Nostalgia for mud
Bunting is at the old stand again.
But it is [A C Grayling’s] claim of the west’s steady march of progress to the happy lands of a universal ideal of rationality and freedom that strikes so hollow. The more vehemently one hears liberal progressives claim progress, the more one wonders who they are trying to convince. Increasingly, the stridency with which the non-religious attack the religious belies their own profound insecurity – that the progress they like to attribute to western or enlightenment values is a much-compromised property. It is challenged by almost everything we see around us: climate change, rising levels of mental ill-health, growing economic inequality fuelled by debt and hyper-consumerism. As Oliver James’s new book, Affluenza, makes clear, the nostrums of the west’s “good life” – success, fame, wealth – mask an extraordinary vacuity of purpose, a desperate, restless discontent.
Isn’t that just the truth? Don’t you just want to leap out of your seat and yell ‘Dang, Madeleine, you are so right!’? That stinking old progress we like to attribute to something called ‘western or enlightenment values’ is just such a, a, a dead mackerel, compared with the bliss and joy and heaven of the alternative. How I wish I lived in Bangladesh, or Zimbabwe, or Darfur, or Congo, or Guatemala, or Indonesia, instead of here in the poxy old ‘West’ with its poxy old enlightenment values. How I wish I were dirt poor, and illiterate, and crippled from overwork and childbearing (or in fact dead, which is more likely), and malnourished, and bossed around by some man who sits smoking and bullshitting with his friends all day while I do all the work. Doesn’t that just sound like paradise? I do so agree with Bunting about that – how I hate all this education, and clean water, and edible food, and electric light, and functioning plumbing and sewer systems, all these streets and buses and libraries and shops, all these books, all this music, all these schools and universities cluttering up the place.
Anthony Grayling agrees with her just as warmly as I do. He is as impressed with her good sense and powers of observation and inference as I am.
Ms Bunting will be on top of the mailing list for the large tome I’ve just spent years writing (I thank her for this advertising opportunity) on the way liberties, first of conscience, then thought, then the person, then for working people and women, were wrested from the bitter opposition of church and absolutisms premised on “divine right” and their joint legacy of oligarchies of privilege and patriarchy. If the Catholic Church were still running Europe, Ms Bunting would not be writing for the Guardian. Actually, if this was 1950s Ireland, she might not be writing anything.
Indeed she might not. Especially if she’d grown up at Goldenbridge, or been shoved into one of the Magdalen laundries. But she appears to be, frankly, not clever enough to grasp that not very difficult point. She’s just clever enough to do the Christianophobia schtick, and not one bit cleverer.
Finally, Ms Bunting wheels out the bunkum that we (here in Britain?) live in unhappier and more spiritually impoverished times because we do not dwell – well, where? In the warm glow of Torquemada’s Inquisition pyres? On a slave plantation in Jamaica? Would she prefer to be in a harem, or an undermaid in a medieval kitchen?
No, but she thinks she would, which is what makes her so absurd. One of the things – she has other ways:
Having abdicated so much ground in political life – particularly over the economy – liberal progressives have to scrabble together another way to define their notion of progress, and they have recycled old anti-clericalism to attack religion. Faith has become a curiously faddish target in a new, ersatz politics. Judging by the outcry over the past few days, Catholics, or Christians in general, are lurking on every street corner to deprive the English of their most cherished liberties, as they have done all through history. The National Secular Society even raised the cry of English kings down the centuries last week: “Who runs Britain – the government or the Vatican?”
Yeah, yeah, yeah, and Catholics have a duty to care for the millions of people who are under their authority, so shut up about them, even if they do demand special exemptions from regulations mandating equal treatment. If it were some dreaded arrogant liberal progressives demanding such an exemption, would Bunting be so briskly dismissive? I don’t know, but [darkly I doubt it.
That’s all well and good; but personal success, fame and wealth aren’t enlightenment values are they?
Well they’re not enlightenment values as such, but you see, they’re what enlightenment values inevitably lead to – success, fame, wealth, consumerism, anomie, accidie, angst, attention deficit disorder, Manolo Blahnik shoes. Tragic, isn’t it.
You forgot something called “Strictly Come Dancing” which according to an earlier article from Ms Bunting is the inevitable result of atheism. Being Australian I’m not sure what that is but I imagine it’s just slightly worse than the black death.
The fact that Bunting proposes the wrong medicine shouldn’t obscure the fact that anomie is at remarkably high levels these days, and that from many perspectives, our society is f*cked upside the head…
One can see the attraction of the kind of myth-building religio-fascism that the recent Harpers article depicts so clearly. The present, for all its equality of opportunity and material goods, is an awful grim place. I wouldn’t swap liberalism for anything, but it has its major downsides.
And BTW, many of the intelligent commentators on the Grayling piece neatly demonstrate that the historical relationship between Xianity and scientific progress is much more complicated than a mere polemic would have it…
[even if, thanks to the Guardian’s screwy servers, many of them post the same points 2 or 3 times… It could never happen here!]
What nonsense Ms Bunting writes.
And Dave, for very many of us the present is not an awful grim place. For me, anyway, it is a place of great joy and happiness.
If it isn’t for you, I am very sorry for you.
I might add that I suffer from depression – which is not, as MB and other critics of modern times suggest, a modern disease, but a very old one. I am alive because of the existence of modern ways of managing depression. Without them, I almost certainly would have killed myself.
Sorry to introduce such a non-philosophical note into the discussion, but I thought it would be improved by some reality.
Demos were an interesting outfit 10 years ago, pinging off advice and ideas to inter-departmental special units all over the place, and having the ear of (New) Labour Govt Ministers; I wonder what it’s like being an analyst there now Madders is boss…
That is a horrible thought, having Bunting as your boss.
Thank you, Ken. Mental illness should bear no more shame than physical illness… but as you no doubt well know, it does. It is important to remind people that, just as penicillin saved so many from infection and death, modern psychiatry has saved many from depression and death.
And Dave… if the present is so very grim, I can only invite you to go live (or rather, odds are, die young) in any place and time in the past. Even the bright points in human history were dark, dark depths for the vast majority who lived there and then. Just as the bright lights in the present are still darker for most. But I’d rather be impoverished in the U.S.A. or U.K. than a Dalit in India, or a resident of Darfur or… wherever. I suppose part of what is lurking under your comment about present grimness is that there still are places like Darfur and the other depths of poverty and despair, but you need to think a bit more carefully about history: They called ’em the effin’ Dark Ages for a reason, after all. And the Middle Ages that came after them are only non-Dark by comparison. And really, life only a few decades ago was so much worse on average than it is now almost everywhere. Misery and despair used to be much more part and parcel of the human condition, not lamentable circumstances that ought to be better if only we did more… This is not triumphalism but fact – and Bunting’s fantasies about the fabled Good Old Days ignore those facts with a particularly stubborn ignorance.
And as for the complexity of the relationship between Christianity and science… Dogma at its heart is fundamentally opposed in every way to the central ideas and ideals of science. And Christianity is, on the whole, inextricably linked to at least some dogmas. We need not cite the Inquisition to point out that dogmatism and intellectual rigidity rather than free inquiry and intellectual rigor have been the hallmark of institutionalized religion, Christian or otherwise, throughout history. Where individual Christians contributed to science, it was in spite of their attachment to religion, not because of it. That’s the real issue that Grayling is on about and Bunting will never see (because, honestly, she just doesn’t want to see it).
In other words: Dogma opposes science, and Christianity is dogmatic, the end. Individual Christians, and even whole Christian sects at particular moments and times, are and have been considerably less dogmatic than average. But Christianity as a socio-political entity, on the whole? It has absolutely been the enemy of every element of progress in knowledge and liberty throughout its history, as any dogmatic hierarchal religious tradition(s) must be by their very nature. It is not a matter of introducing “complexity” to dispute that fact. It is deliberate, willful obfuscation.
Everybody’s always going on about how Newton was a Christian mystic in many ways. But his Christianity found its clearest voice mainly in his alchemy, which encompasses page after page of complete shite which no one but seriously devoted scholars ever read because it detracts rather than contributes to the sum total of human knowledge. Newton’s work in mathematics and physics transcends the limits imposed by his Christianity rather than springing from his faith: Otherwise, his most faith-entangled thoughts would be his greatest work instead of his ignored ravings.
I’m afraid that I’ve come to the conclusion that M. Bunty is completely off her head …..
Which reminds me, the ghastly 2cardinal” O’Connor was supposed to be interviewed in “Today” this morning, so it should be possible to listen to his evasions and smug smarm, if your blood pressure will stand it…..
Ah, but Ms. Bunting is no longer the director of Demos. She “decided to resign” Incompatible visions were quoted as the reason: http://www.demos.co.uk//media/pressreleases/bunting
That’s why she’s back at the Guardian churning out the sort of articles that only she knows how to do…
What a brief and tactful announcement. So, she’s going to “focus on her interests as… a thinker” because “her vision for [a think tank] is incompatible with that of [its]trustees.”
How sensible (in a Bunting-like way, of course). How long did she last?
Dear G, I am a professional historian, I know very well what ‘the past’ was like. The present is *still* grim, frankly. You indicate a couple of reasons for that. There are many others, as we will discover when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports again soon. One of the ‘advantages’ we secular moderns have over so many of our predecessors is that we are no longer blinded by superstition or redemption-narratives to the grimness of existence. As I said, I wouldn’t swap the liberal vision for any of the others on offer, but I am beyond thinking it has ‘solved’ anything on the grand scale of things.
As for the Dark Ages, some would say they have been much maligned. The ‘darkness’ was always metaphorical, regarding the absence of the ‘light’ of Xianity….
Bunting at Demos lasted a very short while, BTW, about long enough for everyone to realise they had made a mistake…
Indeed, G Tingey, Murphy-O’Connor was interviewed. He was interviewed by none other than Edward Stourton, well-known practising Catholic, known to have written for Catholic outlets (I’ve seen at least one article in, I think, the Tablet. OK, it would be discriminatory to say to him, ‘Look, Ed, you’re really wrapped up in this shit, so we’ll let Sarah do the interview, OK?’, but surely for pragmatic reasons the editor should have said, ‘It’s not that you won’t be objective, Ed [I don’t think he was, incidentally], but people know you go in for all this goofy shit, so we’d better keep you off it, OK?’
Murphy-O’Connor banged on about how it’s better for a mum and dad to bring up kids. That may well be the case, and I’m no psychologist. But the fact is that kids are stuffed into orphanages, and the Catholic Church’s adoption agencies do allow adoption by gay people, but only if they’re single prospective adoptive parents, when it seems their sexuality doesn’t come into it. Presumably, they reason that, the mum-and-dad ideal notwithstanding, it’s better to put the children with single parents than leave them festering in homes. Yes, it’s OK to leave them festering in homes rather than place them with same-sex couples. The logic here, please, Cardinal?
And another point (I’m sure there were many more that will be discussed on this comment strand before the day is done) was that Stourton didn’t challenge him when he said it wouldn’t be the bishops who would close down the agencies, but the authorities. Right, then (Ed didn’t say), why would they do that, then? Oh (the cardinal didn’t say), because, erm, well, because they wouldn’t comply with the law. And (Stourton didn’t say) why would they they want to do that? Well (the cardinal didn’t say), because, erm, because … that is, well – look, I’m busting for a wank. Can I go now?
I duly complained. Then it was pointed out to me in my household that to disallow his doing the interview just because he holds certain views would be discriminatory. I felt a little chastened, but my pragmatism argument is probably a better one. The point was put to me, ‘Would you disallow a gay person to interview someone on gay matters?’ I’ve done it, as a gay radio journalist, in the eighties and early nineties, so I suppose I’d have to say no, I can be objective (and I do hope I was – I certainly gave my gay interviewees a hard time).
So, folks, was I right to complain? Should I ask for me email back?
Ahh, thanks Geoff – within the blink of an eye as well, I reckon that’s less than 5 months. Wonder what she’s got over young Rusbridger to get back not only her Op-Column but also the Associate Editor job…
;-)
No, no, I checked (but this is from memory now, sorry if I slip up): she was announced in July, took over in September and within the month the jig was up. So, the snags seem to have been hit pretty much immediately. A shame no one from Demos has leaked the dirt (like, what was it she actually wanted to do that was so incompatible with the trustees’ vision?).
Stewart:
Tried to have personal revelation via her hotline to Jayzuss accepted as valid research methodology?
:-)
“I know very well what ‘the past’ was like. The present is *still* grim, frankly. “
Not mine, it isn’t. I have freedom of speech and movement, enough to eat, free healthcare at the point of use, free education for myself and my children, free access to libraries, clean and plentiful drinking water, no fear of famine or cholera or measles, or dozens of other diseases, legal rights against discrimination at work and at play, loads for cheap goods such as would have been extravagant luxuries at almost any other time in the past and continue to be in most other polities, etc, etc. In what way is this present grim compared with any other time in history
I would guess you’re on the right track as far as the general direction goes.
I’m trying to imagine one of her articles translated into policy…
John, surely it’s obvious. By not having religion forced upon you, you are being denied the possibility of having any spiritual values. That lack of coercion effectively nullifies all the things you view so positively.
Well we could always begin some malicious speculation of our own…
Meantime, more “Pomocricy”: this link was from Demos’ site:
“In ignoring uncertainty, evidence-based policy distorts the expert voice and misleads the public, argues Jack Stilgoe”
http://www.thes.co.uk/current_edition/story.aspx?story_id=2034923
On the face of it, “evidence-based policy” = bad, but in fact if you read the text, what he’s saying is politicians bluntly forcing scientists’ findings into neat boxes to support policy is what gave us BSE. But he has to call it “Evidence-Based Policy.” Nasty, bad evidence.
Groan.
I was curious. Best I could find was this:
http://bagrec.livejournal.com/276754.html
which includes the following: “Now, I’m not one for gossip, but I hear from a Very Reliable Source, that the full details of what really went on in the Demos Boardroom are very unlikely to ever see the light of day. It appears that MB has signed a binding contract forbidding her ever discussing the events with anybody…”
Which makes it even more surprising it’s hardly been discussed. Am I correct in getting the impression that the most high-profile thing she did while incumbent at Demos was criticise Ratzinger for what he said at Regensburg? If so, interesting…
Buntin is clearly off her head and has been for a long time. Of course, even given accidie, AIDS, angst, anomie and Manolo Blahnik shoes, I would far sooner be living now. (He runs the full gamit of his woes from A to B)
To refute Bunting’s argument it is not necessary to prove that we are living in the best of all possible worlds at the best of times. I think it is undeniable that there are stresses and strains imposed by modern life which spring directly out of conditions created by the Enlightenment and John Logie Baird. It is just that there were stresses and strains imposed by pre-modern life too, and they were, by all acounts, rather worse. I may be an insecure lonely twenty-first century soul in the spiritually-impoverished west, but I’d still sooner be that than be a well-adjusted beggar in Mumbai.
Nor is depression by any means new: see Durer’s Menencolia, or reat Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy.
I have argued here before for a less than furious and utter rejection of the state of mind that might be called religious, if only because fury and absoluteness generally do not seem to me to be virtues. They themselves are not particularly rational nor indeed generous.
But Bunting? Why even bother?
Turn the question round: if life was so much grimmer in the past how on earth did our palaeolithic ancestors get out of their caves in the morning?
Golden-Era Wheat ?
The link between Mind and Social / Environmental-Issues.
The fast-paced, consumerist lifestyle of Industrial Society is causing exponential rise in psychological problems besides destroying the environment. All issues are interlinked. Our Minds cannot be peaceful when attention-spans are down to nanoseconds, microseconds and milliseconds. Our Minds cannot be peaceful if we destroy Nature.
Industrial Society Destroys Mind and Environment.
Subject : In a fast society slow emotions become extinct.
Subject : A thinking mind cannot feel.
Subject : Scientific/ Industrial/ Financial thinking destroys the planet.
Emotion is what we experience during gaps in our thinking.
If there are no gaps there is no emotion.
Today people are thinking all the time and are mistaking thought (words/ language) for emotion.
When society switches-over from physical work (agriculture) to mental work (scientific/ industrial/ financial/ fast visuals/ fast words ) the speed of thinking keeps on accelerating and the gaps between thinking go on decreasing.
There comes a time when there are almost no gaps.
People become incapable of experiencing/ tolerating gaps.
Emotion ends.
Man becomes machine.
A society that speeds up mentally experiences every mental slowing-down as Depression / Anxiety.
A ( travelling )society that speeds up physically experiences every physical slowing-down as Depression / Anxiety.
A society that entertains itself daily experiences every non-entertaining moment as Depression / Anxiety.
FAST VISUALS /WORDS MAKE SLOW EMOTIONS EXTINCT.
SCIENTIFIC /INDUSTRIAL /FINANCIAL THINKING DESTROYS EMOTIONAL CIRCUITS.
A FAST (LARGE) SOCIETY CANNOT FEEL PAIN / REMORSE / EMPATHY.
A FAST (LARGE) SOCIETY WILL ALWAYS BE CRUEL TO ANIMALS/ TREES/ AIR/ WATER/ LAND AND TO ITSELF.
To read the complete article please follow either of these links :
PlanetSave
EarthNewsWire
sushil_yadav
Someone said, referring to Bunty leaving the Grauniad ….”Incompatible visions “
What a picture!
Bunty having religious visions of Mahmud & the unmarried mother Mary, presumably, whilst they smite the ungodly rationalists ? (;o>
I didn’t realise that the BBC had caved in that cravenly, btw.
Ed. Stourton is well-known as a catholic crawler of the worst stripe ( he hides it as much as possible) but a couple of years back, I was unlucky enough to catch his obsequious hagiography of the late “cardinal” Basil Hume – who apparently was the officiating priest at Stiurton’s wedding.
AARRRGH!
And, yes, please, everybody write to the today programme, and “feedback” and protest.
Email addresses are:
feedback@…
and
today@…
bbc.co.uk repsectively.
Andy A, no, you’re right to complain. Stourton should have pressed the point about authorities closing agencies.
M. Bunting’s mention of the rise of “mental ill-health” reminded me that the thyroid condition I nowadays keep under control with a little pill a day was regarded as untreatable 150 years or so ago – and that end-stage thyroid patients would often end up in what went for mental hospitals in those days. I’m sure a too one-dimensional glorification of Enlightenment values is open to criticism. But to complain of “rising levels of mental ill-health” or indeed “growing economic inequality” (as compared to, er, the heyday of slavery, colonialism, and near-genocide!?) is shrill.
Gee, for once I agree with JohnM.
“The present, for all its equality of opportunity and material goods, is an awful grim place.”
But compared to what? To a place without modern medicine and plumbing and sanitation and easily available food and clean water and public education and libraries and electricity and books and the internet and a functioning judicial system and progress toward female equality and no slavery and progress toward respect for human rights and one or two other things? That’s not at all to say there is nothing wrong here and now, but it certainly is to say compared to what.
I left one out. Dentistry. Ever had a cracked tooth? I rest my case.
Diagnosis of mental illness also OB. Which she opines has increased, but using what data only her god knows.
I heard the staff cheared when MB left the Demos building.
As for Oliver James, i’ve not read his book, but it sounds like a case of sampling bias. Maybe he needs to get out of the London media crowd a bit more and talk to some ‘normal’ people in Slough or Cardiff or Rotherham or somewhere. I can’t imagine that unatainable sucess, fame and wealth are really what is driving most people into or out of happiness. I certainly don’t know anyone who fits that description. Or indeed, as OB says he should talk to people in Darfur, or Bangladesh or Guatamala.
I just wish she’d stop proclaiming that we are all consumption-obsessed, angst-ridden, spiritually-void, morally- bankrupt automatons in a degenerate culture of celebrity and self- indulgence, thanks to the Enlightenment (which was merely proto-islamaphobia anyway).
I’m not. I’m really rather happy with my family, my friends, my work and where I live. We obviously move in very different circles, but I don’t recognise anyone I know in that and, well, I’m offended. This is a strident, shrill, etc. attack on my culture.
But unless you can persuade people they have a problem, why would they want your solutions?
