Showing posts with label sociology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sociology. Show all posts

Wednesday, 10 June 2020

Not just about chlorine chicken

This isn’t just about chlorine chicken

 by Brian Bamford
GEORGE ORWELL wrote an essay 'In Defence of English Cooking' that:
'It will be seen that we have no cause to be ashamed of our cookery, so far as originality goes or so far as the ingredients go.  And yet it must be admitted that there is a serious snag from the foreign visitor's point of view.  This is that you practically don't find good English cooking outside a private house....  It is a fact that restaurants which are distinctively English are hard to find.' [1945]

Over half a century later in the Caterer & Hotelkeeper Millennium Supplement, on the 23 December 1999 claimed:
'Rationing was reintroduced in 1940, a year after the outbreak of the Second World War.  It continued until 1954, casting a shadow over any real culinary progression. Post-war London's leading restaurants were almost entirely run by Continental Europeans.'

And yet it goes on to argue:

'Outside the capital, though, the general state of food being served in most restaurants was abysmal, apart from rare exceptions such as Sharrow Bay in Ullswater (which opened in 1949) and the Bell at Aston Clinton.'


Raymond Postgate who went on to jointly write The Common People with G.D.H.Cole, helped to found The Good Food Guide.  Postgate a socialist, who helped to found the Communist Party of Great Britain, laid down some rules for fighting a war for English food wrote:



'Navigating a British restaurant during the middle of the twentieth century was in its way not so different from scoring a drink in Sweden before the outbreak of hostilities.  Postgate likened it to war.  The “Rules for Eating Out” published in the first Guide , from 1951-52, refer to restaurant staff as “the Enemy” and recommend battle tactics.'  And he advises:
“Take a long time reading the bill of fare, and see that your wife decides what she wants first. If the Enemy hears one of you say: ‘I’ll have whatever you do, dear’, he immediately decides he has no serious foe to encounter. What you want to impress on the establishment is that it has to deal with a pair of people who know exactly what they want, and are implacable.” ( GFG 19)
Adding in his recommendations:  'While diners and waiters were engaged in conflict, rules of war did apply, and the encounter should be civil even if it was not yet civilized. “You wish to give the impression not that you are angry with this particular restaurant, but that you are suspicious, after a lifetime of suffering.” ( GFG 19)'

His basic justification for the founding of The Guide is clear:
 'The Guide had become necessary because the suffering had lasted longer even than the lifetime of many GFG users: “For fifty years now complaints have been made against British cooking, and no improvement has resulted.” ( GFG 7)'


Serious entertaining was more likely to be done in private houses, where most professional chefs were employed, or in gentlemen's clubs - there were 200 at the turn of the century, compared with about 40 today.  Restaurants were frequented mostly by aristocrats and the gentry.  Women, of whatever class, were rarely seen in such establishments.

Derek Pattison & the 'Veblen good'

In response to the recent news that members of the US Congress have written to the US negotiator, calling on him to get rid of the UK’s ban on chlorinated chicken ‘once and for all’ DEREK PATTISON writes:
'I think it is true to say that people are economic maximizers and though we can make choices, our choices are always constrained for a variety of reasons.  This could be economic and also due to our social/class position in society .'

So speaks Pattsion, the economist, on behalf of the most miserable of sciences; forever labouring the price of everything and the value of nothing.  What would Raymond Postgate, founder of the Good Food Guide have to say about that?

When I did my degree in sociology at Manchester Poly. it was structured around economics, because at that time it was considered  that of all of the social sciences it was the closest to a 'natural science' like physics etc.  Do we want to eat cheap chlorine chicken suitably swilled with the chemical from the USA?  Yet when we considered this science of economics our attention was drawn to 'inverted demand curves'  and the effect of what came to be called a Veblen good as a type of luxury good for which demand increases as the price increases, in apparent contradiction of the law of demand, resulting in an upward-sloping demand curve. A higher price may make a product desirable as a status symbol in the practices of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure.  A product may be a Veblen good because it is a positional good, something few others can own. *

This is a sociological consequence which determines a price according to a snob value.   Here the effect on demand depends on the range of other goods available, their prices, and whether they serve as substitutes for the goods in question.  The effects are anomalies within demand theory, because the theory normally assumes that preferences are independent of price or the number of units being sold. They are therefore collectively referred to as interaction effects.

We can imagine that after Brexit cheap chlorine chicken will quickly become the food of the poor.

Another writer John Wilkins writes:  'And so we have the climb down.  The ban will be dropped and low animal welfare, chlorinated chicken will be UP on our supermarket shelves.'


The concession in this case has been that low welfare products will pay a higher tariff (the tax charged on imports) than high welfare products.  But even if the US agrees to this, there is no guarantee that the tariffs rate won’t be cut later on.

Mr. Wilkins adds:  'This is fundamentally about the right of our government or any government to set standards and regulations on things that people care about, whether on animal welfare, climate standards, workers rights, public health, environmental standards or anything else.'



Worryingly, the government is trying to present this as a win for the environment minister, because even though the promise that a ban would be maintained has been broken, it turns out that what the trade minister, Liz Truss, actually wanted to do was not only overturn the ban but also reduce all tariffs on chicken to zero! 
The Decline of English Food 

When George Orwell was writing in the post-war years there was rationing, and as he says 'Pubs, as a rule, sell no food at all, other than potato crisps and tasteless sandwiches.'  Meanwhile, at that time, the 'expensive restaurants  and hotels almost all imitate French cookery ... while if you want a good cheap meal you gravitate naturally towards a Greek, Italian or Chinese restaurant.'

Raymond Postgate believed that the decline in English cuisine went back to the Industrial Revolution, when he claimed that the young migrant women from the rural areas who moved into the cities had lost contact with their grandmothers thus distancing them from their traditional recipes and ingredients. 

The concession is that low welfare products will pay a higher tariff (the tax charged on imports) than high welfare products.

But we know agribusiness has been lobbying hard on this, and 47 members of the US Congress have written to the US negotiator, calling on him to get rid of the UK’s ban on chlorinated chicken ‘once and for all’.  Former trade minister, Liam Fox, said last month that “the US would walk” if it had to comply with the UK’s animal welfare standards.[5]

And so now John Wilkins says 'we have the climb down and the ban will be dropped and low animal welfare, chlorinated chicken will be UP on our supermarket shelves.  The concession is that low welfare products will pay a higher tariff (the tax charged on imports) than high welfare products.  But even if the US agrees to this, there is no guarantee that the tariffs rate won’t be cut later on.

'Worryingly, the present government is trying to represent this as a win for the environment minister, because even though the promise that a ban would be maintained has been broken, it turns out that what the trade minister, Liz Truss, actually wanted to do was not only overturn the ban but also reduce all tariffs on chicken to zero!' 


It is hard to believe that the quality of English cuisine will improve as a result of these recent developments in UK-US trade relations and animal welfare.

************************* 

*   Veblen goods are named after American economist Thorstein Veblen, who first identified conspicuous consumption as a mode of status-seeking in The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899).[1] A corollary of the Veblen effect is that lowering the price decreases the quantity demanded.[2]

A Veblen good is a type of luxury good for which demand increases as the price increases, in apparent contradiction of the law of demand, resulting in an upward-sloping demand curve. A higher price may make a product desirable as a status symbol in the practices of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure. A product may be a Veblen good because it is a positional good, something few others can own.

Veblen goods are named after American economist Thorstein Veblen, who first identified conspicuous consumption as a mode of status-seeking in The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899).[1] A corollary of the Veblen effect is that lowering the price decreases the quantity demanded.

Veblen goods are named after American economist Thorstein Veblen, who first identified conspicuous consumption as a mode of status-seeking in The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899).[1] A corollary of the Veblen effect is that lowering the price decreases the quantity demanded.[2]

Saturday, 14 March 2020

We Are Following The Science! Oh Really?


by Les May

DURING the Apollo 8 mission to the moon one of the crew, Jim Lovell, pressed the wrong button on the flight computer.  That cleared the memory which held the data about the exact position and orientation of the command module.  As a result the flight computer ‘thought’  it was still on the launch pad so instead of the nose pointing forward along the flight path, it pointed more or less at right angles.  Using the astro-sextant to make sightings on various stars the crew were able to give the computer enough data to allow it to figure out the orientation of the module.

Getting back to Earth safely wasn’t magic or good luck, it followed from the fact that the physics of space flight is an exact science obeying the laws of motion formulated by Sir Isaac Newton in the seventeenth century.   Knowing the mass, velocity and the forces acting on an object we can predict exactly where it will be at any time in the future.

Like ecology, economics, politics and sociology, epidemiology is not an exact science. It uses the tools of science to analyse its data, presents its findings in numerical form and runs computer simulations, but unlike physics, it is not an exact science. Its predictions are ‘educated guesses’ based upon the collective experiences of it’s practitioners.  Those experiences come from investigating past outbreaks of some pestilence.  The educated guesses are in the form of ‘this is what happened last time with a similar disease.

The UK government could truthfully say it was being ‘led by the science so long as we were in the ‘containment phase’ of dealing with the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the name of the virus which causes the disease COVID-19.  Containment worked with the original outbreak of the first human transmissable SARS virus which was eventually brought under control in July 2003, following a policy of isolating people suspected of carrying it and screening all passengers travelling by air from affected countries for signs of the infection.  It has also worked with outbreaks of Ebola, so it is a tried and tested method.  That phase is passed. From now on the decisions are political ones.

As I understand the situation the government is assuming that about 60% to 70% of the UK population will become infected with SARS-CoV-2 and suffer from COVID-19, and that those that recover will resist further infection so the virus will die out, an assumption based upon the concept of ‘herd immunity’.

Now lets put some figures to this. The present population of the UK is about 60 millions. If we take the conservative estimate of a 60% infection rate that means that some 36 million people will be infected.  According to the World Health Organisation (WHO) the crude mortality rate (the number of reported deaths divided by the number of reported cases) is between 3-4%, (the Chinese experience suggests 3.9%), but the infection mortality rate (the number of reported deaths divided by the number of infections) will be lower.  Assuming that it is in the regions of 1% that suggests 360,000 deaths can be expected in the the UK in the space of a few months.

What I find remarkable is that the UK government seems so complacent about the spread of the virus. Compare this with the situation in China where there have so far been 82,000 cases reported and 3,200 deaths in a population of 1.4 billion people. (Figures correct at 13 March 2020)

Just because the UK government has decided that the spread of the virus can no longer be contained does not mean that we as individuals have to fall in with this view.  Older people in particular can to a large extent avoid placing themselves in a position where they might become infected, by avoiding meeting groups of people in confined spaces. This isn’t ‘panic’ it is rational behaviour.


***********************

Wednesday, 12 February 2020

The Working Class & Leftist Delusion

 by Andrew Wallace

LEFTISM gets itself into bogged down into certain delusional mythologies, one of which concerns the romanticisation of the working work, the heroic proletarian toilers and tillers of the earth,  preordained by Marxist gospel to act as the historical revolutionary agent to overthrow capitalism.  Marx had been pretty disparaging about peasants and 'rural idiocy', instead he and his fellow 19th century socialists felt that a newly emergent class of industrial labourers would shape up as the critical agents of modernity.
Alas some 140 years after Marx's death the working classes across the globe remain as distant from this pre-ordained enterprise as they ever were.  Indeed it seems quite the converse; the working class as hitherto constituted has played a most passive if indeed not reactionary role.
Leftist pretensions to scientific rigour can no longer disguise the romantic fallacy and cognitive bias of 'The Superior Virtue of the Oppressed'. As Bertrand Russell tartly observed 'Marx was the Wordsworth of the proletariat; its Freud is still to come."
David Selbourne has dissected this fallacious intellectual cul-de-sac as:
'prodigies of useless intellectual labour, whose largely metaphysical character is determined  by the metaphysical nature of the problems to which they seek a solution At the lowest political level, however masked by intellectual sophistication, they can descend to disappointed abuse of the working class for having failed to live up to middle-class socialist expectation. Theories, as we have seen, of 'consumerism', of the 'deferential' working class, of the 'long catalepsy' of the British working-class movement, of a class consciousness 'subordinate' in its very 'texture' to the 'hegemony of the bourgeois', all have silently inscribed within them the figure of a politically defective proletarian who is the obverse of the archetypally active class hero of socialist romance, first cousin to Dyden's noble savage.'
A truth which can still barely be alighted upon in progressive circles, 'socialism' is a not a product of the working class worldview, instead it is a quixotic interloper of sorts, a radical import of déclassé intellectuals who had reason to take issue with the corrosive workings and hardships of industrial capitalism. The wage labourers of course bore the brunt of the exploitative economics that coerced them to work in the most degrading of conditions and had active interests in agitating for improvements in their lot. However 'labourism' isn't 'socialism', whereby the former is to be realised in seeking redress to particular grievances and privations rather than the latter politically undefined and radical goal of usurping the settlement of the day.  Conservatism presented itself in the passivity of the general population and the consequent isolation and containment of dangerous radicals and agitators who threatened to bring anarchy to social order.
Marxism has had the unenviable task of confronting this conspicuous turd in a swimming pool with a battery of impressive rationalisations. Chief amongst these is the infamous idea of false consciousness which has been taken as an unfortunate slur on character in the same way ignorance as a descriptor is taken as an insult even though a concise definition isn't morally pejorative.
Marxists have also proved adept at accounting for a multitude of countervailing tendencies that militate against economic immiseration, such as the co-opting of 'bourgeois' sociology's 'embourgeoisment thesis' of middle class expansion, thereby muddying the waters of class conflict via a bought off 'aristocracy of labour'.
Leftist intellectuals then have erred in projecting a radical telos onto the working class arena, ignoring the utilitarian and individualistic basis to labour politics and the voluntarist and anti-statist ethos that marked these communities. They have also been oblivious to the deep structural incorporation of working class material resources into the capitalist system through mortgage and hire purchase.
However other sociologists have attempted to sidestep the theoretical travails of working class conservatism and the 'deviant' class voter by pointing out the not unsurprising reality of hegemony by way of the deep state ancien regime of a living museum pageantry (monarchy, parliament, church, armed forces, public schools, civil service, BBC) which naturally defaults us all to the dominant culture. Ironically this confinement to functionalist observation and impotent commentary rather nullifies Marx's famous 11th thesis on Feuerbach which implored for more action and less philosophical windbaggery!
It's the culture, stupid
The class voting sociology (Marxism ‘lite’) of the post war years is now having to contend with the other belated but uncontroversial driver of voting behaviour - culture!  As analysists are now recognising, voters are motivated by cultural issues which may not easily be subsumed within an economic paradigm and furthermore may actually be oppositional to the traditional material class interests.  Bourdieu's ideas on social and cultural capital have helped to redress the balance by giving due prominence to education and the cognitive repertoire that help to constitute social class in the modern era.
Many left revisionists had already discerned that traditional class based politics were becoming problematic with declining working class vote share from the 1960s onwards alongside a new counter cultural zeitgeist. With deindustrialisation poised to pulp much of manufacturing and decimate organised labour, Hobsbawm and Gorz wrote in unflinching terms of the likely recalibration of socialist politics. Gorz talked of moving away from class politics in favour of the 'new social movements'. This turn to identity and culture politics followed in the wake of disenchantment with the 'backward' working class. However such doubling down on the new politics exacerbated the cultural and intellectual chasm between the liberal campus radicals and the more socially conservative blue collar workers, leading to a further breakdown of the previous broad based social alliances between the classes.
Working class Hobbesian attitudes to the Welfare State
Fern Brady writing for The Guardian was taken aback by the distinctive authoritarian attitudes towards benefit claimants, particularly the unemployed and disabled.  Those without obvious physical markers of disability were often the target of an inglorious brutalism unveiled in her interviewees who amply demonstrated
(an) 'internalised...Thatcherite every-man-for-himself mentality, wanting benefits for themselves but resenting anyone else getting a handout...it went in a circle, anger constantly directed at other victims of the coalition government's Welfare Reform  Act instead of the politicians and policymakers responsible.'
Houtman et al drawing on Bourdieu’s work discerned the recourse to a 'deserving/undeserving' criteria in relationship to limited social capital and associated authoritarian attitudes which also were marked by penalising attitudes for 'out-groups' and fringe communities.
So ought we really to be surprised at this abundance of working class authoritarianism?  Again Selbourne is illuminative on precisely this point:
‘...any form of illiberalism in the human-as worker can come to be discounted or recycled as an aberration from the norm of a supposedly instinctive or class, predilection for progressive, fraternal and democratic solutions to social and economic problems. That history does not reveal the latter unequivocally, to put it mildly, is inconvenient. Indeed, illiberalism is as much an ideological choice of direction as any other and more explicable, in conditions of insecurity or fear of unemployment, than many’
In critically disabusing leftism of its ludicrous 'salt of the earth' workerism, it is not my intention to deny the very real and toxic nature of capitalism and I continue to desire even if without much hope that a saner politics emerge to reign in the excesses of our times.  However we need to face up to the increasing intellectual bankruptcy of the left.  We are now very much at the whims of the political right who continue to exploit the post liberal environment in their canny take on working class sensitivities.  'White van conservatism' and Boris's new 'Workers' Party' are set to run the show into the distant future.
I have drawn on the following essays/books/articles during the writing of this article:

