Author John Man takes us from the youth of Temujin, and how he became Genghis Khan and built an empire that crossed Asia into Europe, to his descendants - not just Ogedai and Kublai, but all the branches of his family, taking us into the internecine feuds and jostling for power while the empire Genghis has founded doubled in size, and then caused it to fracture and split.
He does a wonderful job of following the often tortuous paths of history with clarity, but also setting them in the context and feel of time and place; the attitudes of the lands and nations who faced the Mongols, well-argued reasons for why they fell or resisted. The canvas is vast, and he introduced me to many aspects of this history of which I was entirely unaware: the facts that the Turks were a earlier wave of settlers from the same part of the world, the Mongol conquest of the entirety of Asian Islam, the fact that European Christian crusaders allied with the Mongols on more than one occasion ( from a belief that they represented the mythical Eastern Christian emperor Prester John to simple practicality of fighting the same opponent ), the failed invasions of Vietnam and Japan, the off-hand remark that modern Pakistan was part of the empire. Each of these and more could fill volumes in their own right, and I hope I can find accounts written as well as this.
Not that this book is simply a brief overview, Man goes into detail that is substantial and in depth, but not overwhelming. Early on I had been perhaps a little disparaging of his narrative style, but that was entirely unfair; while quite different from the style of, say, Tom Holland, one of my personal favourites and a consummate writer of narrative histories. While initially it seems that Man is rushing through events and piling up detail, he circles back and suddenly he is building a narrative picture that has drawn the reader right into the heart of the story. His main achievement, though, is the way he connects the events to modern history, not only the China ( including how the Chinese claim Genghis for their own ) but Russia, the 'Stans, the Middle East and even how it moulded medieval Japan.
I do have to say that one problem with the book is the way he deals - or doesn't deal - with rape. This becomes especially apparent in a later section when he revisits the fact that one of Genghis' sons was viewed ( possibly correctly ) as illegitimate as his mother had been held captive by an enemy tribe for several months, as well as the fact of Y-chromosomes originating in Mongolia being widespread throughout Asia and Europe. He states these matters as simply that, without acknowledging the sexual violence implicit in both. I'm sure the author would say something along the lines of "it was a simple fact of how the world was then", but he doesn't say anything in the text and this omission, whether he feels it irrelevant, or is uncomfortable with the subject, leaves for me a troublesome gap that should at least have been recognised.
Saturday, 18 May 2019
Saturday, 9 February 2019
Story review: Autobiography of a Traitor and a Half-Savage by Alix B.Harrow
Wow.
This is one of the things I love about anthologies, that they are so often filled with perfect gems from authors I would not otherwise encounter. Alix Harrow's story is set in an alternative America where the land is resisting colonisation, where the native peoples have a connection with the land that, Mythago Wood-like, confound attempts to force settlement - but, while into the early 20th Century the United States has barely reached the Mississippi, it still seems that the technology and perseverance and cruelty of the European settlers will dominate.
The POV character is Oona, the progeny of a drunken Irishman and a native Amerind woman, employed through necessity as a Mapmaker, someone able to help the invaders find their way into the hostile land. Harrow wonderfully portrays the dichotomy of seeking to earn a living in the economy imposed by the white man while betraying her own heritage and a people who have shunned her half-breed nature. We also get a glimpse, via footnote, into wider world of native magic; of the headwaters of the Nile being an inland ocean populated by gods, of Ireland filled with hallucinatory mists and transient fairy mounds.
Just beautiful.
This is one of the things I love about anthologies, that they are so often filled with perfect gems from authors I would not otherwise encounter. Alix Harrow's story is set in an alternative America where the land is resisting colonisation, where the native peoples have a connection with the land that, Mythago Wood-like, confound attempts to force settlement - but, while into the early 20th Century the United States has barely reached the Mississippi, it still seems that the technology and perseverance and cruelty of the European settlers will dominate.
The POV character is Oona, the progeny of a drunken Irishman and a native Amerind woman, employed through necessity as a Mapmaker, someone able to help the invaders find their way into the hostile land. Harrow wonderfully portrays the dichotomy of seeking to earn a living in the economy imposed by the white man while betraying her own heritage and a people who have shunned her half-breed nature. We also get a glimpse, via footnote, into wider world of native magic; of the headwaters of the Nile being an inland ocean populated by gods, of Ireland filled with hallucinatory mists and transient fairy mounds.
