Trip to Westminster

So on Friday 18th September, most of the Year 12 G&P cohort, along with a few Year 13s, travelled down to London for a trip round Westminster. Mr. Owen was saved from having a panic attack when everyone arrived at Piccadilly in plenty of time, we boarded the Virgin train and had a smooth ride. Even the Underground was trouble free. The trip leader was perplexed, things were not supposed to be this straightforward. So, as I gingerly escorted the pupils through the Westminster crowds, I tentatively entertained the idea that everything would pass off without a hitch.

I think it did. In fact I think I speak for everyone in saying that we had a hugely enjoyable and successful day. Even the sun shone down on us. After being denied entry to Westminster Abbey for free (should such places be free as a public right? Discuss) we found ourselves joining Peter Tatchell and a group of electoral reform campaigners. This certainly wasn't in the trip leader's plan. 'Vote for a change' are a recently created pressure group, a result I suspect of this period of so-called 'broken politics' following the expenses scandal. They basically want to see the end of FPTP and the creation of a fairer voting system. One of the alternatives being thrown around at the moment is the Single Transferable Vote (STV), the details of which I wont't go into here, needless to say that it is fairer.

With Year 12 studying Pressure Groups later this year and Year 13 'steeped in it', thanks to Mr. Owen's lessons (!) this was certainly exciting stuff. The pupil's enthusiasm soon got the better of them and before the trip leader could step in, placards were being waved and slogans chanted. It was a fantastic photo opportunity and a journalistic coup for the photographers and promo people wandering round the green. Indeed as I returned home in the evening I was able to find the photos published on the internet. It was a very surreal experience; nevertheless it was one that contributed to the enjoyment of the day no end.

After our foray into political remonstrating we entered Portcullis House for the start of our package. It began with 45 minutes in a Select Committee room. Pupils used 'Quizdom' to vote on and debate a range of issues. After this we had a question and answer session with Neil Gerrard MP. In my opinion, for someone about to leave Parliament and able to 'say what he wanted', he was still incredibly guarded and dry. On several occasions he didn't actually answer the question but did that thing which politicians do best - read from the well-versed song script. I asked him if he was a socialist. He said 'I hope so' (there seems to be an element of doubt there...) and proceeded to argue that he 'wasn't New Labour'. He also failed to sing the praises of FPTP when challenged on electoral reform, preferring instead to rubbish the alternatives. Nevermind, at least the pupils gained an insight into a 'typical' politician.

After this we had our tour. I think for all of us this was the highlight of the day. Both Houses, Westminster Hall, the works. The Houses were, as I expected them to be, small - much smaller than you would expect from seeing them on television. Parliamentary and elected privilege meant that we weren't allowed to sit down. Our guide Emily was knowledgeable and informative - I learned a thing or two, including the fact that UKIP do not have an MP, something that I had automatically assumed up till now!

Following our visit we walked down Whitehall and took in Downing Street, Horse Guards (cue poses with Guards soldiers - poor guys) and Buckingham Palace (again, rather smaller in real life!) This took us in the direction of the Victoria tube. So after Mr. Clayton nearly met a sticky end at the hands of a white van man we caught the now much busier underground back up to Euston and then went home.

Overall, a successful day. The pupils were very lucky to visit a place like this so early into their studies. It was a first for me - Politics degree notwithstanding.

History repeating itself?

Another contribution to my 6th Form blog (published elsewhere)

To say that History repeats itself is the biggest cliche in the book - of course it does. In fact, the repetition of history is so self evident that my mind scarecely registers this circular motion when I see murders being committed in the name of a religion (again), intolerance (again), political ideologies becoming mainstream (again), blue being the 'in' colour this season (again), music styles being repeated (again) and so on. However, one story in this weekend's news did catch my attention.

Have a look at the following article http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/13/right-wing-groups-palestinian-march Now, we're all familiar with the BNP and their racist message. However, a new disturbing racist organisation has emerged - the English Defence League. This 'patriotic' association, like its partners in SIOE (Stop the Islamification of Europe) have been causing riots and disturbances in areas with a high Muslim population, or, as the report says, where various Islamic events and marches have been taking place.

