Commentators

Showers (AM and PM) 6° London Hi 10°C / Lo 6°C

Johann Hari: We've forgotten the force which really drives political change

When you are just one person sitting on a warming planet – when you see economies collapsing, wars raging, and reasons for fear on every corner – how should you react? What can you do? The current cluster of crises has stirred mood-responses that you can hear in every bar and coffee shop. It's worth looking at them, because beyond their siren messages, there is a road to real change that is being neglected.

The first mood is to feel powerless, and to turn this into a defiant pessimism. You know the script. I can't make any difference. It's all going to happen, whatever I do. The political conversation is remote and boring and has nothing to do with me anyway. I'm going to buy an extra-big lock for my door, hug my kids a little tighter, and sit out the storm.

We all have these moods from time to time, but they have now turned into the default mode of citizens in the supposedly advanced democracies. The second mood seems to be the opposite, but is actually its flipside. It says: what we need is a heroic leader who will save us. Enter Barack Obama. He's clever and articulate and has a conscience. He's the photographic negative of George W Bush. He will sort things out. Leave it to him; breathe out at last, and wait for every country to find such a man.

Both these moods leave you – the ordinary citizen – inert. All you can do is focus on your own personal life and wait, for disaster or salvation. But these twin dispositions leave out the real option that is waiting for you. It is the only one that has ever delivered political change in the past, and it is the only one that will pull us out of the ditch now. It is where ordinary individual citizens – you – come together and raise their voices and offer solutions of their own.

To get there, you have to deal first with the people who say that politics is irrelevant and boring and they don't care. I always offer them one fact. According to the best scientific evidence, if we have five degrees of global warming – which is now a significant possibility in my lifetime, unless we change our behaviour fast – there will be global crop failure. Food will not grow.

Are you bored by this prospect? Is that dull? You won't be bored when you are hungry. Martha Gellhorn, the great war correspondent, said: "People will often say, with pride: 'I'm not interested in politics.' They might as well say, 'I'm not interested in my standard of living, my health, my job, my rights, my freedoms, my future or any future.'" Be serious. It might seem remote; it might seem difficult; it might be a world away from the arcane mumblings of Brown and Cameron; but unless you are a psychopath, you care.

Far from being some dreamy call to kumbaya, collective political action is the single biggest reason your life is incalculably better than that of your great-grandparents. When people first called for equality for women, when people first started to conduct scientific experiments, when people first suggested paid weekends and holidays for ordinary workers, they were greeted by the same glib pessimism we hear today. It'll never happen! What can we do? But ordinary people who believed they were necessary gathered together. They spoke and argued and marched and lobbied in their defence – and they won.

These achievements were never handed down by people at the top. Who was the leader of feminism? Who was the leader of scientific progress? Who was the leader of workers' rights? Sure, there were inspirational individuals along the way. But they happened as a result of millions of ordinary people demanding it, and never giving up. If we had waited for leaders to spontaneously see the light, we would be waiting still. That's why the unquestioning faith in Barack Obama of the past year – now slowly dispersing – has been as disempowering as despair. Both ask nothing of you. In reality, Obama will only be a good President if ordinary people pressure him to be one – if they shove him away from his errors (like aerial bombardment of Pakistan) and push him to pursue his good goals more vigorously (like building universal healthcare at home).

Trusting him to do the right thing is a basic misunderstanding of how progress happens in a democracy. You choose the best leader available within the power structure – which Obama undoubtedly was – and then you pressure him like hell. Great democratic leaders permit the public mood to prevail over the entrenched vested interests blocking their will. It's an art, but it's not the most important art: that lies with you, and me, and all ordinary citizens.

That's why I get angry when I see movies or plays venerating leaders as quasi-messiahs. In the otherwise-excellent new play at London's Trafalgar Studios, The Mountain-Top, Martin Luther King is given a premonition of Barack Obama as The One that will come after him. In the movie Bobby, about the assassination of Robert Kennedy, one character asks in tears: "Jack's dead. Bobby's dead. King's dead. Who's left?" The response is – all of you. Bobby Kennedy's mind was changed on Vietnam by the vast public protests by ordinary people; Martin Luther King had power because he was part of a huge movement of concerned citizens. Neither were lone heroes: there is no such thing in political life.