Friday, 16 December 2016

How to be an Inmate?


Michael Burke must prepare his own narrative for cell-mates

by Brian Bamford – a former inmate at Strangeways HMP
IF Michael Burke, who was yesterday sentenced to 15-years jail having been found guilty of raping his own sister 'Selfie Queen' Karen Danczuk as a child, and sexually assaulting two other girls, is to avoid himself being brutalised and possibly raped in the British prison system, he must now be carefully preparing his own narrative to relate to the prison community on the wings. 
Only yesterday the Manchester Evening News (MEN) carried a story by a prison officer at Strangeways notorious Victorian prison in Manchester in which the unnamed source said 'staff are living in fear of violence and nothing is being done to stop inmates using drugs and mobile phones'.
'Out of Sight, Out of Mind'
English people tend to adopt the view of 'Out of sight, out of mind!' with regard to their own prison system, and the anonymous source told the MEN that 'It is clear the home secretary does not understand the issues staff face daily'.
The prison officer is reported to have said in a letter that 'prisoners have no respect for authority, are violent to fellow inmates and staff and take drugs such as spice.'
Furthermore, he wrote:  'There have been several incidents at HMP Manchester where staff have been threatened by prisoners and governors have done nothing to protect the staff.'
'Notoriety' of Defendant and 'Fame' of Complainant
Defending Burke, Nicholas Walker QC said Burke had suffered a downfall of a 'very public nature'.  And Mr. Walker added:  'It's a feature of this case he can't enjoy the luxury of anonymity as the others may enjoy'.  
The judge, Mr Justice Gilbart, told Mr. Walker QC that he was not sentencing Mr. Burke on the 'because of his notoriety' in the media but based of the evidence presented in Court.  Mr Justice Gilbart said of Mrs. Danczuk that though she was 'well known' the Court will protect those in the media, and she had been active as a Councillor. 
Karen Danczuk, the estranged wife of the disgraced Rochdale MP Simon Danczuk, had claimed her mother was distant, that her her father worked nights, and that her brother Michael had begun grooming her from the age of six for sex, before getting into bed and raping her from the age of nine as other siblings slept. 
Mr. Justice Goldbart, handing down the sentence to the defendant:  'Whether she (Karen Danczuk) was nine, ten or 11 at the date of the first rape is not clear, but on any view she was a young girl who not reached puberty.  After she had endured your attentions up to the age of 11 she stood up to you, you didn't touch her again.
'You have shown not a shred of remorse in your defence you spent much of your time claiming she had orchestrated a conspiracy against you, a claim I regard as entirely absurd.  Your second victim was a naïve 12-year-old ... you did not care whether she agreed or not, (went from heavy petting to) forcing yourself on her just as you had your sister.
'You ejaculated within her and you persuaded her and she persuaded herself that it was normal.
'You made (the third victim) submit.  Here too you alleged she was part of the conspiracy.' orchestrated by your sister.'
Mr. Justice Goldbart told Mr. Burke:  'You have an attitude to women that reveals a self-justifying lack of insight.'
Meanwhile, we must wait to see if any British newspaper carries another exclusive insightful interview with Karen Danczuk who claims to have suffered 'severe psychological harm'.
On the wings of a Total Institution
As Michael Burke goes into the cells to begin his sentence he will be entering what sociologists call a 'total institution'.  He will be striped, showered and searched before he gets to the cells on the reception wing.  He will be questioned as to any special dietary requirements.  I normally lie and declare myself to be a vegetarian in the hope that it may enable me to get more choice when the food is dished-up.
Once on the wings he must have a suitably convincing narrative to explain his predicament to his fellow cell-mates and other prisoners in the jail community. 
In Court Two of the Manchester Crown Court yesterday, Mr. Justice Goldbart, educated at the  University of Cambridge, may have preached to you about you having 'shown not a shred of remorse'.  That may well be the case, but the prison community is an entirely different jurisdiction from the Crown Court, and he will soon find out it applies its own rules and posses its own hierarchy and standards. 
Rule 43!
Michael Burke needs to prepare himself skillfully if he is not to end up segregated serving his ten-year sentence on Rule 43.*
To establish his status in the prison hierarchy Michael Burke will have to present a story which will  be acceptable and will gain him respect among the inmates.  To do this and survive on the wings, he needs to reaffirm his defence that a 'conspiracy' was 'orchestrated' against him by a group of people who had malicious intent.  In the context of an all-male community the idea of what the novelist Henry James called a 'capricious woman' would not be difficult for the average prison inmate to understand, (see 'The Princess Casamassima ).
For Mr. Burke to now suggest to his fellow prisoners that he is the victim of a 'conspiracy'  by an ex-girl friend and a former partner would not be something that the male prison community would find hard to understand, especially when one of the complainants has given an exclusive interview to the press.  Though it is not yet known if she will be paid for this.
Some substance may be given to this account by an exchange of e-mails in September/ October 2015, when Northern Voices was given a name of someone who had approached some women previously associated with Mr. Burke.
At that time we put the forward the following question to this individual:
'I have been given information from two separate sources that you were in contact with a number of Michael Burke's former girl friends or partners, some of whom subsequently went to the police.  'Could you confirm if this is true, and if it is, explain why you did this? 
'Look forward to your early response'
A reply came back to NV two days later in the form of a threat:
'These allegations are completely untrue, defamatory and may constitute a malicious falsehood if published.'
Considering this response and in the dangerous prison environment as described by the Strangeways prison officer above to the MEN, a conspiracy narrative could save Michael Burke's life.  Karen. Danczuk may have secured what she now calls 'closure' but she has done so by using the criminal justice system to deliver her own brother into the human jungle of the British prison system.  Meanwhile she can now get on with her life like she has been performing on 'Bear Grylls', or being paid to appear on 'Loose Women'.
As a sociologist/ ethnomethodologist as well as a former prison inmate, for practical purposes in prison I would advise Michael Burke to stick to the defence he presented in the Manchester Crown Court: that he is the victim of a 'stitch-up' by what the defence described as an 'attention seeker' and what the press call a 'Selfie Queen'.
Rule 43 states that any prisoner can apply to be taken into solitary confinement on a Vulnerable Prisoners Unit, for his own protection. Jailed police and prison officers, sex offenders and showbusiness celebrities often apply for this.