As disturbing as this is, it is not without precedent. In the 1930s a new political party was formed called the British Union of Facists. Like now, the country was in a deep recession - some economists would say that it was a depression. However, the country was not supposedly 'swamped' with Muslims back then. Just like in Hitler's Germany it was the Jews who were targeted. In the so-called 'Battle of Cable Street' in London in 1936, 'Blackshirts' (Fascists), anti-Fascist protestors and police clashed. Is history repeating itself at the moment. The Spectator would not have us believe so http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/5324466/john-denhams-mosleycomparison-merely-sensationalises-racetensions.thtml However, to discount the admittedly minor problems caused by the EDL runs the risk of falling into another of the 'traps' of History. The BUF started as a small organisation too - it was only WW2 which saw it being disbanded. The BNP were written off until they won 2 seats in the North West and Yorkshire European elections. The EDL may be small, however their tactics are echoed in History, and just as History shows, far right hate groups have the power, means and the message to increase their scope and success. Watch this space.

The US vs. The NHS

N.B. Originally written for my A-Level politics groups

You may have been aware of a furore over health care that has taken place in America over the summer. The political battles have been very insightful for students of AS and A2 politics. Below, I will try to outline some of the main points.

At the moment, healthcare in America is funded mainly by private insurance companies. In other words, it is not free. In order to cover the costs of a stay in hospital Americans need to purchase insurance with one of the many big insurance conglomerates such as AETNA or AmeriHealth - see http://www.amerihealth.com/. Insurance, however, is not cheap and 47 million Americans go without, leaving them at risk if they develop health problems. In the 1960s the American government stepped in, creating "Medicare" and "Medicaid" - to help retirees and the destitute (you'll have to check which is which). However, these by no means provide the kind of universal health care that the likes of Clinton and Obama have campaigned for.

When Bill Clinton became President in 1992 he tried to pass a bill guaranteeing "Universal Health Care". It failed, and now Obama is trying for a second time. Basically what it means is that a "National" Health Service along the lines of the British and Canadian model will be created. This will guarantee health care for those currently too poor to pay for insurance. Ideologically it recognises that health care is a right, not a privilege of the rich. Also, by covering ALL Americans, it carries rather a lot of moral clout. In the world's richest country, the only superpower left, many people are dying needlessly. Charities originally set up to help third world patients treat Americans in converted sports stadiums. The system at present seems wholly unworkable and unethical. Why, then, is it coming up against so much opposition?

There are three reasons for this:

1. Money. The Health Insurance Companies make a lot of money. It the government suddenly dipped its hands in its (deep) pockets and guaranteed health insurance for all Americans these companies would face a serious drop in profits. They therefore use their influence to flood Washington with lobbyists who get politicians to block healthcare reform in return for financial help at election time. It's a neat situation which keeps everyone happy - the incumbents are re-elected due to well financed campaigns; health reform stays off the statute book. Given this state of affairs, the White House appears incredibly isolated.

2. Ideology. This is perhaps even more important; Americans are incredibly fearful of the growing influence of the state on ordinary people's lives. They see government intervention as the preserve of the failed social democratic countries of C20th Europe. Some right wingers even go as far as to say that universal health care is one small step on the slippery slope towards communism. Amercians are fiercely conservative, they don't like change and they don't like the idea that the government is interfering in their lives - which, as they see it is a waste of money and personnel.

3. Fear. Unfortunately, this is the ugly side of American politics. In order to stop this so-called 'communist' system being passed, some Republicans and opponents have said that:

-National Health Care is a breeding ground for terrorism - they cite the failed Glasgow airport terrorist attack (perpetrated by two NHS doctors) as an example.
-Elderly or sick patients would face government "death boards" where bureaucrats decide whether you should live or die (assuming than continued care would be at too great a cost to the state)
-Obama and his supporters are socialists (a dirty word in America ever since the days of Cold War hysteria), a communist, a fascist, a Hitler-lover etc...

