Skip to content

The Rhetoric of Entitlement

March 29, 2015

Last week Nigel Farage said ‘British jobs’ should be for ‘British people’. Greg Dyke said the Premier League was in danger of having ‘nothing to do with English people’ and announced restrictions to limit non-EU players.

Both statements are intrinsically linked to the idea that people who live within the borders of a country should have first refusal on the opportunities that exist within it. Frighteningly, people are buying into this. An idea full of ignorance, petulance and above all, entitlement. This rhetoric is a solution for a problem that doesn’t actually exist.

Asking employers to value ‘Britishness’ as an asset is bizarre. If you are legally entitled to work in this country, the criteria by which you compete for a job should be based only on the requirements of the role. If a British person needs positive discrimination to attain a position above a person who comes from a different education system, probably speaks English as a second language and didn’t have the privilege of a British ‘first world’ upbringing, perhaps that person isn’t suitable for the role at all?

UKIP argue that immigrants come to this country and don’t pull their weight. How can they be expected to do so if we legislate against their right to work?

English footballers don’t suffer because there are too many foreign players in the Premier League. They suffer because they are not willing to travel to play. The fact is players from the EU and beyond are trained to be bi-lingual and adaptable, so they will be able to play anywhere in the world in a sport where you can be employed anywhere in the world. We have one English player in La Liga and one more in Serie A. That is all.

Many young English players are content to get a contract, get paid and enjoy the lifestyle such careers afford to them (Scott Sinclair jumped into my mind as I typed this…). You cannot blame foreign players who had the drive and determination to get where they are for lack of opportunities for English players. Are you honestly telling me that if an English kid had the talent of Coutinho, a manager would ignore him because quite likes having to wait for work permits?

Jobs do not have a nationality. They exist broadly to allow an economy to meet supply and demand, and to allow business and government to function. It does not actually matter where a person is born when they are performing a role, as long as they perform the role adequately.

Therein lies the real problem. English footballers can’t progress from youth teams because they are not good enough, and English workers with more modest ambitions can’t get employment because they don’t measure up in a competitive market where migrants (within the EU at least) can travel freely to work.

The problem in both cases is inadequate education and insufficient training. After Farage and Dyke’s comments, to this list we can now add ‘denial’.

Before we start critiquing the migrant workforce, we have to question our own. We need to face up to the inadequacies in our own population that foreign nationals thankfully help us overcome.


What the diet industry doesn’t tell you

January 2, 2015

In the New Year lots of people make positive changes in their life that aren’t sustained. A lot of this is down to confusing advice. Over the years I’ve come to realise a few things the fitness and diet industry keeps telling us aren’t quite true.

Industry myth: burn off more calories than you eat and you WILL lose weight

There is a health benefit from all kinds of exercise. But if you want to change your body shape or increase fitness, arbitrary exercise is not enough. It is very difficult to be successful if you don’t, over time, gradually increase the demands you place on your body.

Exercise works better when it increases in intensity. For exercise to be mor effective, aim to be able to do more as the weeks and months go on.

I have been running for years. But it took me almost two years to get a 5k time under 25mins. I was making the same mistake many other people who aren’t able to achieve their goals are making. I wasn’t pushing myself.

An example: you can jog 5kms, three times a week. At first, it may be hard. Gradually, this will become easier.

Once it becomes easier, its impact on your body will be limited.

This is the point at which you increase your load. You could make one of those jogs a faster run. Or make two of them 6kms. Add some sprints. But whatever you do, it must further the demand you place on your body.

This requires a bit of mind over matter.

We are used to getting out of breath every now and again, then congratulating ourselves. The truth is, we are all physically capable of doing more things than our brains will allow us to believe.

Starting to train is not enough. Make sure you plan ahead, push yourself and keep yourself out of the ‘sweaty rut’ – breaking into a sweat with no results because you’re working hard, but should be working harder!

Industry myth: BMI is the best indicator for fitness

Most people think getting fit is about losing weight, but there are slim people who are incredibly unfit and bigger people who are in great shape. If you know someone who stays trim, eats terribly and never does any exercise, it’s likely the fat you can’t see is simply collecting around their vital organs or clogging their arteries.