If you don't turn on to politics, politics will turn on you. In any society, the people who already have power will try to get the state to work in their interests. Every day, the oil companies and the billionaires are lobbying for their interests – and they speak far louder than their numbers, because they have so much hard cash. If you sit back, shrug and say you can't do anything, their interests will prevail over yours.

That's how we got into the credit crunch that endangers your job, and the climate crunch that endangers your ecosystem. Banks spent billions on lobbyists and PR-mongers to make our governments scrap the rules restraining them, so they could then pile up mountains of risky profit. In the end, it caused the financial house to fall down on us all. Similarly, big oil and big coal spend a fortune to stop governments making the urgent transition to clean energy that we need. It will cause the ecological roof to fall in. In both cases, a small concentrated private interest prevailed over the public interest – and you were screwed.

Politicians respond to the pressures put on them. The banks and oil companies and billionaires never stop putting on their pressure, waving their cheques, and making their threats. We need to make sure our collective voices talk louder. The only way to do that is to give your time and energy and dedication to demand genuine democracy.

This isn't something remote. It's very simple and very practical. Choose one or two groups, and donate a few hours of your time a week. There are a thousand brilliant campaigning organisations – I'd recommend Plane Stupid, Greenpeace, End Child Poverty, the Tax Justice Network and the National Secular Society, just for starters. They all have work for you to do, now. If there isn't a group for the cause you most believe in, start your own.

Political change rarely happens in a satisfying orgasmic flash, but if enough of us demand it, it comes in the end. Democracy – real, campaigning democracy, not the dessicated Westminster variety – works like those Push Ha'Penny machines you find in old arcades. You remember: thousands of two pence coins lie on a moving shelf, and you have to drop in coins of your own in the hope it will cause the pennies to tumble down for you to collect. Sometimes it feels like you are wasting your coins and the piles aren't moving even a millimetre – but then a ker-ching landslide happens, often when you least expect it.

You are not powerless. You are surrounded by millions of people who share your frustrations and share your instinct for justice and rationality. It is your job as a citizen to connect with them. Together, you are powerful. If you remain alone and apart and soaked in cynicism, you can be sure the Rupert Murdochs and Wall-Marts and British Petroleums will be fighting for their interests – against yours, and humanity's.

j.hari@independent.co.uk

More from Johann Hari

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Hunmanity: a farfetched civilisation
[info]mackname wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:14 am (UTC)

World could be a frustrating place to live in, particularly for those who consider themselves free.
We dream, think, make plans and hoping one day to make a difference but for some of us, it could hardly ever be materialised.

Interestingly we consciously observe those with less imaginations, talents, enthusiasm, hard-work and sense of responsibility who are grabbing sensitive positions, all over the world and, demanding us to follow their 'leads'.

Despite all thse facts, why don't we try to take the control of situation?

We might have certain reasons to believe that these 'leading figures' should stay in charge, not because we trust them, but because we are living in a world of terror and tyranny where only wild dogs can protect us against wolfs.

Anyway, every dog has also its day!
driver of political change
[info]samjdeubert wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 06:41 am (UTC)
Thank you for writing this article. I shall forward to it on, hoping that it sinks in to others. There is only one other factor to make political change - it usually comes from the comfortable people. When the situation affects them they will stand up. When things affect them personally: The French revolution was driven by its middle class. Some were market traders - albeit selling real goods. Again thanks for making my day.
WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]georgesign wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 07:48 am (UTC)
Read Samuel Smiles Self-Help 1859. Read Ayn Rand. Britain became "Great" by the hard work of individuals who took risks and created huge industries enabling people to raise their standard of living. Governments and politicians only know how to spend other people's money on wasteful schemes. All politicians are corrupt and only want to be in power. Ignore them. Create your own wealth and if you want help the less fortunate in society. Don't believe that by "demanding" something from politicians will ever bring lasting change for the better. Learn to stand on your own two feet and stop whining that not enough is being done for you by someone else.

