Politics, The Final Frontier (Politics)

[Mick Harper]

This sounds reasonable enough and acceptable in a perfect world. But she was, according to the original report, found in a distressed state in the toilet 'later'. I'm not a great authority on these matters but drink does not blot things out on this scale, does it? If there was an immediate complaint of rape, a rape kit, and a blood alcohol test then, yes, all fair enough -- even though there does seem an undue double standard going on here. In matters where consent is so critical, some duty should weigh on the woman. A drunk adult should not be in quite the same category as, say, a child who cannot give legal consent. 'Rape' is beginning to be so broadly drawn as to be in danger of becoming meaningless. Jeffrey Epstein is so accused routinely.

But I cannot help thinking that it was the sex (not the high-fiving) being posted on the internet that might have prompted much later action. But more if you have it.

PS There is an AE aspect. If the British attitude to rape is much less restrictive than is the norm, is it correct for foreigners to be treated entirely as per 'ignorance of the law is no defence'? This is irrespective whether you approve of the British position or not.

[Mick Harper]

If we are to accept that drunkenness obviates consent then some rules will have to be set. It can hardly be denied that acts of sex outside ordinary relationships (or indeed that initiate relationships) take place other than when alcohol is present. Of course this happened with drunk driving after years when it was either tolerated or judged arbitrarily so it is not a novel principle in law. We have got past the stage of "Actually, I find I drive better after I've had a few." We all know the present situation, we all accept the situation; we were all doubtful when it came in, we cannot imagine it not applying now. Plus, we all accept that a certain amount of rough justice occurs. We shrug, it's better this way.

In the present case, one difficulty is immediately apparent when applied to rape. We can be sure that the woman's alcohol intake was not measured at the time since it is inconceivable that she would not be able to remember having been raped by two men immediately after it happened, and it is quite unfair on the men to say that she could not remember later with the clear implication that she must have been too drunk to remember it.

But what if she had been breathalysed at the time? Do we really think the present moral climate would permit learned counsel to argue over whether eighty micrograms per 100 millilitres allows a woman to say yes, but a hundred and twenty, no? But maybe we would get used to it in time.

[Mick Harper]

I am reasonably confident that the Italians' nationality had something to do with it. If you don't know what is or is not an offence, if you are speaking through an interpreter, if you are dealing with drunkenness which has a dozen nuances in every language, it is all too easy to say, "Sure, of course she was drunk." Because of course she was. When I was young -- when I wasn't so young -- I must have raped a lot of women in my time. On not a few occasions I suppose I might argue it was me that was being raped.

Whatever we decide, however we decide to enforce it, it must never be forgotten that sex itself is built on the fact of rough justice. Men vis a vis women. As a society we can even things up if we wish (and generally speaking it seems reasonable to do so) but let's not have too many men languishing in gaol because rough sex makes for rough justice.

[Wile E. Coyote]

It started innocently enough with a WhatsApp message from BOJO wishing me a Happy Diwali. At the time, it seemed entirely appropriate that the PM would wish to make contact with the foremost exponent of Politically Correct AE. I confess I did not even reply, as I had a particularly busy work schedule analysing some coin hoards. But BOJO and his mates have proved most persistent, and a week later I received information on Kashmir. It appears that Mr Corbyn (who I have always considered an eccentric old cove, pining for the days of the old GLC) is secretly in cahoots with Pakistan to destabilise the Kashmir region. Now Wiley is the foremost AE exponent on Terrorism, but hasn't come across this Kashmiri thing much. Anyway, another message arrives this week telling me Corbyn is anti-Hindu, along with an invitation to appear with Boris at a photo shoot as he visits the Isle Of Wight.

Of course this is a great opportunity to boost the AE message, so I will have to attend, but does leave me in a quandary.

1) Do I do a Warren, claiming say 7.5% Punjabi heritage? Maybe a great-grandma who was working close to Kings Cross met an exotic Indian diplomat posted to London?

2) Do I do the full Trudeau?

My understanding is that the political optics are all-important, so it will probably have to be the latter.

I will of course salute as the picture is taken, so you actually know who I am.

[Mick Harper]

Both party leaders should tread carefully. It is a criminal offence in India to suggest that Kashmir should have gone to Pakistan in the first place (possibly vice versa in Pakistan, I don't know). We wouldn't want our Prime Minister being arrested, a la General Pinochet, during a stopover in the sub-continent, by some enthusiastic nationalist busybody. Or perhaps we could arrange it.

