Loss leading is as old as the concept of marketing itself. Whether it’s the freebies provided to promote a new lager at the local bar, or the free samples of cosmetics and fragrances dished out at beauty stores, or the good old fashioned buy one get one free – inducement to invite custom are part and parcel of our business world.

It’s unsurprising then, to find a storm brewing between groups of commercial sex workers in Copenhagen and the Mayor’s office who are determined that none of the working girls are going to have an early Christmas. What with the whole world descending on Copenhagen, it’s naive at best to assume that horizontal refreshments aren’t part and parcel of the ’entertainment package’ available to delegates at the climate and environment conference just beginning in the Danish capital. Just because it’s not on the official programme doesn’t mean that it’s not available.

So when the Copenhagen Mayor’s office issues a formal communiqué that blatantly says ”Be Sustainable, Don’t Buy Sex” and distributes it to hotels, the response from representative groups of the working girls is emphatic.

Conference delegates who show the official “Anti-prostitution postcards” being distributed at the conference and in hotels, in conjunction with their official conference delegates ID cards – are being offered free sexual services as a retaliatory measure against the move by the Mayor’s office.

A spokeswoman from SIO, a sex workers interest organization says:

”It’s completely discriminatory. Ritt Bjerregaard the Mayor is abusing her position when she uses her power to prevent us from carrying out our legal work. I don’t understand how she can be allowed to contact people in this way – we have to defend ourselves.”

It wasn’t so long ago that Jackie Selebi, the South African Police Commissioner urged the South African government to legalize prostitution for the duration of the FIFA 2010 World Cup. Not surprisingly, Selebii’s ‘pragmatism’ as some would say was totally laughed out of the room into the media circles, despite the validity of the argument that the Police should be “policing” the crowds and not focussing stretched resources on vice duties.

Sometimes, morality has no place in situations where practical solutions are needed to manage unsolvable practical problems, and let’s face it, the Copenhagen conference, and the 2010 World cup for that matter is like Christmas, Easter, 4 leap year birthdays and the lotto all rolled into one for a commercial sex worker. There are some things that are simply unpoliceable when supply meets demand if you will.

You can understand why both sides fight their corner though – and why the police helplessly look on.

I’ve made a point though of maintaining my inherent cynicism about this week’s environment and climate conference in Copenhagen. In March, I wrote the article Environmental fascism in its element – Doomsayers are at it again.

In the March article, I conclude that if there’s one thing I’ve come to understand (and something that acts as another contributor to my cynicism) about this environmental fascism, it boils down to the ability to pay salaries and pay mortgages for all these environmental activists. All the focus and enthusiasm and passion and whatever you can call it about the cause for environmentalism, is simply a cover for a direct route to government funding and donor funding for the environment. The environment and lobbying about global warming is a fashion statement for the next decade. In the 70’s women’s liberation was fashionable, in the 80s race relations was fashionable, in the 90s it was all about the gay and lesbian movement, this decade disability rights has become the new gay, and next decade, watch out for the fair trade consuming, bicycle riding, garbage recycling tree huggers.

For one, it’s hard to take anything that happens in the conference seriously if you consider that the Russian security services are being suspected for leaking ’toxic’ (forgive the pun) e-mails being bandied around – totally discrediting the whole environmental movement. Have all these scientist been lying to us about global warming all these years, or are the KGB back to their old tricks. It’s no wonder the sex workers in Copenhagen are seeing the event as pay day and nothing to do with our environment.

Today marks the first anniversary of the shot gun wedding that the Kenyan political establishment was dragged into, kicking and screaming. The choices following the chaos of the discredited 2007 general election ranked somewhere between impossible and improbable, and if only to stop the killing, violence and lawlessness, the two main protagonists had little choice but to commit to political matrimony.

If it wasn’t tragic enough, you could almost picture it:

Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki

To the left of the proverbial priest, a jaded and tired looking Emilio Mwana wa Kibaki, wearing the mystified face of a misguided, power-hungry incumbent – who’s eyes tell a tragic story of a shell shocked and politically disenfranchised character who stares blankly in wonderment about how things could have got so bad. If they could speak, Emilio’s eyes could have been heard constantly asking “They told me wananchi would complain for a few days then we’ll be back to Kazi iendelee. What the hell happened?”

Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga

To the right, a bitter and frustrated Raila Odinga who feels that he’s been violently robbed of his date with destiny as the leader of a people. A man who has only to look in the mirror to recognize the contempt he holds for his partner in matrimony that lurks beneath the surface and is only held back by the desperation to salvage a justifiable sense of political restitution for an election he believes he has just won.

Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan

Lurking in the shadows, the ever humble and diplomatic Kofi Annan, with the clear bulge of a heavy duty shot gun struggling to wrestle out of his immaculate suit. A man who’s biggest regret while Secretary General of the UN was that the Rwandan genocide took place on his watch and the UN apparatus was powerless to stop it or influence other players to stop the genocide. A man who’s face shows a steely determination of someone who has been given a second chance to redeem himself and will stop at nothing to ensure that what happened in Rwanda is not repeated in Kenya.

As Kibaki and Odinga take their vows, a representative congregation of an entire people of a nation watch with bated breath. They watch in anticipation hoping for an immediate cessation of violence. They watch and hope that the killing and mutilation will stop. They watch and hope that the gang rape and horrific violation of women and young girls will stop. They watch and hope that the country does not sink further into tribally fuelled anarchy.

Desperate father scrambling for safety with his 2 children through burning rubble during the post election violence on Jan 2nd 2008 in Mathare Slums.

One year on, has the marriage worked?

The blunt answer to that is Absolutely Not! The Kenyan leadership spearheaded by both Kibaki and Odinga has illustrated a spectacular level of incompetence that at best, is laughable, and at worst, tragic.

In fact, I’ll go as far as saying that the continued leadership of these two characters and their grand coalition government are a direct threat to the existence of the Kenyan society as we know it.

To illustrate my point, I’d like to take a step back and revisit some of the key issues that led us to where we are.

Many observers acknowledge that the discredited 2007 election was most certainly a trigger to the violence that was unleashed on Kenyans – where neighbours turned on each other, lawlessness became a cottage industry, over 1000 people lost their lives and hundreds of thousands were displaced from their homes.

However, before the 2007 election, all the ingredients of the dynamics of a classic civil war were already in place.

• The ethnic fragmentation caused by the 1992 and 1997 clashes in Rift Valley and the Coast province, as well as other pockets within the country.
• Long overdue constitutional reforms.
• Decades of flawed and failed policies that affected the livelihoods of huge sections of the population.
• Historical injustices and land grievances.
• Colonial legacies that encouraged and supported tribal politics in favour of nationalist politics as a divide and rule tactic.
• Wide spread poverty and economic inequalities
• Media hyperbole and irresponsible and unaccountable broadcasting.
• A betrayal of the hopes of the people by the NARC government elected in 2002 on a reform agenda.

Two things are quite disturbing at this point in time.

Firstly, none of the above historical and long term reforms have been addressed. The failed experiment of the grand coalition government has done nothing to give Kenyans any expectation that this lot of discredited leaders can run a bath or organize an empty drawer if their lives depended on it.

Secondly, despite the unanimous calls for change in leadership of a generational kind, there are few, if any, viable alternatives to the leaders in place at the moment.

On the first issue, it’s only a matter of time before another trigger unleashes the worst violence that Kenyans have ever seen. We console ourselves by rationalizing that we have learnt lessons from the violence of 2008, but clearly – the leadership have resorted to their own devices and are blissfully ignoring the ticking time bomb their sitting on and fuelling with their total disregard of the wishes of their electorate.

A brief lesson into the history and chronology of the Rwandan genocide will aptly illustrate how it’s possible for the seeds of a human catastrophe to be sown while we bury our heads in the sand and pretend that what happened in Rwanda will never happen to Kenya. The comparisons of the two scenarios are not far off by any measure.

On the second issue of lack of a viable leadership alternative – there is an unacceptable vacuum in leadership that exists because the next generation have not stepped up to the plate for whatever reason. A “every person for him/herself” unpatriotic attitude” – or the absolute fear of harm and retaliation, political assassinations and extra judicial killings unleashed by the old guard and the establishment on some younger upcoming leaders who have tried – may have put promising leaders off.

But leadership is not just needed in politics, it’s needed in enterprise, in public service administration, in health and social care, in development and in many other disciplines that are essential to keep the country ticking over day by day.