Britain's decline was caused by politicians and the welfare state.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 01:10 pm (UTC)
What a fool! Why should anyone read Ayn Rand? The best that one can say for her is that she was a hopelessly misguided apologist for laissez-faire capitalism. Even after all the capitalist excesses of the last few years, it is sad that there are still idiots who proclaim capitalism as the panacea, if only it were universally applied.

Britain became great due to a variety of factors, which yes include the efforts of individual enterpreneurs, but you avoid noting that most of these entrepreneurs did their best to avoid raising the standard of living of their workforce. You also neglected to mention the vast sums extorted from Africa and Asia as a result of the Slave Trade, the sale of opium and the highly exploitative trade of commodities such as palm oil, rubber, coffee, cocoa, cotton etc etc...

I expect you will find some way to dismiss the above factors. Still, georgesign, at least try to open your eyes! The giant capitalist industries have always been buttressed by generous state subsidies. There has never been a free market and there never will be. Adam Smith himself recognised the inherent danger of vested interests who always subvert the market to maintain their position.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]colinru wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:08 pm (UTC)
Not the Slave Trade again. Put another record on. We stopped the bulk of it centuries ago and it has a vanishingly small affect on present day wealth creation etc.

I suppose that it could be a coincidence that, on average, Human Health, Lifespan, Happiness etc. have all increased in times when individuals could work for themselves rather than a Feudal or other Power, but I doubt it.

Subsidies, in the sense that I suspect you mean, are a recent phenomenon. In most Capitalist Countries for most of the time there was no Power to grant subsidies, monopolies etc.

I agree that when Companies approach Monopolistic Power, they need to be constrained as does any other Power Centre in a Society.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 07:17 pm (UTC)
Lol. Put another record on? Surely that applies more to the cheerleaders of laissez faire capitalism; they have been preaching a lot longer than economists have been commenting on the effects of the Slave Trade on African underdevelopment, centuries longer in fact.

If you'd care to read georgesign's comment that i replied to, you would have seen that he referred to the history of how Britain became Great, which I'm sure you will agree took place over several centuries. British becoming great coincided with the height of the Atlantic Slave Trade, which enabled the British cotton industry to expand exponentially, and after abolition, it coincided with the colonial era. You can choose to view this simply as a correlation. However, economic evidence of cause and effect exists, if you have an open enough mind to want to read it.

I suspect, however, that for you and georgesign, no evidence will suffice, just as no evidence is ever enough for holocaust deniers.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]colinru wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 10:11 pm (UTC)
You started by arguing that the Slave Trade made us wealthy, I disputed that it has any affect on modern-day wealth creation in Capitalist Countries and you now change it round to removing wealth from Africa. Which one are we debating?

The Slave Trade has been going on in Africa for a millenium or more - long before any Europeans reached the East or West Coasts. I would argue that the apogee of Empire was after and because of the Industrial Revolution which was after and unconnected to Slavery in any way. The maximum expansion of the Cotton Industry was in the mid- 19th Century because of Steam Power allowing automated spinning etc. to increase exponentially. I would agree that this was an impetus to Colonialism both to secure supplies and to ensure a captive market.

I do not understand what "holocaust denial", whatever you mean by that, has to do with this debate - is this meant to be some sort of smear re me or georgesign (or both)?
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]shegelu wrote:
Friday, 31 July 2009 at 12:19 am (UTC)
Read my words! They are consistent.

If you can deny that the Atlantic Slave Trade removed wealth from Africa and increased the wealth of Europe and America, then you can deny anything. Ask yourself where cotton was farmed, by whom and for whose profit? Ditto, sugar.

