Some thoughts on 2004

In no particular order, a few musings on 2004. . .

It began, as years so often do, on the 1st of January. Personally I favour moving New Year's Day to 1st March and just ignoring January and February (compositely known as Helluary) altogether, but this idea is yet to catch the public's imagination. All I'm suggesting is that we all hibernate for these two months and don't get out of bed again until March when daylight doesn't end at 1.47pm and there's a chance it might have stopped raining/snowing/hailing. It's just an idea. I think it could be popular.

Chavs continue to take over our fair isle and the word itself, relatively unknown a couple of years ago, has reached near ubiquity. They even have their own chav odyssey now. The girlfriend had a run in with one of our pleb cousins only yesterday in our nearby shopping centre. Having accidentally knocked into a young woman with a buggy, and subsequently apologising, she was verbally threatened by the male counterpart (and possibly the father of the buggy's passenger - who can tell?) who, after calling her a "stuck up bitch", then threatened to "fucking put her in her place" and "knock her down". Nice. All in the middle of a busy clothes shop. Did anyone intervene? No, of course not. This is London and nobody likes to get involved. The sheer number of young thugs dressed in garish sportswear, rutting like animals to fill this country with yet more of their illiterate scum children continues to shock and dismay. And yet, if we were to kill these people, WE would be the criminals.

Another shit show for England in a major football tournament: Euro 2004. The depressing inevitability of being knocked out on penalties AGAIN was almost too much to bear. Still, it made a superstar out of Wayne Rooney, undeniably a fantastic player. Unfortunately, he ruined everything by signing for The Great Satan in the summer. Arsenal, meanwhile, won the Championship in great style, and went the entire season unbeaten. This unbeaten stretch continued a fair way into the 2004/2005 season until calamity intervened. Still, looks like they're finally back on the road to recovery, although Chelsea are looking unbeatable at the moment.

I'd like to briefly talk about the two most controversial films of the year, although I should point out that I haven't actually seen either of them (note to self: must get to the cinema more often in 2005; note to Hollywood: must make more films worth watching): Fahrenheit 9/11 and The Passion Of The Christ. The former I am suspicious of because Michael Moore is becoming an embarrassment, and from what I have seen and read, his film gleefully distorts images of the war to suit his own (and lots of other people's) agenda. By all means go after the Bush family, but please keep to the facts otherwise we all lose. Unquestionably the most entertaining review that I read of Fahrenheit 9/11 was this one by Christopher Hitchens. Hitch goes for the jugular, ripping both Moore and his film to pieces. And as for The Passion Of The Christ, it seems to me that it was made to satiate the desire of a particular type of Christian (more specifically a particular type of Catholic) that enjoys watching the spectacle of a young man being flogged to within an inch of his life. OK, so I haven't seen the film (I don't think I could stomach it anyway and besides, I have no interest in giving money to that little turd Mel Gibson) but if I wanted to watch something like that I would track down a gay S&M flick. Homo-erotic piss masquerading as statement.

Record numbers turned out in the US elections in November to grant George W. Bush a second term, this time without any ambiguity. Personally I wanted Kerry, but what can you do? At least this way Bush and his crew will have to face up to the responsibility of the mess they have created in Iraq. I didn't oppose the war (although sometimes it's difficult to remember why) and believe that the creation of an Islamic democracy in that troubled region cannot be anything but a good thing. It is not in the world's interest for America to fail. Let's hope the election goes smoothly in January 2005 and that we don't just walk away soon after. It will take years to bed down stability and it has to be seen through to the bitter end.

Back in the UK, it's been a tough year for Tony Blair. He has continued to pay the price for his backing of the Iraq invasion, he's got Gordon Brown continually breathing down his neck, he lost his powerful home secretary David Blunkett after a long soap opera and there's probably going to be a general election next year. Luckily for him, the Tories under Michael Howard continue to be a hopeless opposition and Tone will no doubt get the third term that he so craves, although I expect it will be with a vastly reduced mandate. The thing is, I don't know if I even care anymore. The fox hunting debate continues to drag on and, frankly, who is interested? It's difficult to conceive of anything less relevant to the 99% of the population who collectively yawn at the very mention of the subject.