It is completely normal to want to trim some body fat as this does have undisputable health benefits but personally, I think the worst way to measure success in doing this is by using scales.

To lose weight in a sustainable and healthy way, health professionals recommend shedding about 3lbs/1.3kgs a week. This is painfully slow! Why monitor this slow progress on scales?

At first, you might not lose any, perhaps because you are new to exercise and you are getting used to the sensation of being epically out of breath, perhaps because you build muscle easily (muscle weighs more than fat).

Instead, measure your success using fitness indicators. Not only are you more like to achieve these goals, in reaching them you are more likely get what you’re really aiming for; that change in body shape.

So, take up running and aim to cover 10km within a realistic amount of time (dip under the hour if you can!). If you use a gym, jump on the rowing machine and aim to cover 2000ms in under 10 minutes.

Perhaps you’d like to be able to do 15 press ups, or 50 squats.

Whatever you aim to do, make it physical and don’t forget point number one, once you achieve your goal, set yourself a harder one.

Industry myth: exercise in the fat burning zone if you want to lose weight

The ‘fat burning’ zone that gym equipment likes to keep you in is misleading. Whilst you can maintain exercise for longer working at that rate, you use less energy to do so. Constant exercise at this level will eventually become unchallenging and as per point one, will have less of an impact after a while.

Try and incorporate sprints into your workouts. The purpose of these short, intense bursts of exercise is to raise your heart rate to its absolute limit. You don’t need a heart rate monitor to know you’ve reached this. You can tell by your ability (or inability) to talk.

Get to a point during every exercise session at which you would struggle speak. Work at a pace that you wouldn’t be able to maintain for more than 20-30 seconds. Then rest. Exercise like this increases your heart health. The healthier your heart, the harder you can exercise. The harder you can exercise, the more energy you can burn.

Industry food: eat low calorie foods to lose weight

Not all foods that are low in calories are good for you, not all foods that are high in calories are bad. It’s also important to look at how much sugar food and drinks contain.

Sugars can be really bad for sedentary humans. There is not a scientist alive who would dispute this. Sugar in all its forms is metabolised by the body incredibly quickly and converted into fat if not burnt off soon after ingestion. Since the food industry puts sugar into everything, you’re going to have to get used to reading nutritional labels if you want to avoid it.

All food labels will tell you the nutritional value of a product per 100gms. Look for the carbohydrates. Then look for the carbohydrates which sugars. This is your magic number. A teaspoon of sugar is 5gms. This is great news because it means you don’t have to be good at maths to work out the sugar content of your food. Did you know low fat yogurts can have four teaspoons of sugar in them (they tend to range between 12-20gms) and fruit smoothies can have up to six? If you wouldn’t put it in your tea, why put it in your dairy products and cold drinks?

Sugar is often added to low fat foods to make them taste good. Don’t look at the snazzy name manufacturers have given their products (like Special K, Muller Light etc.). Start looking at the numbers if you really want the truth about what you’re eating.

Since fruit contains lots of sugar, it helps to rethink their role in our diets. If you want to see results, aim for no more than two pieces of fruit a day (make up the rest of your five-seven a day with vegetables). This is still an awful lot of fruit (seven bananas and seven apples a week is plenty!) but it will mean you’re consuming sugars at a rate you’ll realistically be able to burn off.

The recommended daily allowance for sugar is 90gms. Try to avoid exceeding this, especially on the days you exercise. If you can start to reduce your sugar intake, you will see results more quickly and be weaning yourself off an industry inflicted addiction. It really is worth it.

Industry myth: swap carbohydrates for protein

The diet industry obessess over protein and carbohydrates and forgets about fibre. Make sure a third of your meals are made of green vegetables. This is a really easy way to reduce your carbohydrate intake and top up your nutrition. Green vegetables like kale, broccoli, green beans, spinach, collard greens, salads and brussel sprouts are full of vitamins, minerals, protein and most importantly fibre. Fibre fills you up, keeps you regular (ahem), and sustained intake is a known preventative of all sorts of nasty chronic illnesses associated with the digestive system.

If you don’t like the taste, experiment with seasoning like soy sauce, ginger, fennel, coriander or just grin and bear it! It really is worth it.