The revolution needed in Kenya to return the country back to the citizens who own it is made even more complicated by the fact that the old guard in power right now have blatantly illustrated the impunity by which they are going to cling to power by all means necessary – and if we want our country back, we’re going to have to take it back because the only exit strategy the old guard know is the kind that permanently relocates them 6 feet underground in a wooden box.

In an early episode of the fictional hit TV drama The West Wing, the show’s President Jed Bartlett vents his fury at his Director of Intelligence. In the plot of this particular episode, the intelligence folks fail to pick up hundreds of thousands of Indian troops and their war machinery marching aggressively towards the Kashmiri Pakistani border in a clearly provocative move that will not bode well for the two nuclear armed neighbours.

In disbelief, Jed Bartlett angrily berates his intelligence chief by pointing out that his motorcade can’t move from K Street in the middle of DC to Connecticut without being picked up on a weather satellite. Aaron Sorkin and his production team obviously did their research well in coming up with a realistic depiction of the plot that is the challenging project of moving the most powerful man in the world from location A to location B.

Last night, London was treated to the real life rendition of this project when the US secret service pretty much commandeered central London to ensure that their boss had his “customary” no nonsense protection as he made his first long haul trip across the Atlantic. The RAF Northolt airbase, the UK’s equivalent of Andrews in Maryland (which normally hosts dignitaries and royalty), clearly wasn’t up to the job of hosting this circus and Stansted got the honour of going out of business for a little while as it hosted Airforce 1. The reality and sheer magnitude of the project of protecting President Obama and his wife is undoubtedly a more challenging proposition than the plot predicted in the TV series.

President Obama and First lady Michelle acknowledge well wishers as they disembark off Air Force 1 at Stansted Airport

Nevertheless, it’s hard to fail to admire the determination of the circus mentality shown by the American establishment as they lap up the opportunity to show the world that they’re the best at what they do, especially when it comes to protecting the big fella from Pennsylvania Avenue. To illustrate the sheer magnitude of this American circus, here are some facts about the project of Obama’s G20 trip:

• Obama is travelling with an estimated 500 to 600 personnel in his entourage. They won’t confirm the exact number as the mystery obviously adds to the spectacle of the circus.
• 200 of the folks travelling with him are secret service officers to cover the protection detail for him and his wife. One wonders how the rest of the entourage will be kept busy in Europe in the next 5 days.
• Apart from Airforce 1 and the second identical Boeing 747 that normally travels with the official plane as a decoy, Obama’s fully loaded Marine 1 helicopter is in town, together with the 2 or 3 equally loaded helicopters that fly together as decoys. The idea being no one really knows which plane he’s on. Clearly, they’ve been advised well on London traffic nightmares and he’s lucky he can afford using a helicopter around the capital to avoid the traffic.
• The beast is also in town to move him around where it’s not practical to use Marine 1. You can’t help but be fascinated with the sheer madness of this vehicle aptly named the beast. Apparently, apart from the out of this planet armoury that this limo has(most of which will make James Bond’s Aston Martin look like a rickshaw from a century ago), it’s also a moving hospital that carries oxygen as well as bottles of the president’s blood, not withstanding that there’s always a fully loaded ambulance in his motorcade.
• His 500 strong entourage also got to dodge the London traffic as they too have their fleet of American military Chinook helicopters to hop on to like the boss

Aside from the arrival circus witnessed by many well wishers waving the stripes and stars at Stansted airport, the most secure piece of real estate on the planet as of last night was Winfield House in Regents Park in central London. The private residence of the American Ambassador is sprawled over 12 acres and has the second largest private garden in London after Buckingham Palace. No problem there for the entourage to pitch up tents if they had to.

It’s a scene also reminiscent of an episode in the last season of the TV hit West Wing, where Matt Santos, the Latino presidential candidate causes a logistical nightmare when he decides to pop home for dinner and the secret service have to take over an entire suburban neighbourhood lock stock and barrel. Needless to say, the neighbours are least pleased as they pretty much have to provide their grandparent’s DNA profile (not literally – but you get the picture of course) to enter their homes, and Santos has to apologize about the circus to his wife Helen, who’s only comfort is the acknowledgement that at least they’re in the most secure neighbourhood in Texas if only for the night.

As a side note – it was interesting to note that the whole character of Matt Santos, the fictional Latino President in the TV hit The West Wing was inspired by the real life political story of Barrack Obama. Eli Adi and the West Wing writing team had the dilemma of not having a precedent to base a non-white presidential candidate on as part of the show’s plot. It was only after Obama’s stomp speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention in Boston in support of John Kerry, that the writers and producers homed in on the Obama inspiration for Santos’ character…..but clearly, I digress here….

So, is the circus in London going to be worth it?

We’ll see after the pomp and ceremony of the tea and reception with Aunt Liz and Uncle Phil at Buckingham Palace, and the Jamie Oliver dinner later in the evening being prepared for the heads of state at Downing Street (well, that’s if Jamie’s heavily pregnant wife doesn’t go into labour – otherwise it’s the local take away for the big fellas).

Incidentally, the spouses of the heads of state don’t get to eat with the big boys at the high table. They get relegated to the long grass of the back room dining areas with the consolation of a few celebs like JK Rawling, Dame Kelly Holmes and Naomi Campbell thrown in for a spectacle. Funny, if I was cynical, I would suggest that the inclusion of black celebs in the dinner for the first ladies is an obvious stunt to make Michelle feel less awkward (would they do that….Nooooo!). Barrack doesn’t have an identity problem and doesn’t need props seeing that he’s the X Factor that is calling the shots – it comes with being the most powerful man in the world. The folks out back are still figuring out how to handle Michelle, but yet again, I digress.

To the more serious matter of the jaunt at the Excel Centre on Thursday where the hopes of the world’s economic future is pinned on a 4 and a half hour G20 meeting. Will they achieve anything of substance? Absolutely not! As they’ll say, it’s a step in the right direction and we’re focused on stimulating the economy, in regulation and in making the IMF almighty and all powerful so that they can screw up developing countries even more.

Brazilian President Lula daSilva will still go back home blaming the blue eyed white folk for having fixed nothing after their breath taking and spectacular incompetence in screwing up the world’s economy, the Metropolitan Police and British Security Services will have spent £20 million in the security operation of the decade (it will be a good dry run for the 2012 Olympics though – but an expensive dry run all the same), and the biggest spectacle will be the numerous battles with the street protestors of different persuasion – from fair trade consuming, tree hugging, environmental mercenaries, to those convinced that this is the perfect opportunity to kill capitalism, to folks just pissed off that they don’t have jobs.

My personal opinion is that if any of these leaders had any vision of changing life permanently for generations to come, they’d actually kick this talk of fixing the world economy in 4 hours into the long grass and be bold enough to conclude the Doha round of world trade talks that would ensure free trade without protectionism and ridiculous tariffs that hit the poorest countries in the world.

All signatures needed for this will be in the room – the question is that of whether they’ll have the balls to do it and fix, as Lula daSilva says, the mess caused by greedy blue eyed white folk.

Trick question: What do Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, Nicolae Ceausescu, Gordon Brown, George Bush, Robert Mugabe and who else….Hmmm let me see…the military junta in Burma, the military junta who ruled Argentina in the 70s and Pol Pot have in common.

Answer: For differing reasons, they have all been responsible for some of the world’s biggest and most severe violations of civil liberties of the poor old folks that they proclaim to lead or have led.

George Orwell (if he could), must have a smug and uncanny smile on his face that has that characteristic “I told you bastards so” look. Look at any plot in his 1984 master piece and you get this queasy feeling that George was definitely onto something that will scare the living daylights out of any self respecting individual who values their privacy.

I’m not particularly interested in this article to talk about or even argue the case and justification for the different ways in which the so called leaders above implemented their totalitarian dictatorships….far from that. Trying to compare and contrast the good guys from the bad guys in that list will give me a headache. What is a constant is that they all have, are, or are intending to take a place in history as those responsible for the massive and ruthless violation of the civil liberties of their citizens, in the name of a better and more grander cause for the good of the majority.

Why am I writing about this? Well, for a long time now, it’s been common knowledge that big brother Britain was slowly descending down the slippery slope into a 21st century police state. You can’t go anywhere in this country without being in range of a CCTV camera which will catch anything from a bemused smile as you indulge in self wonderment of an individual kind, or the quick adjustment of your dodgy underwear that is violating the sacred crevasse in between your bum cheeks, to the violent criminal activities that go on in every street corner.