Worryingly, some even say that health care is not a fundamental privilege for anyone but can be used a tool of "social cleansing" - the worthless sections of society can be allowed to die off, thus improving the collective 'lot' of the 'good' sections of society.

Conservatives have also cited the NHS as symbol of everything that is wrong with government controlled health care. It is claimed that death boards exist, hospitals are dirty, primitive and if you get cancer "then you're a gonner". American news networks have interviewed British conservatives who support their views, most notably the MEP Daniel Hannan who has said that he 'wouldn't wish the NHS on anybody': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiSPRkq28iU

This has let to an almost patriotic outpouring of support for the NHS in the UK this summer. The Labour Party has jumped on Hannan's remarks as symptomatic of the ambivalence felt by the Opposition for Britain's most cherished national institution. David Cameron has dismissed Hannan's remarks as "eccentric" and pledged his party's support behind the NHS. Nevertheless, the Labour Party are bound to claim again and again before next year's election that the NHS will not be safe under a Conservative government: http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2009/08/18/labour-keep-up-nhs-attacks-on-tories/. This is quite clearly a piece of political opportunism by Labour. Everyone knows that the NHS is safe with either party - as Tony Benn puts it, if it were disbanded "there would be a revolution". The bigger problem is how to reform a system which, no matter how much you love it (as Brown's twitter on 'welovethenhs' contends), still provides a number of challenges to a government no matter its colours. This is where the real dividing lines will be drawn before the next election.

In the meantime, American Universal Healthcare seems to be stalling. Town Hall meetings are descending into shouting matches, Democratic congressmen are hiring bodyguards to protect themselves during the heated exchanges and Obama has had to go on TV telling Americans that the government will not kill the extremely ill (as Hitler's euthenasia programme of the late 30s did...this was suggested by one woman at a meeting here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYlZiWK2Iy8). In short, this is a battle for the very soul of America and it reflects the divided nature of this young democracy. If healthcare passes, and I doubt it, this will mean more than the extension of insurance to the needy - it will be a sea-change in American politcs. But then again, this country elected a black man less than a year ago. Anything is possible...

Some thoughts on tourism...

Yesterday morning ı got up early in order to make my way down to Sultanhamet before the crowds so that I could go get into the Aya Sofıa and the Blue Mosque. Both were, as expected, beautiful but were spoıled by tourists. I recognise that İ am one myself and that by going to such places İ am contributing one iota to the commotion. Nevertheless, İ still feel that İ am not 'one of them'...

The way İ see ıt, tourism today has reduced once important and hugely important and influential sıtes to public 'frıpperies'. The advent of the digital camera means that we can snap away without a second thought or glance at what we're actually taking a picture of. Gone are the days when we had only 36 exposures and had to pick and choose carefully.

But do people actually know they're taking photos of? Or do they snap away because ıt 'looks nıce'? Posing is something else that bothers me. By posing you are ıdentıfying yourself wıth an object/paıntıng/buıldıng..whatever. You may share an ımage wıth a 10th century mosaıc of the Vırgın Mary wıth Christ, but what point is beıng made - 'look Frank, I was actually here..!' Does thıs need proving? Cynıcal. It provıdes a nıce background to a pıcture of Bob and Phıl? I'm sorry mate but a 10th century mosaıc deserves to be ın the foreground. Get the fuck out of my pıcture!

