Showing posts with label Tim Pendry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tim Pendry. Show all posts

Friday 31 March 2023

Position Reserved Explained

The subject matter of Position Reserved has always been various - philosophical, political, libertarian on occasions, commentaries on magickal thinking (by no means censorious) and sexuality. The political has ranged from international relations through British politics (including Brexit) to the politics of the Middle East, the Trump era in the US and beyond. I took a particular interest in such outre subjects as the ideology of the Far Right and national populism, sexual freedom and polyamory and the psychotherapeutic role of paganism and the occult. 

I tracked the COVID outbreak for some time as I tracked, with others, the idiocies surrounding the Russo-Western conflict as it developed up until Position Reserved suspended itself in 2018. I doubt if there will be much immediate comment from now on on world or national affairs because these are adequately covered by me on Twitter. Facebook and LinkedIn (see below). The general theme was a personal alienation from our species en masse, apparently a true ship of fools. This is my quasi-autistic side of which I have become increasingly proud. Like Cassandra, I had the unfortunate ability to see the darkness coming (it may already have come without us noticing because we shut the curtains early) yet be unable to persuade anyone else of its imminence.

The paradox struck me that while our species appeared to be a ship of fools, most of my fellow ship mates were in fact intelligent, thoughtful, humane, often quite simply kind, and as puzzled as I was by the way we were hurtling like the unfairly proverbialised lemmings towards any cliff present. The bulk of ordinary humanity seemed to have their heads screwed on properly - the idiots were the ones in power. With emotional insecurities blown into waves of hysteria by the media for which I have developed the deepest distaste (they are the dangerous winds blowing our ship of course), it appeared that we passengers on our many ships were at the mercy of demented captains, officers who obeyed every whim of the madmen and crews who had no choice lest they be keel-hauled for their temerity in suggesting that, perhaps, we might all be better off if we headed for port or at least took a route that did not have us riding those waves on to the rocks. 

Similes take us only so far. The correct and reasoned analysis is that liberal democracy is a fraud and has been for some time. Nobody dare say this any more than anyone could say that there was no God in 1660. Yes, we can elect our exploiters and the fools and, yes, we have the rule of law (often made by those same exploiters and fools) but we are, in truth, impotent, screaming into the wind.  Our noise only adds to the storm.  Of course, we have been persuaded that our world represents a less dangerous fraud than some more severe ideological frauds (which we insistently misrepresent as we go into denial about our own failures) but we should wonder whether that is good enough. It would be nice to think that a bit of activism might change all this fraudulent nonsense but, sadly, replacing one set of fools with another is only a fake progress. Facing our own impotence in the face of the uncaring universe and of the mis-organisation of our species into 'society' is probably the only way of maintaining one's own integrity even if it risks one's sanity.

But that does not mean one cannot have an opinion, only that one's opinion is likely to be futile if one is outside the tiny group of people who hold power in society - as much today as amongst the serfs of the Middle Ages or the industrial workers of Engels' Manchester. Would Spartacus have been anything more than another Emperor if his revolt had succeeded?  Our opinions remain valid nevertheless as acts of tiny defiance - chances, during our small insignificant (to Power) lives, to show that, at least intellectually, it really is better to die on your feet than live on your corporate, media-influenced and socialised knees.And, sometimes, in history, the taste of revolt, though doomed to change little of substance in the relations between men and masters, can be delicious. For brief moments, Milton's Satan becomes Lucifer the Light-Bringer and overturns the prevailing order simply because he can. And, then, dear reader, momentarily, we come to life after years in the dust and ashes of order, conformity and obeisance.

And so this Blog will have rare (when I can shake off my indolence) bursts of 'opinion' - analyses of our species, of the darkness and the light, proposals perhaps of the Swiftian kind and simple observations on how life might be lived better under the cosh of late liberal capitalism, only the latest of many interations of human ineptitude in organising itself for its own survival and happiness, a system of desperate scrabblings by desperate people that cannot house its young, trains rather than educates, provides health by box-ticking, cannot control its security apparats or its borders, leaves swathes of humanity in desperate loneliness and poverty and thinks posturing rhetoric is a replacement for decisive action. D__n them, I say, d__n the incompetent masters who rule by lies, manipulation and secrecy. 