Just beautiful.
Wednesday, 16 January 2019
Story review: The Destroyer by Tara Isabella Burton
This is a tough one for me to score and review. As with the previous tales in the collection, the quality of the writing and construction show that these stories are indeed Some of the best. Here we have have a story told from the POV of the daughter of a scientist - born from self-cloning, and then pressured into being constantly enhanced into something more than human. Her mother is clearly brilliant, driven and insane and this leads to my issue with the piece; I loathe mad-scientist stories. I grew up on pulp and b-movie narrative where the world was destroyed by over-reaching, over-ambitious, arrogant or just plain evil and see the erosion in expertise this, in part, has lead to. It is a theme that has become part of our culture, repeated endlessly in lazy articles and online arguments. In reality, it is not science and scientists that cause the problems, nor even war and generals, but politics and politicians misusing the tools provided to them.
Now, I know that many of the great "destruction by science" tales are not about arrogant scientists at all, or barely so - the progenitor of the genre, Frankenstein, is misread as such, and is a deeper story about a search for meaning and a creator - but just reading that trope tends to set my teeth on edge.
However, that is my reaction to that aspect of the story and is, perhaps, rather unfair. Because this is a fabulous piece of writing. Burton suggests the world as a backdrop - it is in Rome, including the great structures such as the Colosseum and the Senate on the Capitoline Hill, ruled over by Caesar. Is this scientist a witch or an alchemist? But we get reference to other cities that were not contemporaries of classical Rome, and dropped references to technology that is distinctly modern. That fact that this left as no more than hints and never explained makes the backdrop tantalising and somehow mythical.
The first-person narration from the daughter, in the past tense further enhances the mythic quality, and a sense of doom; the story opens "Long before my mother destroyed the world, her experiments were quieter, more contained." So we know where this is going. The backbone of this story, like The Art of Space Travel, the previous one in the collection, is this mother/daughter relationship, although this is obviously far darker and more negative than that of Emily and Moolie, as mother pressures daughter (neither is given a name) through the promise of a fake love to become what the mother wants, despite her own wishes, but ultimately is saved by this and becomes greater than her parent.
You know, I think I've talked myself around.
Now, I know that many of the great "destruction by science" tales are not about arrogant scientists at all, or barely so - the progenitor of the genre, Frankenstein, is misread as such, and is a deeper story about a search for meaning and a creator - but just reading that trope tends to set my teeth on edge.
However, that is my reaction to that aspect of the story and is, perhaps, rather unfair. Because this is a fabulous piece of writing. Burton suggests the world as a backdrop - it is in Rome, including the great structures such as the Colosseum and the Senate on the Capitoline Hill, ruled over by Caesar. Is this scientist a witch or an alchemist? But we get reference to other cities that were not contemporaries of classical Rome, and dropped references to technology that is distinctly modern. That fact that this left as no more than hints and never explained makes the backdrop tantalising and somehow mythical.
The first-person narration from the daughter, in the past tense further enhances the mythic quality, and a sense of doom; the story opens "Long before my mother destroyed the world, her experiments were quieter, more contained." So we know where this is going. The backbone of this story, like The Art of Space Travel, the previous one in the collection, is this mother/daughter relationship, although this is obviously far darker and more negative than that of Emily and Moolie, as mother pressures daughter (neither is given a name) through the promise of a fake love to become what the mother wants, despite her own wishes, but ultimately is saved by this and becomes greater than her parent.
You know, I think I've talked myself around.
Monday, 14 January 2019
Story review: Clover by Charlie Jane Anders: Transformation, luck & beauty
This is an utterly beautiful little story, a perfectly worked gem. A mostly black cat is gifted to a young couple with the promise it will bring luck, and things seem to go well - not miraculously well, but a steady streak of progress in their respective professions. Nine years later, to the day, another cat is delivered as a companion for the first. The first cat, Berkeley, doesn't seem to take to Clover and this disruption begins to reverse the good fortune of the previous years.
Charlie Jane Anders give this a fairy tale cadence throughout, which works perfectly. The unexpected gift of cats from strange men is odd, but within the tone this is not too strange to be accepted. Perhaps it is the cats, but there are hints of Murakami and, perhaps, Charles de Lint.
The tale itself is simple, that of a couple facing the ups and downs of life together, the one from whom we get the POV questioning himself when things go awry and paralysed with fear, unable to communicate. What makes it sparkle is that handling of tone and detail; the characters are minimally but artfully sketched with small details, and is the world. This is clearly a fantasy tale - as I say, a fairy story, with strange people delivering cats that (may) grant luck and may not be cats at all - but the brushed mise en scene suggests a world that is barely tomorrow - increased displacement of refugees, violence and intolerance. Actually, as it was published in 2016, perhaps we are in that tomorrow.
The whole is filled with compassion and flair and magic. We are left with lose threads but this is fine as they are part of the richness of the tapestry, and an acceptance that not having magical, external luck is simply normal life. If that maneki neko actually was any more than a placebo after all.
I see that the story is marked as All the Birds in the Sky 1.5. I've had that on my shelf for awhile, so I think it is due a read.
Original review at goodreads
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2673995901
Charlie Jane Anders give this a fairy tale cadence throughout, which works perfectly. The unexpected gift of cats from strange men is odd, but within the tone this is not too strange to be accepted. Perhaps it is the cats, but there are hints of Murakami and, perhaps, Charles de Lint.
The tale itself is simple, that of a couple facing the ups and downs of life together, the one from whom we get the POV questioning himself when things go awry and paralysed with fear, unable to communicate. What makes it sparkle is that handling of tone and detail; the characters are minimally but artfully sketched with small details, and is the world. This is clearly a fantasy tale - as I say, a fairy story, with strange people delivering cats that (may) grant luck and may not be cats at all - but the brushed mise en scene suggests a world that is barely tomorrow - increased displacement of refugees, violence and intolerance. Actually, as it was published in 2016, perhaps we are in that tomorrow.
The whole is filled with compassion and flair and magic. We are left with lose threads but this is fine as they are part of the richness of the tapestry, and an acceptance that not having magical, external luck is simply normal life. If that maneki neko actually was any more than a placebo after all.
I see that the story is marked as All the Birds in the Sky 1.5. I've had that on my shelf for awhile, so I think it is due a read.
Original review at goodreads
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2673995901
Book review: Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall
Tim Marshall presents an interesting book showing how, in so many ways, geography is destiny, how climate, along with access to arable land, navigable rivers, and suitable coastal seaports determines the level of success a nation can achieve and indeed - along with the seas, rivers, deserts and mountains that border it - the reasons a given area will even become a nation.
This in itself should not be especially revelatory - in his wonderful Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies Jared Diamond give an extraordinarily well argued case of how these factors have shaped the history of humankind, and Marshall references this - but here the writer gives ten specific examples, focusing on recent history, current geopolitics, and the future. He is making the point that these factors seem to be something we have forgotten, that we have been blinded by the power of technology and how much it has shrunk the globe but, in fact, power - either economic or military - still relies on moving large amounts of material by land and/or sea.
He covers such things as Russia's lack of a warm-water port and single point of easy land access to Europe via the Northern European Plain and how this explains that Putin's focus on Ukraine is at least as much tactical as ideological. Why India and China have never had a major conflict, separated as they are by the greatest mountain range on Earth. Why any talk of a Latin American great economic power is premature to say the least, due to the all but insuperable terrain and, well, that it's just so damned far from the rest of world. How, once it gained control of the landmass via clever dealing/luck/genocide the United States was almost guaranteed dominance due to the terrain, climate, and positioning. (As an aside, he points out that annexing of Texas in 1836 was a close thing; how much would an opposite outcome have changed things?)
Marshall writes with clarity but, surprisingly given his pedigree as a journalist, rather drily. Perhaps this is a stylistic choice to let his assertions speak for themselves and grip the reader, which they generally do. While he mentions trade rather a lot, and food production and water availability, his focus is largely on how geography affects military movements (Russian tanks across the aforementioned Northern European Plain, Chinese warships through the Straits of Malacca, etc) and the transport of oil and gas. That this last currently tops all else for importance is difficult to argue with - the modern, and modernising, world runs on energy and fossil fuels are currently cheap and plentiful and (barring the increasingly obvious side effects of their use) incredibly efficient. Marshall seems to be implying increases in fossil fuel use - references to expansion of fields in South America, Africa, and the Arctic in particular - and not only is this depressing but his predictions barely touch on the effect of this use, and don't seem to account for the changes in climate in sea levels that they will bring.
This edition was revised in 2016, and I was constantly reminded of how some things have changed since publication. That Crimea is now part of Russia a startling but minor change. What kept leaping out were the points when discussing US influence around the world. For instance, in the sections on China and Korea & Japan, much was made of China's aggression nautical expansion and the pressure it is putting on its neighbours - throwing money at Pakistan and other places to develop friendly ports, or the threats toward South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the rest. The author regularly states that there is no percentage in countries switching allegiance despite China's best efforts while the US has their backs, and I could not help but think of Donald Trump's systematic dismantling of American diplomacy and soft power. OK, he may be out of the way in two years (or less!) but trust is easily lost and difficult to regain. When faced with both carrots and sticks from the new Asian proto-superpower and uncertainty on the reliability of the existing American one, it may not be a difficult decision. After all, to refocus and repurpose a quote from the book, "Beijing is close, and Washington is far away."
3.5 stars
This in itself should not be especially revelatory - in his wonderful Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies Jared Diamond give an extraordinarily well argued case of how these factors have shaped the history of humankind, and Marshall references this - but here the writer gives ten specific examples, focusing on recent history, current geopolitics, and the future. He is making the point that these factors seem to be something we have forgotten, that we have been blinded by the power of technology and how much it has shrunk the globe but, in fact, power - either economic or military - still relies on moving large amounts of material by land and/or sea.
He covers such things as Russia's lack of a warm-water port and single point of easy land access to Europe via the Northern European Plain and how this explains that Putin's focus on Ukraine is at least as much tactical as ideological. Why India and China have never had a major conflict, separated as they are by the greatest mountain range on Earth. Why any talk of a Latin American great economic power is premature to say the least, due to the all but insuperable terrain and, well, that it's just so damned far from the rest of world. How, once it gained control of the landmass via clever dealing/luck/genocide the United States was almost guaranteed dominance due to the terrain, climate, and positioning. (As an aside, he points out that annexing of Texas in 1836 was a close thing; how much would an opposite outcome have changed things?)
Marshall writes with clarity but, surprisingly given his pedigree as a journalist, rather drily. Perhaps this is a stylistic choice to let his assertions speak for themselves and grip the reader, which they generally do. While he mentions trade rather a lot, and food production and water availability, his focus is largely on how geography affects military movements (Russian tanks across the aforementioned Northern European Plain, Chinese warships through the Straits of Malacca, etc) and the transport of oil and gas. That this last currently tops all else for importance is difficult to argue with - the modern, and modernising, world runs on energy and fossil fuels are currently cheap and plentiful and (barring the increasingly obvious side effects of their use) incredibly efficient. Marshall seems to be implying increases in fossil fuel use - references to expansion of fields in South America, Africa, and the Arctic in particular - and not only is this depressing but his predictions barely touch on the effect of this use, and don't seem to account for the changes in climate in sea levels that they will bring.
This edition was revised in 2016, and I was constantly reminded of how some things have changed since publication. That Crimea is now part of Russia a startling but minor change. What kept leaping out were the points when discussing US influence around the world. For instance, in the sections on China and Korea & Japan, much was made of China's aggression nautical expansion and the pressure it is putting on its neighbours - throwing money at Pakistan and other places to develop friendly ports, or the threats toward South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and the rest. The author regularly states that there is no percentage in countries switching allegiance despite China's best efforts while the US has their backs, and I could not help but think of Donald Trump's systematic dismantling of American diplomacy and soft power. OK, he may be out of the way in two years (or less!) but trust is easily lost and difficult to regain. When faced with both carrots and sticks from the new Asian proto-superpower and uncertainty on the reliability of the existing American one, it may not be a difficult decision. After all, to refocus and repurpose a quote from the book, "Beijing is close, and Washington is far away."
3.5 stars
Sunday, 23 December 2018
An open letter to Jeremy Corbyn
Dear Mr Corbyn
I have always been a socialist, and have almost always voted Labour ( the exceptions being voting tactically in an area Labour could not win, and in some local elections ), but I only became a Labour party member to support your candidacy. I, along with so many others, saw you as someone who would return Labour to its correct place, to fight for a fairer society and for the majority of British people who have not been represented in politics in recent decades, and in your promise to return to being a party led by the will of its members.
And you have fought for these things. You have shown Labour to be a strong, radical, socialist alternative. You have withstood attacks from the right wing of your own party and the constant denigration by the British media, and I have been proud to be one of your supporters. However, your recent comment on Brexit is not only a failure of your party membership, but a betrayal of us.
The vast majority of the Labour membership - 86% of us - are in favour of a referendum on details of the withdrawal agreement and that one of the options should be to remain in the EU. Many have been pinning our hopes to end this self immolation on Labour, so to be told by the leader that Brexit would still go ahead under a Labour victory in a snap general election is the most shocking betrayal.
Mr Corbyn, one of your greatest features is the strength of your convictions, and I understand that the history of the British left has not alway been easy with the EU - seeing it, not always wrongly, as a neo-liberal capitalist mission. This has been, and is, one aspect of the whole, but it is at tension with others; human rights, social progress, regulation of the excesses of corporate power. The EU comprises the most progressive nations on the planet as members - Sweden, Finland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany - or close associates, such as Norway. All these countries and more are far to the left of where the UK has been for decade, and should be models we emulate, so to pretend the club of which they are members and, indeed, run is some capitalist conspiracy is ludicrous. The EU is project is an active entity, shaped by and shaping the members and a socialist-lead UK should be part of that.
There is the argument that Labour represents many areas that voted Leave, so is beholden to its constituents. On the face of it this is a sound argument - we are an representative democracy whose politicians are elected to conduct the will of the people. However, leaders must also lead. It is often a fine balance - to serve but also educate and inform. In this instance, this is nothing but an excuse and rank cowardice. It is clear that, not only were the British people misled and lied to, but that there is no possible outcome of leaving the EU that does not render vast swathes of the country much, much worse off - and those working-class, under-privileged, poor communities that so often voted leave will be and are being hit hardest of all. It is the duty of those who represent these communities - as so many of the Labour MPs are doing - to talk honestly to their electors about the position in which we find ourselves and what the immediate decisions for our future, and that of our children and grandchildren.
Brexit is the most immediate threat to this country’s well being and prosperity. Mr Corbyn, as leader of the opposition, as leader of the party that should represent those most at risk, you should about face on your attitude. For the members of your party and for the good of your country, you should - you MUST - state that you will fight Brexit until there is no other choice. How can 86% of your own party support you otherwise?
I have always been a socialist, and have almost always voted Labour ( the exceptions being voting tactically in an area Labour could not win, and in some local elections ), but I only became a Labour party member to support your candidacy. I, along with so many others, saw you as someone who would return Labour to its correct place, to fight for a fairer society and for the majority of British people who have not been represented in politics in recent decades, and in your promise to return to being a party led by the will of its members.
And you have fought for these things. You have shown Labour to be a strong, radical, socialist alternative. You have withstood attacks from the right wing of your own party and the constant denigration by the British media, and I have been proud to be one of your supporters. However, your recent comment on Brexit is not only a failure of your party membership, but a betrayal of us.
The vast majority of the Labour membership - 86% of us - are in favour of a referendum on details of the withdrawal agreement and that one of the options should be to remain in the EU. Many have been pinning our hopes to end this self immolation on Labour, so to be told by the leader that Brexit would still go ahead under a Labour victory in a snap general election is the most shocking betrayal.
Mr Corbyn, one of your greatest features is the strength of your convictions, and I understand that the history of the British left has not alway been easy with the EU - seeing it, not always wrongly, as a neo-liberal capitalist mission. This has been, and is, one aspect of the whole, but it is at tension with others; human rights, social progress, regulation of the excesses of corporate power. The EU comprises the most progressive nations on the planet as members - Sweden, Finland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany - or close associates, such as Norway. All these countries and more are far to the left of where the UK has been for decade, and should be models we emulate, so to pretend the club of which they are members and, indeed, run is some capitalist conspiracy is ludicrous. The EU is project is an active entity, shaped by and shaping the members and a socialist-lead UK should be part of that.
There is the argument that Labour represents many areas that voted Leave, so is beholden to its constituents. On the face of it this is a sound argument - we are an representative democracy whose politicians are elected to conduct the will of the people. However, leaders must also lead. It is often a fine balance - to serve but also educate and inform. In this instance, this is nothing but an excuse and rank cowardice. It is clear that, not only were the British people misled and lied to, but that there is no possible outcome of leaving the EU that does not render vast swathes of the country much, much worse off - and those working-class, under-privileged, poor communities that so often voted leave will be and are being hit hardest of all. It is the duty of those who represent these communities - as so many of the Labour MPs are doing - to talk honestly to their electors about the position in which we find ourselves and what the immediate decisions for our future, and that of our children and grandchildren.
Brexit is the most immediate threat to this country’s well being and prosperity. Mr Corbyn, as leader of the opposition, as leader of the party that should represent those most at risk, you should about face on your attitude. For the members of your party and for the good of your country, you should - you MUST - state that you will fight Brexit until there is no other choice. How can 86% of your own party support you otherwise?
Wednesday, 12 September 2018
A belated political awakening
I’ve never been someone who goes to political meetings much less speaks at them or takes part in political activism. I’ve always considered myself a socialist and an internationalist, but I’ve kept my activity to voting in elections and discussions, online or in person. I’ve assumed that the march of history is in the right direction and trusted in this progress.
Frankly, I’ve been a lazy bastard. The progress of history has only been in the right direction when people have worked for it, and there are always forces of conservatism that want to halt and reverse this progress. This evening I took the mic at a Left Against Brexit meeting and said so.
In the run-up to the referendum I was complacent. I couldn’t believe that people could possibly back the likes of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson, could possibly believe the transparent lies blazoned across the sides of busses, and vote against what was clearly against their best interests. In my runs and walks around Sheffield the Remain posters I’d seen in windows had far outnumbered those that called for Leave.
I thought that it was enough to just vote, and the result was like a punch in the gut. I don’t think I’d felt such pain from an election result since John Major’s victory, when we had felt so certain of a Labour win, and I had never felt so estranged from my fellow citizens.
The past two years have been hard. It has felt as though we have lost our country, which is somewhat ironic. It has felt as though so much of the progress we were making has been lost. Corbyn’s election as Labour leader on the back of the Momentum surge, pulling the party back to where it should be, representing this country’s working people and poor and disenfranchised rather than being soe Tory-light pretending that market forces and public private partnerships can improve things, has begun to feel hollow. The Labour leadership’s position of not fighting against Brexit, and Corbyn’s own disinterest in leading on this particular issue have been galling.
So I have become someone who attends political events and speaks at them when I have something to say. I have vowed and signed up to take part in activism to shape the world into how I think it should be for the benefit of the many. I dearly hope it is not too late to stop the utter disaster that any form of Brexit will surely be - that I have not left it too late to help. And, even if I can’t if the worst no-deal barely-better-than-Armageddon Brexit - or if we reverse this insanity and pull back from the brink - there will be more fighting to do.
Lazy bastards of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your sense of desperate helplessness.
Frankly, I’ve been a lazy bastard. The progress of history has only been in the right direction when people have worked for it, and there are always forces of conservatism that want to halt and reverse this progress. This evening I took the mic at a Left Against Brexit meeting and said so.
In the run-up to the referendum I was complacent. I couldn’t believe that people could possibly back the likes of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson, could possibly believe the transparent lies blazoned across the sides of busses, and vote against what was clearly against their best interests. In my runs and walks around Sheffield the Remain posters I’d seen in windows had far outnumbered those that called for Leave.
I thought that it was enough to just vote, and the result was like a punch in the gut. I don’t think I’d felt such pain from an election result since John Major’s victory, when we had felt so certain of a Labour win, and I had never felt so estranged from my fellow citizens.
The past two years have been hard. It has felt as though we have lost our country, which is somewhat ironic. It has felt as though so much of the progress we were making has been lost. Corbyn’s election as Labour leader on the back of the Momentum surge, pulling the party back to where it should be, representing this country’s working people and poor and disenfranchised rather than being soe Tory-light pretending that market forces and public private partnerships can improve things, has begun to feel hollow. The Labour leadership’s position of not fighting against Brexit, and Corbyn’s own disinterest in leading on this particular issue have been galling.
So I have become someone who attends political events and speaks at them when I have something to say. I have vowed and signed up to take part in activism to shape the world into how I think it should be for the benefit of the many. I dearly hope it is not too late to stop the utter disaster that any form of Brexit will surely be - that I have not left it too late to help. And, even if I can’t if the worst no-deal barely-better-than-Armageddon Brexit - or if we reverse this insanity and pull back from the brink - there will be more fighting to do.
Lazy bastards of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your sense of desperate helplessness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)