The Common Enemy revisited - pt2

and back to Common Purpose for a moment...

Unlike the ‘Little Englanders’ I referred to in my earlier post I personally doubt very much if an organisation like Common Purpose could ever be the all powerful demon they think it to be

What it could very easily be is part of that network of unaccountable, droid-nurturing lobby groups and think thanks which now envelops the political process and has replaced ideology and conviction with 'glittering generalities'

I have a particularly big problem with the Fascistic (that word again) blurring of the conceptual lines between a public service such as the police or prison service and privately owned companies - a blurring process which organisations like Common Purpose help to promote

Maybe I am prisoner of my personal political ideology but I believe that there is a big difference between running a supermarket and running a police force

There are some services that are arguably best run as monopolies – water supply is the first that comes to mind. Unless that is someone can make a compelling case for laying two competing sets of pipes in our towns and cities

And giving monopolies on essential services over to private ownership is rarely a good idea

There are other services which potentially could compete with each other but it is probably best if they don’t – I’d suggest that having two different police forces or armies competing with each other on the high street would be insane

Another point to consider is that many of our public services exist because we, as citizens, give up our rights to act for ourselves on the understanding that certain activities, such as dispensing justice, might be better achieved collectively

"You know I am no stranger. I know rules are a bore. But just to keep you from danger I am the Law"

But what happens when the politicians we have given up our freedom of action to hand those powers over to privately controlled corporations?

Is a policeman still a public servant if he works for a privately controlled company?

...or thinks, acts and talks like he's working for a privately controlled company?

Would that make someone like Jean Charles de Menezes a dissatisfied customer?




Mentioning JCdM is not quite as gratuitous as it might seem, as the person who gave the order for him to be shot in the face is a Common Purpose graduate

And no, I am not implying that Common Purpose style leadership training turns people in psycho killers but if I had been the person who paid for that particular graduate’s leadership course I’d be looking for my money back...




That’s one story that hasn’t made it’s way onto the Common Purpose graduate case history webpage

It makes much more sense to think about these kind of leadership courses not so much as being about training as being part of a selection process. You can’t turn someone into a leader in a couple of weeks. You can however identify the kind of people your system of control is based on and equip them with the language they need to be identifiable to each other

... a way of looking at things which can help make sense of the fact that the person in command of the Stockwell operation was promoted to even higher office shortly after presiding over what was, even by official accounts, a murderous fuck up

Competence and preferment do not necessarily go hand in hand in our system of governance. There are other qualities much higher on the list of selection criteria

Given the increased blurring of the distinction between public service and private enterprise, it seems only appropriate that the only court case to be heard as the result of JCdM’s execution is being held under Health and Safety at work legislation. Even though I doubt very much if anyone will be held accountable as a result of the case it has at least forced the papers to report a curious incident which happened immediately after JCdM was shot...




Aside from a press statement issued by the driver’s union the following day, the news that the police (sic.) chased the train driver down a tunnel and jammed a gun in his face has not been investigated by any of the mainstream media. Come to think of I don't even think the press release was reported at the time

The significance of this story is, to my mind anyway, that if the police had followed an alleged suspect suicide bomber all the way from his home to Stockwell station why on earth would they feel the need to start running around pointing guns at other people, especially the driver of the fucking train?

And as for the $64,000 question – ‘Why did the police think a guy in thin clothing, carrying no bags, was a suicide bomber in the first place?’ – well, forget it…

The official story continues to make no sense – big time



-

PS - The Antagonist appears to be in the process of resuscitating 'Anything that defies my sense of reason' - a blog that has frequently touched on the events of July 2005 and their consequences, as well as all sorts of other bits and bobs. I'm glad to see it breathing again


.