Industry myth: cut out fat from your diet

Saturated fats (from meat products and fried foods) aren’t great for you. Mono and poly unsaturated fats (from nuts, some fruits and vegetables like acovacods and coconuts and oily fish) are great. If you struggle to keep your diet healthy, make sure you include enough ‘good’ fats in your diet. Food that contains them tend to contain lots of other things that are good for you and will keep your satiated, meaning you miss the chips and bacon a little less.

This is just advice, if it helps, thank me later!

2014 in review

December 30, 2014

The stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 2,200 times in 2014. If it were a cable car, it would take about 37 trips to carry that many people.

Click here to see the complete report.

What the Crystal Palace vacancy tells us about the need for the Rooney Rule

December 29, 2014

Neil Warnock has been booted out of Selhurst Park, just four months into his appointment as manager of newly promoted Crystal Palace. I cannot remember why Tony Pulis left but his vacuum was filled incredibly quickly.

Warnock was approached. As with most football appointments at this level, I would speculate that it was a case of opening up an address book a looking for a face that fits.

A former manager, with a frame that makes a tracksuit look like house clothes, the sight of him in front of the MOTD screens was nothing but familiar. Warnock’s face did, indeed, fit.

Neil Warnock

Neil Warnock

These are not the qualities that should make the person specification for a top flight job. Let’s see how his credentials stacked up (from Wikipedia)


P W D L Win %
Sheffield United 2 December 1999 15 May 2007 388 165 100 123 42.53
Crystal Palace 11 October 2007 2 March 2010 129 47 39 43 36.43
Queens Park Rangers 2 March 2010 8 January 2012 84 33 27 24 39.29
Leeds United 18 February 2012 1 April 2013 63 23 15 25 36.51
Crystal Palace 27 August 2014 27 December 2014 17 3 6 8 17.65


Sacked from his two previous appointments, he left Leeds United in 2013, five points from the relegation zone of The Championship. His performance follows a distinctive pattern; decent starts which he struggles to consolidate.

But Crystal Palace needed a manager, and they had his number.

They have Alan Pardew’s too. Chris Hougton’s reward for dragging Newcastle from the Championship in 2012 was to be replaced by the likeable Cockney (in a deal done with Mike Ashley in a casino). To be fair, despite some rocky patches, Pardew has done quite well. Newcastle are inconsistent, but the ingredients are there.

Even so, the way Crystal Palace have gone about dealing with the departure of Tony Pulis wreaks of the establishment, old boys club nonsense that holds back young black managers. Warnock’s and Pardew’s potential appointment is largely based on name and reputation; there is nothing outstanding about these candidates yet other options can’t seem to compete with these men for the attention of eager Chairmen.

Football clubs are not for experimentation. Clubs are businesses measured by victories, profit and loss and people shouldn’t be appointed to tick equality and diversity boxes. I understand this. However, most discrimination, in the real world and in football, is not intended or born of outright racism. It is born from habit. It is the shortlist of the first names that come to mind with no consultation outside of the board room. It is the affinity bias that clouds judgement when a chairman interviews someone he played golf with last week. It’s the prioritisation of ‘experience’ over all else. One has to ask; if ‘experience’ is such a virtue, why is sacking so commonplace? If the small pool of Premiership and Championship managers have one thing in common, it’s experience.

I do not know whether Chris Houghton, Chris Powell, Paul Ince, John Barnes or any other black manager with badges would be good for Crystal Palace. But I do know that an interview is an excellent way for Steve Parish to find out.

Football clubs can’t be trusted to change their habits voluntarily. The sooner the FA introduces the Rooney Rule, the better.


Fighting for power before politics

December 15, 2014

Today’s leaked document from Labour suggests what I have been thinking for a while. Labour are always a step behind the agenda. Granted, this is not an unusual position for a party in opposition. Come up with a bad idea, the elected powers can make you look foolish. Come up with a good idea, the elected powers can steal it. Yet the staggering failure of Labour’s opposition is that they have failed to challenge their competitors on any level. This is in spite of Tory and Lib Dems popularity echoing that of an X-Factor winner; hugely supported before a few senseless gaffes and a plunge into indifference.

edThe X-Factor can be mined for further analogies – with no identity, you can have no fan base. Labour have lost the working class, the middle class and soon the wealthy will abandon them. BAME communities, notorious for low voter turnout, are unlikely to respond positively to the kind of engagement we’ve got to look forward to next spring. We are being politically marginalised by the debates about immigration and EU membership.

Those that still read The Guardian and watch This Week may vote Labour reluctantly but will probably vote Green. The only Labour supporters left are the ones like me. I vote to participate in democracy, and to do that, I must vote for the party I’m more willing to hold to account. Yes, all the main parties dance to the beat of the centre right. But I still think Labour is the only party I can chastise for doing so. Better the devil you know and all that.

Labour should have found its new identity by now. It’s had more re-launches than the Sugababes. John Cruddas said some good things last year but all that fizzled out – ‘one-nation’ politics didn’t cause any ripples, so Labour shut up about it. If you can’t believe in your own politics, how can the electorate?

Labour’s tactics seem to revolve around focus groups to find out what makes people unhappy, speeches to respond to their concerns, followed by some mumbles about immigration and Europe because that’s what UKIP are talking about again.

Why are they using all these God-forsaken focus groups? People should not telling political parties what principals to have. Parties should have their own. Labour just want to be liked. Right now Labour is that kid who goes along with the crowd. Which works okay in the present, but when we grow up we all wish we’d been braver to be ourselves in our youth.

The same accusation could be levelled at all the ‘major’ parties in the UK, all running into each other, trying to read the minds of the population. In the Kingdom of the Blind, the one-eyed man is king. In 2015 look out for Nigel Farage, winking at everyone.

Why the restaurant that only serves cereal is objectionable

December 10, 2014

London has a restaurant that only serves tinned fish. It has a cat café which is literally, a cat café. I even understand that somewhere (probably Shoreditch) there is a restaurant so discrete you have to crawl on your hands and knees through a hatch to gain access. But a café that serves cereal? No mate. That is one concept too far.



I don’t normally wish for businesses to fail, let alone small businesses. But I am going to make an exception with this one. I hate ironic fandom. I hate fraudulent amusement; the embracing of shit novelty kitsch deemed to be ‘so bad, it’s good’ by people desperately looking some unloved crap to sarcastically embrace in the name of individuality.

This is hyper nostalgia; it is a man listening to music on record player that’s plugged into his iPhone (as seen near London Fields). It is the resurrection of nonsense; the celebration of crap given underserved status in the name of childhood memories. It’s wankers on the bus playing Altered Beast on their Game Watches.

It proves London is now full of thirty and forty somethings whose idea of adulthood is shamelessly derived from Tom Hank’s character in BIG.

Cereal is the culinary S Club 7 – manufactured pap designed to appeal to the most basic tastes of infants. It does not warrant a restaurant. It barely warrants a cupboard in our kitchens. Mostly it is convenience food, designed to leave you hungry, undernourished and addicted so you end up eating more.

This whole concept is everything that is wrong with the way London is changing. It pays no attention to its locale. How ignorant do you have to be to not know Tower Hamlets is one of the most deprived areas of the country, as one of the owners admits here?

I’m not even surprised. Most people who open businesses vigorously research their locations, understand their environments and create opportunities suited to the area in which they are based. Not these guys. Given funding and investment for a terrible idea, it’s another nail in the coffin for the soul of the capital. Of course these dudes know nothing about Tower Hamlets, they don’t expect anyone who from the largest swathes of the borough to eat there. If you were born within 10 miles of this place, it was not conceived with you in mind.

Heck, have you seen the pictures from that café today? Tower Hamlets is about eighty percent BAME, but unless it’s the milk turning ‘chocolate-y’, you won’t be seeing much brown in that place.

This is a restaurant for idiots with nothing better to do with their time or money. Anyone who has a smile on their face whilst eating a £3.20 bowl of Indonesian Shredded Wheat should be sectioned and prescribed a very thorough reading of The Emperor’s New Clothes.

Eating imported cereal excites me about as much as wearing imported socks. Are you impressed by this abomination? My advice for you, is to grow up.

