Velveteen Rabbi

For several years now I have been inspired by the Jewish-American wisdom coming from the pen of Rachel Barenblat, who writes a blog under the title of "The Velveteen Rabbi", whose blog motto has been "When can I run and play with the real rabbis?". Having received ordination from ALEPH - the Alliance for Jewish Renewal, Rachel is now Rabbi Barenblat, and has changed her motto to "Now running and playing with the real rabbis!" At the same time, this talented woman has also just seen publication of "70 Faces",  poems written in response to the Torah in the longstanding tradition of midrash. (1)

Rachel Barenblat is also a believer in ecumenism participation. In June 2007, the Rev. Mark Lewis, rector of Church of our Saviour, Secaucus, N.J., presided over the interfaith baptism of twin boys in which rabbinical student Rachel Barenblat and Islamic scholar Hussein Rashin participated by offering Jewish and Muslim prayers during the service.

She is also notable recently for acting to improve Jewish-Muslim relations. The New York Times reported this story:

On August 26 2010, a drunk man barged into a mosque in Queens, NY, urinated on the carpets [in the entrance] and yelled anti-Muslim slurs at the worshippers. When she learned of the incident, ALEPH Rabbinic Student Rachel Barenblat was appalled. She wanted the mosque's community to know there are many Americans who haven't given in to the wave of anti-Muslim hatred washing over the nation. Rachel put out a call via Twitter and on her "Velveteen Rabbi" blog, passing a "virtual hat" to help the mosque steam-clean the rugs. Many of the first contributions were from friends, but soon donations began to roll in from others - from across the religious spectrum. Many contributors said things like, "Thank you for giving me something I can do." Within 48 hours, Rachel had raised $1,180, mostly in small contributions of $5, $10, $18 and $20. She observed on her blog - "I'm sitting back and marveling at the awesome things we can accomplish when we pull together.A few people mentioned being low income; many people said they wished they could give more. But small donations add up, and there's something incredibly moving for me in the fact that we raised over a thousand dollars in one weekend in this way. I hope we've been able to show our Muslim friends and neighbors (offline and online) that despite the recent rise in Islamophobia, those who are preaching fear and hatred do not represent all of us. Within a few days of initiating the appeal, Rachel sent off the check, which mosque administrators have told her will go toward buying a new prayer rug.

The entries on her blog are too numerous to pick the best. But here are a few to give a flavour of her writing.

On "The entrance to the tent", she looks at the story of Abraham (Avraham), and transforms it into a reflection on our own encounters. In this story Abraham meeting with God takes the form of meeting three strangers. She writes:

The Hasidic rabbi Elimelech of Lizhensk says that the word ohel, "tent," hints at holiness. (Probably because later in Torah, when the Israelites are carrying the portable mishkan / dwelling-place-for-God through the desert, it's referred to sometimes as ha-ohel, "the tent.") Avraham is sitting at the petach, the entrance or opening, of holiness. That reading transforms this line: it's not just about Avraham sitting in the doorway of his tent on a hot day, but rather, he's sitting in an existential state of openness to holy encounter. No matter where we are, we can strive to be like Avraham. We can know ourselves to be at the opening of holiness, the doorway to a meeting with God. Avraham's meeting with God takes the form of a meeting with three strangers; if R' Elimelech's teaching holds true, then he challenges me to see the strangers I meet as faces of God. Try this on for size: "I am sitting at the entrance of holiness, and the people who appear to me are divine messengers." The people at the coffee shop; the guy behind the counter at the post office; even the person online who's giving me a hard time -- all come from God. How does it feel to aim, even for a moment, to emulate Avraham in this way?

On "This week's portion: hatch", she reflects on the story of Jacob, when he leaves Laban, and his wife Rachel steals from her father the household gods to take with her. She asks:

But what does it mean to steal the household gods? This question came up in our Torah Journeys class last week, and we had a fabulous conversation about the poetic imagery of Rachel sitting on the idols as though they were eggs she intended to hatch. That's the idea which gave rise to this week's Torah poem. We don't tend to think in terms of household gods anymore -- the term puts me in mind of Aeneas taking the Lares and Penates, wrapped in his toga, as he flees from burning Troy -- but I like the idea that there is something each of us takes from our household of origin when we set off on our own to create our own homes and families. What from my parents' household has come with me the long way from south Texas to western Massachusetts? What did I bring with me, knowingly and unknowingly? How do the talismans and the stories of my childhood continue to shape me and my house, and what will they mean to my son as he grows? Does any of this resonate for you?

These comments certainly resonate for me. It is not just possessions, although still have an wooden ship that was my grandfathers, and a framed picture of an old seaman smoking a pipe that was my great-aunts. There are also the formative influences of childhood; my mothers determination to always be fair with myself and my sister and not play favourites, and learning that her parents played favourites with her elder sister, and that influenced her to act in the opposite manner. The pleasure of beach combing, and being soaked by a spring tide as it splashed over the sea wall (and trying to dodge it). Learning about the Jewish faith from my parents generous and tolerant friends, and being thus appalled by the ignorance of anti-Semitic attitudes at school. My love of books, from being taken to the library. Science from being given as various birthday presents, chemistry sets, and the joy in trying out experiments. Gathering limpets for the cat to eat. Helping out at charity events because my mother believed we should learn to do our bit, even as children. My physics teacher lending me a copy of E.F. Schumacher's "Small is Beautiful", and how this book profoundly reshaped my thinking. These are some of the memories, and these feed into attitudes, into ways of looking at the world. It's not so much the physical possessions that shape who we are, and which we want to share with our own children; it is the patterns that have shaped our lives.

And here is the lovely poem Rachel writes as a reflection on Rachel pondering what she brought with her when she left her home with Jacob:

The question no one asked:
what did I want to bring with me

from the old hacienda, every rock
and bush familiar as my own palm?

What talismans of my childhood
could I sequester in the saddlebags

and sit on like a mother hen
brooding over her speckled eggs?

Even my husband doesn't understand
how these old beliefs shaped me

how my curves and corners fit
snug against what I've rejected

and what I embrace, even him,
even here in this goatskin tent

where my father's household is only
a memory clouded with distant dust.

Rachel's blog, however, also draws upon Jewish traditions to reflect on the need for social justice. She comments as follows about Rabbi Daniel Brenner, and she says that "he notes that immediately following one instance of the Torah's most oft-repeated verse (about loving the stranger, for we were strangers in the land of Egypt), there is an injunction about honest weights and measures. He writes:"

Why is a law about strangers followed by a law about honest measurement in the marketplace? Because in order to create a society which treats the alien as the natives are treated, we must begin by creating a just, transparent, economic system. One which does not cheat immigrants, one that does not create a second class of citizens who must hide in the shadows for fear of imprisonment and deportation...

And she brings that into a reflection on the Passover Seder meal, which involves eating "the bread of affliction", and challenges the idea that it should just be a symbolic act, and no more:

So when we raise our matzah in a couple of weeks and intone, "this is the bread of affliction which our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt," we need to ask ourselves, who's eating the bread of affliction now, not because it's a symbolic Passover gesture but because it's the only bread they have? And what can we do about it, once we open our eyes? (3)

Lastly an extract from her "Haggadah of Pesach". The Haggadah (Hebrew:  "telling") is a Jewish religious text that sets out the order of the Jewish Passover Seder. She put together her own version, and has worked and reworked it over the years. It is Judaic, but within the Jewish renewal movement. To understand it, this example is a reflection on the plagues of Egypt, and how we can take it up and look at the plagues afflicting today's world:

Midrash teaches that, while watching the Egyptians succumb to the ten plagues, the angels broke into songs of jubilation. God rebuked them, saying "My creatures are perishing, and you sing praises?" As we recite each plague, we spill a drop of wine-symbol of joy-from our cups. Our joy in our liberation will always be tarnished by the pain visited upon the Egyptians.

Blood
Frogs
Lice
Insect swarms
Cattle plague
Boils
Hail
Locusts
Darkness
Death of the First-Born

These plagues are in the past, but today's world holds plagues as well. Let us spill drops of wine as we recite: these ten new plagues.

Apathy in the face of evil
Brutal torture of the helpless
Cruel mockery of the old and the weak
Despair of human goodness
Envy of the joy of others
Falsehood and deception corroding our faith
Greedy theft of earth's resources
Hatred of learning and culture
Instigation of war and aggression
Justice delayed, justice denied, justice mocked...

Shekhinah, soften our hearts and the hearts of our enemies. Help us to dream new paths to freedom, so that the next sea-opening is not also a drowning; so that our singing is never again their wailing. So that our freedom leaves no one orphaned, childless, gasping for air. (3)

For following up on social justice, she blogged on the Rabbis for Human Rights - North American Conference, which covered the following observations:

Gordon Tucker text study on the dignity of work and the indignity of slavery
Renewing America's commitment to human rights panel
Torture in Jewish Law and Values led by Rabbi Melissa Weintraub
Text study on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights led by Rabbi Miryam Glazer
Vision for the RHR-NA led by the RHR-NA staff
Muslim text study/conversation with Munther Darjani
Abrahamic Religions and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights with Arnie Eisen, David Gushee and Sulayman S. Nyang
Zionism, Israel and Human Rights with Avrum Berg, Munthar Dajani and Paula Hymen
Opening Ceremonies of conference
Religious Jew, Secular Zionist: R. Art Green on Jewish Theology and Israel
Beyond Guantanamo, Ending U.S.-Sponsored Torture, with two lawyers from the Guantanamo defense team.
Rachel Barenblat's closing reflections on the conference (4)

The link below gives the summary page, for anyone interesting in following up and seeing what was discussed at this conference.

http://www.rhr-na.org/story/velveteen-rabbi-blogs-rhr-na-conference

And from her closing reflections, she writes:

It's important to have a space in which one feels at-home. I think this is especially true for those of us whose political stances may be to the left of the American mainstream. Those of us who feel strongly about issues of social justice, and whose political and ethical orientations are shaped by our religious convictions, can feel twice-marginalized: first, marginal as Jews within American culture writ large, and then marginal within mainstream Jewish community as supporters of, say, equal rights for Israelis and for Palestinians alike. Being part of a group like Rabbis for Human Rights allows us to affirm the ways in which our faith and our politics are inextricably intertwined.