There are also likely to be significant gaps between postings yet some may appear very soon after each other. The randomness is appropriate for someone who, quite honestly, writes only for himself, for a small circle of friends and that extremely rare person who might just 'get' what I am saying out there in the desert we call culture. And I may also write about strange and personal things ... dogs, how to live longer, life in a provincial backwater, whatever!  Intelligent comments are certainly welcome. Silence is assumed to be the default position of most readers.


For updated old book reviews and rare podcast reviews, see https://timpendryfictionreviews.blogspot.com and https://timpendrybookreviews.blogspot.com  For all book reviews (still being added to), see https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/1016626 - there are some 1,000+ at the time of writing with only revisions and more effective reorganisation of early ones appearing in the two new blogs. 

Film reviews were only of the best films seen in recent years and appeared on my Facebook Profile alongside quite rare Exhibition and Podcast Reviews. Cinema is, in fact, my first love but I only have time to write on books. I have Tarantino's attitude to the Art ... it is an Art and not Reality. No more reviews will appear from now on because I have decided that the mad sacrality of cinema requires silence and films will now only be discussed in person.

For examples of me wading into the seas of public trivia like a twenty-first century Flying Dutchman, see https://twitter.com/TimPendry  I tend to block people who stick silly little flags on their Profiles.

The Facebook Profile is at https://www.facebook.com/tim.pendry but I make it quite hard for people to get through and become one of the Elect. There is, however, plenty of material that is public domain. The huge number of Groups I used to run have now dwindled but I am happy to direct people to the remaining lively ones.

The LinkedIn Profile is at https://www.linkedin.com/in/timpendry but this will only be interesting to anyone who wants very short near-daily updates on the global economic and political situation. LinkedIn is otherwise an intellectual desert filled with desperate corporate platitudes. 



Saturday 25 March 2023

Position Reserved Restored

After around five years of neglect and suspension, Position Reserved is coming back online with a little more focus.

Book reviews will continue to be published elsewhere, either book-by-book on GoodReads or on one of two book review blogs covering fiction and non fiction. These latter generally take old reviews from some years back, collate them under subject matter and re-edit the original reviews to create a more considered overview.

You can catch up on immediate reaction to world events as the mood takes me at LinkedIn and Twitter. You can also see public domain material (including reviews of exhibitions, events and podcasts) on Facebook. Facebook also gives access to a range of specialised groups which I administer but only to people I know and who clearly have an interest in that specialised area. I have a presence on Academia.edu

Commercial and international affairs commentary will be centred on LinkedIn. Position Reserved will be reserved for general political commentary, philosophy, culture and occult and fortean matters. Film reviews used to be occasional on Facebook but I stopped these to protest unwarranted Facebook censorship. They may start to appear here instead. I spend a lot of time on cinematic matters but very little of this will emerge as text here or elsewhere.

Over the next few weeks I will be concentrating on transferring a few redrafted opinion pieces that were placed on an experimental blog that now looks surplus to requirements and on providing an overview of a research project undertaken on Facebook that looked at alternatives to the Tweedledum-Tweedledee choices we are given at British General Elections.  Once those commitments have been made, I will post when and as I feel like it.

Comments are welcome but you might do better to connect on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and GoodReads if you want to connect more directly.

Thursday 21 July 2016

Exaro - The End Game

At a Board Meeting yesterday morning, the Directors of Exaro Holdings Ltd. voted to wind up Exaro, the online investigative news channel. This is now public knowledge as a result of a Tweet from the former Editor so there is no need to abstain from comment. At the meeting (which I attended through a dial-in call), I abstained on the vote not because I thought that the winding up was unreasonable given the commercial situation but because I had not been consulted on the matter beforehand and because I had concerns about a number of internal issues which I am confident would be resolved once I had drawn them to the Board's attention. Immediately after the Board Meeting, I resigned as a Director of Exaro Holdings Limited and write now only as a minority shareholder and private individual.

In two weeks (date as yet undetermined), there will be a shareholders meeting. Since I speak for only 18.2% of the shares (20% if proxied by others), the outcome is a foregone conclusion but I think it important, because Exaro has a public interest aspect, to lay out such facts as will set the record straight for the future and to raise one issue of public interest.

First, let me make it clear that the decision by the majority shareholder to withdraw support is a commercially sound and reasonable one. I will have more to note on the commercial aspects below but I have no reason to believe that the decision had anything to do with editorial content.

At the prior Board Meeting, a number of decisions were taken - that the Company was not commercially viable under current arrangements and that, while the Company was acknowledged to have public interest value, a time frame should be set for ensuring that the Company became viable. Support was committed to the end of 2016 on strict condition that the Company had a business plan and business model which would demonstrate incontrovertibly long term commercial viability. The task of creating such a re-orientation of the business was given to the Managing Director and a Sub-Committee of the Board was set up (including myself) to work on such a plan once immediate issues related to editorial staffing were resolved (expected to be around this time).

The commercial viability of an investigative journalist unit was always going to be a issue of concern. Some errors were made at the beginning which may be useful to any who follow in our footsteps. There is no point in going over old history but the bottom line is that the original plan that my team formulated was put on ice because a judgement was made (a reasonable one which I fully accepted at the time) that the first year should place all resources into the hands of the Editor in order to establish the brand and the positioning. My short period in management thus coincided with a period in which there was no management other than to support editorial. By prior agreement, I ceased to take a managing role after six months and became a Non-Executive Director based on my minority shareholding. I attended Board Meetings but had little role other than to assist in defence of reputation, more as an associated individual than as an official spokesperson.

During this lengthy period, I repeatedly noted that the Editor had accrued too much power under the guise of 'editorial independence'. This meant that the first stage strategy of creating the brand through content had morphed into a commitment to the expense of content without adequate commercial revenue to support it. The primary lesson for those who follow us is to institute strong management and commercial control of editorial from the very beginning in every area except direct content and to ensure an editor is in place who has a strong understanding of market realities. No private sector entity can be a bottomless pit into which money must be poured.

From this perspective, I wholly accept that the senior shareholder and creditor, evaluating the matter with his own team, came to the conclusion that Exaro had become such a bottomless pit even if I am disappointed that the reversal of policy at the preceding Board Meeting was not undertaken with some prior consultation with the Director representing the minority shareholders. My abstention was a function of being surprised by the policy but should not be construed as disagreement with it. The lack of consultation simply meant that there was no time for this Director to consider carefully the 'interests of the Company' beforehand. However, the decision is now accepted as in the best interests of the company as commercial entity. Clearly, the Managing Director recommended that there was no viable commercial rescue plan and that we would be wasting more funds and time to create one. I am afraid that I have no magic bullet to hand that says otherwise. I would only have been able to say otherwise if I had been directly engaged in the evaluation and around six months' further of risk money had been made available. It would have been too much to expect the majority shareholder to risk more at this stage.

Under these circumstances, I respect the decision of the primary funder and go further in thanking him for his exceptional public interest support for Exaro to date (far beyond the point that I might have done in his situation) and for his personal commitment to editorial independence throughout. I have no reason to believe that editorial content played any role in the decision. It was never an issue at any Board Meeting throughout the history of Exaro although of course I cannot speak for the final decision because I was out of the loop on that one. My judgement is that it did not.

If anything, the funder's faith in editorial was not reciprocated by editorial which proved somewhat unco-operative in considering the commercial base for the operation at every stage but this is not a time to cast stones. Yet, whatever the decision is, it is not the 'act of vandalism' claimed by one outgoing figure. It was a probably necessary final act after a long period of being tolerant of an over-emphasis on the public interest mission of Exaro without understanding commercial realities. Exaro never was intended to be a charity. It was designed to be a new business model for investigative journalism. In that, it has failed.

The question is now - what next?  Formally, the Company will be wound up (whatever my minority vote says) in about two weeks' time. Because it does not have a business model to hand, it is not salvageable unless a third party magically appears and makes an offer for the Company or the assets to the majority investor to which I must agree (and to which, unless obviously destuctive, I would agree). Such a purchaser would either have to understand the need to invest in the business planning agreed one month ago with or without me or find some synergy with existing operations. I will assume that it is not salvageable and will be wound up in two weeks.