No, don't bother! The dots are too far apart for your eyes.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]colinru wrote:
Friday, 31 July 2009 at 04:33 pm (UTC)
I am not denying that the Slave Trade would have increased the Wealth of Britain in the 17th and 18th C but the Cotton Industry expanded dramatically after the mid 19th C because of Industrialisation via Steam Power, replacing Water Power, and Canals. There were no British Slave Plantations by then and America, a big supplier of raw material did not, from 1865 at the latest, have Slaves. So the big leap in British Wealth was not because of Slavery.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]georgesign wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 05:23 pm (UTC)
Name calling is always the thing that others resort to when they have little intelligence. I suppose you think wealth and your standard of living grows on a tree. Study the life of Josiah Wedgwood and you will see that he provided 20000 people with a standard of living they never had before. Grow up and learn in life that you can't stand around waiting for someone to give you a hand-out. Where do you think all of your welfare state and unemployment benefit comes from? ..... Hard working tax payers. Many industrialists built towns, schools and hospitals for their workers but of course you wouldn't know this because you obviously go through life blaming everyone else, rich or poor, for your situation. You also obviously know nothing about the slave trade but I can't be bothered to explain it to you.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]georgesign wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 05:27 pm (UTC)
Shegelu look under coliru for my reply as this is meant for you. colinru seems to show intelligence.
Re: WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH
[info]shegelu wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 07:46 pm (UTC)
Interesting. So, for you, the only sign of intelligence is when people agree with you? I actually think that you and coliru are probably very intelligent. However, you both seem determined to ignore a mass of evidence contradicting your beliefs. As such, the term "fool" is quite appropriate, denoting "One who is deficient in judgment, sense, or understanding".

My my, you do jump to conclusions about "my situation". I'm doing fine thank you, a hardworking tax payer, who doesn't wait for anyone to give me a handout. By dismissing my point without consideration, it is you that displays your ignorance of the slave trade. You also chose to ignore my observation about how exploitative commodities trade helped to make Britain great. Your point about the great Victorian philanthropists is well made, but they were exceptional individuals who chose to buck the norm of rapacious exploitation rather than typical industrialists. Still, this point is debatable and offhand I can't think of anyone that has economically quantified the benefits of philanthropism versus the depredations of capitalism.

I could be wrong about you of course. If you are a laissez-faire capitalism cheerleader and also very wealthy, then I would say that, rather than being a fool, you are simply being extremely disingenuous, which of course laissez-faire capitalists have made their stock in trade.
Political change
[info]sissyrosa wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 08:08 am (UTC)
Good again Johann Hari!

Thank you for these timely words.
Johann Hari: We've forgotten the force which really drives political change
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 08:48 am (UTC)
British Petroleums will be fighting for their interests ? against yours, and humanity's.
Where do you fill your car if at all. If you go to Texaco, you are not a patriot. I read they plant for every gallon they sell one tree. I have to find this yet. I do not want to go that far but the profits keep piling on and I like their advertisements.
I thank you
Firozali A.Mulla
Re: Johann Hari: We've forgotten the force which really drives political change
[info]maxmillerfan wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 11:28 am (UTC)
Uhhh... Hari has writeen many times that he doesn't drive.
Re: Johann Hari: We've forgotten the force which really drives political change
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 11:43 am (UTC)
That explains why I keep on seeing Hari on the cabbage gas cart pulled by the ass Bishop has the bike, Tony has the blaze and we have the trees You are so in4mative I thank you firozali a mulla
Re: Johann Hari: We've forgotten the force which really drives political change
[info]idlepenpusher wrote:
Sunday, 2 August 2009 at 03:21 pm (UTC)
I wonder what powers his public transport...
Please add another group to the list...
[info]tallise wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 08:51 am (UTC)
... the Optimum Population Trust.
A comparitively small percentage drop in the number of births will reduce enormously the pressure on the resources on this planet.
Totalitarianism has finally broken the people...
[info]collin_brown wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 08:53 am (UTC)
Spot on!
[info]gp_norwich wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 08:54 am (UTC)
Well done Hari, one of your finest! I'm sure there are thousands out there now feeling more inspired.
The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]rhysjaggar wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 09:33 am (UTC)
It is time for you to stop lying about this Mr Hari.

