Well, this has got me thinking…………. First off, my ‘lack of quality’ comment was a rather crass and lame attack on the first ‘British’ thing that came to mind i.e. Morris dancers, but thinking deeper you’ve only got to look around and you can see the demise of ‘British culture’ in places like the high street. Most UK towns have a pretty identical high street these days. Yes I’d agree that there are many imported food outlets, though these are usually small businesses, often family run that most of us (including right wing racists) enjoy. (I bet most of those joining in the riots last week could be found having a curry on a Friday night). But look at the chain stores that homogenise our towns. Where does this idea come from? The US. So I would argue that US style commercialisation has had a far more dramatic effect on our loss of culture than immigration. In fact, I’d argue UK culture is one based on influence from all over the world (since we thought it might be a good idea to colonise far flung places) and the presence of exotic food venues have a more beneficial effect on our culture than all the chains selling the same stuff town after town after town.

I can see how a 1 in 1 out idea might look attractive on paper, but is it really practicable? How would that work out economically? I’m no economist but I can hear alarm bells there.

Which led my thinking onto a subject that often gets my head scratching - borders. This is where I struggle with the label ‘libertarian’. I get the idea, but when I see most self proclaimed libertarians apparently caring more about rights to carry guns than anyone else’s right to be safe, or what my concept of liberty means - freedom of movement. I feel that I should be free to travel anywhere I like, any time I like. In this way I struggle with the concept of borders. I don’t even like fences ffs! And if I feel I should be able to go anywhere I like, why shouldn’t anyone else? I would call myself a libertarian if I felt it didn’t give people the idea I love guns. (Clearly I don’t).

I can now hear people waving their arms in horror imagining all these people “coming over here, taking our jobs and houses etc etc”. But think of it in terms of what many people like to refer to in their conversations about economics - markets. Markets are supposed to be reasonably self regulating (I’m not sure they are or should be but remain to be convinced). So why wouldn’t freedom of movement be the same? If an area became over populated, wouldn’t that in itself encourage a movement away from that area?
Maybe I’m thinking too long a term, more anthropologically than politically. I don’t know.
In any case all this could well be academic as I’m not convinced the human race has much longer left to run. I can’t see how we can turn around climate issues faster than they seem to be accelerating, but I still try to hope.

There was an interesting comment on a Miriam Margolyes programme the other night. She was in Byron Bay. Someone said that the cost of housing there meant that businesses were struggling to employ staff, leading to “rich people having to make their own sandwiches”. Made me chuckle, but could this be a glimpse of what the world might look like soon enough? The only survivors the rich, whose only experience is in employing staff, finding out they don’t know how to feed themselves.

Sorry for going on but nice to chat in a way that doesn’t lead to the toxic nastiness I’m seeing more of on extwitter these days.

Stay well stack well!