The RHR conference offered me the opportunity to engage with some difficult realities. Listening to Avram Burg speak about the situation in Israel today; listening to Rabbi Brian Walt, who just led a RHR delegation to Israel, describe the racism and oppression he witnessed; listening to Rabbi Melissa Weintraub talk about torture, and then listening to Gita Gutierrez' unbelievably powerful remarks about American use of torture at Guantanamo and how we are all culpable in what our nation has done there: these were not easy. Often I came away drained. My heart hurt. It made me cry.

But the conference also offered me the opportunity for learning and for connection, which can heal the very heartsickness that the difficult material can induce. I come away strengthened in my sense that my Judaism calls me to work toward a just society, in my certainty that the prophetic call to justice still resonates in my religious community today, and in an awareness that I am not alone in caring deeply about these issues. I came away with a deeper sense of being part of a larger Jewish social justice community. And I came away inspired to find ways to do the work I need to do to help repair the world, an obligation which is incumbent on all of us. (5)

 

I think it is equally important for those of us who are working towards and regarding matters of social justice in Jersey should also meet; I would like to see a conference, not with a narrow minded "Imagine Jersey", which puts management (and fixes the available options) at the heart of government, but looking at how fairness and a just society come first, and draw upon our own traditional roots, and consider what needs to be done to improve matters, and only after see how such a change might be managed. There are times when politics should take a back seat, and principles should be considered first.

Links
(1) http://www.phoeniciapublishing.com/70-faces-torah-poems.html
(2) http://velveteenrabbi.blogs.com/blog/2009/11/this-weeks-portion-hatch.html
(3) http://velveteenrabbi.blogs.com/blog/2006/03/social_justice_.html
(4) http://www.rhr-na.org/story/velveteen-rabbi-blogs-rhr-na-conference
(5) http://velveteenrabbi.blogs.com/blog/2008/12/rhr-2008-closing-reflections.html

Guernsey Watch and Jersey Musings

I've been looking over the waters to see what's been making the headlines in our neighbouring Island of Guernsey.

"Cut red tape from Sunday shops law" suggests a reform of the Sunday trading laws in Guernsey. These are tighter than Jersey, and until fairly recently, no garages could open to sell petrol on a Sunday, which could cause problems if a holidaymaker was running low on petrol, and not aware of the fact. But this story was not about reform of the laws, but reform of the red tape. A Bridge butcher took over a new shop, and had to wait for a month before the licence application was approved.

Mr Le Poidevin applied for a Sunday trading licence from the St Sampson's constables when he took over the former Johns the Butchers shop late last year. But he had to wait more than a month for his application to be approved and could not open on a Sunday during that time. (1)

Jersey has its own spell bureaucratic madness, when Liberation day fell on a Saturday, and Simon Crowcroft permitted Town retailers to open on a Sunday, with some Parishes following suit, and some not, according the whim of their Constable. Until persuaded that it was grossly unfair, Ransom's Garden Centre would have to remain closed because of the Constable of St Martin, while the Constable of St Peter was happy to see St Peter's Garden Centre open.

My suspicions are that nothing will be done to rectify this kind of mess until the same problem comes round again, whereupon we will see our glorious international high calibre finance centre being subject locally to what appears to the outsider to be narrow minded small town politics. And yes, the irony is intentional - it seems a bit much that we have all kinds of rules and regulations to make our finance industry comply with international standards, and it is talked up as world class at the same time as the internal framework of laws allow the Constables to have a law applied in one way for one Parish, one for another. We need a bit of Parish harmonisation!

Meanwhile, retailers are complaining about the delivery of fresh milk that stays fresh:

A review of the dairy industry said there were concerns that fresh milk products were presently being distributed to major retailers in un-refrigerated vehicles, with the exception of Marks & Spencer, whose milk was refrigerated in line with company policy. (2)

It turns out that the some large retailers have to take the milk from whichever roundsman has the control of the zone in which a store was located, and cannot insist on it being refrigerated. On a hot day, this does not seem a wise idea. Mind you, I have seen milk in Jersey, in one of the smaller group of retail outlets, just stacked up for at least an hour before being put into the cool cabinet, and I wonder how well Jersey does in this respect? I usually get the blue or green cartons, as skimmed or semi-skimmed milk seems to last longer anyway.

When I was at primary school, the school milk (then in the bizarre pyramid shaped "tetrapaks") was often just brought in and left in a corner of a classroom, so that in a hot summer, it was already curdling by break time, and virtually undrinkable. The pyramid shaped design was particularly ill suited to fridges, as they took up an extraordinary amount of space.

I remember the nascent new age pop-culture of the 1970s coming out with a book on "Pyramid Power", in which it was stated that the reason the Pharaoh's were buried in pyramids was because the shape was conducive to "earth energies" which would preserve anything, including dead bodies. The author even stated he had success with a small perspex pyramid and fruit. He obviously had never tried Jersey milk's Tetrapak, which produced thousands of refutations every day.

We have had violent incidents in Jersey recently, with people out at night being beaten up, but no single individuals who could perhaps be described as "dangerous loners" recently, as in a Guernsey case:

After shooting a chicken with a crossbow, Richard Le Conte pulled the trigger on an unloaded rifle he was aiming at his sister and waved a knife in her face. In the Magistrate's Court, Le Conte, 20, admitted causing unnecessary suffering to an animal and conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace. He was sentenced to nine months in prison, suspended for three years, and two years' supervision.

Advocate David Domaille said that his client, who was sent to youth detention for a year in 2008 for shooting a rifle at people from a car, accepted the facts but wanted to explain the 'spirit' of the offending. Judge Philip Robey said he was not concerned with what the defendant intended or did not intend to do.(3)

Interestingly, I came across a case of waving a weapon at another individual from Jersey, but within the police force. In Lenny Harper's affidavit, he mentions a number of incidents of bullying with the local police when he arrived, not as has recently been alleged by him, but rather stopped by him. Here is the case in question:

One male officer told how one night shift he was sitting in the Station Office with the Sergeant when the latter produced a 9mm semi automatic pistol. The Sergeant dismantled the firearm and cleaned it. When finished, he assembled it, put the magazine in and cocked the weapon. He then pointed it directly at the male officer's head for several seconds before lowering it and saying "No, not tonight." That male officer is still suffering the effects of the bullying by the Sergeant.

The recent mention of bullying in the force by Ian Le Marquand, appearing to suggest that Graham Power and Lenny Harper were bullies, ignores this kind of incident. It is well known that when bullies are stopped, they will themselves complain that they have been bullied, and it would be truer to say that Mr Power and Mr Harper brought about a change to a culture to that within which bullies would have felt intimidated.

Every profession in life attracts its share of bullies, but professions which involve the exercise of power (such as police or politicians) are probably more prone to attract the kind of individual who enjoys wielding power. This is, of course, not a Jersey problem, and we need to be aware of that. The brutal beating up of Ian Tomlinson, or the dragging of Jody McIntyre from his wheelchair during the recent student protests illustrate how some police, but not all, should clearly not be in the force at all.

But in terms of "dangerous loners", the most alarming case was that of the SOJ Police Firearms Clerk at the time himself, whose home address was searched by Lenny Harper:

At his address I recovered a huge number of firearms lying insecure in a bedroom. These included an RPG7 Rocket Launcher which was later found to have only a minor fault. Among the dozens of other firearms found at his address were some which had been handed into the police for destruction. Lying around the room on the floor next to weapons such as 7.62 rifles, machine guns, and magnum revolvers, was a large quantity of ammunition for these and other weapons. A 'SEACAT' Missile Launcher was also taken from his home.

Is the grass always greener elsewhere? Guernsey is opening up meetings to the public:

The doors of government will creep open further again next month. In the slow evolution towards open government, the Scrutiny Committee is following in the footsteps of Public Services and the States Assembly and Constitution Committee in allowing the media to sit in on some meetings. Also in February, Environment will take the long-awaited step of making planning decisions in front of the public. Planners have been leading lights on openness in recent months - their website is now something of a treasure trove of information if you know what you are looking for. (5)

But what amazed me was the following sentence:

Is it all enough? No, still the island lags behind Jersey, which has a freedom of information regime.

Jersey has freedom of information guidelines, but these fall far short of the UK. As the Telegraph pointed out in 2008:

The Freedom of Information Act gives journalists and members of the public the right to demand access to public documents in mainland Britain. Jersey, however, has its own independent legal system, with no such freedom of information laws.

In 2000 the States adopted a voluntary Code of Practice on Public Access to Official Information, which states that the public should be given access, "wherever reasonably possible", to information held by the States. However, there is no provision under the Code for people to apply for information held by the police, hospitals, or other public bodies (in the UK all publicly-funded bodies, from the BBC to local councils, are bound by the Freedom of Information Act). The type of information which islanders in Jersey can access is also limited; government committee agendas and minutes should be disclosed, for example, but documents supporting an agenda item do not have to be given out. (6)

It is voluntary, not statutory - hardly a "regime" as such, as like so much else, it depends on the whim of individuals involved. The salaries of top civil servants, for example, have not been revealed as they have been in the UK, and Terry le Sueur only grudgingly revealed information about the range of salaries particular jobs or groups of jobs had. It is a case of getting blood out of a stone, and if the stone in question is hard Jersey granite, as appears to be the case, it is difficult and what should be a simple process is often subjected to endless delay and prevarication.

In the case of the UK, a request was made to Kent County Council regarding the following - under the UK Freedom of Information Law in March 2009:

Please confirm if Kent County Council has ever placed any children into foster care placements in Jersey and/or made any payments to Jersey for foster care? In particular if any children have ever been placed in the Children's Care Home Haut de la Garenne in Jersey? Have any children placed into foster care in any area including any part of the UK, ever been sent there for a holiday or respite?

The reply gave the timetable for a reply:

I acknowledge your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Assuming we hold this information, I will endeavor to supply the data to you as soon as possible but no later than 6th April 2009 (20 working days from date of receipt).

In fact, Kent Council was not able to give the information because the records for the period after 1990 because the records were not in electronic form, and were poorly kept, after that date, they confirmed there were no placements. As far as Jersey is concerned, of course, the record keeping at Haut de la Garenne was also extremely poor and incomplete for earlier periods; this seems to be endemic for that period. But what is striking is that in the UK a request could be made, and a timetable placed for that data to be given.

Jersey has been trying to get a Freedom of Information law for ages. Draft legislation exists in a PDF form, but costs have been cited as a factor for delays. In 2008, the Telegraph noted that Jersey "has now drafted its own Freedom of Information Act". It is still there, still waiting.

Deputy Roy le Hérissier has stepped in after a committee said it could not take responsibility for implementing Jersey's Freedom of Information law. He is calling on the chief minister's department to draw up a plan for enforcing the new law. The St Saviour deputy is suggesting an implementation plan be drawn up to ensure the law is "not buried". (8)

It is another case of "poor practice", and the disparity between local laws, which are mired in a swamp of delays and petty fiefdoms, and the Island as an international finance centre, where legislation is continually been refined to make sure the Island complies with the best standards. We badly need laws which are as up to the mark for the local community as for the international community - what might be termed "law harmonisation"! We simply can't have "world class" finance laws without "world class" local laws.

Links:
(1) http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2011/01/13/cut-red-tape-from-sunday-shops-law/
(2) http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2011/01/12/retailers-are-cool-with-dairys-fresh-delivery/
(3) http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2011/01/13/crossbow-wielding-man-shot-chicken-threatened-sister/
(4) http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2010/10/sworn-affidavit-of-mr-lenny-harper_17.html
(5) http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2011/01/11/the-doors-of-government-set-to-open-a-little-wider/
(6) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1579981/Why-documents-in-Jersey-remain-secret.html
(7) http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/kent_county_council_children_pla
(8) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-jersey-11570450

Thoughts on States Reform

I see the States have brought up reform again, but I'm not  so keen on "doing Clothier properly"; I tend to find myself in surprising agreement with Pierre Horsfall and Roy Le Hérissier and Colin Egré over larger electoral districts for Deputies.

What I think is needed first is to agree on principles on which reform can take place before looking at the mechanics of reform; in other words, rather than looking at the different options, which are all flooding into the States, instead to look for agreement (and perhaps vote on the merits of) principles on which the options can be judged.

For instance:

a) even representation - the ratio of voting population / (deputy +constable) must I think be evenly distributed.

We've been lucky in that this has largely managed to fit Parish divisions, by getting extra Deputies for larger Parishes. But with the population growth over the last 40 years, this has not been even, and there are wide disparities. St Maries ratio is almost double that of most of the other Parishes, which is really an impossible situation, but there are other Parishes which have grown and should really have an extra Deputy if they are to retain parity with St Helier, St Brelade, St Saviour, and a few which should also be reduced.

If you look at the history of England, the most notable change happened when large industrial towns sprang up, so that by 1832, and the Reform Act, there were large industrial areas with virtually no MPs, and "rotten boroughs" with far over the number of mps to a declining population. The Reform act was one step, but there is a continuing boundary commission to ensure that the even representation continued, and continues to this day. If we had larger districts for Deputies, such as in Guernsey where they combine several smaller Parishes, we could get better ratios, and reduce the number of Deputies accordingly, and it would be easier to manage in the future. Jersey has altered significantly since the last additional Deputies were added, and the population now varies widely. A reassessment of even representation is long overdue.

The question is: are there any other ways of maintaining even representation? Clothier manages it for most parishes, by taking out Senators and Constables and adding some extra Deputies, but St Mary is still clearly over represented with two, and would need just one. Clothier (and John Henwood, who favours this solution) always balk at that option.

b) voting choice - in a party system, it doesn't matter that the PM is only elected for one safe electoral district, because the spread of votes across all districts is what counts. If one doesn't have a party system, then one could have a situation where the Chief Minister (as a worst case scenario) is elected in St Mary, and has the smallest possible Island mandate, with only a small number of voters being able to vote him out. Larger districts, combining smaller Parishes,  would ensure that at least a large chunk of the population could vote for a Chief Minister (and for other Ministers) when they come up for re-election. It also means a Chief Minister could have an extremely small Island mandate, and be entrenched for years, despite the majority of the electorate being dissatisfied. This is not a good way to go.

The question is: what is sufficient to allow the voter to vote out someone, or to restrict their power? An alternative might be like many countries, to only allow a Chief Minister to serve two consecutive terms of office as a Chief Minister. There may be other mechanisms.

c) Parish links - this is more of an "option choice". Do we want to retain a single Parish link. If one removes the Deputies from Parishes to Districts, if Constables remained, there would still be a Parish link. Do we want that?  The Clothier option leaves the Deputies and removes Constables and Senators to retain the Parish link.

d) Island wide mandate and "voting power". At present, in St Brelade number 2, I can vote for 6 Senators, 2 Deputies, 1 Constable making 9 States members. In St Mary, electors can vote for 9 States Members. Clothier would reduce St Brelade to perhaps 3-4 Deputies, St Mary to 2 Deputies, thus in losing the island wide mandate, reducing the individual "voting power" hugely. Districts for Deputies could maintain more of that "voting power". Or should we also have at least 6-8 Senators as well to balance that?

e) Any other principle that a fair voting system needs, that I haven't thought of!

I've also been wondering if it is possible to develop a scoring method based on (a) to (d) to measure how well different proposals work out, and rank how they do.

For instance, for a given proposal of reform.

On even representation: 1 Improve 0 Neutral -1 Diminishes
Voting choice:  1 Improve 0 Neutral -1 Diminishes
Parish Links:  1 Improve 0 Neutral -1 Diminishes
Voter Power:  1 Improve 0 Neutral -1 Diminishes

This would allow the different ideas for electoral reform to be given an overall total score, and rank each against one another, so there would be some way of assessing the merits of each option.

My rough and ready assessment yields:

Clothier score = 0,-1,1,-1 = -1

Larger Districts, no Constables, No Senators (Guernsey model) =  1,1,-1,-1 = 0

Larger Districts, Constables, No Senators = 1,1,-1,-1 = 0

Present Reform: Deputies, Constables, 8 Senators = 0,0,0,-1 = -1

Larger Districts (but with less Deputies), Constables, 4-8 Senators = 1,1,-1,0 = 1

The present form is neutral on a number of issues, because it doesn't adjust the status quo very much at all. Of the other options Clothier is poorest in every respect, because it fails on voting choice and voting power. The present reform (to less Senators) is equally poor, for the same reason.

Options based on the Guernsey model are better and are mostly neutral, meaning that they leave the score much as they find it. But  keeping the Constables and Senators with larger districts is an improvement. The Constables keep a Parish link, while the number of Senators can ensure the "voting power" is on a par with the present.

Ranking is always a simplification; I remember Spearman's rank correlation coefficient which simplifies how X changes with respect to Y, seeing how well the two variables can be described using a monotonic function. There are undoubtedly more sophisticated methods of ranking. It is also debatable, perhaps, whether "voting choice" should be included; especially if the terms of office of a Chief Minister are prescribed. There is also a subjective element to the scoring.

But I hope I've given some idea of the means by which we can set forth principles, decided on those, and assess different electoral reforms so that we can see what is at least neutral in the overall effect (rather than just concentrating on one aspect), and what is a regressive step.

Jersey Under the Swastika - II Evacuation

Continuing the occasional transcription of Ralph Mollet's account of the Occupation of Jersey, this extract takes us up to the point just before the Occupation proper.

It is interesting to see that Jersey had its own equivalent of a "phony war", with trenches and defenses being set up in the Island, and the urban population periodically evacuating to the countryside, before it was finally decided that the Island could not be defended.

The change from a Committee based system of Government to a Departmental one may well bring a sense of familiarity to the reader, as we have ourselves in recent years, experienced a transition to Ministerial Government, with quite a different style. The difference, of course, is that this was an emergency measure, designed for the contingency of war. But it is interesting to wonder "what if?" this had led to a more centralised precursor to our present system after the war, rather than (as happened) a reversion to Committee Government. It would not have been impossible - after all, the Attlee Government in the United Kingdom drew very much on the experienced of centralised wartime  planning in a way that pre-war governments had not.

My own grandparents, and my mother and sister decided quite early on to remain here during the Occupation, being very much those "who had their roots in the soil", as my grandfather was secretary to the RJ&HS . They were not caught up in the panic of those trying to leave, or deciding to leave, and then changing their minds.

The official line throughout was one of calm, telling islanders that there would very likely be only a token German force, and "they could rest assured such occupation would not be of long duration". From the panic, it seems clear that many islanders were not convinced by the assurances of the authorities, and it became clear in hindsight that they were right not to be. Official assurances, then as now, were not always reliable.

---

Jersey Under The Swastika by Ralph Mollet

II THE EVACUATION
 
On Sunday, the 9th June, 1940, a dark pall of smoke covered the, sky, coming from the East at about noon, and cleared away to the West late in the evening; it must have been the burning of a petrol supply dump in France during the retreat of the Allies. The black cloud seemed like an omen.
 
On the 11th, the. States met and restricted the use of motor vehicles between midnight and 5 a.m. The next day the news of the occupation of Paris by the. Germans came as a shock to Jersey, many residents started leaving for the mainland and, and troops were sent to Jersey to cover the retreat of the British Expeditionary Force from Normandy through Cherbourg, St. Malo, and Brest. The Lieut.-Governor, Major-General J. M. R. Harrison, C.B., D.S.O., gave orders to have hospitals ready to receive wounded, and sent all available craft to clear the beaches on the French coast. On Saturday the 15th, thousands of British troops, ammunition, and stores were landed in Jersey. The Evening Post stated in a leading article : " We are officially informed that the whole question of the defence-in the widest sense of the word--of this Island is receiving the urgent consideration of His Majesty's Government, who are in possession of the whole of the facts, and will decide the appropriate action which the strategic situation requires. This statement, we trust, will reassure our readers, who will realize that this vital matter is safe in the hands of those most competent to know how it should be dealt with."
 
The next day the troops dug trenches and set up defences in various parts of the Island. At 1.30 p.m. Air Raid Wardens were ordered to stand by. Each mail-boat took a fill complement of persons to the mainland. On Monday the 17th, heavy gun fire was heard all day. The States met and the Lieut.-Governor made a statement as to the situation. Saint Helier was to be evacuated. Many townsfolk went to sleep in the country. A curfew was ordered from 9 p.m. The next day the evacuation of the- B.E.F. from France was completed.
 
The Germans were occupying Cherbourg and Rennes. The Bailiff told me that the British had decided not to attempt to defend the Channel Islands, and we would be compelled to surrender to the Germans, if they came; those who wished to leave would be evacuated by the British Government. 'I understood that the Lieut.-Governor did not expect the Germans to occupy the Island, and that, if they did, it would mean a nominal occupation by a few hundred men. The States decided that no one could take away from the Island more than twenty-five pounds in cash.
 
Wednesday the 19th was the climax. The Lieut.-Governor informed the Assembly of the States, that the British Government had given him orders to demilitarize the Island immediately, as it was not in the interest of the war to defend the Channel Islands. The Home Office was arranging to evacuate the bulk of those who wished to go; but he felt sure that those who had their roots in the soil would not want to leave. He further said that the Island might be occupied by the enemy. His Majesty's Government hoped that it would not; but they could rest assured such occupation would not be of long duration. When this information reached the public, a considerable amount of panic ensued. A register was immediately instituted at the Town Hall for the names of those who wished to leave the Island, and a long queue of people five and six deep extended as far as the Opera House, Gloucester Street, some standing for at least ten hours; 23,063 registered their names, almost two-thirds of whom subsequently changed their minds, and decided to remain. The telephones were working without cessation, trunk calls and telegrams were very long in transmission. Everyone was asking his neighbour what he was going to do. Many buried their valuables. The sound of gun fire ceased in the evening, and a considerable proportion of the population of St. Helier slept in the country.
 
Thursday the 20th. The panic was at its height. Long queues of cars were waiting to take their occupants to board the Government ships. The following list of ships sailed from Saint Helier with evacuees:--
 
On the 20th ,June,1940:- S S. Archangel; Antiquity; Autocarrier; Broomfeld; The Baron; Coral; Hodder; Malines; Nagtira; Perelle; Porthmorna; St. Sedan; Seaville; Suffolk Coast; Stork; West Coaster. (16).
On the 21st June, 1940:--S.S. Atlantic; Brittany; Caribin; Despatch; Dominion; Felspar; Fintain; Gorecht; Hindsrig, Isle of Sark; Maidstone; Ringwood; Shepperton Ferry; Vega; Whitstable. (15)
 
All the troops left, including the Island Militia. Crowds of people gathered around the banks, withdrawals were limited to twenty-five pounds in notes. To calm the people the following declaration was made, signed, and published:--
 
"At this anxious hour we wish the people of this Island to know, for their guidance and assistance in the decision, which each must take for himself and his own, that we are remaining at our posts to carry on our respective duties, and that we are, all of us who have them or either of them, keeping with us in this Island our wives and families.
 
A. M. Coutanche, Bailiff ; P. de C. Le Cornu, P. E. Bree, Lieut.-Bailiffs ; P. M. Baudains, J. M. Norman, E. P. Le Masurier, A. Luxon, E. A. Dorey, F. V. Le Feuvre, S. Hocquard, E. G. Labey, P. N. Gallichan, T. J. Bree, Jurats ; C. W. Duret Aubin (Attorney-General) ; C. S. Le Gros (Vicomte) ; C. S. Harrison   (Solicitor-General)."
 
Friday the 21st. The evacuation concluded during the afternoon, and the total amounted to 8,600. Some waited to go by the mailboat, which was still running to Southampton every other day. About 4,500 left by the mail steamer and air services during the month.
 
During the morning a naval auxiliary ship arrived, and H.E. the Lieut.-Governor, Mrs. Harrison, and Major Clark bade farewell to the Bailiff and other officials on the pier, and left the Island on this ship. The Government Secretary, Col. H. H. Hulton, D.S.O., remained. (He died 7th December, 1940)
 
The Bailiff returned to the Royal Court House and was sworn in as Civil Lieutenant-Governor.
 
The following letter was read to the Royal Court:--
 
Home Office,
Whitehall,
19th June, 1940
Sir,

I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that, in the event of your recall, it is desired by His Majesty's Government that the Bailiff should discharge the duties of Lieutenant-Governor, which would be confined to civil duties, and that he should stay at his post and administer the government of the Island to the best of his abilities in the interests of the inhabitants, whether or not he is in a position to receive instructions from His Majesty's Government.
 
The Crown Officers also should remain at their posts.
I am, Sir,
 
Your obedient Servant,
(Sgd.) A. MAXWELL.
The Lieut.-Governor,
Government Office,
Jersey-
 
As soon as His, Excellency left the island, the last civilian plane left the airport (Pilot Harrison).
 
As the day ended the population became calmer. On the piers and at the airport large numbers of cars were found abandoned by the evacuees, and were gradually .reclaimed by their friends who were looking after their effects.
On Saturday the 22nd the run on the banks still continued, but the panic subsided and calmness became more apparent. Shops reopened, and people paid in money to the banks.
 
The States met and authorized the Constables to enter unoccupied or abandoned houses to save all perishable goods and attend to animals. Many people had left in the midst of a meal, and others simply jumped out of bed, collected a few things, and fled to the ships.
 
The States met again on the 24th, and received the following Royal Message
 
From the King to the Bails of Jersey and Guernsey.
 
For strategic reasons it has been found necessary to withdraw the armed forces from the Channel Islands. I deeply regret this necessity, and I wish to assure My people in the Islands that in taking this decision My Government have not been unmindful of their position. It is in their interest that this step' should be taken in present circumstances.
 
The long association of the Islands with the Crown and the loyal service the people of the Islands have rendered to My Ancestors and Myself are guarantees that the link between us will remain unbroken, and I know that My people in the Islands will look forward with the same confidence as I do, to the day when the resolute fortitude, with which we face our present difficulties, will reap the reward of victory.
 
The message was published in the Royal Square, posted on the Monument, and in the Parish Church Notice Boxes. It was not published in the Press.
 
At the same sitting of the States it was resolved to form a Superior Council
 
"Having regard to the gravity of the hour and to the political and economic situation, resolved to set up eight Departments as follows: 1. Essential Commodities. 2. Transport and Communications. 3. Finance and Economics. 4. Agriculture. 5. Public Health. 6. Essential Services. 7. Public Instruction; and 8. Labour.
 
"These Departments to take the place of the various Committees.
 
The Presidents of the Departments as well as the Law Officers of the Crown to form a Council under the Bailiff as President of the Council, to take into consideration the problems arising from the present situation, and to make to the States, from time to time, such recommendations as it thinks necessary in order to meet those problems."
 
The President said he was anxious to prevent all alarms, and to reassure the public that they were adopting the best form of temporary government. Nothing which it was proposed to do would interfere with the liberties of the House or of the Island. What they had done that day could be undone tomorrow, if the House felt inclined to do so. There was nothing in the Act which did not leave the Constitution the same as they found it at the beginning of their deliberations.
 
On the 26th potatoes were again shipped, and the Island began to settle down awaiting events. - All documents and papers that might give information to the enemy or cause offence to Germany and the German people were burnt by the various departments and by private individuals.
 
Several thousand pet animals were destroyed at the Animals' Shelter.
 
The Evacuation was purely voluntary. States Officials were expected to obtain permission before leaving. Only two members of the States, the Constable of St. Saviour (Major L. T. Anthoine) and the Deputy of St. Brelade (Capt. R. E. B. Voisin) left the Island with their regiment, the Royal Militia. The Constable was ordered by the Attorney General to resume his post when he should return to the Island. When he did return, he was made a Prisoner of War, and was transferred to Germany.

Parking, Waste, and Pericles

Gas place car park closes after today, and Transport and Technical Services say the spaces will be "made up" at other car parks. Perhaps they might also like to consider the parking of ex-Jurats. As officials, Jurats rightly receive free parking so that they can efficiently and easily carry out their official duties. What is not so well known, however, is that retired Jurats, even after a number of years after they have retired, often retain the free parking, which is a nice little perk, but not one which can really be justified. Perhaps some of those permits or spaces can be withdrawn?

On making it up, it has come to my notice that the transfer of rubbish from Bellozane to the new Incinerator in preparation to firing it up for tests is also juggling figures. Rather than employing existing staff on overtime, in order to keep within budgets, no staff overtime is being used. Instead private contractors - at a considerably greater cost - are being used to move the rubbish. This is fine though, as far as TTS are concerned, because it comes from another budget - probably the budget for getting the incinerator up and running - and therefore won't show on the States profit and loss account as wages, but hidden in another expenditure stream as subcontractors. It's a neat fudge, but one which probably is costing the taxpayer more money.

And lastly I notice some disturbing trends in local political thinking. Juliet Gallichan is in favour of bringing in a deposit of £500 for anyone who wants to stand for the States, which is a restriction against the poor, for whom £500 is a substantial amount of money. Indeed, I'd find £500 a substantial amount. It is to dissuade frivolous candidates, but it is an antidemocratic measure, and I hope it is opposed.

In saying it is antidemocratic, I would refer the reader to the funeral oration of Pericles, where he notes that "Our administration favors the many instead of the few: this is why it is called a democracy.", and in speaking of governing, he notes:

Election to public office is made on the basis of ability, not on the basis of membership to a particular class. No man is kept out of public office by the obscurity of his social standing, because of his poverty, as long as he wishes to be of service to the state.

or as another translation puts it:

Neither is poverty a bar, but a man may benefit his country whatever be the obscurity of his condition.

Well, a £500 would certainty make poverty a bar!

And in yesterday's Talkback, Terry Le Sueur commented that while he didn't think it possible, he would personally like debates to be limited to a fixed number of speakers. Looking back to Pericles, I suspect he would have some rather trenchant comments to make on this:

if few of us are originators, we are all sound judges of a policy,  and, instead of looking on discussion as a stumbling-block in the way of action, we think it an indispensable preliminary to any wise action at all

It seems the Chief Minister takes a different point of view!

Industrial Disputes

"Ask yourselves - What can upset Hari Seldon's careful scheme of history, eh?" He peered from one to the other with a mild, questioning anxiety. "What were Seldon's original assumptions? First, that there would be no fundamental change in human society over the next thousand years. "For instance, suppose there were a major change in the Galaxy's technology, such as finding a new principle for the utilization of energy, or perfecting the study of electronic neurobiology. Social changes would render Seldon's original equations obsolete. But that hasn't happened, has it now?" (Foundation and Empire, Isaac Asimov)

In the first of two programmes, Melvyn Bragg and his guests discuss the Industrial Revolution. Between the middle of the eighteenth century and the early years of the nineteenth, Britain was transformed. This was a revolution, but not a political one: over the course of a few generations industrialisation swept the nation. Inventions such as the machine loom and the steam engine changed the face of manufacturing; cheap iron and steel became widely available; and vast new cities grew up around factory towns.

All this had profound effects - not all of them positive - as an agrarian and primitive society was turned into an industrial empire, the richest nation on Earth. But why did this revolution take place here rather than abroad? And why did it begin in the first place?

Jeremy Black - Professor of History at the University of Exeter
Pat Hudson - Professor Emerita of History at Cardiff University
William Ashworth - Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Liverpool. (1)

This programme was something of a first, it went out live, so that Melvin Bragg's newsletter was written before the programme began. In it, he asked:

"And then there's this great Industrial Revolution. I wonder what they're going to say? In the briefings and the extracts that I've read, there is a tendency to play down the contribution of individuals. There is talk of how the colonial possessions of Britain gave it a flying start. Of how the slave trade brought in goods which plumped the economy and the Indian textile industry fed, and was fed by, Britain in protectionist and unfair ways. There is talk about mercantile nexus. On it goes. With some historians it's a bit of a fight to foreground individuals. All is flow. Perhaps I'm being unfair. One of the pleasures of this programme is to have your own ideas and find them expertly proved to be wrong when you hit the air at 9:02." (Melvin Bragg) (2)

Poor Melvin. There must have been blood on the Green Room carpet afterwards. He innocently asked the question about the main factors behind the industrial revolution, and was pounced on by Professor Pat Hudson, who not only criticised the role of individuals, but also accused him, in a heated discussion, of being racist when he asked if individuals had no part to contribute in the shaping of the industrial revolution:

Bragg: Pat, what were the 3 main causes of the Industrial Revolution?

Hudson: "We must get away from the idea that the Industrial Revolution was caused by a wave of gadgets or by a peculiar inventive ability of British science or scientists-"

Bragg: Why?? WHY?? You are not giving this fair due in my mind-Why must we get away from it? People invent stuff, they made things, this made things happen and you keep denying it.

Bragg: ..."Oh its all to do with the broad sweep of history". Listen people invented things that hadn't been there before which enabled things to happen that had not happened before.

Hudson: Can I say that that really does characterise nationalistic accounts of the period with a peculiar sort of emphasis on British genius or.

Bragg: I didn't say that!

Hudson: "Or the superiority of the British as a race, this characterises some really almost racist accounts of the Industrial Revolution."

Bragg: Hold on! When you start talking about my arguments as racist-that's really not on!

Of course, Professor Hudson is well known for downplaying the part of individuals and technology. In her article in BBC History Magazine, no doubt also a summary of her book on the subject, the reader will look in vain for any mention of entrepreneurial or engineering genius:

For a few decades in the 19th century British manufactured goods dominated world trade. Most mass manufactured items were produced more efficiently and competitively in Britain than elsewhere. She also had the commercial, financial and political power to edge out rivals at home and abroad. In some industries, most notably textiles, massive changes took place in technology and in the organisation of production causing dramatic productivity growth. This in turn brought a steep decline in prices. In many other sectors more modest organisational improvements coupled with greater specialisation and the employment of cheap labour brought similar, though less dramatic, results. An unprecedented range and variety of products thus came within the grasp of a new mass market both within Britain and overseas. No other country could at first compete so Britain became the workshop of the world.

This is the "lucky geography" argument that is becoming increasingly prevalent in today's history. A society becomes dominant because it has the resources available, whether in agriculture, or natural resources such as coal, which can hence be exploited more readily than in other societies, and so that society steals a march on others.

There is also what C.P. Snow called a "Tolstoyan" idea of history. Snow suggested that there were two competing ideas in historical explanation. One was the Tolstoyan one, that individuals didn't really matter, so that if one individual had not come up with an idea or invention, or done something important, someone else would have done pretty much the same thing. A good example from the field of science is the calculus, which was independently invented by both Newton and Leibniz. Again, both Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace were thinking along the same lines about evolution. But Snow saw that there were exceptions. On Einstein, he commented that:

As with Rutherford, as with most scientists, if Einstein had never lived, most of his work would soon have been done by someone else, and in much the same form. He said himself that that was true of the special theory of relativity. But, when he generalised the special theory so as to include the gravitational field, he did something that might not have been done for generations: and, above all, might not have been done that way. It might, some good theoreticians have suggested, have ultimately been done in a way easier for others to handle. It remains an extraordinary monolith, like a Henry Moore sculpture, which he alone could have constructed. (CP Snow, Variety of Men)

The "Churchillian" notion of history sees it as driven by individuals who seize the moment, rather than a general background of forces; it is these individuals who change the world. As can be seen from Snow's account, history can in many ways be understood best on Tolstoy's terms, but the Churchillian people do exist, and do make changes. Whoever was President in the White House would have probably ordered the atomic bomb to be used against Japan. Germany might well have headed towards dictatorship and war regardless of who was the dictator in charge. But individuals also make a difference - another dictator in Germany more in the mould of Mussolini, or Stalin, or Franco, might not have put in place a genocidal policy to destroy the Jews.

Moreover, with her decrying of a "wave of gadgets", Professor Hudson nevertheless brings in the same gadgets, minus inventors, by the back door:

The period from the late 18th century to the mid-Victorian years witnessed a major shake up and change in both the economy and society. This was seen in the organisation and finance of industry and commerce, the skills and work practices of production and technology, massive population growth and urbanisation and the development and disciplining of labour. Canal, river, road and sea transport were all greatly improved. From the 1840s, railways revolutionised the speed of communication and the transport of passengers and, more gradually, freight.

If the steam engine is not a "gadget", I don't know what is. Moreover, while canals could move freight around more easily and faster than the bad and almost unusable roads of the time, the railway could move freight around at huge speeds. With the invention of the telegraph (another gadget), communication also changed beyond recognition. The gadgets also changed the way society worked - time became centralised and standardised because of the railways. Wars also changed - the problems with supply lines could be radically altered, and far more cheaply than any other means of transport.

Now it is possible to take the Tolstoyan view, and say the time was ripe for these inventions, and if one person had not invented one, someone else might have done so. Nonetheless, the "gadgets" and their inventors also fed back into the industrial revolution, especially as entrepreneurs saw the opportunities provided by inventions. Taking Professor Hudson's point, the background culture had also to be ripe for such change - what she didn't cite, but might have done, was that earlier steam engines, such as that described by Hero of Alexandria, or the those mentioned by Taqi al-Din in 1551 and developed by Giovanni Branca in 1629 never saw any practical use.

The steam engine didn't come out of nowhere either - Papin's digester, a steam pressure cooker for extracting fats from bones by high pressure steam used a steam-release valve, which was to prove essential in the later development of the steam engine. But it was Newcomen and Watt who developed the steam engine as such, and Watt, more than Newcomen, applied scientific concepts rather than just existing technology to improve the engine, and also saw the economic potential of a massively improved design. 80% of the steam used by the Newcomen engine was wasted. Humphrey Gainsborough had also similar ideas to Watt, but did not have the commercial nous to exploit the market for such engines.

Likewise, in a different field, George Stephenson and Humphrey Davy both had similar ideas for a mining safety lamp, and Stephenson was actually accused by Davy of stealing Davy's ideas, although this was proven to be unfounded. The designs were different, but worked on the same principle, of letting air into the lamp by tiny holes.

But the importance of the "gadget" can most clearly be seen in the invention of the wheel. No one knew who invented the wheel, yet its use in transport and farming was of immense importance, so that the knowledge of the technology spread rapidly, but not to South America, where no such invention was ever made. Geography does play an important role here, but it is hindering the dissemination of technological knowledge, rather than anything "lucky" about geographical resources.

Moreover, the suppression of knowledge can also play a part. If it hadn't been for the Reformation, which aided significantly by the printing press (another gadget), Europe would have been under the sway of a Catholicism wedded to Aristotelian ideas about the universe, and resistant to any changes. How long it would taken for astronomy to have changed is debatable, but the freer movement of ideas after the Reformation undoubtedly contributed to scientific advances. The Reformation led to a culture in which there were more scientific geniuses outside of the domain of Catholicism not because of any racial superiority, but definitely because of a culture of freedom. This could be described as "uniquely Reformation". In a similar way, British non-conformist culture definitely provided more non-University educational opportunities for self-taught individuals, and more opportunities for inventors to get commercial exploitation of labour saving inventions.

Returning to Professor Hudson's remarks on the industrial revolution not occurring because of the "peculiar inventive ability of British science or scientists". I can agree more with this remark, because the Royal Society actually played little part in the industrial revolution. George Stephenson was self-taught. Watt was working as an instrument maker at the University of Glasgow. The main inventors seem to have been outside the mainstream of the scientific community. But perhaps this should be considered in more detail. Why were the inventors mostly outside the scientific establishment? Why were there no major inventions coming from there? Why were there such opportunities for creative inventors?

It can also be argued that there are two parts to the industrial revolution. One comes with improvements such as Hagreave's spinning jenny, which was a technological advance, a labour saving device, but not one which changed the basic operations in textiles, which were still functioning by manpower. The other comes with the introduction of automatic mechanical power, such as we find in steam engines and railways.

The first kind of improvement introduces a new gadget, but the second introduces a real revolution in how - in terms of physics - "work" is done - taking it from manpower to automation. It was these "power gadgets" that made the Industrial revolution quite unlike any other development, and changed the demographics, the way of working, the marking of time, and made a fundamental change in human society quite unlike any other, so that in around one hundred years, there was a seismic shift from 80% of the population working on the land to 80% working in the cities.

Once they arrived, the "power gadgets" began a process of change which is still with us today, which is why I see this as the critical tipping factor in the Industrial revolution, marking it out from other changes, and making it qualitatively different (provided the sources of energy are not consumed) and why I begin with the quote from Asimov - "suppose there were a major change in the technology"

The ideological agenda which ignores this change is misguided. When Professor Hudson uses a washing machine, or turns on an electrical gadget, I hope she reflects on the fundamental change in society that "power gadgets" have brought about, and how they set in motion an impetus for change and better gadgets that is with us still. We are still struggling to understand and cope with the environmental and ethical problems brought about by that change.

Links
(1) http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00wqdc7
(2) http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/2010/12/the_industrial_revolution_and_the_in_our_time_puppy.html
(3) http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/workshop_of_the_world_01.shtml

Sky beholding

With a series of programmes on TV this week on the night sky, and the feast of Epithany celebrating the journey of the Magi, as star gazers, this is a celebration of our close satellite, the moon, written to the melody of "We Three Kings"....

Sky beholding
 
Moon above, her craters' scar
Imperfection above behold afar
Plain and crater, pit and mountain
Shining splendour do not mar
 
Reflected glory, pale in night
In darker skies, so gleaming bright
In eclipsing, red as bleeding
Galileo marvelled at the sight
 
Apollo landing upon the plain
Golden days, never seen again
Gone forever, ceasing never
In memory, joy and pain
 
Gazing upwards, vision inspire
In the mist, cloaked from the eye
Moonbeams falling, spirits raising
Here the glory, shining high
 
Dulls the shine, in daylight resume
Yet still just seen in gathering gloom
No wind blowing, airless flying
Rock as cold as stony tomb
 
Now the sun, hidden from eyes
Eclipse is the Sun God's Sacrifice
Hidden so far, returning our star
From moon's belly does arise.

Jersey Under the Swastika - Introduction

By way of a change this year, I will be posting occasional extracts from "Jersey Under the Swastika" by Ralph Mollet, which was published in 1945, partly after the Occupation ended, and constructed from his own diary and official notices.

Mollet had been the private secretary to three successive Bailiffs over a period of twenty years, and it should be noted that this is not just an "objective history" (if such a thing can be said to exist, which I doubt), but a history with a definite purpose - "it may serve to vindicate the Island Officials from much criticism and the repetition of untruths to which they were subjected." Such criticism has largely, but not entirely, vanished from the record, as it consisted, as G.R. Balleine observed, largely of unsubstantiated gossip - "information received on high authority from the cousin of the laundress who takes in the washing of the Bailiff's".

But in 1945, just after the Occupation, feelings on the matter could still be strong, and it is hard to realise quite how much criticism was passed on about the Island authorities. Even in the 1960s, I was told (by word of mouth, as part of the oral culture), that the Bailiff had been alright during the Occupation because of his black market dealings. In fact, no evidence has ever turned up to show this to be remotely true, while there is evidence in plenty of other officials involvement in black market activity. As historian Paul Sanders has noted:

Coutanche, according to his own statements, also never used the black market; another important contrast to
other dignitaries. One of these, a judge known for having condemned many people for black market involvement, was a regular customer of Emma C. who was conducting a brisk under-the-counter trade in supplies smuggled across from France to Jersey, at the photographic depot of her common-law husband Edmund Hassall. (1)

Almost everyone relied on the black market. And 'everyone' included members of the island elites; it was of particular piquancy that members of the Royal Courts were not immune to the allure of the black market. (1)

Coutanche was able to avoid using the "black market" because he had enough resources to use the "barter market", which was described by Denis Vibert in 1941, on his arrival in England

A barter trade has sprung up and there are frequent advertisements in the "Evening Post" offering to exchange items such as a pair of shoes for a pound of sugar. Shops will also display articles to be bartered for which they charge a fee of one shilling [5 pence] (2)

Sanders notes how the "barter market" was seen in much better light than the "black market", because the goods it involved were exchanged without money, and using the black market (but as a consumer, not a trader in black market goods) was a necessity for most islanders; this is also confirmed by John Lewis in his "Doctors Occupation". But after 1945, the use of the black market was seen as a critique of officials.

The 'black market' bears similarities with the discussion of 'collaboration': there is a marked tendency to view the phenomenon in Manichean terms. Some people, such as the Very Reverend Matthew Le Marinel, the Rector of St Helier, made a point of never using the black market. The results were obvious in Le Marinel's considerable weight loss. According to Jerseyman Bob Le Sueur, after some months his dog collar started to hang very loosely around his neck, as he had lost half his body weight. This position was not very realistic, perhaps even foolish. While Le Marinel probably could not afford to by-pass the black market, the Bailiff of Jersey - who later also wrote that he never used the black market - probably had enough pre-war substance to live on during the Occupation and could limit himself to barter transactions which saw no money changing hands.(2)

That a Manichean view is inadequate was already noted by Jersey chronicler Leslie Sinel who saw a need for distinctions between, on the one hand, hoarders with the intent of profiteering and, on the other, what the French aptly described as 'le marché noir familial'.(2)

Now to the extract, in which Ralph Mollet describes the Island and sets some of the background. This was before the post-war Reforms of the States, and the Jurats and Rectors both sat in the States. What is notable is that during the Occupation years, if an electable States position became vacant, it remained so; there were no elections under German rule.

---

Jersey Under the Swastika by Ralph Mollet

I - INTRODUCTION

FROM the commencement of the Occupation of the Island of Jersey by the German Forces I kept a diary containing information of a purely civil character, and have thought that an account of the Occupation may prove to be of general interest; also, as it consists of a record of what happened, it may serve to vindicate the Island Officials from much criticism and the repetition of untruths to which they were subjected.

Using this diary as a basis, and with the help of newspaper cuttings and public notices, I have written the following account of a period that was most trying and difficult for all. It was only by faith, hope, and patience that the inhabitants survived.

I trust that it will be useful for reference by my fellow countrymen and by others who have interests in the island.

For the enlightenment of those who may not be acquainted with our Island history and institutions, a brief description is here given.

Prior to the year 1066 the Channel Islands formed part of the Duchy of Normandy. On the 14th October of that year, William II, Duke of Normandy, became William I, King of England. Normandy, including the Channel Islands, became linked to the English Crown.

In the year 1204 Normandy was conquered by the French, but the Channel Islands remained faithful to King John.

In 1461, Pierre de Breze, Comte de Maulevrier, Grand Seneschal of Normandy, sent an expedition- to Jersey under Jean de Carbonnel. He succeeded in gaining possession of Mont Orgueil Castle, probably through the collusion of Nanfan, acting under orders from Queen Margaret of Anjou. For the next seven years Jersey was under French rule. Then, in October, 1468, de Carbonnel, after a siege of five months, surrendered the Castle to Sir Richard Harliston, Admiral of the English Fleet. Since that date, until the 1st July, 1940, the Islands remained undisturbed and peaceful under the Crown of England.

The laws and institutions, by which the Channel Islands are governed, being derived from Normandy, are different from those of England. The area of Jersey is about forty-five square miles, and the average population about 50,000. The Island is divided into twelve parishes and each parish has its own municipal or parochial government.

The STATES, or Legislative Assembly, is the local parliament, and has power to make, amend, and repeal laws. All permanent legislation must, however, be approved by His Majesty in Council. The Assembly consists of the Bailiff, the twelve Rectors, the twelve Jurats, the twelve Connétables, and seventeen Deputies, representing the various parishes.

THE ROYAL COURT consists of the Bailiff as President and of the twelve Jurats. There are also the Attorney-General, the Vicomte or Sheriff, the Solicitor-General (these three appointed by the Crown), the Greffier or Clerk of the Court, and the Advocates.

THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR is the representative of the King, and is Military Commander-in-Chief of all the forces in the Island, and of the Island Militia. He is appointed by the Crown.

THE BAILIFF is the Chief Justice of the Island. He is President of the States and of the Royal Court. He is appointed by the Crown. The office is important and of very ancient Norman institution.

THE RECTORS, twelve in number (one for each ancient parish) are appointed by the Crown.

THE JURATS are twelve in number, and are elected by the people. They are called " jures justiciers " or sworn justiciars, and the office is for life. Besides his judicial duties a Jurat is by virtue of his office a member of the States. He receives no salary, the honour and dignity being a sufficient inducement and reward. Beyond the fact that he must be a Jerseyman by birth, there are no special qualifications required for the post.

THE CONNÉTABLES are twelve in number (one for each parish). The Connétable, constable, or mayor is elected by his parishioners, and is the head of the parish in all matters. By virtue of his office he is also a member of the States. He is a person of considerable importance and influence in his parish. The position is purely honorary.

THE DEPUTIES are representatives elected by each parish as members of the States. The work is entirely honorary.

STATES OF JERSEY
List of Members during the Occupation.

PRESIDENT:
ALEXANDER MONCRIEFF COUTANCHE, Bailiff of Jersey.

JURATS:
PHILIP DE CARTERET LE CORNU, O.B.E. (died 23rd January, 1944), Lieutenant-Bailiff
PHILIP ERNEST BREE, Lieutenant-Bailiff
PHILIP MELMOTH BAUDAINS
FRANCIS VIBERT LE FEUVRE
JAMES MESSERVY NORMAN
EDWIN PHILIP LE MASURIER, M.B.E.
ARTHUR LUXON
EDGAR ALECK DOREY
STANLEY HOCQUARD
ERNEST GEORGE LABEY
PHILIP NICOLLE GALLICHAN
TOUZEL JOHN BREE

RECTORS
St Helier - Rev. M. LE MARINEL, M.A., Dean
St. Brelade - Rev. J. A. BALLEINE (died 15th February, 1942).
St Clement -Rev. T. H. LABEY
Grouville -Rev. J. H. VALPY, M.A.
St John - Rev. R. S. HORNBY
St Lawrence - Rev. C. P. DU HEAUME
St. Martin - Rev. R. LE SUEUR, M.A.(died 26th January, 1941).
St. Mary - Rev. C. C. OULESS, M.A.
St. Ouen - Rev J.S. NORMAN
St. Peter - VACANT
St. Saviour - VACANT
Trinity - Rev W.G. TABB

CONNÉTABLES:
St. Brelade - WALTER BENEST
St. Clement - SYDNEY GEORGE CRILL
Grouville - P.W.C. BRIARD
St. John - JOHN LE MASURIER
St. Lawrence - JOHN W BAUDAINS
St Martin - CHAS. P. BILLOT
St. Mary - FRS. J. PERREE
St. Ouen - FRS. LE BOUTILLIER
St. Peter - JOHN DU VAL
St. Saviour - L. T. ANTHOINE
Trinity - SNOWDON BENEST (died 10 October, 1944)
St Helier - CHARLES JAMES CUMING

DEPUTIES
St Brelade - RALPH E.B. VOISIN
St Clement - THOMAS R. BLAMPIED
Grouville - W. J. BERTRAM
St John - J. GARTRELL (died 2nd February, 1945).
St Lawrence - T. A. PALLOT
St Martin - Ph. AHIER
St Mary - Ph. LE FEUVRE
St Ouen - F. LE FEUVRE
St Peter- W. SIMON
St Saviour -THOMAS P. MOURANT
Trinity - EDWIN D. GIBAUT
St.Helier P. N. RICHARDSON, Ph LE QUESNE, Ed. LE QUESNE, JOHN H AMY, W. S. LE MASURIER, JOHN LE MARQUAND

H.M.'s ATTORNEY-GENERAL:
CHARLES WALTER DURET AUBIN

H. M.'s VISCOUNT
CHARLES SYDNEY LE GROS

H.M.'s SOLICITOR-GENERAL
CECIL STANLEY HARRISON

Links:
(1) http://www.jerseyheritage.org/templates/jerseyheritage/occupation_memorial/historybook/occupationhistorychapter1.pdf
(2) http://www.jeron.je/thatwasjersey/occcond08.html

Curse the Tax Man

MOGOSOIA, Romania - Everyone curses the tax man, but Romanian witches angry about having to pay up for the first time are planning to use cat excrement and dead dogs to cast spells on the president and government. Also among Romania's newest taxpayers are fortune tellers - but they probably should have seen it coming. Superstitions are no laughing matter in Romania - the land of the medieval ruler who inspired the "Dracula" tale - and have been part of its culture for centuries...Romanian witches from the east and west will head to the southern plains and the Danube River on Thursday to threaten the government with spells and spirits because of the tax law, which came into effect Jan. 1. A dozen witches will hurl the poisonous mandrake plant into the Danube to put a hex on government officials "so evil will befall them," said a witch named Alisia. She identified herself with one name - customary among Romania's witches. "This law is foolish. What is there to tax, when we hardly earn anything?" she said by telephone Wednesday. "The lawmakers don't look at themselves, at how much they make, their tricks; they steal and they come to us asking us to put spells on their enemies." The new law is part of the government's drive to collect more revenue and crack down on tax evasion in a country that is in recession. In the past, the less mainstream professions of witch, astrologer and fortune teller were not listed in the Romanian labor code, as were those of embalmer, valet and driving instructor. Those who worked those jobs used their lack of registration to evade paying income tax. Under the new law, like any self-employed person, they will pay 16 percent income tax and make contributions to health and pension programs.Some argue the law will be hard to enforce, as the payments to witches and astrologers usually are made in cash and relatively small at 20 to 30 lei ($7-$10) per consultation. (1)

In Jersey, of course, witches and astrologers are licenced under the Regulations and Undertakings Law, and pay taxes like anyone else. But wouldn't it be wonderful if someone put a hex on the Treasury Minister for putting up GST, so that all his hair fell out? Maybe they once did?

Actually, modern neopaganism in Western culture, such as Wicca or modern Druidry, frowns upon curses.

Most Wiccans are against baneful magic - that is, to cause harm to another through magical means, or to interfere with another's free will.

One of the main arguments that Wiccans use is that in the so-called Wiccan Rede:

Mind the Threefold Law you should,
Three times bad and three times good.(4)

or stated as:

Ever Mind The Rule Of Three
Three Times Your Acts Return To Thee
This Lesson Well, Thou Must Learn
Thou Only Gets What Thee Dost Earn

This, also known as the "law of return" says that if you do an evil spell, it will return or rebound to you threefold, whereas a good act will also do so.

This is a far cry from Romania, or the older cunning folk traditions of Jersey and Guernsey, when curses could be given freely, in what amounted to what amounted to a kind of magical protection racket. An good example of this comes from Stephen Dewar's pamphlet on "The Evil Eye in Guernsey:

In 1914, Mrs Lake was charged by the Constable with fortune telling, interpreting dreams. Mrs Outen had asked for police protection after a spell had been cast on her by Mrs Lake condemning her to die unless she paid a specified sum (presumably a fee) to Mrs Lake. A police search by PC Lihou revealed buried six packers of powders composed of flour, brown starch, salt and baking powder.

It transpired that the previous October, Mrs Outen's cattle had died and gone to Mrs Lake who revealed (by divining tea leaves in a tea cup) that her cattle and her husband had died from witchcraft, and she was in fact under a spell. Powders were given to her to take as a counter-spell. Mrs Lake was charged not with witchcraft, but with "disorderly conduct". The Constable was amazed that anyone could believe such things in this day and age.

And yet credulity is on the increase. Just look at the sections for Tarot, fortune telling, Wiccan spells etc in local book sellers - from a small shelf tucked away in bookshops in the 1970s, it now takes up a massive amount of space within book shops. But while there have been political demonstrations against GST increases, I have yet to see any kind of action in Jersey like that taken by Romanian witches.

Perhaps 13 people should chant and move around the Royal Square when the States is sitting, because they certainly couldn't take less notice than they take of political demonstrations or petitions.

Here is a sinister incantation they could use, which I understand was used at a coven in Wiltshire, between May 22 to June 19 in 1971 by the presiding officer, a Vicar who had a prediliction for the dark arts, a certain Mr Magister:

Ymar dah a elttil bmal!
Sti eceelf saw etihw sa wons!
Dna ereh wyreve taht ymar tnew!
Eht bmal saw erus ot og!

Links:
(1) http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110105/ap_on_re_eu/eu_romania_witchcraft
(2) http://wicca.timerift.net/curse.shtml
(3) http://wicca.timerift.net/laws/credo.shtml
(4) http://www.mystikgarden.com/Ethics.htm

Autism and Vaccination: A Trench Warfare Scenario

A particular kind of argument that I have noted emerges when both sides in a dispute believe they are right, and the evidence "proves" their case. What seems to happen is a retrenchment, when both sides get dug unto fixed positions, very much like the opposing sides in the Great War, and lobby shells across the no-mans land to try and strike at the enemy. Rationality seems to take a back seat. There is no denying the sincerity of the people involved, but what they do is to seek confirmatory instances which prove their case, while ignoring any data that does not fit.

Imre Lakatos noted this in his seminal paper "Proofs and Refutations", which was a study in the history and logic of mathematical discovery. Given a "monster" which represents a challenge to an existing model or position, the options are:

Surrender - Throw the model away and start again

Monster barring - Reject the exception as invalid, a "monster". This usually involves refining the definition of one or more constructs, to explicitly exclude the exception as a monster. (1)

A case in point last year was a resurgence of the dispute over whether there is any link between vaccines and autism. In September 2010, CBS News reported on the case of Hannah Poling:

Terry and Jon Poling spoke publicly for the first time Thursday about a case being watched by thousands of families with autistic children. "My daughter, who had been completely normal until getting nine vaccinations in one day, was suddenly no longer there," said Terry Poling, mother of 9-year-old Hannah. Hannah Poling appeared to be like many children. At 19 months, her pediatrician noted she was "alert and active" and "spoke well." At that same visit, she got five shots - nine doses of vaccines. She almost immediately developed fever, seizures and severe health problems. Eight years later, the government has quietly conceded that vaccines aggravated a cell disorder nobody knew Hannah had, leaving her with permanent brain damage and autistic-like symptoms. (2)

The first court award in a vaccine-autism claim is a big one. CBS News has learned the family of Hannah Poling will receive more than $1.5 million dollars for her life care; lost earnings; and pain and suffering for the first year alone. Hannah was described as normal, happy and precocious in her first 18 months. Then, in July 2000, she was vaccinated against nine diseases in one doctor's visit: measles, mumps, rubella, polio, varicella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and Haemophilus influenzae. Afterward, her health declined rapidly. She developed high fevers, stopped eating, didn't respond when spoken to, began showing signs of autism, and began having screaming fits. In 2002, Hannah's parents filed an autism claim in federal vaccine court. Five years later, the government settled the case before trial and had it sealed. It's taken more than two years for both sides to agree on how much Hannah will be compensated for her injuries

In acknowledging Hannah's injuries, the government said vaccines aggravated an unknown mitochondrial disorder Hannah had which didn't "cause" her autism, but "resulted" in it. It's unknown how many other children have similar undiagnosed mitochondrial disorder. All other autism "test cases "have been defeated at trial. Approximately 4,800 are awaiting disposition in federal vaccine court.(3)

The language can be seen to be deliberately slippery. What is the difference between "caused" and "resulted"? It seems the legalese is being used to differentiate between a kind of direct cause - A and only A caused B, and indirect causality, A with C caused B.

There is a difference, but it is one of ignorance. If I give someone penicillin, not knowing that they are allergic to that antibiotic, I may kill them unintentionally, but I have not deliberately set out to do so, and I have given them an antibiotic that is very effective for a good many people. Drug allergy is a good case in point, because it occurs in smaller numbers:

Around 15 per cent of patients hospitalised in the UK report adverse reactions to medication, but less than five per cent of those reports are true allergic reactions (mostly to antibiotics). Of this five per cent, less than one per cent are fatal. (4)

But testing for something which is definitely known to happen - there are no "drug allergy deniers" out there - is in fact incredibly difficult:

Most medications are chemicals that bind with various proteins in our body, called haptens. It's this drug/hapten complex that may trigger an allergic reaction. As a consequence, these reactions are difficult to recreate on the skin or in a blood test, so blood testing for drug allergies is unreliable and inaccurate, with false positive and negative results.

Only penicillin, amoxicillin, sulphonamide and cephalosporin allergy can be checked by skin and RAST testing, and in such cases still has only 50 per cent reliability. (4)

Given this problematic scenario with regard to known allergies, it is probably that any autism / vaccine / genetic indirect causality would be even more problematic. That does not stop Congress Rep, Doctor Dave Weldon, for pushing for more research into screening:

Weldon has long been pushing the government to aggressively work to develop ways to screen for children who might be the most susceptible to ill effects from vaccines. The government has been telling the public for more than a decade that there's absolutely no reason to be concerned about any link. "I wouldn't recommend they say something like that in light of the Poling case and the admission on the part of the government," Weldon said.

While the Poling case is the first of its kind to become public, a CBS News investigation uncovered at least nine other cases as far back as 1990, where records show the court ordered the government compensated families whose children developed autism or autistic-like symptoms in children including toddlers who had been called "very smart" and "impressed" doctors with their "intelligence and curiosity" . until their vaccinations. They were children just like Hannah Poling. (3)

The Poling's had a special advantage, Jon Polling is a neurologist and had co-authored a peer-reviewed study on the his daughter, which was not contested by the government -

Autistic spectrum disorders can be associated with mitochondrial dysfunction. We present a singleton case of developmental regression and oxidative phosphorylation disorder in a 19-month-old girl...

To determine the frequency of routine laboratory abnormalities in similar patients, we performed a retrospective study including 159 patients with autism (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV and Childhood Autism Rating Scale) not previously diagnosed with metabolic disorders and 94 age-matched controls with other neurologic disorders. Aspartate aminotransferase was elevated in 38% of patients with autism compared with 15% of controls (P < .0001). ... These data suggest that further metabolic evaluation is indicated in autistic patients and that defects of oxidative phosphorylation might be prevalent. (J Child Neurol 2006;21:170-172; DOI 10.2310/7010.2006.00032). (5)
There was some criticism of Jon Polling for using his daughter (if anonymously) as the subject of a paper, and of a potential conflict of interest. This seems to have stemmed from the "no problem at all with vaccines" lobby, which is a good example of how ad hominem arguments enter the fray, as if somehow because it was his daughter who was one of the test subjects, that his research would thereby be definitely biased.

However, this line of research seems to have been followed up later in the "Journal of the American Medical Association" in an article entitled "Mitochondrial dysfunction in autism." published in December 2010

Objective To evaluate mitochondrial defects in children with autism.

Design, Setting, and Patients Observational study using data collected from patients aged 2 to 5 years who were a subset of children participating in the Childhood Autism Risk From Genes and Environment study in California, which is a population-based, case-control investigation with confirmed autism cases and age-matched, genetically unrelated, typically developing controls, that was launched in 2003 and is still ongoing. Mitochondrial dysfunction and mtDNA abnormalities were evaluated in lymphocytes from 10 children with autism and 10 controls.

Results The reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) oxidase activity (normalized to citrate synthase activity) in lymphocytic mitochondria from children with autism was significantly lower compared with controls (mean, 4.4 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.8-6.0] vs 12 [95% CI, 8-16], respectively; P = .001).

Conclusion In this exploratory study, children with autism were more likely to have mitochondrial dysfunction, mtDNA overreplication, and mtDNA deletions than typically developing children.

Now this is a small study, and has been seized upon as "proof" that vaccines cause autism. In fact, the author of the study, Professor Giulivi, clearly regards this as a pilot study, as revealed in an interview:

KL: Do you think, based on available science (including your paper) that vaccines cause autism?

CG: We do not have any evidence for this in our study. Our study was cross-sectional not longitudinal so it cannot point to any cause (not just vaccines), meaning we do not have any data supporting one way or another.

KL: "Do you believe your own paper adds weight to any opinion regarding autism causation by any means?"

CG: "No. At this point we do not know if it is mainly genetic, environmen­tal or a combinatio­n of both. Again, with a cross-sect­ional study you get a snapshot of the situation but not how you got to that situation

The author of the interview (Kevin Leitch) is clearly determined to debunk the idea that there could be any autism vaccine link, and notes that this means that the "study in question does not add weight to any hypothesis of autism causation, let alone vaccines." He rightly has also observed that a biological malfunction could cause side effects from causes other than vaccines, such as illnesses, but if it is a weakness to the immune system, why is he so concerned to absolve vaccines from the possibility of being involved?

It is obvious that a study of 20 individuals could hardly lend much "weight" to anything, but equally Professor Giulivi is open to the idea that autism could be "genetic, environmen­tal or a combinatio­n of both"; any kind of complex causality has not been ruled out as rapidly as the author of the interview suggests.

What strikes me is the way in which those people arguing the case for an autism vaccine link jump rapidly to any kind of causal link, and magnify results, while those who deny any link at all seem quite content to defend the status quo.

From my own examination of the situation:

a) there are a number of subsets of biological markers with associations with autism. Fragile X is well known, Mitochondrial dysfunction could well be another. This field is very much in its infancy.

b) At the moment, autism is defined largely on the basis of behavioral markers. This is a major weakness. To take an analogy from evolution, "convergent evolution" is when environmental pressures cause widely differing species to develop the same kind of characteristics - water born mammals, such as dolphins, and fish being one example. The present state of play with autism is rather like classifying creatures by the look of the thing, in which dolphins are a singular kind of fish - by the original Greek etymology, most likely the name means "a 'fish' with a womb".

c) Even when we have biological markers, the small numbers involved, and the complexity of reactions (just considering allergic reactions, and problems of determination) suggest either proving or disproving any causality would be a long way off. However, determining conditions such as mitochondrial dysfunction could help isolate "at risk groups" for whom single vaccines, carefully monitored, would be a better option. However that would not take away all risk, but only reduce it, because any other environmental insult could also cause problems.

d) Better reporting of adverse vaccine reactions is required. In Jersey, for example, in the early 1990s, not only were vaccine batch numbers not recorded properly, there was also no procedural mechanism to enable any reporting of adverse reactions; it was purely the discretion of the health visitor, who would usually suggest taking Calpol, and make no file notes. I don't know if matters have improved, or are any better in the UK. In the USA, Adverse Vaccine report documents can be downloaded and completed by anyone, from health professionals to parents. This is not the case in the UK or locally.

Statistics are only as good as their collection, and while there were no extreme cases of reaction locally requiring hospitalisation, no reliable data is available on any less severe reactions which might have shown a pattern. Part of the problem here is that the medical establishment (less so in the USA) "know" that vaccines are definitely safe, hence don't see the need for proper procedures to monitor that this is true, and then cite the statistics to "prove" their case, without checking the reliability of those statistics.

e) In most cases, I am sure vaccines are safe. But not all vaccines have the same safety record, even if they have the same desired outcome. In 1992, for example, the Urabe strain MMR was withdrawn because of significantly severe side effects - asceptic meningitis (8), which is why more detailed studies are now done on new vaccines to check safety. There is also the problem associated with risk. A minute risk to a population may loom larger to an individual; statistics are good for generalisations over the large population, but general fatality statistics don't tell me what my personal risk would be if I decided to climb Everest, for example, where factors such as my personal fitness might well play a more significant role.


Links
(1) http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~rxv/kmoi/monster.htm
See also Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Edited
by John Worrall & Elie Zahar. Cambridge University Press, 1976.
(2) http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/06/eveningnews/main3915703.shtml?
(3) http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20015982-10391695.html
(4)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/in_depth/allergies/allergicconditions_drug.shtml
(5) http://jcn.sagepub.com/content/21/2/170.abstract
(6)
http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/304/21/2389.abstract%22%20target=
(7)
http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/12/mitochondrial-dysfunction-and-autism-brief-q-and-a-with-lead-author/
(8) http://www.springerlink.com/content/0khbch9v3r10mgnq/

The Cottage Gardener's Calendar - January and February

I see that the funeral of Dennis Shaw, Jersey's much loved "gardening guru", takes place today. The notice in the JEP reads:

SHAW, Denis Richard Relatives and friends wishing to attend the funeral service are invited to meet at Ebenezer Methodist Church, Trinity, on Tuesday, 4 January, at 1 p.m. A private committal will follow at the Crematorium Chapel. Family flowers only, please. Donations, if desired, may be sent to Jersey Hospice Care, Mr Ian Richardson, Clarkson House, Le Mont Cochon, St Helier, JE2 3JB or Ebenezer Methodist Church, Trinity.

Ransom's Garden centre Twitter also had this:

"Lovely Dennis Shaw, died on Christmas day, true gentleman and gardener. He will missed. "

In tribute to him, and burrowing in my archives again, I have a piece from my copies of the Whitnash Parish Magazine of 1863. Whitnash is now a suburb of Leamington Spa, but until around 1850, the only access was "through paths and lanes across surrounded cultivated fields. It is likely that this relative isolation has bequeathed to the residents a strong sense of belonging to a distinct locality. There is no marked town centre but a handful of half-timbered thatched cottages centred on St Margaret's Church mark the nucleus of the old village."(1) Around 1850, still a small village, some roads began to connect it to other towns, but in 1863, it was still small and rural, much like the village centres of country parishes in Jersey.

This piece is "The Cottage Gardener's Calendar" for January and February, and when it was written, most people would have been working off the land, either as farmers or labourers, but even labourers, in their cottages, may well have also grown their own crops for home use. Here, then is the advice given:

All draining, trenching, and ridging should be got on with, so as to prepare the surface for spring cropping'. Hedges, boundaries, and corner pieces should be trimmed and made the most of. Paths should be made clean, tidy, and of moderate width, nor encroaching indeed on the public, or boundary way, but extending to the proper limit by a well marked line.

The manure heap which should have been thrown together in November, so as to exclude rain and snow, should be occasionally turned and broken up.

Store Produce.-Of course these have been secured before now ; take a peep at them, however, and see if any rot prevail; if so, let them be turned. Potatoes, especially, must be well examined, both as to seed and eating potatoes. Onions, also, must be watched a little; and towards the middle of February the remaining Parsnips in the soil be trenched out. Apples, too, should be picked carefully, and if in some dry place and beginning to shrivel, they should be covered closely. Exclude both light and air.

Seed-beds. - By this I mean your stores of -Cabbage, Lettuce, Cauliflower, and other little matters, provided by a wise anticipation for spring planting. Little protection has hitherto been needed, but we have not parted with the winter yet; let us not be betrayed at the eleventh hour.

Rhubarb.-Those who desire to have this early should cover the crowns with some open litter, or get chimney-pots and such-like over them, and if they have a little hot manure they may pile it round them.

Pruning.-Some of our readers have, doubtless, a few Gooseberry or Currant bushes in their gardens; now is the time to prune them; and I will offer a few simple rules for their guidance. Thin out Gooseberries much in the centre of the bush; thin also the exterior, so that the young shoots would be, on an average, two or three inches apart, and, of course, throw all the bearing powers of the bush towards the exterior; this will save trouble in gathering, and produce finer fruit; shorten the ends according to the condition of the wood. Black Currants bear best on the young shoots, like Gooseberries, and require similar thinning, but rather avoid shortening them, as it induces too many side-shoots and suckers, which rob the system of the bush.

Red and White Currants must have all the side-spray cut back to within an inch of each main branch, and in shortening the leading shoots leave about four or five inches annually.

Planting.-Those who wish to plant fruit-trees or bushes, and have not done it in November, should wait until the opening part of February.

Sowing.-Little of this at present. Early Radishes, and very early Peas may now be sown at any open period.

Finally, let those concerned take into consideration the great importance of using every spare hour, while the busy season is advancing, of carrying out all they can as to the forenamed maxims ; when March arrives, they will find a much greater pressure, and their hands tied as to improvements. The mere cultural operations of that period will be found enough. ;It is astonishing what the soil will do if handled with a little sense, and, above all, with industrious perseverance.

Links:
http://www.whitnashtowncouncil.gov.uk/town.aspx