The planet 'warmed' from 1976 to 1998, cooled from 1945 to 1975 and has been cooling in the 21st century.

You can write as many poxy articles as you like, but those FACTS do not change.

So if you want to do something about 'global warming', wait until it starts warming again.
Re: The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]maxmillerfan wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 11:29 am (UTC)
Yes, you random commenter, clearly know better than 100 percent of the world's climatologists published in peer reviewed journals. Clearly we should all listen to you instead.
Re: The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]richardb1 wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 12:28 pm (UTC)
I'm afraid he's right. If you don't believe him, maybe you'll believe Richard Lindzen, the Alfred P Sloan professor of climatology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who says that there has been no global warming since 1997 and no statistically significant global warming since 1995.

Alternatively, go to the web site for the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research (part of the Met Office) and download the HadCET spreadsheet of the Central England temperature record. An hour's work in Excel will show you that there has also been no increase in temperatures in England since 1997 either.

Don't take this on trust - go and do it yourself.
Re: The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]colinru wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:01 pm (UTC)
You are incorrect. Many Scientists, including ones with climate related expertise, disagree in whole or part with AGW.
Re: The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]maxmillerfan wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:31 pm (UTC)
Rubbish.
Re: The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]colinru wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:55 pm (UTC)
Look at http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadcrut3/diagnostics/global/nh+sh/annual which shows the 1997 to 2008 Global Temperatures. They are flat or slightly declining.

This may be a short term blip but some Scientists think that it is the beginning of a reversal that will last for decades or more.
Re: The planet is NOT warming Mr Hari
[info]colinru wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 03:02 pm (UTC)
I assumed that your rubbish comment applied to the Global Temps dropping slightly but I now wonder if you were disputing my claim that many Scientists disagree with AGW in whole or part.

If so, look at http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.SenateReport where 700+ and rising Scientists (many with Climate-related expertise) have petitioned the US Congress to deny AGW in whole or part. If needed, I can produce other references for Scientists who disagree with AGW and/or The IPCC Models.
Hmmm
[info]dinsylwy wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 09:36 am (UTC)
Power was seized by the Russian people in October 1917, Subsequently, some Russian people emerged as more equal than others. Of course you can bring about political change through mass action. But once the dust has settled, the alpha members of the species will come the fore, and the whole cycle of "power corrupts" begins once more, whatever their political hue. George Orwell got it right when he said that people ar at their most liberated when working towards change. Once change has been affected, the old order will resume.
Re: Hmmm
[info]maxmillerfan wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 11:29 am (UTC)
Yes, clearly, by arguing for democratic mass movements, Hari was advocating a Bolshevik tyranny. You've got him there.
Re: Hmmm
[info]dinsylwy wrote:
Thursday, 30 July 2009 at 01:51 pm (UTC)
You misconstrue, deliberately, perhaps, considering the torch you carry for Johann Hari. What I said was that democratic mass movements can be, and have been, hijacked by the less-democratic. I neither said, nor implied, that JH was "advocating a Bolshevik tyranny"; and it certainly wasn't my intent to "get" him.
Re: Hmmm
[info]belfastboy wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 08:48 pm (UTC)
Power was not seized by the Russian people, but by a small, tightly-knit and conspiratorial group of extremists, who capltalised on the breakdown of society in the aftermath of the February revolution and military defeat. Learn some history! Lenin and his fellow fanatics did not represent the Russian people, although he brazenly claimed to be acting in the name of the "masses".
Re: Hmmm
[info]dinsylwy wrote:
Thursday, 30 July 2009 at 01:56 pm (UTC)
What you've spelt out, in greater - and more accurate - historical detail is exactly what I meant. Popular revolution of Feb 1917 paved way for Bolshevik Revolution of October, carried out in the name of the people.
Thank you for encouraging me to learn *some* history; better, I think, to learn *from* it.
Thanks
[info]shoe_size_43 wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 10:57 am (UTC)
Johann Hari