Photography ın the Blue Mosque (and in any place of worshıp) bothers me (lıke most thıngs? Another rant..) If you lıke the look of the place, buy postcards. They're probably better qualıty anyway. You're measly flash ıs not goıng to fıll the dome of the Aya Sofıa. What ıs partıcularly dıstressıng about photography ın the mosque ıs that ıt ıs stıll a place of worshıp (as well as a tourıst productıon lıne). Tourısts are allowed ın only between prayers..however, there are people prayıng here all the tıme. The thought of someone takıng photos of thıs sacred act ıs pretty sıckenıng - 'Look ^^generıc mate/relatıon from home^^, a real Muslım prayıng ın a real mosque.' WTF! The crowds move through one door and out of the other - lıke a tourıst productıon lıne..and stıll yet the quıet serentıy of the Blue Mosque ıs unmoved. It's almost as ıf the Gods or the buıldıng ıtself are lookıng down wıth a quıet aır of dısapproval or bewılderment at the waterıng down of thıs sacred place. Sure, let us foreıgners and tourıst see ıt. However, we should behave ın a way that shows gratıtude that these places are opened to us ın the fırst place. Photos I don't have a problem wıth, as long as they are taken at the rıght tıme and place. On the beach, at the restaurant, of a hugely ımpressıve buıldıng - not of you ın front of a mosaıc wıth a belıever prayıng ın the background.

As İ knelt down ın the Blue Mosque among the hordes I trıed to ımagıne what the place would be lıke wıthout people such as myself - to tap ınto the 'quıet serentıy' ıf you wıll. Then I heard 'so ıs thıs stıll a ral Mosque mom?' Shame.

A visit to a Turkish Hamam

İf you go to the right sort of place (i.e., neither a tourist trap, nor a place where men go to cruise - unless you're gay in which case go crazy..), a visit to a Turkish Hamam can be a very invigorating experience. The place İ went to was called Park Hamam and was in Sultanhamet in the centre of İstanbul. For the princely sum of 60TRL (about 25 quıd) you get the works...

First of all you are escorted to a camekan where you undress - all clothes are left ın here, the door ıs locked and you keep the key to your belongıngs. Although ın some hamams women can bathe nude, the men's sectıon is strıctly modest...blokes wear a pestemal (a cloth round the waste) and rubber cloggs. You then get taken ınto a steam room or a hararet where you sweat for a whıle.

After about ten mınutes a man comes ın to wash you. He douses you wıth water and scrubs you wıth a kese - a course mıtten whıch removes most of the muck that showers never quıte manage - ıf you enter thınkıng that you're already reasonably clean then ıt's a bıt of a surprıse. After thıs you lıe down on a belly stone - called a gobektası and the washıng begıns.

Nothıng quıte prepares you for thıs experıence. I was expectıng a gentle soapıng down - what I got left me feelıng that I'd been abused ın some way - ın soapıng you up the man squeezes pretty much every muscle, stretches every sınew and beats every ınch of your skın. The massage whıch followed was sımılar, albeıt perhaps slıghtly less paınful (apart from the bıt when the man seemed to squeeze to death every dısc ın my spınal column)

Nevertheless, after an apple tea, feelıng some 25 quıd lıghter, I dıd come out of the hamam feelıng around 5 years younger. Thıs made me wonder why Turkısh men look so unhealthy, and then I saw some kebap on a skewer and I stopped wonderıng.

Yesterday I went for a haırcut and a shave - the former was pretty standard. The latter ınvolved clıppıng nose and eyebrow haır and sıngeıng 'ear haır' wıth a lıghter. I thınk that I'm goıng to return from Turkey a new man, or a least one who has enjoyed mezes and kebaps enough to warrant a few laps round Chorlton park. C'est la vıe.

In the Ottoman lands..

I am currently halfway though my trip around the old Ottoman Empire, or for those of you whose heads are not filled with History junk, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey.

It all started a week ago when I landed in Bucharest. Fresh from a dizzying experience in London in which I got lost on my way to the British museum, I arrived at a European capital that could not be more different to our own. Stray dogs, crumbling buildings and abandoned cars will be my defining memory. Although the place had an odd, quirky charm about it, I cannot help thinking that if the Prime Minister himself has to park amongst overgrown weeds and broken concrete (as seems to be the case at the People's Palace), then the country has some way to go. Like Sarajevo, this will be an interesting destination to visit in 10-15 years.

