The balloon

source

Many years ago while bringing up our young family, a little lad and his sister used to come round to our house to play with our two kids. We never really knew who they were, they just appeared on the doorstep every now and then.

One day they both came round each holding a toy helium-filled balloon on a bit of string. In those days such balloons were more of a novelty than they are now. Anyway, as usual the little lad played various games with our son while his sister tried to be friendly with our daughter.

The two boys were outside when cries of consternation caused us to see what they were up to. Unfortunately the little lad had managed to let go of his balloon and up into the air it went. We were just in time to see it disappear into the heavens never to be seen again.

However the little lad didn’t go in for tears and lamentations. He simply nipped into the house, snatched his sister’s balloon, popped back outside and let his sister's balloon go too. An impeccably egalitarian move I thought.

BBC Brexit bias

To my mind the most remarkable revelation of the week was to be found in the Daily Mail. John Humphrys' take on the BBC attitude to the Brexit referendum.

But recalling the morning after the 2016 referendum, he says: ‘Leave had won – and this was not what the BBC had expected. Nor what it wanted.

‘No nods and smiles when the big bosses appeared. No attempt to pretend that this was anything other than a disaster.

‘Their expressions were as grim as the look on the face of a football supporter when his team’s star player misses the penalty that would have won them the cup. Bosses, almost to a man and woman, could simply not grasp how anyone could have put a cross in the Leave box on the referendum ballot paper.

‘I’m not sure the BBC as a whole ever quite had a real grasp of what was going on in Europe, or of what people in this country thought about it.’

Yes this is easily explained as well-known BBC bias, but surely there is another question which isn't so easily answered. Why would professional broadcasters fail to take some pride in understanding both sides of the Brexit debate? If Humphrys' view is sound then BBC staff up to and including senior levels failed to understand the basics of the debate - such as crucial questions of democracy and accountability.

Yet it isn't difficult to understand both sides of the debate. I voted Leave and I'm hoping that Leave means Leave but I understand why people voted Remain. From what I see, I think most Leave supporters understand why people might vote Remain. Similarly I would have expected professional broadcasters to have no great difficulty in putting their own views to one side in order to understand and maybe even predict the mood of the electorate. Apparently they weren't up to it.

It suggests the BBC is an astoundingly unprofessional outfit which in turn suggests there are two BBCs. One section delivers the technical side of BBC output plus the slick, professional presentation. That side of the BBC is pretty good.

The other section seems to be a narrow, somewhat amateurish and bureaucratic management structure which does not even understand its own audience. Dump this bit and maybe the BBC could revive itself - but only within a fully commercial environment.

Susan Crockford on polar bears

A good, concise summary of why we may ignore polar bear scare stories. 

Incidentally, why are polar bears so fascinating? Their ability to thrive in such severe conditions? I'm not sure but they are fascinating.

Between known and unknown

Where sheep pasture meets high moorland.

The photo was taken not far from the Barrel Inn during one of our favourite Eyam walks. It always reminds me of the way our view of the natural world has changed over the centuries. 

That sharp division of the land would have been even sharper for our ancestors - almost a border between known and unknown, between civilised and uncivilised . Most of them, especially town dwellers, would have seen the moorland as a wild, remote and dangerous place. Even with a touch of superstitious awe in some cases. An area to be avoided. 

Save your praise

It's a strange world where Greta Thunberg can speak to the US Senate climate task force when she is not a US citizen and has no expertise in climate science.

Greta Thunberg has told US politicians that they're not doing enough to combat climate change.

"I know you are trying, but just not hard enough. Sorry," said the climate activist, who's inspired young people across the world to protest against the impact of global warming.

She told the Senate climate task force in Washington DC to "save your praise".

"Don't invite us here to just tell us how inspiring we are without actually doing anything about it," she said.

The 16-year-old was one of several young activists from around the world invited to address the task force during two days of action and speeches.

Save your praise? Consider it saved. We know why such stunts are arranged of course, but is the obvious explanation sound? Lateral thinking might suggest that she is being manipulated to convey an impression that climate change is no longer an adult concern. 

Whatever Greta says about the global climate, her age, lack of experience, and general demeanor add nothing obvious to the supposed gravity of climate change. Almost as if that is the underlying intention. Not her intention, but the intention of people who wish to see the whole sorry business discredited.  

One step forward, two steps back

source

...they were the eyes of a madman, but of a madman who can yet calculate upon and arrange his position in the world. He was mad for his own purposes, and could, for these same purposes, bind his madness to its proper bounds.

"My brothers and sisters," he began, "I have come to-night to give you a warning, and this warning is given to you not as the expression of a personal opinion but as the declaration of an assumed fact. Disregard it or not as you please, but I shall have done my duty in pointing out to you the sure and certain meaning of my message."

"I, a sinner like the rest of you, live nevertheless in the fear of hell fire. Hell fire has become, I think, to many of the present generation a mockery and a derision. I come to tell you that it is no mockery, that it as surely lies there, a blazing furnace, in front of us as though we saw it with our own eyes ..."

Hugh Walpole – The Captives (1920)

What does Lib Dem mean?

Rhetorical question of course - but from the BBC

Lib Dems pledge to cancel Brexit if they win general election

The Liberal Democrats have pledged to cancel Brexit if they come to power at the next general election.

Members voted for the new policy at their party conference in Bournemouth by an overwhelming majority.

Previously, the party has backed another referendum or "People's Vote", saying they would campaign to Remain.

After the vote, their leader Jo Swinson, said: "We will do all we can to fight for our place in Europe, and to stop Brexit altogether."

Of course the Lib Dems know they won't win the next general election so as usual they are in a position to promise anything. A liberal democracy for example. Yet anyone with even the most rudimentary observation skills will know that the Liberal Democrats are not liberal and are not too hot on democracy. Maybe one shouldn’t complain because the Labour party isn’t interested in those who labour for a living.

Yet even in political life words ought to mean something.

liberal
adjective
respecting and allowing many different types of beliefs or behaviour

democrat

noun
a person who believes in democracy

Seems clear enough to me. I wonder why they have such difficulties with it?