The evil spreads like cancer.

Much of the news at the moment is understandably focussed on the slaughter in Gaza.  There have been plenty of analyses of the situation but all the rhetoric doesn't stop the carnage.  It is, in my opinion, symptomatic of an evil streak within the human race that, despite our obvious intelligence, seems to spread like the most deadly cancer within societies.  It is 'legitimised' by vast expenditure and allocation of resources on war machines around the world, usually in the name of 'defence'!  Expenditure on defence increases year-on-year.  Why?  Because one nation will always want to make sure it's defence capability is greater than its enemy's offensive capability.  Of course, the enemy will want to ensure its offensive (which now becomes defensive) capability is greater than its enemy's defensive (which now becomes offensive) capability.  This is what is commonly known as an arms race.

Let's return to Gaza.  A very simplistic analysis of the tragedy is that Hamas is firing rockets at Israel, so Israel is defending itself by bombing the hell out of Gaza.  That, in my opinion , is a very simple summary of the symptom, not the underlying problem.  To try to understand and articulate the latter would require research that would probably take me at least another twenty blog posts.  So I won't try. That said, no matter how tense and for whatever reason that region of the world is, the slightest tension tends to result in resorting to force with highly sophisticated weaponry.  The decision to take military action might only involve a handful of politicians on each side who, by the way, are unlikely to be personally and directly involved in the military action.  You won't see Benjamin Netanyahu or Khaled Meshaal fighting on the streets of Gaza City.   Maybe if that was a requirement, both participants in this dreadful war would feel differently towards achieving a negotiated, lasting settlement.

In my view, the real impediment to peace and catalyst for future military confrontation, is the availability of deadly military capability, which is used as the option of first resort.  I have explained the arms race, which is an example of a vicious circle.  Maybe world governments need to put more effort into converting the viscous circle to a virtuous circle.  If nation A reduces its military capability, then its enemy, nation B, should logically do likewise.  This should lead to nation A continuing its arms reduction........and so it goes on........vicious becomes virtuous.  An unachievable utopia you might think but I'm more optimistic.  The decision for conflict is made by a very small minority of the population.  But those affected by the military actions, defenceless civilians, are a large majority of the population and, for example, in Gaza City the entire community lives in fear and trepidation.

So let the majority have it's say.  Let's stop this foolishness and stem the spread of evil.  A lasting settlement will only, in my opinion, be achievable with progressive and rapid arms reduction, which requires demonstrable action by those nations that are funding the arms race.  War does not determine who is right - only who is left (Bertrand Russell).

David Beckham or Darren Blakely?

I am sure you've heard of David Beckham, but what about Darren Blakely?  It was a name I plucked out of the air.  He does, or they do, exist because I've checked on Google but they are not as famous as David Beckham - why?  What makes fame?  What was it that 'transformed' David Robert Joseph Beckham from an ordinary young lad brought up in Chingford, whose mother was a hairdresser and father was a kitchen fitter, into a world famous footballer?  A big question that is not easy to answer.  Whatever sequence of planned or unplanned events took David Beckham to where he is now, he has achieved world fame. The same is not true, however, for many of the Darren Blakelys that there are in the world today.

Malcolm Gladwell in his book 'Outliers', explains how success is not as unpredictable as we might think and it's certainly not about being born with a silver spoon in your mouth - well, not always!  Whatever happened to give David Beckham his early successes, there is plenty of evidence gathered from many diverse success stories, that success really does breed success.  Conversely and unfortunately, failure often leads to more failure.  In systems terms, success breeding success is known as a virtuous circle, whereas failure leading to more failure is termed a vicious circle.  These phenomena are observed not just with individuals but also with all sizes of organisations,

But how should we measure success?  With David Beckham I have attributed his success to fame and notoriety, which was driven in his early career by his skills on the football pitch.  We don't know if that makes David Beckham happier than all the Darren Blakelys because we don't have enough information to make that judgement and there is no universally recognised system for measuring happiness.  So my message to all the Darren Blakelys (and Alan Haymans) of the world, is not to judge your lives by comparison with others because the comparisons will be too simplistic to assess the complexities of life.  Another successful person is Bill Gates, who once said: "Success is a lousy teacher.  It reduces smart people into thinking they can't lose."

Nice one Bill!

Surrounded by Sound

It's never quiet!  Sound abounds.  Unwanted sound is called noise, but this is where subjectivity comes in because one person's noise is another person's favourite sound.  Ask any parent who is frustrated with their teenage offspring's latest audio download!  In physics, sound is a vibration that propagates through a medium such as air or water and that's what this post is all about.

Have you ever experienced true silence?  It's a very rare occurrence although if you have ever been in an anechoic chamber, which I have, then apart from perhaps hearing your own bodily sounds, you will have been pretty close to experiencing absolute quiet.  That's because the anechoic chamber is echo-free and insulated from external sound.  But that's a rare environment.  As I write this post, I am sitting in a room with a temperature of 30 deg C + and so I can hear the sound of a fan blowing air across my desk.  It just so happens that I can also hear the Imam doing a call to prayers from a local mosque and there are various human-induced sounds around the house - clocks ticking, refrigerator pump, etc.

If I venture outside, then I can still hear sounds that are human-induced, like cars occasionally passing by on a nearby road but, at this time of the year and in daylight hours, there is the continuous sound of cicadas.  Ever heard of them?  No?  Well I hadn't until I lived in Turkey.  It is quite a remarkable insect.

There are at least 2,500 species of cicada and I have no idea what those are that live in my garden!  I live in a property surrounded by trees, which provide homes for the cicadas.  Most of their lives they live underground at depths ranging from 30 centimetres to 2.5 metres.  During that time, which can be up to 17 years, they feed on sap from the tree roots.  Eventually they emerge and males go to the trees where they 'sing'.  The cicadas have a noise maker (or should it be a sound maker?!) called a tymbal below each side of the abdominal region.  As they contract and relax they produce clicks.  The very loud continuous clicking sound is what is going on in my garden right now.  Is it a pleasant sound or just a noise?  Well that depends upon how I feel!  Apparently each species produces its own distinctive mating songs, which ensure they only attract the appropriate mates.

I mention the cicadas because they are unusual and not emitting sounds all year.  But there are loads of other sounds.  Inside and around the property there are geckos.

They are everywhere!  They also make sounds - clicking and chirping.  Add to that our two dogs and a cat, there is never a quiet moment!  What really interests me about the animal sounds is the fact that it is a form of communication that most of us really don't understand.  Zoologists have plenty of theories, many of which I am sure are close to being proven facts, but whereas when we walk into a crowded room the chitter chatter is decipherable, the noises (sorry, sounds!) from my cicadas and geckos don't convey any information to me.

But I'm never alone!!

Political Disillusionment

In my advancing years, I find myself becoming more and more disillusioned with political systems in many of the so-called democracies.  Let me use the example of the UK to illustrate how my views on politics are not at odds with current public opinion.  Here are a few statistics.

Electoral turnout in the UK has fallen from 84% in 1950 to 65% in 2010.

In the 2010 general election, only 44% in the 18-24 age group voted.

The most recent British Attitude's Survey found that two thirds of 16-24 year olds have no interest in politics.

A 2008 survey found that 68% of British respondents were either 'not very' or 'not at all' satisfied with democracy.

A 2012 survey found that 82% of UK citizens said that they 'tend not to trust' political parties.

Membership of political parties has plummeted since the 1950s and as an example, the Conservative party has gone from three million to one hundred thousand members over the last six decades.

So am I just following the crowd?  Well I must admit I didn't know the above stats until I did some research for this post, but there has been plenty of anecdotal evidence of growing political disillusionment.  I am a thinking person with an avid interest in the news, including political events, so I like to think my disillusionment has developed objectively rather than jumping on a bandwagon.

The comedian and activist Russell Brand, also believes the political system is bust and if we vote, we are providing some sort of endorsement for the system and helping to perpetuate it.  Others argue that people fought hard and lives were lost for universal suffrage and we should, therefore, treasure and use our right to vote.  They also argue that politicians are kept on their toes by knowing that if they fail to perform they will be voted out at the next general election.  Well, on balance, I'm with Russell Brand.  In my view, a poor political system is attracting low-calibre politicians, who in turn add to the poor performance of the system - it's a vicious circle.  In the UK, the problem is exacerbated by the 'elective dictatorship', resulting from the 'first past the post' electoral system, combined with the party whip, which enforces party policy.  This manifests itself in a party with a very small following in the country being able to push bills through parliament regardless - what's that if it's not a dictatorship?!

So what's the alternative?  Well I really think we have to move with the times.  The internet has brought a complete new dimension to communication and people engagement.  People are concerned about issues, many of which transcend party politics and national boundaries.  Consider, for example, climate change, where there is overwhelming evidence that human activities and notably the combustion of fossil fuels, are adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere at an alarming rate and leading to climate change, the effects of which could be destructive to life as we know it, on this planet.  So what are the UK politicians doing about it?  They are supporting and encouraging fracking projects all over the country to produce shale gas and thereby add to the carbon dioxide atmospheric pollution!  Opinion polls have shown support for fracking has been falling and the latest poll has shown that less than 50% were in favour.  A government poll also showed that 80% of the population were supportive of wind and solar power, rather than nuclear power and shale gas.  But the elected dictatorship continues to ignore public opinion.  Why?  Because they are looking for short-term fixes to the energy supply problem, which might keep the government in power beyond the next election, rather than making the investments that are required to help sustain life on this planet, as we know it.

Thus my disillusionment with the current political system.  There are many issues, like climate change, where the facts are well known, public opinion is clear, but the political system stands in the way of real progress.  There must be a way of running society with policies that reflect the true majority of opinions but I don't see that happening with democracy as we currently know it.

Einstein said: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results".  A change to our democratic political system is long overdue.

Targets, Bloody Targets.

This post was inspired by a recent BBC TV programme, Police Under Pressure, which focussed on the effect of UK government spending cuts on the effectiveness of the country's police force and specifically in Sheffield, South Yorkshire.  It was a two-part documentary and I watched the second part, which dealt with the need to improve crime-reduction performance, notably in the areas of burglaries and car thefts.  It was a classic case of you've got less funding and resources but at the same time we want you to improve your performance!

I know Britain has social problems and the portrayal of East Sheffield highlighted how bad some of the UK's cities are, particularly the high rate of robberies.  Clearly, it must be very unsettling, or indeed distressing, for law-abiding citizens to be ever fearful of having their homes burgled or cars stolen.  So given the budget cuts imposed on the South Yorkshire Police force, the possibility of increasing day and night patrols, which might ease the problem, is clearly not an option worthy of consideration.  So what's the solution?  Well the subtitle of the programme was 'More for Less'.  Great words and I've come across them many times in my long career in industry, although that didn't include working for the police.

Performance targets, collective and individual, are seen as a way of measuring and improving key performance parameters.  The measurements can be very simple.  For example, football team A scored 4 goals per match last season, whereas football team B score 2 goals per match.  However, team A's win rate was 50%, whereas B's was 70%!  Now there's a dilemma because scoring more goals does not necessarily mean winning more matches.  That's one of the dangers of performance targets, they cannot be viewed in isolation.

Returning to the documentary on South Yorkshire Police, what really came home to me was the obsession by the senior management on targets per se.  There were scenes of senior officers, with smart uniforms and plenty of pips on their shoulders, pouring over charts and spreadsheets, looking for improvements in their crime figures.  Management clichés were in abundance - "thinking out of the box", "targets are challenging and aspirational", "green shoots of improvement"........bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!  When things were not going as well as hoped, the Chief's decision was to go for even tougher targets!  At the same time, the guys at the front line were being run-ragged and forced to work longer hours because of staff cuts.  Surely when times are tough, the senior managers' time would be better spent out on the streets rather than discussing performance targets........all hands to the pump!

There was, not surprisingly, some criticism of the programme notably from senior Tories, who pointed out that crime had fallen since 2010, both nationally and in South Yorkshire.  By the way, 2010 was the year of the last general election when the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition took over the reigns from the previous Labour government!  Well the Tories' comment, together with the 'improvement' actions taken by the senior officers in South Yorkshire Police, indicate to me the sheer naivety of those responsible for ruling and policing the UK.  The East Sheffield community, like any other diverse population, is a very complex societal system.  It exhibits the behaviour of complex systems, which includes the fact that there is often a considerable time lag between cause and effect.  So the fact that crime has fallen since 2010 might be as a result of actions that were taken by the previous government before 2010!  I am apolitical, I don't have much time for politicians or the political system, so I am certainly not trying to make a political point.  What I am convinced of, however, is that the type of target-driven actions that appear to be taken in the UK's police forces will not show immediate results and the outcomes (harmful or beneficial, but in my view the former) are unlikely to be felt for many years to come.

Don't let targets take over from common sense and remember, it's easier to count the bottles than to describe the quality of the wine!

Power to the People

Power to the people!  No, this post isn't about urban warfare or even milder forms of civil unrest.  POWER refers, in this case, to the energy that we all consume every day of our lives, derived mainly from electricity, oil and gas.  Now, in previous posts, I have waxed lyrically on the dangers of burning fossil fuels, which is where most of our energy comes from, on climate change.  The excessive emission of carbon dioxide is creating a 'blanket' around the planet, which is causing global temperatures to rise with disastrous effects on the environment.  It is very easy to be negative and become somewhat depressed when articulating the causes of climate change, particularly when we know that politicians the world over, with their short-term agendas, have no real interest in upsetting the fossil fuel bandwagon.

This post is going to be far more positive about the future because I now realise all is not lost.  Take a look at this illustration:

The three squares superimposed on the Sahara Desert, represent the areas of solar panels that would be required to meet the total energy demands of The World (largest square), The European Union (middle square) and Germany (smallest square).  This shows how CURRENT TECHNOLOGY can supply power to the world WITHOUT BURNING FOSSIL FUELS.  I stumbled upon this very powerful illustration when finding out more about DESERTEC.  This is a project supported by a foundation of the same name and the consortium Dii (Desertec industrial initiative) created in Germany as a limited liability company.  The project is creating a global plan for renewable energy particularly by constructing solar installations on sun-rich, almost uninhabited, desert sites.  It makes sense doesn't it?  All our energy originates from the sun, the star at the centre of our solar system, formed over 4 billion years ago, which generates masses of energy by nucleur fusion.  Just look how much energy is available from the sun each year, compared with other forms.

So there we have it, the solution to the world's current and future energy demands is there before our very eyes and it does not require huge investments into new technology.  It's available now - take a look at www.desertec.org.  There are those who say the renewable approach is not viable for economic reasons.  Well I have a simple response to that argument - BULLSHIT!  Money is a wonderful human-made method of doing transactions.  It means, for example, I don't have to exchange a chicken for a pair of shoes.  But it is just a method of doing transactions and shouldn't be used as an excuse for NOT doing transactions.  The supply of petrol has a finite life - maybe 50 years.  So even $1,000 a gallon would not be unreasonable for a commodity where the future demand will far exceed the potential supply.  What does this do for the economic argument for renewable energy?!

Well done DESERTEC and, of course, all the other similar projects.  I now see the light at the end of the tunnel.  Power to the people!

Haircut

During the Greek financial crisis we got used to the phrase "Taking a haircut".  The meaning of haircut in this context is a reduction in the stated value of an asset.  The other definition of haircut is, of course, the style in which a person's hair is cut.  Well today I had a haircut, the traditional type not the financial one.  Usually my wife, Sandie, looks after my hair but when, like now, the weather is getting really hot, a trip to the barber is called for.  Here in Turkey a haircut is quite an event and I want to share that experience with my readers.

First an foremost, you mustn't be in a hurry.  If you have the full works, including a shave, then you might need to allocate up to an hour and a half, which includes your waiting time and socialising prior to the operation.  Even a quick trim is unlikely to be completed in less than half an hour.  I guess it took me around an hour this morning for my tidy-up.  If you enter into the spirit of the Turkish haircutting experience, it can be extremely therapeutic and today that was just what I needed.  I usually publish my blog post on a Monday but I missed that deadline this week because I lacked the inspiration.  But whilst sitting in the barber's chair, having my hair cut and washed, ear and facial hairs burnt off, arms, hands and fingers massaged - not all at the same time! - the inspiration came!  Haircut would be the theme of my blog post.

But whilst my mind drifted, particularly during the massaging period, I couldn't help thinking about the two definitions of haircut - financial and original.  How different they are.  The original definition is, of course, the styling of someone's hair and as I have described, it can be a truly satisfying experience, during and after the event.  Whereas the financial definition, if we use the example of the Greek financial crisis, can be very painful.  Assets are sold off at less than their true values to service a mounting debt.  For some reason that has been likened to cutting hair.

There are some who believe the metaphor is based on the weakening effect of the Biblical Delilah's shearing of Samson's invigorating mane.

Samson's strength was apparently in his hair.  Well this morning before I went to the barber, I cut the lawn but gave up after three hours as the morning sun got hotter.  Now that I've had my mane sheared, I feel invigorated and ready for more action!  So the strength wasn't in my hair!!  I doubt this post will contribute to the elimination of the modern definition of haircut but let's hope that the pejorative connotation of the word will not, particularly for those new to the English language, be confused with a wonderful experience.