John Peel sadly passed away. It's always the good ones who have to go before their time. Peel dies, yet "Dr" Fox lives. Justice? No. Still, 2004 was a good year for music. Highlights for me, again in no particular order:

Franz Ferdinand - Franz Ferdinand
The Killers - Hot Fuss
Morrissey - You Are The Quarry
Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - The Lyre Of Orpheus/Abattoir Blues
R.E.M. - Around The Sun
Brian Wilson - Smile
Keane - Hopes And Fears
Scissor Sisters - Scissor Sisters
Snow Patrol - Final Straw
Embrace - Out Of Nothing
Thirteen Senses - The Invitation
The Dears - No Cities Left
Kings Of Leon - Aha Shake Heartbreak

So much else. Democracy resolute in Ukraine; Arafat dead; Reagan dead; iPods EVERYWHERE; Spain capitulates to terrorists. . . . and then, right at the end of the year, nature pops up with devastating consequences to remind us all that the world is a very dangerous place, that despite all our technology and sophistication we are at the mercy of the elements. Makes me glad to live in a country like the UK where, minor grumbles and the crappy weather aside, we don't really have much to worry about. For that we should be extremely grateful and we should all pledge some money for the relief effort in Asia to at least help in some small way.

See you next year.

The Queen's Christmas speech

Obviously it wasn't watched in my household, but I was reading about the theme of the Queen's speech yesterday, where she praised the diversity of modern Britain and urged for greater religious and cultural tolerance. All fine sentiments of course, and the media have been praising the content and timing of this unusual foray into such a sensitive area.

Hmmm, well, yes, that's great, but I think Liz would be better off expressing this desire closer to home, don't you? Namely, to that racist old twat that she's married to - Prince Philip. After all, this is the man who asked some Aborigines, on a state visit to Australia, whether they still threw spears at each other; asked a driving instructor in Scotland how they stopped the locals from drinking long enough to pass the test, and warned some British students that if they stayed in China too long they would go "slitty eyed".

So yes, thanks for the concern Liz, but I think you'll find that most people in this country are cosmopolitan enough to live quite comfortably with people of different race, religion and sexuality already. A lot has happened since the 1950s, you see? So while your speech is no doubt appreciated by some, it also happens to be hollow, empty and cheapened by the existence of your husband who is to race relations what Gary Glitter is to child welfare. Still, thanks for the effort, and see you again next year.

No IDea why we need these

I was kind of hoping that the issue of ID cards would die once David Blunkett stepped down as Home Secretary, but that buffoon Charles Clarke has picked up the torch for this bureacratic nightmare from day one. Now we're being told that Britain is "crying out" for ID cards. Really? In what sense? How exactly? This whole policy is such a mess. Leaving aside the illiberal notion of everyone being "registered" in such a way it's also going to be incredibly expensive (six billion pounds) and difficult to enforce (it's not even going to be mandatory to carry them apparently so, really, what is the point?). And for what? Supposedly to crack down on benefit fraud and (oh yes, of course) TERRORISM! Because terrorists are deterred by such things aren't they? Spain has ID cards - did it stop them being victims of terrorist attack? No. Nor would it make any difference here and everyone knows it. Tony Blair is so determined that Labour be seen as the party of law and order he's going to push this one through no matter what the arguments. The majority of the country favours them (why?) and now we have a, frankly, bizarre situation where Michael Howard of all people is considering opposing them on libertarian grounds. Michael Howard!

Truly, the mind boggles.

Suicidal tendencies

Suicide rates are falling in this country it would appear. Good old New Labour - "Tough on suicide, tough on the causes of suicide".

