Elegant Chaos

The thing that's depressed me most about the response to the recent budget in the UK is the same thing that depresses me at election time (or for that matter when reading most of the commentary in most of the British press).

It's the fact that there appears to be such a lack of empathy amongst the general population. Most people's perspective, be they rich or poor, seems to be so narrowly focussed on themselves.

The media plays its part, by endlessly focussing the debate on individuals, asking people how they think this or that policy will effect them. The media isn't to blame though, it's just not helping.

Rather than just moaning (I'm good at that), I came up with a crazy idea.

The next time you're going to vote, forget about yourself. I'll say that again, just in case you got confused. Forget about yourself. Don't vote for your own interests.

Think of the two people that you know who probably need a lucky break most right now. Then work out what would really help them, and vote accordingly.

I'm not saying you should imagine your way into the mind of a homeless person sleeping under Waterloo bridge (unless you happen to know one). Just pick a friend, family member, someone you see on the bus each morning, whatever. Someone "normal" like you. You don't have to be an angel - just try to be honest and pick people who need the help.

Picking two people gives a bit of balance - maybe they'll need different things, so you might have to compromise a bit.

Perhaps you'll still end up voting for selfish policies, but at least you'll be doing it for someone else, and not for yourself. Who knows though, maybe the act of thinking about others will give you a bit more perspective.Don't forget, you need not worry about yourself whilst doing this - your friends and neighbours will be looking out for you. Just worry about them.

Of course I realise that there's a danger of this ending up with little cartels of people voting to preserve each other's interests (sounds awfully familiar, come to think of it). Taken to extremes, it could get parochial and insular, nationalistic even. Ok, fine, don't take it to extremes - obviously (like, duh...). Maybe pick someone from, oh, the next town or something!

You never know, maybe, just maybe, thinking about other people might turn out to be habit forming.

PS.

If you're one of those shit-for-brains people who doesn't vote because "they're all the same, nothing I do will change anything" etc etc, then this counts double for you. If you look hard enough, you will find a policy that someone is proposing which will help someone who you know. If you can't find one, you're not looking hard enough. Put aside your own cynicism, and vote for them.

A couple of weeks ago I went along to a meeting of the Open Rights Group.

Cory Doctrow gave an interesting talk about some of the issues surrounding the debate over digital riglts management, in which he pointed out, amongst other things, the futility of trying to prevent the copying of bits - it is something that will only get easier with time. Cory is a good speaker, and it was an interesting talk, although as is so often the case with these events, there seemed to be a large element of preaching to the converted.

The second talk was on the campaign against identity cards, an issue that I think is more controversial. One of things that worries me about ORG is that it will attract people with certain views, and an orthodoxy will emerge to the exclusion of others - I suspect that the ID card debate might be a case in point.

It's not that I'm particularly in favour of the government's scheme, it's just that i think that most of the debate about identity - tracking of information, dna databases, identity theft, civil liberties - is the wrong way round.

There are good analogies with the DRM debate. Just as it is futile to attempt to prevent the copying of digital information, it seems equally unrealistic to believe that we can prevent the storage and tracking of personal information.

The idea that we have a right not to be offended by others, and in particular that people with a religious belief hold some sort of privileged position and should be treated differently, is a dangerous nonsense which needs to be refuted.

I've heard lots of sensible comment about the current "cartoon-gate", mostly from liberal folks like myself who believe in the importance of free speech.

I've been surprised and worried though, by the number of them who have qualified or modified what they have said - adding something along the lines of "of course, we must respect religious people's beliefs".

Respect your beliefs? No, I don't respect your beliefs. As it happens, I find many of your beliefs deeply offensive.

I respect your right to hold those beliefs, and even to express them to me, but that in no way obliges me to modify my behaviour to fit in with the way you think I should live my life.