However, I have one last public interest concern. The historic work and data of Exaro provides an important contemporary historical archive of some four years of investigation and it should be preserved. If it has no commercial value to New Sparta and is not of interest to a third party, then the Board (of which I am no longer a member) should consider this public interest aspect of the case and either preserve it as an archive asset within New Sparta available to the public (which would be of minimal cost) or transfer its brand and content to either an individual or public interest institution who can at the least maintain it for scholars and at the best maintain it for public access. I am raising this concern with the Company and hope that the archive can be maintained by transferring it by agreement to a third party before the winding up - if no third party appears to acquire the assets for commercial purposes by the due date. I shall keep readers informed of my progress.

Finally, for all the failures, it was a noble experiment and, although controversial (which is no bad thing), for some four years it did hold power to account on many fronts. The dominance of the child abuse story has been much exaggerated as even a cursory review of the UK archive Page of the online journal would demonstrate. Even the child abuse narrative (about which, in retrospect, it became a little over-concerned) undoubtedly helped to raise awareness of the necessity for the State to stop pretending that institutionalised sexual abuse was something to be ignored and so tolerated. The modernising elements of the State have picked up on this, helped also by awareness that, as in the case of Rotherham, tolerance of sexual abuse was not a matter of Right or Left but of flaccid elites turning their gaze away from the vulnerable and the difficult in society. The engine of reform has now started and we will see a very different cultural framework for the protection of the vulnerable in this area within three to five years - Exaro contributed to that greatly. I am honoured to have initiated the Exaro project and only regret the necessity of having to become little more than a supportive bystander for so many years

I want to give express my personal appreciation to Jerome Booth, whose patient funding over many years cannot be dismissed by those whose own money is not at stake, to my former colleagues on the Exaro Holdings Board and the Company's advisers, to the former Editor Mark Watts (who may have broken with Exaro in recent months but who was instrumental to the development of its original mission) and to all the editorial and staff of Exaro who showed unstinting commitment and who it would be invidious to name individually lest someone be forgot. And a word for the original team at one of our companies PendryWhite who set up the design and branding and the online platform on a shoestring budget under the direction of Jenina Bas.

And so the wheel of fortune turns ... any serious interest in either the archive idea or some 'deus ex machina' to save the business should go to either the Chairman of Exaro Holdings, Jerome Booth, at New Sparta or you can connect with me on LinkedIn for a chat. The silence may, of course, be deafening ...

https://uk.linkedin.com/in/timpendry


Saturday 22 August 2015

So Who Is The Author of Position Reserved?

[It occurred to the Author that regular readers had no frame of reference for the personality behind the postings. This is a slightly edited version of the Facebook Profile I use and may act as a sort of reference point.]

Existentialist, Anti-Trancendentalist Mysterian Supermaterialist and Politically Non-Euclidean with Chaotic, Possibilian, (cautiously) Trans-Humanist, Gothick, Nietzschean, Antinomian, Discordian/Erisian, Zen & Tantric Tendencies. Believer in Wu Wei and Wyrd and not much else. Looks on the species as work-in-progress likely to take another 30,000 years to become basically secure and so decent.

Politically into personal liberty (all things being equal, especially in cognitive and sexual matters), anti-bureaucratism (above all, that of the European Union which is the 'monstre sacre de nos jours'), good order mixed with compassion and common sense (the 'way of the decent copper'), sustainability for future generations and maintenance of the natural environment (which is not to be confused with any support for the Greens who are as mad as hatters or professional environmentalism which is little more than a job-creating racket), the primacy of the young over the old who usually are responsible for screwing things up in the first place, national self-determination (though never ethnicist which means that Israel worries me), against German-led Europeanism (as opposed to liking Europeans) and American-led Atlanticism (as opposed to liking Americans even though I go into hiding when they 'get God'), secularism (big time! anyone who believes in fairies and is in politics is a threat to me and mine), evidence-based policymaking, respect for difference (it is the outliers who ensure the progress and survival of the species), kindness to people who believe in fairies except in politics, anti-feminist, anti-identity politics (you are a person not an hysterical attribute) and anti-Frankfort School ideology which precisely means that I support the rights of women to make their own choices and that I support socio-economic and political equality, above all against the matriarchal top-down busybodies of the Academy.

All in all, a classic pre-1970s rational, pragmatic liberal socialist who still believes in the democratic nation state (not that the UK is really one any more) - very much an endangered species amidst the hysterics, posturers, hypocritical moralists, opportunists and downright liars of modern media-driven democracy. Not currently party-affiliated: the Labour Party is so appallingly decadent that the Tories now look relatively competent. How did that happen? Oh, and past contributor to Tribune, The Chartist and Lobster and founder of www.exaronews.com over which I have no editorial control or influence whatsoever.
 