Why giving the police body cameras will not work

December 7, 2014

Today was the first time I saw the full video capturing the homicide of Eric Garner in full. I watched the clip here alongside with a commentary of how the officers’ actions compared with NYPD guidance:

This video proves that there will always be instances where police are inexplicably above the law and protected. It is horrific. So why was it judged, by fellow human beings, to be acceptable?

The cases of Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Mark Duggan, Brian Douglas, Leon Briggs, Sean Rigg, Jean Charles de Menezes and more direct me towards a few conclusions:

1. America’s laws were written by the worst kind of racists and we are living in the unequal world that they intended

The laws in several American states are simple. If you fear for your life, you are entitled to kill. Correctly, these laws have been etymologically linked to American chattel slavery. They allowed African Americans to be murdered by white Americans without punishment. Brutal and violent societies often have these bizarre legal charades – see Apartheid South Africa. The problem with America is that the charade was never acknowledged and through these deaths, we can see it continues today. The first step towards recovery in a newly democratic South Africa was in the undertaking of a new constitution. America’s wounds were never healed because the racism of its forefathers has never been politically confronted, and now it’s condition has become chronic.

2. Protecting the police’s right to act without fear of recrimination is considered more important than justice.

The position of police is wildly contradictory. We protest against their wrong-doings but when our houses get robbed, they are the first people we call. And the hegemony (decision makers, powerful people, the illuminati, whoever you think is in charge of this world) use this very idea to let the police officers literally get away with murder.

In the UK,  incidents of police bias are generally seen via individual acts of dissent, institutional disregard and abuse of power. Hence the “missing CCTV” in the case of Leon Briggs, or the instructions given by the coroner presiding over the Mark Duggan inquest (the jury was told to find the killing unlawful only if they thought so ‘without doubt’ and not ‘on the balance of probabilities’ which is more usual for inquest verdicts). Who gave the instruction to ‘lose’ that CCTV and who instructed the Coroner to change the criteria the jury could use?

Over the decades we’ve seen equal marriage and legalised cannabis. Sorry to state the obvious but laws can be changed. Why not these ones? Why not make all inquests or Grand Juries consistent, with the same criteria for judgements and the same process – interviews, cross-examination and so on?

There is simply no incentive for the ruling class to allow this. I don’t know why that coroner gave that rare direction to Duggan’s inquest jury, and I don’t know why the Grand Jury in America never had to interrogate Daniel Pantaleo. I cannot fathom how Darren Wilson’s testimony was taken as fact whilst other witnessess were decided to be false. But I would propose that empowering police over citizens took priority over justice. The idea that police are above the law is ludicrous. But I suspect that this practice persists in the spurious belief that without it, the law enforcement we can’t live with and can’t live without would be undermined and society would be worse off.

3. Cameras won’t work and there doesn’t seem to be anything we can do

When we get caught rioting, the law has teeth that later disappear when inquests and Grand Juries need to be negotiated (see some of the sentencing handed down to the UK 2011 rioters – attacked for their consumerism a few months before the middle classes raided John Lewis during Black Friday).

When we peacefully protest, we stop traffic, we inconvenience commuters and we make the news. But where is the change?

My fatalism comes from the public nature of the corruption. None of this is discrete yet still it goes on. Decades ago The MacPherson Report and subsequently Duwayne Brooks publically named a whole host of Met Police officers for their manipulation, criminality and downright falsehoods told during the Lawrence case (WPC Brooks, DS Christopher Crowley, PC Linda Bethel, DC Mick Tomlin, DI Sturge…) but only did so months, often years into their retirement and still, no real recriminations were ever proposed.

The IPCC have been exposed time and time again for inadequate investigations that are not fit for purpose. So why the obsession with trying to generate more evidence that will be ignored, or ‘misplaced’?

I can predict the excuses that will materialise if body cameras are ever standardised. Perhaps the evidence will be withheld, maybe the batteries will coincidently not have been be charged. Memories will suddenly be full or overwritten. I wouldn’t be surprised of a conviction isn’t secured because a lens cap has been left on.

Body cameras are designed to capture evidence. But the problem has rarely been lack of evidence. Until America and the UK have the stomach to confront the racism not in the heart of law enforcement, but in the spine of their very laws and governments themselves, no evidence will ever be enough.

%d bloggers like this: