Are supermarkets good things?

It has become customary and clichéd to moan about the death of the bustling high street market at the hands of the supermarket behemoths. There is no doubt the quality of local life and community spirit does suffer if the local shops are all boarded up. Yet there is an element of elitism in the moans.

The reasons why people shop at supermarkets are simple: they offer value for money and variety of products. Many products they sell come in premium and cheaper own-brand versions. There is something for everyone. At the local shop, everything costs a lot more. The local shop does not have the same power of bulk buying and direct link with manufacturers. It cannot afford to have its own label stuck on things.

Problems at the Big Brother house

What is all this furore over Big Brother and the treatment of Shilpa, the Bollywood actress? Big Brother is a morally redundant and culturally banausic format. The realisation that this is the case is beginning to dawn on the viewing public. In the short term, the controversy has been like manna from heaven for the programme makers, because viewing figures have shot up. In the longer term, this could be the beginning of the end for BB in the UK.

Mirpuri ignorance

Today the Independent reports a depressing story of how a young bride, from Palak, Mirpur, was tortured to death by her British husband for, among other things, failing in her domestic duties. Palak is in fact within the Dadyal district, from which I also hail. So it’s a story that interests me.

As I read the Independent report, it became clear that the case bears all the hallmarks of ignorance and hypocrisy that blight our community and which I have discussed in previous blogs. There appears to be the hypocrisy and arrogance of a westernised family failing to understand and support a girl whose life had hitherto been spent in a village. As I have said on previous occasions, a little humility is in order from British Mirpuris. Then the there is the ignorance and philistinism of seeking the advice of a ‘holy man', who diagnosed 'problems' by looking at an item of the girl's clothing.

The horror of the case speaks for itself. I just want to say a word about relying on 'holy men'. This practice is common throughout South Asia for dealing with emotional and mental problems. Clearly cultivating spirituality has a role to play in helping to deal with these sorts of problems. However, in recent years things have gone too far- the spiritual element is in fact completely lacking, as money, power and fame take over and as the 'holy men' increasingly intrude into territory that should be the domain of professionals.

A number of satellite channels now invite these 'holy men', who you can call using a premium number. In one programme, a practice similar to the one described in the Independent story takes place. The 'holy man' asks the caller to measure an item of clothing of the person with a 'problem'. Then he recites something and blows at the camera. The caller is again asked to measure the item of clothing- a different diagnosis is offered depending on whether the item has shrunk or increased in size. Of course nothing of the sort has happened; but if you measure something in haste over the phone, using your fingers, you are bound to get different 'measurements' each time.

The point, however, is that rather than offering spiritual reassurance, these 'holy men' are offering diagnosis. That is clearly a wrong turn; in fact one that should possibly be investigated. Reliance on quacks means genuine diagnosis, and hence proper treatment, is delayed.

Myth of 'return' and 'expulsion'?

The myth of return among some immigrant communities, particularly Mirpuris, is now on the wane, as reality dawns that we are here to stay. This even as Mirpuris pour huge amounts of wealth into Mirpur, especially for constructing large residences with the Grecian pillars. Another, more ominous belief, discussed sotto voce by elders who arrived in the 40s and 50s and which has fluctuated over the years but was revived after 7/7, is that at some point we will be expelled.

It's a nasty thought that first took root after Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech and was commonly held in the days of National Front marches during the 1970s. It subsided somewhat during the 1980s, but has seen a resurgence recently in the days of 7/7, an upturn in BNP fortunes and the new wave of immigration during the late 90s and the first few years of this century.

So what is my own take on this view? Is it totally unreasonable? At one level it is; the culture of human rights is so deep in western Europe that it would be impossible to expel people. But that misses another point. If there is ever expulsion, it would be preceded by serious deterioration in the social and economic health of the country. Rising unemployment, precipitated by the drainage of jobs to low wage economies, could provide the spark for such instability. We are nowhere near that stage at the moment.

There have been reports that the BNP is ready to exploit the next recession as part of its electoral strategy. My fear is that it may also be helped by the current trend, whereby we are becoming an unequal economy, with a large number of people working in low-wage mc-jobs and a minority of super-rich people. Those in the middle are the most vulnerable to the drainage of jobs to low wage economies. Again, we are nowhere near reaching this point, but in the long term, this could provide a new pool of support for the likes of the BNP.

Execution of Saddam

What can be said about the execution of Saddam? So much has been written and much will be written. Here are just some random thoughts.

1. Whatever your view of Saddam, his last moments were, in the circumstances, dignified. He died with courage and fortitude. Others would have cracked. This contrasts with the attitude of his executors, whose appalling behaviour- reminiscent more of those who torment Western hostages than servants of the state carrying out due process- could have far reaching consequences. The tyrant has, in his last moments, won many admirers- which could make him more dangerous in death than he was in jail.
2. The hasty execution will strengthen sectarianism. Those who think that the execution will mark a new beginning for Iraq are clearly deluded. To Sunnis in Iraq and elsewhere, this was an act of sectarian vengeance, not justice, made possible by the US. It will strengthen sectarianism and anti-Americanism.
3. Why wasn’t there a fuller enquiry into Saddam’s crimes? How about because it would have disinterred some uncomfortable truths about the days when relations with the US were cosier?
4. What message did the Iraqi government wish to send to Sunnis everywhere by executing him on the day they were celebrating Eid?
5. There is, finally, a thought about what moral and logical principle can be derived from Saddam’s execution. Perhaps that those who kill innocent people should be executed? Surely he was not just killed because he was a dictator- but because he was a brutal one? What is the decisive factor, that he was a dictator or that he killed innocent people? These are actually more difficult questions than you think (from the point of view of the US and its acolytes), because if you start to generalise, then the net may be cast wider than you want, as the US has killed many innocent people and some of its closest allies are tyrannies (and have also killed many people). How to devise a principle which captures only those who harm US interests? But then you move away from conventional morality into the dubious territory of neo-con/ New Labour morality.