed art, humanities and science A-levels. Clearly I had usurped my parents dreams of making a pure scientist.

Architecture beckoned as a mix of art and science, and so was to be my career for twenty years.

But I wasn’t to gain an understanding of buildings until I worked an Australian Chinese architect. He explained to me that ‘all buildings should tell a story.’

This planted a seed on fertile soil for Professor Bob Maxwell had helped me explore how buildings carry meaning in signs and symbols.

To explain my point more abstractly, there are two components of any art, whether it is music, literature, painting, architecture etc. These are content and technique. It’s as simple as that. Any creative person must have both a message and the means to express it. The message can therefore be awarded fifty points and the skill of the technique another fifty points. In this way, a ‘perfect’ created entity will score one hundred.

That’s the theory and here’s how it is applied.

Let us consider the Mona Lisa by Leonardo de Vinci. We know that Leonardo concealed many stories in his paintings, so the landscape in the background, the choice of sitter, the smile, the geometry – all tell a tale that has engaged critics for centuries.

Then there is the technique, of which Leonardo was a master. No brush stroke out of place which is perhaps why he carried the painting with him where ever he went.

Now let us apply this same critical method to a poorly written and badly executed popular song; what is generically known as ‘Pop music’.

The lyrics may be without any meaning at all or perhaps allude to a well worn subject.

They may be shouted or mumbled so poorly that no listener can determine what they are. Score 5 for content and 2 for technique.

A popular song must also be measured for it’s musical content. This one has just the two chords and follows the well worn verse / chorus format. It contains repetition of phrases that becomes monotonous, and the tune is easy to anticipate. Score 5 for content and 3 for technique. This song therefore scores in total 10 for content and 5 for technique. It’s a flop because the public are not fooled.

When the Beatles came along with their Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club record, it was a revolution. Mainly an about turn from the type of song in the example above. Suddenly there were stories being told with. Original stories with subjects that were well known but not normally the subject of songs. And the production was just as novel, George Martin experimenting with all the effects at his disposal in the recording studio, unlimited by imagination.

Score for Sgt. Pepper; content 45, technique 45 making this a smash hit with 90 out of a 100.

This method or criticism and creativity can be applied to any area of creativity. It is an invaluable tool for critics and artists. Artists who produce a single colour on a canvas with not even a name for the piece, can be score 0, 0 without reservation. Art critics do not need to give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to appreciation. They can quickly see that a work is without content and technique and dismiss it as offering little to the human story.

A shark in a tank? 1 for content (what does it mean?) and 10 for technique ( nature has done most of the work here ).

It should be obvious that this process, which is engaged either consciously or not, is a unification of head with the heart. The heart contains the message and the head delivers it.

We live in an age where the messages are confused and blurred but the head is certain of how clever it is. For this reason people can no longer reason whether God exists or how to write a poem.

We have become a world of science, looking vainly for reason. The only escape from ‘this mess’ (Laurel and Hardy) is to teach our young people the importance of being adept at both heart (art) and science (head).

Actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually actually as I say; actually

The recent election of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court of Justice in the United States of America, split the Senate between Republicans and Democrats, more or less equally. This gives a snap shot of American politics as quivering in the balance, much as currently is the dis-United Kingdom.

And yet, the whole point of the Supreme Court is to be independent of political views. It should act as a check, to any excesses of the Senate, Representatives and the Executive Orders of the President. President Trump refers to this in the edition of The White House 10^th July 2018 as follows;

“what matters is not a judge’s political views, but whether they can set aside those views to do what the law and the Constitution require.”[

How outrageously ironic then, that the voting procedure for the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh was almost exactly along party lines. Only two Senators voted opposite to their parties views which cancelled each other, being one Democrat and one Republican.

You might feel a little compassion for the candidate to have a serious historical criminal allegation made against him when approaching the peak of his career. Allegations of rape are hard to prove when recent and almost impossible so long ago. One Democratic Senator expressed a view that the presumption of innocence is too important a legal principle to override and so could not vote against his nomination. The FBI also closed their investigation conveniently prior to the vote.

With such a clear road ahead I had to wonder why President Trump made an odd remark when addressing a rally of his supporters. He said that the accuser who made the allegation (an old college friend) must have mistaken Brett Kavanaugh for someone else. His supporters whooped for joy at this statement despite it’s absurdity and being completely unnecessary. As far as I am aware this was not the conclusion of the FBI although I have not read their report. Perhaps Mr Kavanaugh has a twin brother? How absurd did Mr Trump need to be at this barbecue of the most crimson of all red herrings?

Remember that some critics of Mr Trump were against the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh because his power could get Mr T. out of deep water, in the unlikely event that an unexpected tidal surge swamped the White House and it’s barbecue terrace.

How odd that Mr Trump did not challenge the 2,4oo American law professors who objected to Mr Kavanaugh on the grounds of an ‘intemperate, inflammatory and partial manner’, in his congressional testimony. Characteristics that a cynic might say are admired by President Trump; in private if not in public. Characteristics that Mr Trump stated he did not admire in the opening quotation above! Who do you believe? Are the Law Professors being subjective and President objective?

