Critical Fellow-Traveller

Like anyone of any left wing persuasion, I have spent time in meetings with no particular topic and a pitifully small number of attendees. All that is ever gained from such meetings is a general agreement that our society is controlled by big business, Margaret Thatcher is not very nice, and the world would be a better place if leftys were to join together and take some kind of action rather than sitting around having useless sectarian meetings. All left wing groups need to address the question – what effect does their current activity have, and how can they be more effective?

Any person’s goal within politics should not be to develop the best analysis of the world, or the best blueprint for the ideal society, it should be to actually change the world. One beneficial change of policy is worth more than an infinite number of excellent ideas. I believe our effort should be put into specific, effective and achievable policy changes. Targets should be set by asking, “what do we want?”, “what can we achieve?”, and “how can we achieve it?”

Some attempts have been made to set specific policy targets without sectarian divides, one such example being the “people before profit” charter, which springs from the SWP. However this actually contains quite a large number of policies, many of which are vague and not achievable. Which policies are most achievable is obviously a matter to be debated. Personally I believe it is the policies that will be most easy to gain public/media support for, and least opposition to. Viability should come before all else. The ideal targets are the most achievable things, so long as they are sufficiently beneficial. Once two of three specific aims are identified, it then falls to discuss how to go about achieving such changes.

I think by going through this process meetings could generate meaningful outcomes, and an effective plan for action may be developed.

Youth organisations are increasingly campaigning over the negative picture of young people painted in the UK media. A recent study found that young people featured in the news are usually either criminals, victims of crime or celebrities. Surely, this is what anyone would expect.

Looking at the BBC UK news front page right now, the vast majority of headlines either refer to political stories – which will not feature young people since they will not be MPs or ministers ­– or stories about crime, some of which involve young people.

The argument that is often put forward is that young people in the media are never shown as doing good things and being friendly to other people. Stories about someone being generally well mannered and altruistic are unlikely to make the news. This is a result of “no news is good news” or more accurately “good news is not newsworthy”. Ordinary members of the public of any age are unlikely to end up in the news without having something to do with crime. Exceptions obviously do exist, but they are not easy to find. The first thing that sprung to my mind was the story of the young boy who fought off an attempted murderer but that comes well under the crime category.)

The impression older people have of young people at this time is a problem. Older people do treat teenagers and children over suspiciously and young people certainly do face prejudice and discrimination. I suspect this has always been the case between younger and older generations, but it would take someone much older than me to say whether intergenerational relationships are getting better or worse. However, I doubt news reporting is responsible for these attitudes, and the fact that 80% of young people featured in the news have something to do with crime is extremely insignificant.

I am unsettled by the whole drama over the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Sharia law interview. With regard to what he actually said, I couldn’t really give a toss. Religious courts, along with Judge Judy and other ways of settling disputes, have always existed and are not a threat to UK law. How Muslims sort out their mortgages is really not of interest to me.

However, I feel this incident has redefined the role of Christian leaders. Within a denomination people’s opinions vary greatly. Because of this, religious leaders have seemed to me to say wishy-washy uncontroversial things, and when they have strayed into slightly controversial territory there has never been huge personal criticism. In this case, the media has come out full force against the Archbishop. I think the BBC coverage has certainly been biased, and the coverage in the Sun was extremely aggressive. There is even a game on the Sun’s website where you can throw sponges at the Archbishop.

As an Athiest, I don’t exactly hang on the words of religious leaders. However, I can’t believe this amount of disrespect would be given to the Archbishop. I think a lot of Atheists would give much more respect to the Archbishop than a lot of “church of England” people seem to be doing.

This generally comes down to the problem I have with many people’s attitude to religion in this country. Those who have received a message from God and dedicate their lives to acting on that are generally worthy of respect. I am genuinely grateful to the people who knock on my door and try to save me from eternal damnation in hell. Given what they believe, it is the only rightful thing to do.

70% of people in England and Wales ticked the box for Christian in the 2001 census, and when asked people will say they are Christian. Yet a European Commission poll in the UK found only 38% of people said they believed in God. My boyfriend’s mam ticked C of E for her whole family in the 2001 census, when she is a member of a Spiritualist church and her two sons are definitely atheists. I think the fact that there is so much disrespect towards the Archbishop and that it is aired in such an informal manner highlights this casual attitude towards religion. Devout believers would not have treated the matter in this way.

The press have certainly now set a precedent, this will not be afraid to open fire on religious leaders in the future. I am disappointed that people will so easily side with The Sun above senior members of what they class as their own religion.