The balls of Donald Rumsfeld

By anyone's standards, Donald Rumsfeld has handled the invasion of Iraq very badly. Not enough troops in the first place; failure to close the borders (and subsequently allowing every insurgent in the region easy entry to the country); widespread abuse and torture of Iraqi prisoners (probably the biggest PR disaster for the US since the use of napalm on civilians in Vietnam); criticism from the troops themselves, who argue there was a lack of training, body armour and even ammunition; criticism from within his own party; criticism from former Generals. But will he take any responsibility? Will he do the decent thing and just stand down? No.

Now, this. Turns out he doesn't even personally sign letters of condolence to the families of troops killed in action in Iraq. Incredible. I mean, what exactly does this guy have to do for someone to say "actually, Don, you're kind of fucking things up for us here. Can you leave please?" The guy's got balls sticking around like this, I'll give him that.

More religious horseshit

All this talk of a law to protect faiths from being offended? Pah! What's the point? Religious zealots will always find a way to take these matters into their own hands anyway. Don't like the way Salman Rushdie depicts a key figure of your faith? Issue him a death warrant and force him into hiding! Theo Van Gogh makes a film critical of your religion's attitude to women? Stab him to death in the streets of Amsterdam! Someone writes a play you don't like? Wreck the theatre and issue threats to the writer! It's all so simple isn't it?

In all seriousness though, can somebody explain to me how a religious group seeking the banning of a play that offends them is in anyway different to the Nazis burning books? This may seem like an extreme analogy but ultimately it amounts to the same thing: trampling on free speech in the name of some arbitrary higher purpose. The right to practice your religion does not equal a right to crush any criticism or interpretation of it.

End. Of. Argument.

Your mind gets dirty as you get closer to. . .

. . . THIRTY.

So here it is, the big day itself. I am 30. It really does creep up on you. It's been playing on my mind since I hit 25 (rounding up and all that) and now the day I never wanted to happen is here and it feels. . . . . . . . OK actually. Perhaps 30 suits me after all.

I thought I would have plenty to say on the subject once I collided into this milestone but I haven't really. So far it's been a perfect morning. Me lovely missus made a fantastic breakfast and has spoiled me rotten with some really great presents and just generally done everything possible to make this day as memorable as possible. Later it's some dinner with friends and, probably, a very drunken evening filled with laughter and silliness. No doubt a sore head tomorrow as a consequence but, as ever, it will be worth it.

Age is not a particularly interesting subject. Anyone can get old. All you have to do is live long enough - Groucho Marx

Losing my (right to offend) religion?

So many issues with this I don't know where to begin. The bottom line is that I do not want my government, any government, passing legislation to protect religion. The whole idea is nonsense and a minefield to boot. What constitutes "religious hatred" anyway? I'm an atheist, and I happen to hate all religions as I believe they belittle humanity and, above all, ceased to be relevant this side of the Enlightenment. Am I going to be a criminal under the new law? Our beloved monarch, Liz II, is not only the head of state, she is also the head of the Church Of England, which means that, unlike pretty much every other modern liberal democracy, we do not have formal separation of church and state in the United Kingdom. So what we effectively have is a constitutionally defined national religion. Well, under the new law, could it be argued that this deliberately excludes all other faiths in the country and is therefore a form of religious hatred? Let's suppose that I am a member of the XIV Epicurean Church Of False Idols and worship there every day with my fellow believers. Could we challenge the Bible as being blasphemous to us? After all, that God fella spells out his philosophy pretty clearly near the beginning with those ten commandments. According to the Bible, my entire faith is forbidden. Surely this is religious hatred? In which case, I want the Bible removed from every bookstore and library in the country as it clearly peddles nothing but religious intolerance. Ban this filth!

OK, I'm being facetious, but that is my right. This right extends, by the way, to being facetious about any religion that I choose. This is the bitter twist for us non-believers: while everyone else is guaranteed freedom of religion, we cannot be assured of freedom from religion.