That's certainly one way to deal with an annoying sibling!

Force young people to vote at first opportunity, says think tank

From The BBC

26 August 2013

Young people should be required to turn out at the first election in which they have the right to vote, the IPPR think tank has said. The plans, to be set out in a forthcoming report, involve a small fine for young people deciding not to vote at their first election. They would also offer first-time voters who did not back any political party a "none of the above" option. Labour is reportedly considering whether to back the idea. Shadow Lord Chancellor Sadiq Khan has also said his party might propose lowering the voting age from 18 to 16. IPPR researchers found that the UK has one of the largest differences in voter turnout between young and old people in Europe. In 2013 local elections, an estimated 32% of 18- to 24-year-olds voted, compared with 72% of those aged over 65, the think tank said. It also estimated that turnout for under-35s earning less than £10,000 a year was just 34%, whereas turnout for over-55s with an income of at least £40,000 a year was 79%. According to the IPPR's figures, young people have been hit hardest by public spending cuts, with 16- to 24-year-olds facing cuts to services worth 28% of their annual household income, compared with 10% of the income of those aged 55-74.

Guy Lodge, an associate director at the think tank, said: "Unequal turnout matters because it gives older and more affluent voters disproportionate influence at the ballot box. Turnout rates among the young have fallen significantly which means there is less incentive for politicians to pay attention to them. Young people who don't vote today are less likely than previous generations to develop the habit of voting as they get older, which is why first time compulsory voting is so important." The result was a "vicious cycle of disaffection and under-representation" in which, he said, "As policy becomes less responsive to their interests, more and more decide that politics has little to say to them." Report co-author Sarah Birch, a politics professor at the University of Glasgow, added: "There are many other things that young people are required to do, not the least of which is go to school. "Adding just one more small task to this list would not represent an undue burden, and it could well help to reinvigorate democracy. It would make politicians target first-time voters like never before and give young voters the potential for far greater political power."

[How delightfully ironic – forcing people to express their democratic right. Isn’t that kind of the opposite of democracy? After all democracy is basically about choice isn’t it? You choose which political party to vote for but, just as importantly, you choose to vote in the first place. In democracies around the world you have an undeniable right to vote, arguably you have a duty or even an obligation to vote – after all voting is the lifeblood of democracy. But if you choose not to exercise that right, duty or obligation should you be punished? Is having the right to ‘none of the above’ enough to compensate for the imposition of government into yet another area of citizens free choice? How long before the ‘none’ option is removed? How long before spoiled papers carry the same sanction as not voting at all?

Voting is a choice and should remain that way. You do not get people into the habit of voting every 4-5 years by forcing them to do so the first time. That’s just crazy. All major political parties are seeing their total vote fall for the very simple reason that every year less and less people trust them to do anything more than line their own pockets and continually lie to us about everything they do. Encouraging people to vote by force is nothing more than an act of desperation. It is no more than a farce. If politicians want us to vote for them they’re going to have to something they will find very difficult indeed. They will need to earn our trust.]

Just Finished Reading: Dracula Cha Cha Cha by Kim Newman (FP: 1998)

Rome, 1959. The worlds press, celebrities and the new jet-set are arriving in the city in ever increasing numbers to witness the social event of the century. The reclusive Count Dracula, previous consort to Queen Victoria, is to marry Moldavian princess Asa Vajda in an attempt widely perceived as the prelude to him emerging back into the world of European power play. Amongst the late arrivals is Irish journalist Kate Reed who previously fought in the English resistance under Dracula’s iron rule. Within hours of her arrival her vampire companions are brutally attacked by a killer of immense speed and strength – yet Kate in convinced that the killer is no vampire himself. With a mystery to solve she turns to her long time companions the elder vampire Genevieve Dieudonne and her long-time lover Charles Beauregard late of the British Secret Service. As more vampire elders are murdered against all logic the suspicion falls on all the powerful organisations represented in Rome – the Mafia, The British, Russian Special Forces, the Vatican, or maybe Dracula himself clearing out the elder vampires to make way for the new and vibrant undead. What few of them realise is that forces older than Dracula himself are moving into opposition to him regaining power and they will let no one or nothing stand in their way – be they vampire or human.

I’ve read Kim Newman before – The Bloody Red Baron – so knew at least something of what I was letting myself in for. What I had forgotten was the delightful and playful way he weaves the real and the fictional into a compelling and highly original, to say nothing of outrageous and hilarious, tale of the power struggles of vampires now very much in the public eye. The basis of this frankly bizarre ‘alternate world’ is that the Bram Stoker story is true (indeed was a subversive and banned book under Dracula’s rule of England) but that he survived the supposed victory of human over vampire, emerged into the light – metaphorically speaking – and began creating a European dynasty for himself and his kind. Vampirism in effect goes mainstream distorting history, culture and economics along the way (part of the continual fascination in the book is the plethora of little details – like raspberry ripple ice cream where the ‘ripple’ is in fact blood – that make it out as a very different world). The characterisation is practically flawlessly handled although the author does sail very close to the wind from time to time but always manages to pull back before comedy becomes farce. There is a real love of the genre here and not simply a jumping on the band-wagon. Newman knows his subject and milks it for all he’s worth. The plot moves at a generous pace and certainly kept me guessing almost to the end. He has created a compelling and totally believable universe where fiction vampires (and fictional humans) co-exist uneasily with the rest of us. A delight and, in consequence, recommended. More of Mr Newman to come I think!

Cartoon Time.

My Favourite Movies: The Mummy

Way back in 1999 when I still went to the cinema at every opportunity I took a chance and saw this movie. Maybe it was because even after all that time I still had fond memories of Raiders of the Lost Ark which this film seemed to be channelling. Maybe it was because it just looked like fun, lots of fun.

The story takes place (mostly) in Egypt at some point between the World Wars. Trying to get enough practical experience to be accepted as an archaeologist is Evelyn Carnahan (played by the delightful and delicious Rachel Weisz) who is presented with a very unusual puzzle box with what appears to be a map of the lost city of Hamunaptra reputed to be the location of untold treasures. Forced to join forces with the ex-soldier who found the map (Richard O’Connell played in brilliant over-the-top fashion by Brendan Fraser) they begin an adventure that no one could have imagined – especially the staid Evy who steadfastly refuses to believe in the supernatural. But that is exactly what they find in the aptly named ‘City of the Dead’. Locked away for 3000 years is the mummy of Pharaoh’s high priest Imhotep (played by Arnold Vosloo who spent most of the movie frowning at those around him) who is accidently resurrected and is very, very annoyed. Setting an ancient curse in motion he plans to bring his ancient lover back from the dead and rule over mankind for ever – unless Evy, her light-fingered drunken brother (played by John Hannah as comic relief), O’Connell and the mysterious Arab warrior Ardeth Bay (played by Oded Fehr) can stop him in time.

It’s funny that sometime film critic Jonathan Ross described this film as ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark meets The Terminator’. It certainly had elements of both – though far more from Raiders to be honest. It certainly had that sense of Saturday morning matinee fun that pervaded almost every scene in Raiders. The Mummy is most definitely a film that doesn’t take itself too seriously, indeed it doesn’t take itself seriously at all. The plot is far from original, the dialogue is cheesy and the plot, such that it is, is so full of clichés that you could watch it a second or third time and make a game out of finding them. I’m sure that the SFX was pretty good for the time but has become very much to be expected over the last 14 years so none of it will raise any admiring eyebrows. The chemistry between Fraser and Weisz is great fun to watch. They certainly had a lot of fun together playing would-be lovers. The comedy elements provided by Hannah and Omid Djalili is mostly slapstick but still amusing and the bad-guy weasel (played by Kevin J O’Connor) is suitably slimy and objectionable. Of course the fact that the film has no great depth makes it supremely easy to just sit back and enjoy the adventure. You certainly don’t have to think about anything. The elements that are even slightly odd or potentially difficult to swallow are explained by a cast member in ‘the-know’ to those less fortunate (which probably means that they are on the shortlist to being an ex-cast member). In this movie what you don’t know will most definitely kill you as will tripping at the wrong moment! The main reason why I still like (and watch) this film after 14 years is, as I keep saying, it’s unapologetically fun, fun, fun. If you treat it as such I’m sure you’ll be in for a good time too.

Cartoon Time.

