SatNav for the soul®

On a recent visit to St. Paul’s Cathedral in London I was shocked by the corruption of the Christian ethic.

Here in the capital city of England is a glorious monument of faith, built  by the church to demonstrate the power and majesty of God. To see it, is to be astonished at all the human endeavour involved, the complexity, the design, the perfect symmetry… all dedicated to the infinite love and compassion of Christ and His teachings.

Except you have to pay to see it.

Now I’m not an expert on religious buildings but I thought their function was to inspire people into believing that there is a God and he is worth checking out. To do that, people have to be able to visit the building and see it for themselves. Only now, the poor, the disenfranchised and the lonely aren’t welcome any more. These were the people who formed the bedrock of the church and built it up through their obedient following and service. But now they have served their purpose, the church is very successful and powerful thank you very much and they don’t require the attendance of such destitute people as it doesn’t help their coffers any, so go away now please.

As I stood in the reception area of the commercial faith machine (I refused to pay on principle), I saw a young man sitting in front of a cash register working conscientiously at taking in the money. Isn’t there a passage in the bible about Jesus coming to a church and finding the money lenders trading in it. And wasn’t Jesus furious about it and physically threw them out? I thought so.

So what would Jesus do if he came back and decided to visit one of his dad’s houses, say, St. Paul’s in London? Would he have changed his tone and say something like, “Well, yeah, these cathedrals don’t build themselves you know and the maintenance bill is, how many pieces of silver? Anyway, most of the people who come here are only sight seers, so they don’t count when it comes to joining the Heaven party and they can probably afford it too”.

So much for the largesse of the church. It doesn’t matter that the Catholic church, for example, is one of the richest organisations in the world, to be awed by its artistic acquisitions, is an experience that requires a large admission fee.

To be fair, there was a begrudging sign up in the reception area that said if someone really wanted to worship, they could do so at no charge when a service was being held – but get out quickly when the service has finished!

Okay, I made that last bit up, but you couldn’t help get the feeling that the entire concept of worshipping God had been abandoned and it was all about worshipping the money now.

It made me consider what the business models of the future might look like.

Information wants to be free, someone famously said. The digital age makes that a reality, so what is left that can be charged for?

Spectacle demands attendance, I now famously say, and St. Pauls is a classic example of how this works. No YouTube video is going to do it justice. You have to be there to appreciate the massive grandeur. It is a unique experience and as that experience can be controlled, it can be monetised.

The music industry has slowly woken up to this fact. An mp3 costs nothing to reproduce and distribute ergo it is worthless. A live performance on the other hand is a unique experience, which demands attendance, which means it can be controlled and therefore monetised.

Film making will become the spectacle – those willing to pay will see the process in action – and the actual finished film will become a mere artefact, a free memento of the experience. The stars of the films will have to get used to being paid a much reduced working fee and make do with the fame alone and possibly some creative satisfaction. Clever writers of screenplays will accommodate the commercial exigencies of the new film making process by allowing for a large paying audience to gather on the set in as many locations as possible so people don’t have to travel too far to attend.

People will still be able to make films but the films will look a lot different.

There has been an advertisement on television recently depicting a ’spontaneous’ dance event taking place in a railway station. According to the London press, a copycat event was staged at the same station by a Facebook group. This event brought total chaos to the station and it had to be closed for one and a half hours.

Think about this. The sheer weight of bodies in one place made the normal place of business inoperable.

There is nothing to stop people, in this country,  gathering together in one place in large numbers (yet).

Think about this. At the moment, these social groups are using the internet for recreational purposes and bringing chaos to various locations. What if such events were used not for fun but for political purposes?

Here’s an example. I mentioned the boycott of Nestle in a recent post. What if a flash mob event was organised for the factory gates of Nestle’s operations in York?

Or what if such an event was organised for the shopping outlet of a company that uses child labour in Third world sweat shops for it’s UK products? The shop would have to be closed for several hours resulting in loss of trade and profits – a language these people understand.

Okay, so what’s the difference between this and a mass demonstration?

Speed and fun. An event can be organised within hours, minutes even, over Twitter etc. If the event is a spontaneous dance event or balloon blowing event, it is much harder for the mainstream media to report it as a ‘terrorist’ attack planned and organised by the Hard Left. Also, the police and the business targeted wouldn’t have time to organise themselves against such disruption. Remember, the idea is to hurt the business in a legal, non violent way. A smashed up shop is simply claimed for on insurance and Joe Public ultimately ends up paying for it. Loss of earnings can’t be claimed for.

Of course, this is a democratic country (of sorts) and so it would not be just the environmentalists or anti-capitalists who could use this power; anyone with a large enough following could adopt these tactics and that includes the Hard Right. Welcome to people power.

Surely someone must have realised the potential here? Or is it a case of someone actually putting it into practice?

Shall I start?

However you look at this financial crisis you can only ever reach one ineluctable conclusion; the poorest will carry the heaviest burden.

All those with the greatest responsibility for the meltdown are still exceedingly wealthy. They may claim to have lost a fortune in share options and the like but I don’t see any of them signing on yet or riding around on the bus. They gambled with other peoples money – and lost. Their money was probably sensibly invested in off shore accounts.

So now the government steps in to rescue the bankers. The money the government pledges is not theirs, it is our money entrusted to them to provide all the social services we expect in return for all the taxes we pay. Bailing out the bankers is not going to improve welfare services or environmental improvements. It is going to impoverish us, especially the most vulnerable in society. The government is selling its poorest people into bonded labour and the chief executive gang masters continue with their reckless profligacy.

And we put up with this.

I say again, it doesn’t matter how you do the calculations, the current tax regime puts the greatest burden on the least well off. And so, how do the perpetrators respond? Well, just recently, we had four of the major culprits appear before a Select Committee here in the UK and perform their practised apologies with all the sincerity of spoilt brats caught stealing from the sweet shop.

And we put up with this.

At the start of the crash some wag put up a sign on wall street which exhorted the traders there to “Jump you fuckers”. I am putting up a sign here on Joe Public Place. Mine says, “Fight you fuckers”.

We don’t have to put up with this. We don’t want insulting apologies, we want retribution. It’s all very well exhorting the bankers to jump, but they won’t jump. They will gladly take their golden severance packages and pull the same trick somewhere else some other time when they are again unbelievably, appointed CEO of some ‘me too’ outfit. These people need to be pushed. And they can be pushed. Switzerland has already clawed back some of the bonuses paid to errant bankers there though public pressure. Government officials who are all matey with these people aren’t going to jeopardise their own positions unless someone bigger tells them to do so. That someone bigger is us.

The dispossessed need to act, to demand reform, to use the power that they are unaware of to get some of their money back. At the very least, vote. If you are not registered, do so and make your voice count. Vote for the candidate that makes sense, not for the one that makes the most false promises. Vince Cable, for example, makes sense.

Write. If everyone who felt outrage at the naked greed of the system wrote just one letter to their MP the MP’s would very quickly realise the strength of feeling and do something about it.

Form a co-operative. Work for favours or contra deals. Cut out the puppet masters.

Here is a link to some intellectual heavyweights fighting our corner and here is a template letter for you to fill in and send to your representative as required;

As a law abiding citizen of the land who only asks for fairness and justice, I am writing to you as my representative in government to right the wrongs of the bankers who have made this world poorer. You asked me for my support in your ambition to make a difference in this world and I gave it. I am asking you now to justify my faith in you by bringing to account the people who have nearly wrecked the banking system. I particularly ask you to lobby for punitive legislation which would recoup some of the money paid out to these people in bonuses – bonuses acquired through misrepresentation.

We have all been taught a lesson during this economic depression but how much have we learned? What legislation is being considered to prevent this from happening again?

All I want is a better world. That means a fairer world with responsibility, accountability, sustainability, moral prosperity and meaningful work.

I ask you now, as my public servant, to serve the people who have been wronged, all of them. The rich and powerful must be seen to be within the law of the land. If common criminals stole money from a bank it would only be right and proper that they be punished and that the money be recovered. These bankers have effectively stolen money from the banks, the government and from me… what is your response?

I look forward to your reply.