The state of Youth Work.

Tony Taylor (pictured), a leading light in the In Defence of Youth Work campaign has written a piece critical of some recent developments in youth work.

This is an enjoyable romp through the current desperate state of youth work in the UK. Taylor points to some truly chilling developments such as the psychologisation of youth work. A think-tank (the Young Foundation) has produced a psychological tool which is being adopted by some national organisations to inform how youth work should proceed. The work appears to have been sponsored by The National Council for Voluntary Youth Services, The National Youth Agency, Social Enterprise UK and the Young Foundation itself.


Normalising selfishness

This is just a footnote. One could do a series of footnotes on the destruction of humanity by the current money-materialist culture in the UK.

Ah the irony…

Following a “Friends of Syria” meeting the war-criminal Hague has said:

We are clear that Syrian President Assad has no role in a peaceful and democratic Syria

The irony of a British Foreign Secretary determining in advance of any kind of electoral process who can and can’t have a role in a sovereign foreign country while claiming to be promoting democracy in that country, appears to be lost on the war-criminal William Hague. On the other hand, it is revealing about what they mean when they talk about promoting democracy around the globe.

The second irony is of course “Friends of Syria”. The group includes those countries who are spewing in arms, fuelling a violent civil war, causing untold suffering and countless refugees. Not really all that friendly. Reliable and independent estimates at the start of the conflict were that about 40% of the Syrian population supported Assad.

Criminalising the Population

Increasingly these days government agencies are taking the most efficient approach to policing the population. It turns out that the most efficient approach is to assume that everyone is guilty, to treat everyone like a criminal.

Possibly one reason for this is that this is the most cost-efficient way of policing a population. For example; (and speed cameras provide a very good example of this kind of mass disciplinary system) consider two police forces. Police force A sets out to catch people who knowingly speed, who are a danger to others. These criminals are savvy about speed cameras. To catch them therefore takes an intensive operation involving multiple police cars. In one morning Police force A nets 10 of these criminals. Police force B on the other hand realises that it is a numbers game. They set up a single camera in a spot where it is easy to make a mistake (typically they find a stretch of road with a 30 mph limit but with no buildings – the sort of road where there may well be a good reason for the speed limit but where it is also possible to make a genuine mistake). Police force B captures 50 people in the morning for a fraction of the cost of the operation conducted by Police force A. In the New Years Honours lists it is the Chief Constable of Police force B who is honoured.

Examples abound. One of the most notorious examples of this kind of dragnet policing is the BBC’s campaign of sending intimidating

The law of money

Islamists apparently have Sharia law.

In the West we have the law of money.

After the Sarin gas attack in Syria on 21st August some information emerged about who supplied some of the pre-cursor chemicals. No surprise that Britain and Germany were major suppliers. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said the supply was:

commensurate with the stated end use in the production of cosmetics and there was no reason to link them with Syria’s chemical weapons program. This remains the case.

Which is complete nonsense. Why would Syria have wanted

Russia calls their bluff

I’ve been trying to stay out of the Syria conflict, so to speak. But I can’t resist this one. Russia has tried to remove the pretext for a US strike on Syria by inviting Syria to surrender all its chemical weapons to some sort of international control.

The US Secretary of State, Kerry,

Raping your customers

Marketing is defined as exploring your customer’s needs and then meeting them.

Modern businesses which are driven to produce a profit for external shareholders are typically reduced to the situation where all they are concerned to do is to make profits. The ‘bottom-line’ is all-important. Either they have to make more profits than last year (in case the investor’s money goes elsewhere) or they have to strive to increase profits when they are falling. In any event all these kinds of businesses are just geared around one aim; to increase profits in the short to medium term.

In this context the legitimate aim of marketing is perverted. If the customer doesn’t need