Thinking About: Babies

There’s been a lot of talk about babies recently and not just because of the recent Royal birth. In the last few weeks a report was published outlining the fact that the financial cost of raising a child from birth to 18 has risen to over £140,000 – how they arrived at this figure I have no idea. This week it was revealed that, I think for the first time, the number of one child families in the UK (or possibly just England and Wales) breached the 50% barrier. Almost immediately calls where heard to encourage parents to have at least a second child for a multitude of reasons. I found this to be quite incredible.

It is certainly arguable that a significant number (if not actually all) of the world’s most pressing issues are as the direct result of human population growth. The strain on resources from water, food, oil and land is caused by the simple fact that we already have far too many mouths to feed. Extoling people to have more children is, to me, at the very least a questionable (if not actually crazy) recommendation. Rather than criticising single child families we should be congratulating them. Rather than burdening them with even more financial responsibilities we should be thanking them for being pragmatic, reasonable, and sensible – especially in these times of fiscal irresponsibility. If families across the world restricted themselves to a single child, or certainly to no more than two, global population would level out before falling back to a more reasonable level. After a few generations the Earth, if it was capable of such a thing, would heave a sigh of relief and the people of that time could spend more time improving the lives of the much reduced population rather than spending more and more of their time and energy chasing fewer and fewer resources.

I like children as a rule. It small doses, at a distance and with the ability to give them back when they start crying, fall over or wet themselves they are a delight. But I also pity them. Any way you look at things, the future is not going to be a very pleasant place for anyone not already in the top 1%. The next 100 or so years will probably constitute mankind’s greatest challenge to its own survival. Still, after being told for decades and bearing witness to increasing evidence of environment degradation, we are doing next to nothing about Global Warming. As technology, especially in bio-genetics, becomes ever more sophisticated we continue to use it to develop ever more efficient ways of killing our fellow man. In the not too distant future someone somewhere, either on purpose or by accident, will release a virus which will inevitably get out of hand a kill millions. In the not too distant future someone somewhere will explode a nuclear device in a major city and kill tens of thousands. Meanwhile for the majority of people on Earth life will become more difficult. Food and especially water will become scarce. Billions will go to bed hungry and wake up angry. Today’s political turmoil will start to look like a golden age of peace and opportunity. This is the world into which people are choosing to bring more and more children. This is why I shake my head and wonder at the mentality of people or organisations who can, seemingly without thinking, advance the notion that we should have more children not less. Thankfully it’s something I don’t need to personally worry about. As someone who is childless and who will probably remain so – for practical reasons as much as philosophical ones – I don’t have to worry about my child’s future. That doesn’t stop me feeling a little sad every time I see a child though. 

Meanwhile in Japan........

Just Finished Reading: The Etymologicon – A Circular Stroll Through the Hidden Connections of the English Language by Mark Forsyth (FP: 2011)

It all started with an apparently simple question from a stranger – where does the word ‘Biscuit’ come from (twice baked before you Google it). After regaling the poor slob for the next 10-20 minutes of all the connections between biscuit and bicycle and much else besides he managed to escape never to look back. The author, after being sat down for an intervention by his closest family and friends, decided he had a problem which needed to be addressed – by putting all of his energy and knowledge of the English language into a book which he called The Etymologicon.

If like me you’ve ever wondered where some of the words and phrases you hear every day or maybe even use every day come from this is most definitely the book for you. Full of interesting stories (some of which I honestly had problems swallowing whole), the highways and byways of the planets global language – until it’s eventually replaced by Chinese – and revelations of the true meanings of some of the phrases that, on the face of it make no sense at all (my favourite bug-bear is ‘the exception that proves the rule’) this book will make you laugh out loud, nod sagely, bore people to death with language based revelations and generally make a nuisance of yourself for days on end. What it also did to me is deepen the love of the quirkiness of my native language all the more by letting me into some of its secrets and seeing just how random some of the sources are – not only from across the world but by the English mishearing, misunderstanding or simply modifying existing words to ‘make more sense’ and thereby changing them forever. If you never really considered language as a living, evolving thing this book will definitely change your mind on that count!

Above all else this is a delightful cornucopia of trivia, history, human fallibility, hubris, and the messy reality of language in all its glory. Highly recommended for any language geeks out there and for anyone who wants to dip into a work that is pretty much guaranteed to leave you chuckling after a few pages.