Then it was over into Bulgaria and the charming medieval town of Veliko Tarnovo. This place was literally bursting at the seams with history. Nevertheless, I opted for a tour of the churches and monasteries of the local area - one of which - Ivanovo - is on the UNESCO list. I travelled with an Australian girl called Lucy and a Dutch brother and sister. Before I left Veliko I went to the top of the Tsaverets Fortress - a great symbol of Bulgarian pride and nationalism.

I then intended to go to Varna, but the complicated nature of the cyrillic alphabet dictated that I would end up in Sofia. The only good thing I can say about this is that I can tick off another European capital city. It was much nicer than Bucharest, though.

And now here I am in Plovdiv, 1 week into my trip and still with a week to go. This place boasts a Roman ampitheatre that was only discovered after a freak landslide in 1972. Tomorrow I head for Burgas for a few lazy days by the beach in preparation for an onslaught of the senses - Istanbul will hopefully be the highlight of my travels this year. I can hardly hide my excitement.

I will write at greater length soon!

Back..

So here I am, back in the UK after a hectic couple of weeks. It all started a few Tuesdays back. After a full day of teaching I went home, only to return to school at 12 midnight to meet 64 children a 6 colleagues for a trip down to Dover and then onwards to the battlefields of WW1.

We travelled through the night, stealing bits of sleep here and there. After a trouble free crossing we went to the 'Trench of Death' in Belgium. I had been told that I'd be feeling reasonably OK despite being up all night and this was pretty much true. I was on working on adrenaline and the repetitive counting of kids and trench exploration meant that tirednes ddin't catch up with me until about 10. I was even happy to have a few beers that evening in the main square in Ypres. The reconstruction has been immaculate (comparisons could be drawn with Warsaw - my residence over last weekend).

So we visited 'the usuals' - Vimy Ridge, the Somme etc.. very interesting to visit the places I've studied (and taught about) for a good while - one worrying point though. A few of the kids said 'it isn't as bad as I thought it would be'. I suppose that this is one of the main differences between a place like the Somme and Auschwitz (my next port of call). The WW1 battlefields have been maintained in pristine condition and, quite frankly, look 'beautiful'. Graves are tended with flowers and grass is diligently mown. The trenches themselves, if they have not been filled with concrete, are covered in thick grass which hides the mud, the rats, the barbed wire and general shit that the trip was supposed to give pupils an insight into. Regrettably, I still think that some of the pupils don't quite recognise the 'horror' of the trenches. Ironic, really considering we have visited the sights themselves. What more is a teacher to do?

So bearely 10 hours after arriving back in Manchester I was out on the road again, this time to Krakow, Poland. I visited with Mike and Owen in 2007 for a 'Lad's break' and we did the usual touristy things - Wieliczka (?) salt mine (crap) and Auschwitz. But of course, this week has taught me one thing - tourism and Auschwitz are uneasy bedfellows. Of course this is a site of mass murder and I visited on two occasions this week, not as a 'tourist' but as a Freelance Educator with the Holocaust Educational Trust. I applied for the post back in May and was successful (thankfully my current employer, Crompton House School, doesn't mind about the time off that this role will entail). What I've just done is a week's on the job training. We studied at both camps (Auschwitz I and Birkenau) with the intention of bringing 16-18 year olds on one day visits over the next year. We also spent a lot of time in the town of Auschwitz (or, to use its correct Polish name - Oswiencim), the Jewish Kazimierz district of Krakow and various Synagogues here and there. Overall it was a rewading, albeit tiring experiences and I look forward to working with HET on its LFA and Outreach programme over the coming year.

At the weekend I got the train up to Warsaw and continued my 'Jewish journey' - finding a surviving section of ghetto wall and visiting the only surviving Synagogue in a city that suffered like no other in WW2. After two days of this and monging in the hostel/drinking Zywiec off Nowy Swiat it was back down to Krakow for the flight home.

Overall a very rewarding two weeks - which is that same amount of time that I have to wait until Bucharest-Istanbul. It is going to be interesting!