As an observer from far away, I am reminded of another famous leader who was also a master of deception. He too looked down on the populace as easily lead through appealing to their emotions rather than  evaluating corroborated facts. I quote from his book;

It would never come into their (the people’s) heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol 1, ch.X

The scene is the office of the Prime Minister, before the re-election of the Conservative Party without the Liberals. Mr. Cameroon looks up from a newspaper he is reading as Sir Comfrey walks in.

What is it Comfrey? Come on out with it man! You are standing there like a cat having trouble swallowing a canary.

It’s the proof copy of the “Conservative Party Manifesto” Mr. Cameroon – and may I say what a particularly smart tie you are wearing.

OK, enough of the platitudes. It usually means you are hiding something…let me see.

(Cameroon grabs the manifesto while Sir Comfrey peers out of house of commons window)

You’ve missed the ‘leave Europe or not’ referendum promise out Comfrey! Blantantly missing! For Goodness sake why?

(discrete cough) MI5

MI5?

Yes, you see there has, unfortunately, been a memory stick found in a London taxi cab and handed into the police which contains…amongst daily menus for the Commons restaurant, roast potatoes, brussel sprouts that so of thing…a conversation between…

Who?

You and me.

You and me? You mean this room is bugged?

Yes, by MI5 – just in case it is also bugged by the Russians. I see by you blank expression that further explanation…

Too right it is!

Is necessary. (coughs into hand) That all ministerial conversations are now recorded, so that when the Russians should listen in, we can not only deny everything, but also prove what we said.

I see. Clever.

And there is one conversation on that stick in particular that you may remember;- where you are saying that you wish to have a referendum on whether the UK should leave the European Union. You give reasons for this ‘charade’, in your words, as wanting – quote ‘lots and lots of votes from that idiot UKIP party to help the conservatives win the forthcoming election‘ and ‘squeezing my Euro sceptics back into the sceptic tank they came from.’

That sounds more of less the gist of what I said. So what’s wrong with that? We are not likely to loose a referendum are we? I mean the voting public are not as stupid as the dissenters in my own party…are they?

Yes Prime Minister, they probably are since, they did, if you remember, vote for them.

You are going to make a suggestion Comfrey. I have known you long enough. Come on…

Well, it’s mainly about the Irish question.

The Irish question? I haven’t heard those words for a very long time. I thought Northern Ireland was quiet now. I mean, since the Bank Holiday Agreement.

Good Friday Agreement Prime Minister.

Yes, yes that one.

Well it seems that certain long serving members of the department…

You mean yourself.

…long standing and loyal members of the civil service, yes, believe that the Irish question needs to be addressed before any referendum takes place.

Good Lord, Why?

It’s the rather delicate matter of the border between the Republic and Northern Ireland. Smugglers being caught in the spot lights from watch towers positioned every hundred yards along the whole length of the border. And simple citizens crossing to visit family or go shopping. Lost children – pets. They just won’t have a barbed wire border again. Just won’t.

So we need to solve the Northern Ireland thing once and for all?

Precisely.

I see. You are suggesting we Brexit from Northern Ireland instead of Europe? Won’t that be expensive?

The British Treasury Department pays the Treasury of Northern Ireland assembly fourteen billion pounds a year. That is roughly £270 million a week.

Good heavens. Really?

Health, prisons, police, schools, roads…the usually money pits.

Yes. I see. And if we ceded Northern Ireland to the Irish, made a sort of United Irish Republic, we could stop wasting all that money. Clever Comfrey, very, very clever but surely the hard liner loyalists will never tolerate it?

Unless there is an independence referendum in Northern Ireland Prime Minister. It could be accompanied a publicity campaign along the lines of ‘become part of a strong vibrant economy within the prosperous European Union’ – meaning Eire, not us. As you know we don’t attract European money because we are rich whereas the Irish Republic is not. A lot loyalists in Northern Ireland would be happy to be a minority in a United Ireland now; now it very likely to vote in favour of abortions on demand and a host of other, shall we say, un-Catholic, liberal values. Plus they will get the pot holes outside their houses mended. A matter particularly close to their hearts.

I think Comfrey, you are onto a very strong pitch here. I can see us being able to place all the ‘British’ interventions in Ireland in the history box and embracing moving forward into a new prosperity for…Britain rather than that awful mouthful, ‘The United Kingdom of Britain and Northern Ireland.’

Precisely.

And Stormont, currently in recession due to irreconcilable differences and inability to form a government…is a headache we want to get rid of…

…we can push it all south so to speak.

…prior to any referendum for Britain to leave Europe.

Which British people would never vote for since they are saving 270 million a week  -which we can promise to the NHS and Cat and Dog charities.

I say, do you think the Russians are listening?

I sincerely hope they have written down every word. Homeless cats and dogs in Russia are having a very bad time.

Jolly good. Let’s do it then. No referendum until the Irish Issue Stew, is in the pot. The Euro sceptics in the conservative party will have to shut up for good and I get to be Prime Minister for a good few more terms. Long summer holidays, beach houses…

What an enormous privilege that would be for me Prime Minister.

Comfrey, ring downstairs for some tea and fresh currant buns. I’m feeling an unexpected wave of patriotism all of a sudden.