Instinctively polyamorous like most men if they were honest but married to a remarkably interesting woman with two very bright and likable kids ... I really like women a lot and my sympathies are wholly with Emma Goldman on 'feminism'. I do not like sport or engines. I rather like fashion and art.

However, my aversion to ideology, identity politics (which has destroyed and fragmented the intelligent distributionist Left) and post-Frankfort School idiocy suggests that if you are a dim-witted femi-nazi who denies men their fulfilment as anything other than pale imitations of themselves, an ethnicist or traditionalist or a happy-clappy rights liberal or activist, you might be a helluva lot happier not entering into my circle..

Philosophy

My philosophy in life is existentialist (as if regular readers had not guessed). Life is a path that leads to death and no other end. There is no point in believing that you will be pulled from the pit by some great God. You climb out yourself.

The only meanings are those you make for yourself. But, actually, life is good, very good, if you feel the fear and make it work for you. I am passionately anti-anti-natalist and all philosophies of death and the death instinct. I prefer Catholicism for all its evils and mistakes to a Buddhism which negates.

Sometimes, things will go very wrong but these can be good times in retrospect, though you may regret that you had to learn the hard way.

But no regrets is part of the rule-book. Just live with it and move on ...

Philosophers who are admired include Heraclitus, Socrates, Kierkegaard (without the God bit), Nietzsche, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Wittgenstein and Foucault. I respect Wilhelm Reich and Jack Parsons not for their thought but for their good will. I find the philosophers of the Far Right challenging, fascinating and instructive - their critiques of contemporary liberalism resonate even though I oppose them. There are dangers in these thinkers and they require contesting with respect.

Philosophers who are despised include Plato, anyone deluded enough to think that meaning subsists outside ourselves, Hegel and all Hegelians (though with a sneaking respect for Marx's use of Hegel to create a dynamic political movement which, though it went wrong, still gave hope to the hopeless and still has things to say today) and guilt-ridden post-Nazi 'liberals' like followers of Kojeve and Habermas. Zizek drives me up the wall - did he and others not see that Tsipras was engaged in a doomed enterprise. I have no time for German Idealism more generally, analytics who dance on the head of a pin or who invent elaborate ethics in order to avoid personal despair or ensure tenure. My current bug bear is the fashion for extreme scientific speculation which is taken too seriously - it is an enjoyable stopping off place between real philosophy and science fiction.

Matters of the Spirit

I was never interested in the idea of some ghostly spirit, internal or external, animating us and then merging with some abstract Great Beyond. The mind is materially embedded in the body and the mind-body in society and all is fundamentally matter. We are emergent from matter but we cannot say we understand precisely what we mean by matter in this context. Functionalist materialism is simply an interpretation of materialism and there may be more here yet to be uncovered - or never recoverable.

There remain great mysteries in the functioning of society, about the nature of ourselves and about the workings of minds which may as well be regarded magically as undiscovered, and possibly undiscoverable, science.  If there have to be gods, then I choose Dionysos and Aphrodite, Odin and Freyja ...

But you cannot escape the drag of matter, of others or of your own carcase. A Luciferian rebellion, in the end, makes it all worthwhile because it asserts the working of your own deeper matter against the matter worked on you by the laws of physics and by the burden of social organisation. The imagination, a creative irrationality, is what makes us able to move beyond being mere walking stones, shuttled around by blind necessity and previous chance.

If I could rebel against matter I would but I cannot, so, instead, I reserve the right to rebel against social convention and the dead weight of history to free the mind-body for new experiences and pleasures, for individual psychological transcendence (not to be confused with claims about the universal) and for the benefit of those I love.

God certainly need not be involved. Past texts, especially those 'revealed' in the Iron Age, are useless. As are all socially constructed abstracts ... I very much prefer the realist Foucault to the delusional Habermas.

Politics

I used to be involved in politics a great deal. I wasted much of my life and time on the 'official' Left. It achieved little and all I learnt was that the few will always command the agenda of the many, not because they are strong but because we, the many, are weak. Recent events surrounding Jeremy Corbyn's candidature for leadership has exposed to the gaze of all what I learned in the struggles of the 1990s - the main Party of the British Left is deeply dysfunctional, staffed by second and third rate minds with no strategy beyond the 'next election'. The British Labour Party is little more than the defensive manouevre of conservative special interest groups terrified by the onward march of history. I may join it again if Corbyn wins even though his politics are not mine (though I know and respect the person)

On the other hand, anarchism tends to the naive, riddled with the naturalistic fallacy, deviant forms of religion and hidden communitarian terrors. One sinks back into a soft sort of left-libertarianism, a social liberalism or libertarian socialism created out of justifiable pessimism tempered by good will. I would prefer even Baathist order to the killing fields created by enthusiastic and naive armchair liberal outrage, at least when push comes to shove on taking the AK47 out of the broom cupboard.

I have certainly come to dislike the self-regarding political class and the lies of the 'international community' (aka professional fixers) but equally those who afford them loyalty out of an ignorant tribalism, corporatist cowardice or a refusal to think about the nature of power and how the power of the few depends on the willing servitude of the many at home and their disregard abroad ... evil lies so often in obeying orders provided by those same second rate people who naturally rise to the top of political institutions.

The foot soldiers of domestic left-wing politics have been continually digging while in a hole. Solidarity, once it has served its initial purpose, tends to become slavery. The networks of people determined to collaborate to get the cattle trucks from place to place without asking about the destination, combined with the awful truths of social psychological experimentation by our elites, suggested to me that evil was well embedded in the human species by its very socialisation strategies long before we were born.

And so I am a peculiar form of pessimist of the anarcho-Left, owing more to Rabelais, De Sade (the philosopher), Nietzsche (again), Paine, Shelley, William Morris and the incomparable Oscar Wilde than the current degenerate crew of rascals serving special interests, overseas and domestic, who have passed by the moniker of 'New Labour' and who owe more to Lloyd George than Keir Hardie.

These became mere statist war-mongers who have run the economy into the ground for the sake of power, and whose supporters are a rump of dangerous post-Marxist ideologues. In the end, they rise like scum to the surface to get their well-paid jobs in an international system that they created. In that context, it is billionaire wealth creators who deploy capital well to create jobs and build economies that impress me more than the Atlanticist and European clowns who do the opposite. The real talent is at the front end of capitalism nowadays and the leaders of the people should be ashamed of themselves for letting this happen.

The problem may be with Parliamentary Democracy itself, with the prerogatives of the Crown, with the dominance of Party and with institutional special interests that stand in the way of the people's own ability to develop their capabilities in collaboration with others. The way that the priestly class of public intellectuals and third-rate journalists dictates the terms of politics in the Atlantic system and the way modern graduates lap up the nonsense is a lot of the problem ... closed cosmopolitan (a classic contradiction) elites believing their own lies about the nature of the world and existence.

I stand against the bureaucratic State, the Crown as State (though I quite like the Windsors out of sentiment), foreign wars, federalism of all types, the corporate mentality (while appreciating the innovations supplied by genuinely free Jeffersonian markets and even intelligent State infrastructural investment), managerialism as cult, neuroscientific manipulation and tenured technocracy.

Science, technology and innovation are mostly very very good indeed but have to be kept out of the hands of the fruits and the nuts. The market and the State do inspire great works of progress as well as great evils.


Malatesta,Tucker, Rocker, Kollontai, the Kronstadt Mutineers, Zapata, Makhno and, of course, Goldman all had a point and the naive Jack Parsons makes that point likeable: freedom and personal autonomy within a society of free individuals is our highest aspiration ... but I would still trust a weak democratic State over any number of self-righteous activist enthusiasts who weedle their way into the bureaucratic corporatism of social democracy under self-righteous liberal cover.

Tuesday 21 April 2015

The English Hour with William Morris on ANN TV - Guest Tim Pendry (English with Arabic Subtitles)

The video below was filmed in January 2015 and is now available on YouTube. It was broadcast by the non-State Syrian Channel Arab News Network and the interviewer is William Morris, Secretary-General of the Next Century Foundation in London. It is an extended discussion of religion, politics and culture in Europe and ther United Kingdom in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo event. At the end is a short supplementary discussion on the transition from the British to the American Empire as viewed through a history of the Royal Navy.