You have a sharp mind and your heart is in the right place.
Hypocrisy
[info]muckle10 wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 11:44 am (UTC)
You supported Tony Blair on the Iraq war Mr. Hari. By doing so you made a mockery of the democratic process in the UK you now claim needs rescuing. That is rank hypocrisy on your part.
Re: Hypocrisy
[info]maxmillerfan wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:32 pm (UTC)
Hari said he was "terribly wrong" about that SIX YEARS AGO. And has said so ever since. And been praised for his "great contribution to the anti-war movement" by Andrew Murray, shair of Stop the War, for the work he has done.
Re: Hypocrisy
[info]muckle10 wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 02:51 pm (UTC)
Mr Hari never recanted the reasons for going to war he just blamed the Bush administration for mishandling the invasion and occupation which eventually cost 1 million Irqai lives.

If President Obama said tomorrow that he had information at hand that Iran posed a direct threat to US national security, and had to be dealt with by immediate military intervention to reduce that risk, would Mr Hari support such action?
Re: Hypocrisy
[info]maxmillerfan wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 11:58 pm (UTC)
That is flatly untrue. Go and read his articles about why he was wrong. You are either lying or misinformed. And Hari has already +explicitly+ said that bombign Iran would be "a disaster". You just aren't reading his stuff.
Re: Hypocrisy
[info]muckle10 wrote:
Thursday, 30 July 2009 at 12:50 pm (UTC)
Mr Hari has never recanted on regime change and pre-emption.
To get there, you have to deal first with the people who say that politics is irrelevant and boring
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 12:01 pm (UTC)
Thanks shoe_size_43 wrote: Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 01:57 pm (local) Many have UTC What is that?
Johann Hari You have a Sharp mind and your heart is in the right place.
I am so happy I feel proud, honest. At least one has that. Others I do not know, onions?.
You see when you abuse the polticians you are raising every thing in proper manner. The 3 years becomes life sentence and so forth. But you carry on, we are with you . When we see you see at the end of the rope we part.
But we love you . Keep on reporting we give you kokes. Jokes>>> I speak Hindi. That will be good for your eyes.
Aging Mildred was a 93 year-old woman who was particularly despondent over the recent death of her husband Earl. She decided that she would just kill herself and join him in death.
Thinking that it would be best to get it over with quickly, she took out Earl's old Army pistol and made the decision to shoot herself in the heart since it was so badly broken in the first place.
Not wanting to miss the vital organ and become a vegetable and burden to someone, she called her doctor to inquire as to just exactly where the heart would be.
"On a woman," the doctor said, "your heart would be just below your left breast."
Later that night, Mildred was admitted to the hospital with a gunshot wound to her knee.

An old man and woman hate each other, but remain married for years. During their shouting fights, the old man constantly warns his wife, "If I die first, I will dig my way up and out of the grave to come back and haunt you for the rest of your life!" One day, the man abruptly dies. After the burial, the wife goes straight to the local bar and begins to party. Her friends ask if she isn't worried about her husband digging himself out of the grave.
These are the few medical fictions; I see these in reality these days as we are very ignorant of what is right and what is wrong. Here is another piece. The top shot comes from USA as rep from Obama and tells us this, ?.Dr. Shu SORRY IT IS CHU, I think to tell us, PAINT the roofs white as the paint is good for the global warming? I like pink. It soothes my nerves my doctor say. They are painting all the hospitals, crazy houses with pink; they are also planting pink roses on the roads, as they have no fragrances. These keeps the hay fever away I am told. Please to save my typing read the last line I am not paid to give all these to you.
Now where DO WE ALL GO? THE TV 4" is full of violence and all the students are hooked to the nets watching XXX.
Darling: 'We need to get lending going' That is not you or me IT IS THE TREASURER
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla

Johann Hari THE Political Guns come to town with fire in mouth
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 12:10 pm (UTC)
Johann Hari
What is in the name? I thought that Johann was ( no offence please ) was a woman. But I see you as a man. Plastic surgery? My she dog is Rex? Is that bad?
Please do not comment on this It is between me and him(her).
Is Tony short of Anthony Golsanvez. Bill for William, Ted for Edward. They are all politicians. Why you not change your name Jane Hari Rama Hari Krishna I send you to India and you earn many pennnies.
Ilove your column It is so.... ED please do something. Transfer him to Sarah Paliniii El Pacho
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
Wonderful :-)
[info]mirabehn wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 12:36 pm (UTC)
This is a wonderful article, and a timely and inspiring reminder of a very important truth.

Thank you.
nice work
[info]frank598 wrote:
Wednesday, 29 July 2009 at 03:39 pm (UTC)
A fine piece.

Cyniicism, laziness and despair are the enemy of democracy. I see these mental attitudes everday here in Brazil, and it saddens me. People would rather moan, or escape to shoping malls than have fun- yes it can be fun (!)- campaining for what they want.

Keep up the good work Johann.
The people have too much power
[info]confusemungous wrote:
Saturday, 1 August 2009 at 01:11 am (UTC)
I disagree - collectively, it is the people that drive the direction of government policy, having an influence disproportionate to their understanding of the issues involved.

Let's take a look at the groups you mentioned. The first two - the environmenalist lobby has an enormous influence on policy (it has even been compared with organised religion, although I would not go that far) not to mention they aren't always exactly law-abiding. And the NSS - the secularist lobby has so much power in Britain today that Christians are pretty much oppressed (look no further than the string of items in the news where public sector workers are suspended for even talking baout their faith) - while we as a nation bend over backwards to other religions, Christianity is relentlessly attacked.

You also talk about sustainable energy and lack of financial regulation. The latter was actually requested by ordinary people who voted for Thatcher's Conservatives. The former is blocked not only by big oil but also by the general public - the NIMBY brigade are always protesting against the building of just about anything, but the main problem is that the public are simply not prepared to pay the set-up costs, as Eurobarometer surveys show. To suggest that the world's problems are due to some shadowy figure pulling the strings is at best scare-mongering that brings you down to the level of organised religion and at worst class discrimination - a cheap shot at the wealthy.

As for other issues, the government's need to keep the people on its side sometimes results in the inability to do the right thing. Why did we withdraw from Iraq? To curry favour with the anti-war majority and their misguided views.

The success of China as a nation has lead some people to openly question the effectiveness of democracy, and many more will follow. Perhaps the EU have adopted the right approach in leaving the ordinary person out of the decision-making process.

Once again, I repeat my main point: pressure groups have far too much power as it is and you are advocating exacerbating the problem.
One of your best
[info]respectedgraham wrote:
Thursday, 6 August 2009 at 06:57 am (UTC)
I totally agree with what has been said here, and it is true 'that a country gets the government it deserves. For too long the people of this nation have accepted all that is told to them, given to them and stolen from them without challenge. Bankers continue to receive bonuses, no politician has been prosecuted, personal freedoms are being stifled and soldiers are dying and being mutilated because of a parsimonious government, in a war which nobody wants. I am not a revolutionary but I do feel that it is about time that the people cry out-enough. Joanna Lumley showed us what can be done if we just get off our backsides for once and act. I too am fed up of hearing people moan about the government but end their rhetoric with the comments such as that 'I will still vote Labour because my father,and his father before, voted Labour', 'a wasted vote to vote for an independent' or 'I can't be bothered to walk to the polling station when 'Big Brother' is on the box'. For the sake of our children the people of this nation ought to display a little backbone and demand change.

Columnist Comments

johann_hari

Johann Hari on Alan Bennett

In his new play, he takes his dark analysis of pederasty further

steve_richards

Steve Richards: The real reasons why Blair went to war

To him, the domestic calculations pointed overwhelmingly in one direction

terence_blacker

Terence Blacker: Planting trees is a facile option

A sapling stuck into a pot is presented as a private little planet saver


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion