Wednesday 19 March 2008

Greed, Westernisation and the Church

I've just read a piece on the new Oxonomics blog about Modernisation and Westernisation, asking whether one can be "modern", or develop the "technology, customs and institutions which might herald their own intensive growth", without also developing Western morals.  

I doubt I'll be able to coherently write my thoughts out, but I am sceptical that one can have the Western pursuit of more more more without Western lax morals, because these countries have looked enviously in the first place at the living standards in the West, and decided that they like them and want them, and this is surely only a hop, skip and a jump from greed, which dictates Western morals.

The desire to grow, grow, grow can surely only come from greed for more?  Otherwise why wouldn't we be satisfied carrying doing just as well as before?

At least, the most abhorrent displays of "Western morals" anyway - showing off flash cars etc., but these are far removed from "Christian morals" anyway, morals which are based, incidentally, on gratitude, not guilt.  Gratitude for the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ in the place of the Christian, motivating a response.  

Not particularly related, Jean-Paul Carvalho, the author, makes a suggestion which rankles with me, as a Christian and an economist, hence something like a scientist.  The "scientific and Darwinian revolutions undermined belief in a Christian God", Carvalho claims. Science explains the "how" about the universe, how it works, while Christianity gives a motivation, a "why" for it all, why are we here at all in the first place?  

There is nothing undermining about finding out more of the world that God has created, if one is a Christian - about finding the rules and regulations God set in place.  Additionally, there is nothing contradictory in God using evolution as a force in the world he created.

Sunday 2 March 2008

88%?

Here's another bit of virulent anti-Europe talk from the UK. Apparently 88% of us want a referendum on some treaty or other, some watered down bit of paper which affects us in about zero ways.

That's 88% of a 36% turn out in a poll in some marginal Labour and Lib Dem constituencies. So that's not really 88% is it? And half the people in these areas didn't recieve ballot papers...

But who to listen to on this? Some say it's watered down so much it's not worth making a fuss about, others claim it's a disastrous encroachment of our national sovereignty. Both sides are probably tweaking things a little to back up their prior positions: either very pro-Europe, or anti-Europe.

Some sensible politics from the States

So I have to admit I'm quite impressed with this Obama chap, and part of me would like to see him President. My preferences on US political parties are pretty limited by the fact I'll never vote for one or the other given I'm not American. But the kind of talk coming out of the Democrats that is anti-free trade is concerning, to put it mildly.

However, John McCain appears to be talking a lot more sense on this issue, saying it's crazy for the US to start threatening to renegotiate NAFTA or pull out.

It's certainly the case the US doesn't really practice what it preaches with regard free trade; the whole furore over steel a few years ago made that abundantly clear. And the recent fuss about Airbus being given a contract to build something for the US military has had a number of US politicians talking as if Europeans are barbarians or something. Wasn't the big criticism of Airbus that it was too protected by European governments?

Port Vale 0-3 Oldham Athletic

Yesterday morning, I realised that Oldham were playing away, but were only playing down in Stoke, which is about an hour's drive from my parents' place in North East Manchester. So, having not yet been to an Oldham match the entire season (not since I was about 10 years old have I been able to say that), I decided I would head out and take in my first match of the season!

An hour's drive later, I arrived in Burslem, some suburb of Stoke, slightly delapidated and displaying the effects of what some would say is post-industrial Britain. I paid my £4 parking, deciding it was better to do that than find some chav breaking into my car when I returned to it (as has happened before when leaving my car near Oldham's ground for a home match!).

The chap on the turnstile relieved me of £19 for the joy of watching Port Vale, marooned at the bottom of the League One table with 5 wins from 33 matches so far, against Oldham, the epitome of mediocreness - played 33, won 11, drawn 11, lost 11.

I've been to Port Vale to watch Oldham play on at least two previous occasions: one Oldham won, and another Oldham lost. Oldham's usual trait at Port Vale is to lose: Port Vale are Oldham's bogey side, as the lingo goes. In fact, in my lifetime, Oldham had won just once at Port Vale, 12 years previously (and to my distress I had been there, making me feel old).

The first thing that hit me was the lack of people in the ground to watch the game. Numbers on the internet later told me Oldham took 785 supporters there, and "swelled" the attendance to 3,700. But if I looked around stadium, it was simply a mass of empty seats. Clearly being adrift at the bottom of the table has taken its toll on Port Vale.

Then the game began, and quickly I found that Oldham supporters haven't changed too much. They still sing about how much they hate other teams, rather than how much they like Oldham. They still sing about how they hate Man United, as if it matters! We were last in the same division at Man United 14 years ago now, and the chances of it happening again in the near future are slim to zero. But still, we do really hate them, apparently.

The game was played in windy conditions, on a pretty poor pitch, making it hardly the greatest spectacle ever. But not long in, on 21 minutes, a floated ball into the area found Oldham loanee Jordan Roberton, who hit a superb volley into the net. Sadly this was at the far end of the pitch, so it was hard to see its full glory. Nonetheless, 1-0 to Oldham!

Port Vale then came into the match, and almost certainly should have levelled the scores, first when a complete mix-up between an Oldham defender and keeper Crossley left the ball rolling across goal. Thankfully another defender ran in to hoof the ball away. Secondly, another defensive melee minutes later saw the ball fall to a Vale player about 3 yards out, but his shot cannoned off a defender and on to the cross bar. Another let off.

In fact, if I ever saw a match which confirmed that when you're near the bottom, it all goes against you, this was it. Oldham's keeper pulled off a great save to deny another attempt by Vale, but the second half was almost entirely one-way traffic. Port Vale hit the post, a player of theirs twice rounded the Oldham keeper, only in one case to miss the open goal, and in another case to be crowded out by defenders. Oldham's keeper also made a number of good saves.

But to add gross insult to injury, with 13 minutes left and Oldham still hanging on to their 1-0 lead by some miracle, a long ball forward hit a Vale defender, and almost rebounded past their goalkeeper for a spectacular own goal. The keeper though responded well, and saved the unfortunate ricochet. However, in a most bizarre decision, the referee decided this was a deliberate pass back to the goalkeeper, and awarded Oldham a free kick right in front of goal!

Few people, even the Oldham fans, could quite believe it, and understandably the Port Vale fans and players were livid. I'm not sure I ever want to condone intimidation of the referee, but I could certainly understand their frustrations, having worked so hard, been so close to getting a goal and a win finally, to be undone by a seriously bad mistake by the referee must have been a hard pill to swallow.

The pill became even harder to swallow when Oldham dispatched the free kick into the bottom of the goal, via Neal Eardley, their Welsh International full back. At 2-0, the game was almost up, though still there was time for a superb double save by Oldham's keeper to deny another almost certain goal.

Into injury time at the end of the game, a long ball forward saw an Oldham substitute Wolfrenden race on to it, and delightfully loft the ball over the goalkeeper to score Oldham's third. This gave the scoreline an even harsher look for Port Vale. I've certainly never been to watch a more unfair 3-0 scoreline before, but it was pleasing for me that Oldham were on the end of some good fortune...

More fun at Newcastle...

Well, they've appointed two managers since the Summer, one's been sacked already, and that great bastion of unsettlement, the media, are trying to spread rumours the next one's on the way:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/newcastle_united/7273517.stm

Not only that, but we also get, thanks to the BBC's lay-out, an insightful comment from some Newcastle fan or other, saying how everyone now must be able to see that Keegan was the wrong choice.

I'd love to have his explanation. Keegan's come in, and been forced to deal with someone else's squad, a squad more geared towards defensive grit than attacking flair, and Keegan's management career has hardly been filled with defensively strong sides. He's also come into a team low on confidence, and been asked to turn it around - oh and in his first six or seven games he's had to face Arsenal twice and Manchester United.

So what the hell's he been playing at? How come he hasn't got Newcastle up to the top of the table?

Mind you, I am forgetting this is Newcastle, and they will always be a good source of entertaining news, not too dissimilar to Manchester City...