Anarchy is Not Chaos

After been asked what my political views are on Facebook I thought it would be a good time to air them. Just to make it clear the only question I will be answering will be what the least worst form of government we can have on earth is. I will not address how we should relate to the current government in existence; how we can move from the present state of affairs to a better one; or a general moral theory.

The basis of my political theory is the axiom of non-aggression- no one should aggress against the physical integrity of any person or their property; however for this to make any sense one needs a theory of property rights. The one I propose is a Neo-Lockean one: he owns himself since he is made in the image of God ; those previously unowned resources he appropriated by mixing his labour with them (the first comer principle or homesteading) and any goods that he voluntarily acquired, assuming the individual who traded it had title to that good i.e. the good has an unbroken chain of voluntary exchange back to its first appropriation. Just for clarity this refers to man's relationship to other men not to God since God ultimately owns everything. Further one needs a concept of what ownership implies. I will define it as the unilateral right to do what one wishes with his property unless it harms the physical integrity of someone else's property; if one does not have this then one cannot be said to own it. To clarify, ownership applies only to the physical properties of the good not their value- if I own a shop you can't burn it down but you can put me out of business by undercutting my prices.

If one rejects that one owns himself there are only two other possibilities of who owns him: someone else owns him or that everyone owns everyone else. Let us first take the latter- no-one could do anything without approval of everyone else, however in attempting to seek approval one must use his vocal chords which he cannot unilaterally do. Thus with this ethic no-one could do anything and everyone would die; hardly a moral ethical theory. The former ethic is slavery which implies the slave owner has the right to maim, dismember or even kill his slave since he is his property; again this seems vile to any right thinking man. Self ownership has it.

If one rejects the first comer principle one must accept the second or more principle. However to do so creates problems: firstly no-one would appropriate any resources since some else could legitimately take it out of his possession so the whole human race would starve; secondly even if he did appropriate some resources theft would be legitimate which would reduce man to perpetual warfare and a subsistence, at best, existence. So anything but the first comer principle legitimises theft and would destroy society. If one says that the worlds' resources are given to man in common then you run up against the same problem of everyone owning everyone else as in the above paragraph. Therefore the first comer principle is the only conceivable ethic.

Having ascertained that the only possible moral position (liberty) is self ownership, homesteading and none aggression let us look at what the State is: it is a territorial monopolist over arbitration and has the power to tax. By a monopolist I mean an individual or group which has legal privilege; other people are legally restricted from using their property in that way. As is obvious from this uncontroversial definition the State is in contradistinction to liberty since by being a monopolist it is saying that it owns you- having a State is a form of Slavery. It says you must go to them if you have a dispute between yourself and another man. Any talk of the State protecting property rights is nebulous since in its nature it is an expropriator- the State is a protection racket. It says unless you pay it tribute it will kick your door in and even kill you. Hardly a moral organisation. So the State must be abolished to have a moral political system.

Now having ascertained that private property anarchism, or free market anarchism, is the only moral form of political system what about the practical question: it would descend into chaos wouldn't it? If we have a two person society do we need a monopolist? Well no, most people say. If you say there are one thousand people they say yes. Following this logic a monopolist is always necessary, otherwise one would descend into Hobbesian chaos; thus a one world government is necessary otherwise, as at present, each state is in an anarchic relationship between each other and need a monopolist to hit them over the head. Let’s look at the incentives for the individual and the state: the former can only fund themselves by work and voluntary exchange and must bear the full costs of their actions. A state on the other hand can impose a monopoly price for justice and can shift the costs of their activities onto others via taxation. After looking at these incentives who would be the most responsible?

As is clear society wouldn't be chaotic but would be less violent than the current system. However how would a pure free market provide security and law. Before I attempt a brief answer, this is the same as asking how would a market produce shoes when the State has produced them for as long as anyone could remember. So in answering I can only give a tentative sketch.

Security is an easier question to answer. Currently most security is private: door locks, car alarms, security lights, shutters, bouncers, security guards and such like. And as the former provide many different forms of security so would the private security forces. You would pay a fee, as in everything else, to do many different functions you wished them to do- a daily foot patrol, car patrols and any other mix of services. Now, unlike a State police force, the private ones prime aim would be the return of the loot and compensation of the victim rather than the imprisoning of the offender at the cost of the victim. So if Joe Bloggs steals my TV then the prime aim of my security firm would be the return of my TV set. This is easy if I and Joe Bloggs are part of the same security force. But what if Joe Bloggs is part of another firm which disagrees that Joe stole my TV, wouldn't both firms just fight? Fighting is expensive and since both firms want to maintain their reputation and make a profit that is an unlikely course of events. More probable they would go to arbitration which leads into how a private legal system would work.

Under the private legal system both parties would have to agree to the judge, or judges, to arbitrate in the case. If he then convicts you and you don't like it and don't pay up this would render huge suspicion upon yourself, since a respected judge convicted you of a crime, and thus a lot of society would disassociate from you and not trade with you. Also the victor in the case could call upon a police force, as such, to enforce the judge’s decision. So come round and take your possessions and sell them to pay your debt.
But wouldn't those with most money win? If a judge got this reputation many plaintiffs or defendants would refuse, legitimately in the eyes of society, to be arbitrated by that judge.
Currently one has to pay a monopoly price for justice which is higher than what it would be under a free market and accounts for the bad service rendered by the monopolist.

So as I have shown a State is immoral and also unnecessary. For those interested in more detailed description of how a stateless would provide law and security read this chapter from Murray Rothbard's For a New Liberty. For some historical examples of a stateless societies see here: The Not so Wild Wild West and Mediaeval Iceland.

Don't Believe the Inflation Figures

Inflation figures are said to be a measure of the price level. However what is the price level? This is normally calculated using a weighted basket of goods and calculates the change in prices over a time period, normally a year. However there are numerous problems with this approach. Firstly it fails to take into account changes in quality of goods- when deriving the price level it calculates the change in price of a good over the year however no-one can actually objectively determine that the good bought in the second year was identical to that of the first. Since quality, in this context, can only really be defined as “those properties to which the buyers and would be buyers pay-heed” and since these properties are in constant flux, determined by individuals’ value judgements, one is essentially adding apples and oranges to create this statistical construct.

Secondly, since various goods play-varying importance in one’s existence, coefficients are needed to show the relative importance of various commodities which is of course are arbitrary since importance to each actor is subjective. The conventional method for this is to calculate how much one spends on a good to see its relative importance- so in low-income households the main expense would be mortgage, or rent, payments. However if the price of a good rose, such as butter, this would change the pattern of consumer spending since they would substitute it for other goods, such as margarine, changing the relative importance of each commodity based on their expenditure upon it. So any change in a good will change the individual’s expenditure pattern which is neglected by the computation of the price level.

Another problem with this weighting is that different people buy different things and thus have different “price levels” which the government statistics do not take account of; Murray Rothbard always complained that the prices of books kept increasing but it made no indentation on the price level. Astonishingly mortgage repayments are omitted from the CPI even though they constitute a large percentage of household expenditure. Further there are various statistical techniques to compute these averages: arithmetic mean, geometric mean, harmonic averages, median and such like. However there is no objective way of deciding which is a superior technique and thus any decision must again be arbitrary. Finally, as Mises points out, a “judicious housewife knows more about price changes as far as it affect her household than the statistical averages can” and she is no less scientific than the statisticians.

So how should we measure inflation? The older, and far more cogent, definition of inflation is the increase in the money supply. Suppose one had two goods in the economy A and B which both had prices of £5 each. Now if good A was to rise in price to £6 the price good B would have to fall to £4, assuming a constant money supply, which would yield an average price of £5. The only way prices in general can rise is if the money supply increases: suppose the money supply increased by £2 then the average price in the economy would rise by 20% to £6. Thus the prices rises are only a consequence of the increase of the money supply. It must though be stated at this point that prices in the real world do not increase, necessarily, at the same rate as the growth in the money supply since new money enters via a step process with different people receiving the new money at different times.

So instead of looking at the Price Level we should observe the M3 (a monetary aggregate) growth to see the true inflation rate and its wealth reducing consequences.

Quote of the Day

I'm back posting now, hopefully regularly as previously. I had an extremely busy summe hence the lack of posting. Now for quote of the day:

"The police's job is only easy in a Police State"

Said by Mike Vargas, played by Charlton Heston, in Orson Welles' Touch of Evil. The film is pretty good although not one of Welles' best,

Maidwell 2007 Part 1

On Sunday I returned back from a fantastic week or so at a Christian camp in Maidwell, near Northampton. Now when I say camp I don't mean we were under canvas but actually in dorms of a boys prep school; however we, the Bereans', slept in classrooms which included the Latin one. Now the Bereans are neither members or leaders, although legally we're the latter. Our motto is study and service. To get a feel of how this works here is a typical day:

0830- Quiet Time (which normally involved going through one of the seminars from the day before)
0855- Breakfast
0920- Business Meeting (sorting out the practical issues of the day)
0940- Corporate Prayer
1015- Bible Overview
1100- Break
1110- Bible Overview/ Seminar (depending on which day)
1145- Break
1210- Seminar (at which the senior members could attend)
1300- Lunch (then washing up for 140 people)
Free Time
1630- Afternoon Tea
1645- Bible Study
1745- Question Time (write any question on the board and get it answered)
1830- Tea Proper (then more washing up)
2030- Evening Meeting
2115- Evening Entertainment
2200- Free Time 2
2300- Sleep (well allegedly)

The Bible Overview sessions were conducted by Andrew Towner who recently graduated from Oak Hill Theological College with a Masters in Theology. We spent most of the time in the Old Testament since most people know little about the Old Testament and it has far more narrative in it than the New. The basis of the overview was People, Place and Blessing, which was nicked from Vaughn Roberts' God's Big Picture. Interestingly, we didn't start the overview immediately in Genesis but in Ephesians 1 where God declares his eternal plan of Christ being the vessel by whom we are saved, thenceforth to be his people, and to bless them through him. However we were taught Calvinistic predestination based on a faulty exegesis of the passage; however this didn't unduly affect the content of the overview. The reason for starting there is that how do we know where to start if we don't know where we're going. i.e If you ask a potter to make something he doesn't know where to start unless you tell him what you want making. This may sound a plausible argument especially since Ephesians 1 is chronologically before creation however I believe it carries many presuppositions which it brings to the text, not just Calvinism, and can yield interpretations filtered through one's own previously created system instead of allowing the Bible to naturally create the system. Further since Genesis was revealed first surely it follows that one should automatically start there and if there are greater insights from latterly revealed scripture then one should apply them latterly. (I will write on this at a future date) However I must repeat this did not unduly affect the overview.

We then skipped back to Genesis for the Creation and then the Fall: the second most momentous event in history. In this small part of the Bible a great theme is begun and the most eagerly awaited prophecy ever. The theme is that God blesses his people, they then turn away from God, he punishes them but then acts graciously: Creation is very good and Adam and Eve, not Steve, enjoy the blessing of God in the garden; they then sin by demonstrating that they believe God to be a liar by eating of the FRUIT, not apple, of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil; God then punishes them by kicking them out of the Garden and cursing creation; but God provides skins to clothe Adam and Eve. This pattern is best outlined in the Exodus: God frees the Israelites from Egypt and carries them through approaching the promised land; now instead of trusting in God and taking Canaan they send spies in and get scared that the Canaanites are giants and do not attempt to take the promised land; God punishes them by condemning the Israelites to 40 years in the Wilderness however he provides manna for them in the desert.

We continued through the Law, Wisdom Literature and then the Prophets. One of the most interesting aspects of the Wisdom Lit. is that the Psalms are far more ordered than one might imagine: they are split into five distinct books put together by an editor. The first book focuses on David and God's commitment to him; the second on the Davidic line; the third on the failure of the Kings; fourthly on the nature of God- God is God; and finally on cries out to God for help followed by Psalms of huge praise to God.

We then studied Jesus' death and resurrection and how this fitted in- Towner also stressed the importance of Jesus' life since if it had not been perfect his death would have been in vain. Finally we looked at heaven and glory- the latter being living in the New Earth, not the one with cat nurses, in our resurrection bodies. This was particularly helpful in focusing our minds on what an unbelievable future we have and we should live for that and not now. Not surprisingly the millennial kingdom was conspicuous by her absence.

The other morning sessions were seminars on a variety of subjects including lust, doubt, suffering and ,in my opinion, most helpful those on image and pride. The former was done by Kate and it focused on how God sees us and how this changes our view of ourselves and consequently of other people. If one sees themselves as made in the image of God, and thus made to be in relationship with Him, this completely reorientates our outlook on life. Instead of defining ourselves by the world's riches, though these my be good in and of themselves, we see ourselves how God sees us. This then changes our view of other people since instead of primarily viewing them as ugly, beautiful, thick or intelligent we see that they're image bearers and are deserving of our love- this in particular should spur on our evangelism since if we now see them as they truly are we will see that their main need is that of Salvation.

Stuart did the seminar on pride which main point was to show how heinous pride actually is. I have come to the conclusion that pride is the essence of sin: it says I don't need God, I'll go my own way. This may seem obvious however pride can creep in unawares. The talk was a good boost in the arm for myself, and others, to critically evaluate our motives and actions to see whether we are doing things our own strength and thus feeding pride. Note well at this point false humility is worse than pride- it is being proud of the fact you are humble. What we need is to see what gifts God has given us, use them according and thank God for them. So if a position or role comes up which you believe God has given you the gifts to do it then do it. If you don't know what your gifts are try things out until you do. There is nothing worse than being given a fantastic present and refusing to use it.

The Bible studies were based on the overview. The first was on Ephesians 1. Subsequent ones included Exodus 20 (the 10 Commandments unfortunately not featuring Charlton Heston), Ruth and the "model" prophet Amos. These were helpful in going over parts of the overview in more detail.

Question Time was greatly useful and also entertaining; especially when we got discussing Baptism- Towner believes that non-professing belief baptism is legit whereas Stuart and myself believe solely in professing Believers baptism. Other topics discussed include the perennial predestination question (during which I bit my lip and put my head down), application of the Mosaic law today and capital punishment. On the latter the helpful distinction between 1st and 2nd party relations, and 3rd party relations was raised: in the Sermon on the Mount when Jesus states "turn the other cheek" his analogy is between two people- first and second party relations. Whereas all instances of execution of justice are meted out by third parties. This distinction is important since it retains an eye for an eye, retributive justice, for legal authorities to execute.

The evening meetings were a mini service with singing and a talk. The songs were actually pretty good and most were contemporary. Who says I only like old music?! The talks were on the basics of the Gospel and the Christian faith; all were clear, concise, and Biblical.

The service aspect and anecdotes will be dealt with in a subsequent post.

To see photos see here:

http://cardiffuk.facebook.com/photo_search.php?oid=2223143238&view=all

I am Away

I will not be posting in the next two weeks or so since I am on a Christian Camp. It is a 14-18 camp in Maidwell, near Northampton, at which I am on a training course and generally doing the dirty jobs around camp; lots of washing up. I did it last year and it was great fun. I'll report more when I return.

Spiderman's Take on the Responsibility of Man

A couple of months ago I watched the first two Spiderman films directed by Sam Raimi. They were pretty solid films but that was it. However what struck me was the portrayal of man’s responsibility.

Let’s first take Peter Parker. Throughout the whole films it is pretty explicit that he should be use his powers as Spiderman for the good of mankind. The two most noteworthy scenes in this regard are: the line by his Uncle that “with great power becomes great responsibility”; and when the robber steals money from the wrestling event owner and Parker refuses to stop him as he runs past, since the owner defrauded him- the robber subsequently kills his Uncle Ben. But not only is he expected to use his powers to fight crime but should keep a perfect domestic calendar; for example when he returns late home and misses helping Ben decorate and missing Sarah Jane’s performance in that play. These two incidents, and other similar ones, are portrayed in a very bad light showing not only does he have a great responsibility to the community to fight crime but also to be the perfect man.

Now contrast this with portrayal of Norman Osborn (aka the Green Goblin). Initially he is shown to be an enthusiastic, but misguided, scientist and an ambitious businessman. He only becomes evil after he uses that green gas before it has been properly tested and turns him into a vindictive and malevolent criminal. What is most interesting is his internal fight between his true self and the Green Goblin: there are a few scenes in which his true self pleads with the Goblin not to kill Spiderman and innocents but this schizophrenia slowly dies until the Goblin takes over; although remnants of his true self are remain as the Goblin’s last scene shows. Due to this scripting Osborn is portrayed in a sympathetic light even to the extent of pretty much absolving himself of responsibility for his actions as the Goblin. This is a similar kind of portrayal given to Otto Octavius.

Now if I’m not mistaken these portrayals of mans’ responsibility are somewhat inconsistent. Someone who misses decorating with his Uncle is portrayed as if he has killed thousands while someone who has killed thousands is portrayed as if he has missed decorating with his Uncle! The underlying theme is that man only commits evil actions because an outside force- society- causes him do it. However what makes society bad? Well it must have been their society. But who made theirs bad and so on. As is clear this exhibits a regression ad infinitum fallacy: today’s action is based on yesterdays but never explains why the ultimate yesterday was bad. Therefore someone at some point must have commit an evil action of their own accord and be responsible for it otherwise the chain of causation does not come into existence. As is clear from this is that individuals must be responsible for their actions good or evil. This is clearly shown in the Garden of Eden when Eve ate from the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and sinned- demonstrating that you believe God to be a liar. She didn’t have to do it but she did and was responsible for that; she was though tempted by the Devil but she still had free moral agency. Consequently the film’s view of man is contorted and factually inaccurate showing man to be in denial about his true self and thus continuing in his sin. I believe the way Parker is portrayed is an attempt by the maker’s who know that they commit sinful actions to shift attention and responsibility upon someone superior to them and hold them to far higher moral scrutiny.

Price Controls are Killing People

Yesterday Liam Donaldson, England's chief medical officer, suggested that there should be "presumed consent" in regards organ donation; essentially this would create an opt-out, rather than, an opt-in system. This would, he said increase, the number of donors and save lives: currently only 20% of the UK population are organ donors, 13 million, but since a lot of the organs are unsuitable for numerous reasons the number of people awaiting an organ transplant is 8,400.

There is indeed a problem here however the State essentially taking control over our own bodies is surely not the answer. As Hans Hoppe points out: either someone else owns are body-slavery; everyone owns everybody- communism; or we own our selves- liberty. This most definitely comes under slavery and is another attempt to extend the State's control over us.

So how do we solve the problem? Well suppose you ask me to work in your factory for 40 hours a week. I then reply "that sounds a good job; how much does it pay?" You then reply "nothing". Do you think I will take the job or not?

This is an analogous situation in regards organ donations: the government imposes a price control of zero on organs and you wonder why not that many people donate their organs. This is simple economics: if the government introduces a price ceiling below the market price excess demand will exist; which is precisely the case with organ donations. Currently you can only give away YOUR organs for free. Now since we own our own bodies (in a interpersonal sense since God actually owns everything) why can't we sell our organs the same way we sell our labour services? One can save lives by being a fireman or doctor and be paid for it; so why can't one save lives by donating their organs and be paid for it? Either the first activity is legitimate and the second is; or neither are legitimate. It would be inconsistent to argue otherwise.

Thus the answer is, as normal, to allow the free market in organ donations. By allowing the free trade in legitimately owned property, our own organs, this will increase the supply of organs and save lives. This does not mean that all organ donations will yield a price; some people will donate their organs for free in the same way some people do voluntary work. Neither will organs be tremendously expensive as in the current black market since the supply will be far larger due to the removal of the price control and the fact it will no longer be illegal, without demand changing in much; it is similar to a large degree to the drugs market.

Now to the much vexed question of "exploitation": people could buy organs, most likely to be kidneys, cheaply off people from the third world thereby exploiting there poor position. However if one is to argue this then one must also argue that importing cheap goods from the third world is a form of exploitation too. Yet these cheap, normally textiles or electronic goods, are examples of the third world's comparative advantage. To ban these imports or to put a tariff on them would destin the third world to be forever economically backward. Now to ban organ sales would not have as greater impact however would be prohibiting a mutually beneficial exchange. You have two perfectly good kidneys of which you could live comfortably live with one; I will die in the next three months if I don't have a kidney. I then pay you £400 for your kidney. I will now live for another twenty years and you have £400, which is equivalent to around a year's wages in your country allowing you to better feed your family and educate your children. How on earth can this be exploitative? Finally economics tells us how this cannot be exploitative: to this trade to go ahead you most value my £4oo more than your kidney and I must value your kidney more than my £400; there is no other way we would logically trade since if we valued both items equally there would be no point trading; and if you valued your kidney more than my £400 you wouldn't trade. The fact that you live in less than desirabe circumstances is irrelevant.

The government price control is killing people and the only way to stop this senseless slaughter is to allow the free trade in organs.

Source for the first paragraph is here accessed 18/07/07.

Mending Society with Sticky Tape

Over the past few days the Tories' "Social Justice" Policy group, headed by former Tory leader Iain Duncan-Smith (who I met once at the Lostock Hall "Conservative" Club a few years ago when I still thought they were useful- how wrong was I) has produced a huge 671 page report on the ills of society and policies to remedy them. The key points can be seen below:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6287914.stm

Most of the attention has been focused upon the report's support of marriage in the form of tax breaks. The report rightly points out that children from a married household are less likely to commit crime, do drugs or be unemployed and do better academically; the unmasking of this manifest truth has provoked anger in the leftist relativist corner who believe all form of lifstyle choice to be legitimate. The report also affirms that the family is the building block of society and should be the focus of policy to heal society of its rather long list of woes. However despite a good anaylsis of the problem the solution does not tackle the root problem; it is similar in some respects to The Death of the West by Pat Buchanan.

The destruction of marriage, the family and society can almost solely be blamed on the state: in particular the welfare state. It is not a coincidence that since the German pioneered welfare state has been in existence the family has become a weaker and weaker institution. On a side note the state provision of welfare was first introduced in the Elizabethan era because that Church was no longing giving alms to the poor; the reason for this is that Henry VIII stole the monasteries. Where the state does more, the Church and family (nuclear and extended) do less. This can be seen on a purely economic analysis:

In the absence of state provision traditional marriage would come to the fore as the common type of family set up for the main reason that it affords the greatest financial stability than any other form for the following reasons: firstly a marriage contract commits the two parties to life long companionship (contractual stability whereas cohabitation has none); this then makes it conducive for child rearing since the contract is not intended to be ended; ending the contract (note at this point the state has made easier), this would only be possible if the Church or other institution sanctioned it- normally only allowed under limited proscibed circumstances-, requires a cost normally falling upon the man to provide income for his former wife while she looked after children.

Now what incentives does the welfare state introduce: Well for starters where people used to wait to get married to have children they no longer have to because they know that the state will bail them out; if you’re a “poor” single mum they’ll give you a council flat (sorry social(ist) housing). But not only that, but the child’s education and health needs will also be provided by the state and in some, cases, income support for the mother and the child’s day to day needs. It even does not stop there: you get a reward for every time you produce another one. No longer are these things needed to be paid for; the benevolent state with its unlimited resources (i.e. stolen money and counterfeited (fiat) money) will do it for me. Even cohabitation, due to the current “benefit system”, now makes more financial sense than marriage again artificially increasing the incidence of a less stable structure.

In short the welfare state shifts the costs of individual’s actions onto other people thus making them more irresponsible. More children are born to the feckless and foolish than they otherwise would, thus cause a lot of the problems we see to day. Further and more insidiously the bailing out by the state replaces the normal guardians of financial stability- fathers. With their financial responsibility gone, so does there parenting responsibility which leaves them to indulge in their whims. This then leads to an unbalanced upbringing causing a lot of the problems of young men today.

For an in depth analysis read James Bartholomew’s excellent The Welfare State We’re In

So what has been shown is that it is again the state that has caused the problem and it is now attempting to disguise itself as the solution again. As to the proposals, any tax cut should be supported; as for the rest it will be purely ineffectual at best. Only the entire abolition of the welfare state will solve this and many other problems; as long as it exists these problems will be perpetuated.

Poland 2007

As some of you may be aware I was in Poland from the 21st June to the 2nd July. I went there to teach English as a foreign language with the Cardiff Navigators (Navs). Here is how it went:The Navs lads- Phil, Jonny and I from Cardiff and Clarence from Southampton- met up at London Liverpool Street Station on the Thursday and got the direct train to Stansted airport, or should I say Tesco Extra under Martial Law. Firstly it really does look like a Tesco Extra (see above- sorry for the bad placement of pictures: help in putting them around the screen properly would be appreciated)

Secondly, as soon as I walked into the compound, I was greeted by two burly men carrying sub-machine guns seemingly getting macho highs out of carrying them. The whole atmosphere inside the building generated by the increased security and regulations introduced last year (I now believe its worse after that flaming car was driven into Glasgow airport; makes sense to increase security inside the airport when the problem came from outside doesn’t it?)- the “attempted bombing” at Heathrow which precipitated this, although no evidence of any plot as been aired neither has anyone being convicted of any crime, which was responded by rolling the tanks in a very Fascist fashion- was designed to frighten the travellers into giving up more and more liberty to the state to “protect” us hastening the slide to a totalitarian state. If the security threat is so large the individual airlines and airport authority would impose the regulations themselves: what do you think Ryanair’s sales figures would be like if one of their aircraft was blown up by a terrorist? One must also remember at this point that practically all plane crashes have massive media attention which would further damage Ryanair’s reputation. Also I seem to recall a lawsuit in the US in which a film contained a plane crash bearing the name of an existent firm who sued the makers for essentially slander; such is the importance of safety reputation in air travel industry. Thus the fact that the airlines themselves did not increases the regulations and security proves that the new regs are either superfluous at best, or sinister at worst. (This is an area I will cover in more depth in the future)

Back to the narrative.

When entered we met up with an other member of our team Rachel- she was a member of Navs in Cardiff back in 1989 when she started her optometry degree. We then checked in with no trouble although Rachel’s hold luggage was two kilos over the 15kg limited- this proved not to be case on the way back when she was charged 64 zlotys (£13) for this unfortunate aberration; although Jonny’s was the same weight and was charged nothing at all. We then went through security which wasn’t as bad as expected although at one point I uttered that “you spend more time queuing than you do in prison these days”; however we were spared the ignominy of having to take our shoes off unlike the chosen few.

The flight to Wroclaw, the south-west of Poland, (pronounced vrotz-lav contrary to the woman on the tannoy) was delayed by around an hour due to the plane arriving from its previous flight late. The flight was uneventful except for the landing which was singularly the worst landing I have ever experienced: it at was as if the pilot had forgotten his training and landed on the front wheel. When we arrived we were met by Bev- she is a Navs’ missionary who teaches English in Eagle school in Wroclaw and has been there for the past 13 years (I think)- and Bogusia; the latter was the lads’ host for two nights and for one on the way back . We were then taken back to Bogusia’s flat while Rachel went to Bev’s. On arrival we were provided with some supper: various cheeses, ham and bread which, as we were to learn, seem to be the Poles staple diet; not that I was complaining about that.

On the Friday we had our orientation day in which we met two more members of our team: Amelia and Lauren. The former is now director at Eagle school and the latter is an American from Owensboro, Kentucky who has come to Poland for a whole year to teach English; she was dove tailing this with work with another American team who she was then with. During the day Bev went over what we would be doing and various things to be aware of during our stay. In the evening we went out for a traditional Polish restaurant in which I had fried pork steak in breadcrumbs and fried cabbage (another very Polish food); it was very tasty although the cabbage was slightly bitter. The best thing though was the price- 8zl or about £1.60. The prices for most things were darn cheap: under a pound for a packet of 20 fags and about £40 for a good three piece suit; if I had the time I would probably have bought one. We then retired for the evening in preparation for the mammoth eight and a half hour train journey to Ketzryn the next day; it is in the north east of Poland near the Lithuanian and Soviet border.

Getting on the train however was made difficult by possibly the worst designed train doors I have ever seen: there was a central bar down the middle left after opening the doors thus making it difficult to put luggage on. The journey itself wasn’t too bad after we had commandeered most of the luggage space of the carriage. My defence of Open Theism at the behest of Phil was probably the most noteworthy. Upon arrival we were picked up at the station by a member of the Ketrzyn Baptist Church and taken to the church which would be our base for the next 9 days or so. The Church is attached to the Pastor’s residence and a small school which is where we taught the lessons and is where the year round teaching is done; the Pastor was President of the Baptist Union of Poland for 8 years. Our decampment was delayed due to a wedding in the Church which boosted the congregation numbers the next day. We ate that evening in a small restaurant which was practically smoke free- unlike here the Poles still have the liberty to smoke in places where the proprietor agrees. Upon return we settled in: the girls in the attic and the lads on the balcony at the back of church; that wasn’t too bad except that to turn the lights on and off required walking downstairs and across the church which made coming back up again, after turning them off, more difficult than for the girls who had lights next to each bed. After we had unpacked we played cards in the kitchen- this came to be the past time in the evenings after the organised events. That evening we were introduced, by Amelia, to a game called Phase 10 which lasts an inordinate length of time.

On the Sunday we attended the morning service at which Fonda, who was to be the last member of our team, gave her testimony and Bev translated the sermon. During the service an interesting custom of bringing greetings from various places and churches was observed. The rest of the day we relaxed.

The format for the working week was as follows:

Breakfast: 9am

Cleaning

Bible Study: 11am

Lesson Preparation: 11:45am

Dinner: 12:45pm

Free Time: 1:30pm

Tea: 5pm

Lessons: 6pm

Evening Event: 8:30pm

Breakfast, as previously indicated, was mainly cheese, meat and bread. Cleaning entailed washing up, cleaning the kitchen and mopping out the showers; by the time I arose they were mainly cold except once when I got lucky and it was vaguely warm. The Bible studies were on the Psalms including 119 and before you ask it wasn’t on all of it. Most of them went pretty well and were of existential use especially the discussion of true rest however there was a collision between my methodology and the rest. I think I came across as over theoretical with my talk of means and ends even though this was intended to be the sound base from which to deduce practical ideas.

Dinner was ordered in from a local bar offering an array of food such as Goulash, Birgos and Pirogi; it was mainly meat and potatoes. In general it was rather tasty, and cheap; on one day Lauren and I had strawberries and pasta, a traditional Polish dish, which was surprisingly good.

In the free time we generally relaxed: reading, walking into town and to the castle and going to the internet café. However Rachel used some of time to carry on lesson prep; she somehow had the most to prepare, or took longest to do. In fairness however she had the lowest ability group. On the Wednesday we went to the Wolf’s Lair: one of Hitler’s secret wartime bases. The site was 10km sq and consisted of mainly concrete bunkers in various states of decay. We climbed to the top of Goerring’s collapsed bunker where there were gun emplacements. Climbing was the operative word since it required us to climb a ten foot of rock face and then a ladder- a collection of steel rungs- to the top. Neither while climbing, nor on the top, were there any barriers stopping us from falling off; in short Poland has practically no health and safety laws- cash back! The lair was also the place of an attempted assassination of Hitler.

For tea it was some food to complement the bread, cheese and ham; one night there was some meat and sauce but beyond that I don’t remember much.

Now to the teaching: There were four groups- elementary (Rachel), lower intermediate (Phil and Clarence), intermediate (Jonny and Lauren) and upper intermediate (myself and Fonda). The teaching went pretty well supported by the fact that Bev, who organised it, was asked, by the students, to bring the same team back next year. However there was a slight problem with Rachel’s group on the first day: two ladies complained that the group was far too easy and they claimed that they were near a first certificate in English (a Cambridge accredited exam) which was above the level my lot; they clearly weren’t, as ascertained by Bev’s interview prior to being assigned their group, and so left. My group had four to six people depending on what day it was; the other groups were of similar number. I got on very well with my group in particular a lad called Jakub who was at Warsaw University doing Journalism. The lessons mainly revolved around getting the students to converse in English rather than teach them grammar et al. Subjects discussed ranged from childhood to the health industry. The latter was rather amusing thanks to Janusch who displayed a level of cynicism approaching mine: he complained that one had to queue for hours in a doctor’s surgery only to have a quick check over and be told to take vitamin C; and that if there was anything actually wrong with you they merely referred you to a specialist. He further complained that they were currently on strike and could be replaced by other people to do most of the referral job. The problems cited by Janusch are mainly due to the State’s monopoly and continuing intervention in the health industry which are mainly manifest in restriction of supply. In one of the lessons we played a game of life in which Anna became a pop star, I a baggage handler and Janusch was arrested on fraud charges; this went down a treat. Working with Fonda was great even though she is an extrovert character like me; she did though tell me I annoyed sometime during teaching after correcting her pronunciation, she is American after all, although I was entirely oblivious to this.

In the evening events we did different things each night. The first was a games evening with coffee and biscuits: games included Phase 10, Uno and Scrabble; I got beat playing the latter by four Poles! - I hang my head in shame. The second evening comprised of silly games such as the famous chocolate game and the mummy game: who is the fastest at wrapping a team mate head to toe in toilet role. The next night was Scottish Dancing which went down well although I did nearly injure one of the girls by being slightly over enthusiastic which led her to connect with the floor. Then it was British night which was just a quiz with music, pictures and standard questions. We had decorated the room up with post cards, flags, pictures and tea towels to give it a vaguely British flavour. We also supplied a small array of British food including Jelly babies and shortbread. Bev’s team won on a tie breaker of guessing the population of Wales which is either three or four million. On the last night the Yanks (sorry Confederates) did line dancing and supplied some good ol lemonade and strawberry and cream flan- they have a name for it but I’ve forgotten again- darn senility. The line dancing was entertaining however that doesn’t mean I was any good which one can see by viewing the video below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5JtOfa7ZsI

On that evening we were joined by Tomick’s friends who are in a rap group called The Real People; think of wiggers and you know what they look like. Tomick was the person who affected me most while I was out there. He has only been a Christian for less than a year, he attends the local charismatic church bizarrely called the Granary Church, but has turned his life around: he no longer smokes weed, drinks or watches television for Jesus now; he also prays and fasts every Friday, he used to do it Friday and Saturday, because of his love of God. He is an example to us all of how our lives should be radically different after believing in Jesus for salvation. Note it may not require any of the above; again it is an area I will discuss in the future.

During one of the evenings I had a good chat with Antoni which started off about cameras: he had a digital SLR while I still use my fully manual film SLR. He said that cameras in the US were cheap but he wouldn’t import any due to the tariff imposed upon them. I then told him about how we (Brits) go on Booze Cruises to France due to the tax disparity. He then said it was the same on the Soviet border: Poles go over every day and bring back booze and fags to sell on the black-market because they are even cheaper than the Polish prices! Do Ryainair fly to Russia yet?! Another example of making naturally law abiding people into criminals by providing a service other people want.

On the Saturday we had a day of site seeing around the local area. We visited a Catholic “church” which was very beautiful and contained an exceptionally ornate organ which had moving angels and spinning stars on it. While we were looking at the merchandise one of the clergy, an elderly gentleman, started talking to us and took particular liking to Rachel and attempted to teach her “I love you” in Polish; Rachel tried to respond and asked him to say what “I love God” is in Polish. After this we travelled to a small town which had a Teutonic Castle and a church with a large bell tower- 180 feet high. When we reached the top of the bell tower, which had magnificent views of the surrounding country side, all there was stopping us from falling off was a bit of plastic fencing bought from the local garden shop. Not that it was unsafe: if one used a slight bit of common sense while up there and didn’t go up there when it was particularly windy it was perfectly safe. However this Polish common sense, I was informed, will be replaced by our ridiculous laws within the next twenty years or so. While standing outside the ice cream shop, opposite the castle, a black dog ran past panting, for at that point it was rather hot, upon which I remarked “I’d hate to be black in this weather” which was responded with a suitably black look from Rachel. We then took an hour off and then went to an excellent local restaurant. I had a sort of thick stew with pork, garlic, cheese and potatoes which was delicious. On the walls of the restaurant were some wild boar furs. We were then taken to a local folk museum which had various rooms mocked up to be different periods. The building was actually four houses: each with a quarter of the building to share one communal chimney in the middle. The reason for this strange set up was: TAX! The Polish government taxed the number of chimneys and thus distorted house building in this way.

On the Sunday we attended the church service at which Jonny shared a few words about what God had been doing in his life recently; Phil gave them some words for thought from Mark 5 (he though that is what the reading was from but in fact it was Matthew 5); and Clarence gave his testimony (this was all translated btw). The Church is a mixture of old and new- most similar to Emmanuel Baptist Church for you Cardiff lot. On the previous Sunday I recognised most of the tune which included Amazing Grace; however that day I recognised precisely none of them. During the service the Pastor and his wife sang a duet which translates something like whatever trouble you may face Jesus will always be there. However the reason why I remember it was because it was just pure 80s: the song was pure synth from a tape deck and had a fade out ending. After the service we all went to different families houses for dinner. I went to one of the elder’s house which was around 15 miles away. And yes, if that were possible, Polish roads are worse than British roads. He didn’t speak English although his grandson fortunate did; we conversed in the car mainly about basketball of which he is a big fan. For my dinner: I had chicken soup with homemade pasta; followed by various cuts of duck, pork stew, potatoes, salad and some disgusting vegetable looking like a small cucumber; this was finished off with cake, ice cream and biscuits. All in all it was a great lunch. After this I returned to the Church whereupon I had arrest and got ready for the next days train journey. Fonda didn’t arrive back until around 9 after being shown the sights and sounds of the area by Janusch, his wife and daughter.

On the Monday we disembarked for the station. We got on the train fine although we then had a heated rush down a few carriages to get to a cabin to ourselves. After this however the journey was again uneventful: we read, listened to music and at one point Phil and myself had a fruitful discussion of free market anarchism. However about 40 miles from Wroclaw the train stopped and we were informed that there were trees on the line. We then proceeded to wait an hour then travel for ten minutes then weight an hour and so it continued. During this time we were reduced, at my suggestion, that we should play the game think of a category and think of words for it going through the alphabet. We had innovative categories such as films, actors and actresses and Bible characters; Rachel was excellent at the latter. This was brought to an end when we rolled up to the station around three hours late. We were later informed that there had been a storm in there which probably caused the trees to fall; well it’s a better excuse than leaves on the line, isn’t it? We were collected by Andrew, Bogusia’s husband, and taken back to their flat where we were fed with-you’ve guessed it- ham, cheese and bread. Basha, Bev’s flat mate, picked her and Rachel up.

The next day the lads gave presents to Bogusia and family including a Love Spoon, a model of Salisbury Cathedral, a British flag and a book of Japanese Logic Puzzles- Marius, there son, was good at maths so I figured he’d like it, which he did. We then met up for a final meal in Wroclaw square then headed to the airport. Security was not as tight heading through airport which pleased me somewhat; however I didn’t expect them to be as generous as they were: I had accidentally not put my toiletry bag, which contained my razor blades, in my case and left it in my hand luggage. Yet know one in security batted an eye lid. The flight was again uneventful except for continuous inane pre-recorded adverts coming through the sound system; and the landing was suitably better. We survived immigration said goodbye to Rachel, who was catching a coach on the way back home, and headed into London and then went our separate ways.

To see a collection of photos of the trip see here:

http://cardiffuk.facebook.com/photo_search.php?oid=2374809620&view=all

PS. I forgot to say what the weather was like. It was variably with quite a bit of rain although it got rather warm and sunny of some days. I donned my Hawaiian shirt on a few days anyway.

I Have Entered Cyberspace

Cyberspace is no longer safe- the Eclectic Rambler has arrived. Throughout my blogging career I intend to blog on practically everything: film, music, television (= Doctor Who), sport, politics, philosophy, economics, theology and anything else I happen to have an opinion on. I will endeavour to post every week or so with my first proper entry in the next few days.