But then again the Tories had better be careful about choosing sides at all. Hindus are not an important demographic whereas Pakistanis not only are, they manage to get the vote out whether they are or they aren't. If you know what I mean. Sikhs should be approached with caution whichever side of the border they are on or think they should be on.

You are right to be in the dark about The Left and Kashmir. This is a familiar problem: they know which side they ought to be on (Pakistan's) but they know which country they cannot be seen to be supporting on account of it being peopled by religious reactionaries, mainly ruled by military governments and always taking the American side in foreign policy (Pakistan). But things can change over time, e.g. Israel. Ah, like I say...

PS Good to hear you've got a touch of the tarbrush, Wiley. We operate a strict positive discrimination policy here at the AEL so you might be in line for a promotion. We've got a part-time position for someone who can weed out offensive racial slurs if you're interested.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

We can now sum up the position strategically as we enter the Last Days of Gomorrah. The Tories are further right than at any time in living memory. Labour are further left than at any time in living memory. And the centre has imploded. So where is everybody?

Holding their noses to keep out the sulphurous fumes, that's where. We shan't see their like again. For five long years.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

This is an example of "tyranny of large numbers". When the police estimate the numbers at a demo to be 20,000 and the organisers reckon 100,000, everybody concludes the truth is 'somewhere in the middle'. Only AE-ists say the actual number will be c 18,000, because both sides have professional reasons to over-estimate.

Thus with trees the outcome is a) likely to be lower than the lowest since it is an aspiration of the probable executant power and b) it is not very important anyway since there would be closer (or wider) affinity if it was. The figures, as presented, are clearly a case of "your fiver and raise you another fiver".

[Mick Harper]

[Mick Harper]

[Wile E. Coyote]

I still don't think this Brexit business is critical.

Still.....

This is the first time I can remember that a National State that had a Eurosceptic referendum vote to leave, or halt greater integration, has not had the good grace to back down. Stubborn lot the Brits.

The Conservative party, after years of being ridiculed as split over Europe, has just snatched victory from the jaws of defeat, by being united. The Peoples Party are currently, as is the modern way, urging reflection and listening whilst Labour Splaining on Twitter about the thickos that have just let Bojo in through their Red Wall.

Labour has now abandoned Scotland. Some comrades want to go recruiting the city youth vote in the hope the older reactionary voters in the North will die off, others want to rebuild their Northern wall.

The pendulum theory of politics (two terms is enough, if you are lucky enough to get a third you are buggered in the fourth election) might be broken. That is if it ever existed at all.

Ted Heath's legacy, ie permanent British membership of Europe, is now about to be rewritten.

Or.....

OK, once the Brexit deal is done we will still be back to two party politics, with Europe as our biggest trading partner.

[Mick Harper]

You're much too pessimistic. There are sure to be a few spills and thrills before we settle down.

It's good to be reminded though that Europe was originally a Tory project. Even quite recently a Eurosceptic was someone who was opposed to Mrs Thatcher's (yes, you heard that right) espousal of the Maastricht programme of ever-greater union. Actually leaving was strictly fringe fruitcake. Then a minority. Then a majority. Then a requirement. Imagine, every single Conservative MP has had to go through that 180 degree transformation independently in his or her own head.

When the Tories move they take no prisoners with them. Now we are all their prisoners (as Owen Jones will be telling us shortly).

[Wile E. Coyote]

You gotta hand it to the Tories, they are patriots, in the sense they expect everyone else to put country before party, but only when it's in the Tories' interest. When Farage gave them a free run in many seats, they took him up and gave him nothing in return, not even Hartlepool. You would think the others would learn. It was a bit like the old Con Lib-Dem coalition. The Lib-Dems put country before party, and got a few ministerial cars, no influence, no proportional representation, and ended up defending spending cuts. The only thing the Lib-Dems got was a future kicking at the hands of the electorate, for breaking their promises.

[Mick Harper]

One Brexit oddity has not received any attention as far as I know. The Brexit Party got a few hundred or at most a few thousand votes in all Labour-held constituencies with these two striking exceptions

Barnsley Central
Dan Jarvis (Lab) 14,804
Victoria Felton (Brex) 11,223
Iftikhar Ahmed (Con) 7,892

Barnsley East
Stephanie Peacock (Lab) 14,329
Jim Ferguson (Brex) 11,112
Adam Gregg (Con) 10,377

What is it with Barnsley? I will tell you about the significance of Iftikhar Ahmed shortly.