Still, at least she has stopped claiming Hume as a notable christian philospher.
Yes, mental illness too. Given the number of people I have known well who had (it now appears) undiagnosed major depression and self-medicated themselves to death – my guess is that that must have been a huge problem throughout human history. It still is, of course, but there is (oh no, surely not) [whispers] progress
“some ‘normal’ people in Slough or Cardiff or Rotherham or somewhere.”
I take it you read Julian’s article!
“at least she has stopped claiming Hume as a notable christian philospher.”
Ah, but has she? Perhaps she’s merely resting.
Bunting is at the old stand again
>”The Catholic Church a “hapless victim”? Hardly, it quite deliberately sought a confrontation and lost. Hapless victims were and are the victims of child abuse by Roman Catholic clergy who have not only been protected by the church but allowed to continue abusing by it as well”< Premiere of paedophile priest film A DOCUMENTARY following a convicted Irish paedophile priest Oliver O’Grady will have its international premiere at the Jameson Dublin International Film Festival. US director Amy Berg will present her controversial feature Deliver Us From Evil following former Catholic priest Oliver O’Grady who served seven years in a California jail on charges of child molestation. Part of the documentary on O’Grady, who was born and raised in Ireland, was filmed in Dublin. O’Grady, who admitted to molesting 25 children while a parish priest in California, was deported to Ireland in 2001 and is believed to live in Dublin. The film, which has been nominated for an Oscar and won the best documentary award at the Los Angeles Film Festival, will have its premiere at the fifth Jameson Dublin International Film Festival on February 17. Stephanie Denton from Lionsgate, which is releasing the film, said: “We are very pleased that the Dublin Film Festival will host the international premiere of Deliver Us From Evil. Given the film’s vigour and fearlessness, we believe that audiences in Ireland and worldwide will be captivated by this incredible story.” The film follows O’Grady, whose victims ranged from a nine-month-old baby to a middle-aged mother of another adolescent victim. Berg also speaks with several of his victims as they attempt to repair their lives. The festival, which runs from February 16 to 25, will screen 100 feature films, shorts and discussions at cinema sites in Dublin city.
>”If the Catholic Church were still running Europe, Ms Bunting would not be writing for the Guardian. Actually, if this was 1950s Ireland, she might not be writing anything.”< >”Indeed she might not. Especially if she’d grown up at Goldenbridge, or been shoved into one of the Magdalen laundries.”< OB, She might be SCRAPING like me to try to get her story into the public blogosphere domain, that is of course -unless they had petted her in the institution, as they were invariably treated thoroughly differently. Since the late 1800,s and UP TO THE 1960,s I REITERATE – only “one” person in Goldenbridge reached Leaving Cert standard. Yet, the ethos of the SISTERS OF Mercy was to educate, the ignorant, the poor, and downtrodden who were sent into their care. IT IS A DISGUSTING RECORD. WE WERE ROBBED OF OUR EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS.
Most of the inmates who grew up with me cannot even creat a sentence, WHAT A SAD INDICTMRNT INDEED.
“As Oliver James’s new book, Affluenza, makes clear, the nostrums of the west’s “good life” – success, fame, wealth – mask an extraordinary vacuity of purpose, a desperate, restless discontent.”
There is a growing genre of “happiness studies” works which argue that people are really very miserable and that this is the result of affluence.
They base such conclusions on focus groups and questionnaires.
It seems to me that this dissatisfaction is hard wired in humans. It is what has made progress, on all fronts, possible. We are never satisfied and want to go faster, further and, in some cases, to make more money.
Even people who write books are motivated by dissatisfaction – to say it better, to persuade more people.
I would have thought that the mere existence of someone like Bunting, let alone her national prominence as a commentator, was enough to prove my point about contemporary grimness.
It pains me somewhat to have to point out that, while commenters here have uplifting tales of the contentment brought by modern pharmaceuticals, the majority of the world’s population doesn’t have access to these panaceas, and that, great as they are, such chemicals are the offshoots of a vast industrialisation which, as the IPCC will shortly confirm, has f*cked the planet into a cocked hat.
The history of medicine is taught in British schools with a monotonous regularity and exceptionally high profile, largely, I suspect, because it allows for the preservation in childish minds of a notion of “progress” that would otherwise need to be called rather disconcertingly into question.
Pardon me for going off on one, but the parade of joys here seems rather like doing the ‘what have the Romans ever done for us’ sketch, and forgetting that 40 years later said Romans obliterated Jerusalem… All those lovely drains, and then, bam!
History is vile. Humanity is vile. To pretend that the present is not vile, and that humanity has somehow escaped history, is a dream.
Dear Ms. O’Loughlin,
I trust you have written/are writing/will continue to write to things like cardinal O’Conman, and all the Grauniad writers like Vernon and Bunty, and ghastly hidden-agandaists such as “Ed” Stourton of the Beeb, telling them in great detail (I hope) just how rong and completely f*ck*d-up their ideas for wonderful christianity are?
For that matter, do you want to start a petition, and can I sign it?
GT – yeah, it’s distressing, I usually like Stouron’s approach in so much as he usually asks all the right questions without harrassing and hectoring interviewees (which can makes Naughtie et al look like bullies.)
BTW – I think Bunting’s agenda must be to become seen as some sort of brave interfaith pioneer between RC and Islam. The fact that her juvenile and simplistic rants get so many column inches can only be down to Alan Rusbridger’s and the Guardian Media Group’s strategy. But I am beginning to wonder whether it’s even worth getting upset over her insultingly dimwitted arguments; or whether they even belong in the same intellectual world as someone like Grayling’s, so is there really a ‘debate’ going ion at all ? A lot of the time, it seems a bit like getting cross with a five year old who’s tried to deceive you over pocket money really… irritating, but not actionable !
“They base such conclusions on focus groups and questionnaires.”
Actually, it’s worse than that. Some of them, Oliver James for one, misleadingly represent the findings of these surveys. In fact, there is a strong correlation between reported levels of happness and personal wealth. What James and co base their hysterics on is the fact that there is a disjunction between reported personal happiness and perceptions of how happy the society is as a whole. In other words, as people get richer, they tend to feel happier themselves but to asume that society is going to hell in a handcart. It’s all very dishonest.
OB [above], it’s nice to agree with you from time to time, it feels warm and cosy, especially now that you have been so bigged up by N Cohen. Actually, I think I agree with you on most fundamentals but suspect am a bit more of a pragmatist in how those principles should be applied.
“If the Catholic Church were still running Europe, Ms Bunting would not be writing for the Guardian. Actually, if this was 1950s Ireland, she might not be writing anything.”
In pre-enlightenment days
Content as cows we’d graze,
So much fulfilment there,
Pigs happily grunting.
Under the Church’s will
No contraceptive pill,
No ambition nor despair,
And no Madeleine Bunting.
Sounds like bliss to me.
There’s a good fisk at obscene desserts
http://obscenedesserts.blogspot.com/
“It pains me somewhat to have to point out that, while commenters here have uplifting tales of the contentment brought by modern pharmaceuticals, the majority of the world’s population doesn’t have access to these panaceas”
Now Dave – that was part of the point, after all. Bunting’s lament was about place as well as time, how bad it is here as well as now; my point was to doubt that she really wants to be part of that majority of the world’s population that can’t get meds, which carries the implication that the goal should be making the meds available everywhere, not making them unavailable here (which would be the logic of her inane laments).
History and humanity are vile (though a curate’s egg), but some are more vile than others.
KB Player. More please !
Should have been – “create” -“indictment”
I wrote several times to Dr Diarmuid Martin Archbishop of Dublin expressing very vehemently thoughts about a lot of so called christian matters. It was a waste of time. ROME RULES THE ROOST.
KB Player,
Good link. That was an elegant fisking, was it not?
Don:-
Yes, I think Obscene Desserts is pretty good but I wonder if he gets as much traffic as he deserves. Those of us who reads blogs at work – a tiny, victimised minority – don’t really want to be caught reading something called Obscene Desserts. Sounds like something improper with jelly and cream.
Dern it, I was going to link to the Obscene Puddings item yesterday, but didn’t get around to it. I hate being scooped. (No not that way, the journalistic way.)