The National Health Service has been trying for years (thank God for the incompetence in technology implementation to put in place a global central database of patient’s most intimate medical and psychological issues apparently to streamline the system and make medical support at the point of contact more accessible and a more efficient experience…at least that’s what they say – though the thought of every Thomas, Dickson and Harriet knowing that you have mental health issues or genital herpes before you even say hello at the GP’s reception doesn’t amuse any 3 dimensional individual.

A few months ago, a stealth law was introduced in the British parliament under the guise of “Anti-terror” legislation that every single email, sms text and phone call was going to be recorded and monitored as a strategy to defend the citizens of the country against acts of terror. It’s amazing that there wasn’t enough time given to debating this law and letting folks really understand how ridiculous it is.

Gordon’s government hasn’t had enough….now they want to monitor and record every web site and social networking activity that internet users make. Recording our email and phone calls is not enough – Nooo! Let’s go ahead and record every single thing they do or say on Facebook, MySpace and other social networking sites. Frankly speaking, I’ll be amazed if they get anything from the crap that’s written on folks walls on Facebook, but that’s not the point here…

The thought that it won’t be long before you’ll have to ask the government for permission to take a piss, or apply for a licence to have sex, or have your friends on Facebook or those who e-mail you be under surveillance because of what both of you were supposed to have said makes my stomach turn. And for what? Supposedly to save us from the imminent threat of a terror attack?.

This smirks of a classic case of “Problem, Reaction, Solution”, a strategy that has been used to oppress masses for time immemorial. Create a problem (usually calculated but can be opportunistic), create a massive reaction and outcry from the populous, and then provide a solution that stamps your authority on a desired political, social and financial order that satisfies your agenda.

All this nonsense about fighting and winning the so called Dubya’s war on terror is becoming blatantly annoying. If there’s an enemy out there, they must be laughing their arses like nobody’s business. Look at how terrified and clueless citizens have their liberties violated in places like airports where they’re herded like the sheep they are, barefoot and forced to hold clear paper bags for inspection like those suspected of exceeding their food rations in a prisoner of war camp before they board a flight. Some airports are even trialing thermal imaging x-rays that see through clothes as you pass security – now this is not even funny….and passengers don’t even have a clue.

…And all this for what? To save us from the big bad ugly terrorist. You know, folklore has constantly shown that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Take Charles dGaulle for example. This dude was at one time seen as the nemesis of all things civilized in France and actually branded a terrorist. Now look at what they call him. Besides, who gets to decide who is a terrorist…what’s the difference between those supposedly living in caves and using crude methods of destruction and those wearing Savile Row suits, sitting in plush offices in the safety of a security blanket and sanction the killing of hundreds and thousands of civilians using an expensive pen to sign a decree.

You know, if I was cynical, I’d actually suggest that Gordon’s government need a serious smoke screen and side show to change the agenda from the fact that Britain is running bankrupt and its a result of spectacular incompetence over the last 10 to 15 years in fiscal management that saw the City and Wall street get away with Casino style gambling of the economy. No prizes for guessing who was in charge of the coffers then.

If all fails, scare the shit out of the public with immanent threats of terror (by the way, whatever happened to that traffic light system in the states where people were shafted around based on someone’s decision to change the terror alert by traffic lights – green for somewhat OK, amber for vigilance….you catch my drift, but I digress) – and once the public are shit scared, take their liberties from them and tell them it’s the only way to save their lives.

And all this from a government with the worst record in the storage and security of sensitive public data (or if you prefer, the best record in losing sensitive public data). Those in charge of data security don’t even seem like being capable of hitting a barn door with a shotgun and they want to record every single email, phone call, sms, where folks go on the web and what they do or say on social networking web sites.

I wonder which is worse…someone violating you and they make no effort in hiding the fact that they’re violating you, or someone who violates you when they’re pretending that their reason for doing so is solely to protect you from the big bad wolf outside.

I’ve always found it interesting to consider how people rationalize arguments to spin their own agenda – whether in politics, in civil society circles, in business or in relationships. The one common thread that runs through the spin cycle is the cryptic question about “who benefits?” – when negative, inaccurate and in most cases, misleading arguments carry the day.

Take Kibera for example. Rightfully or wrongly, this stretch of Nairobi real estate that spans over 2.5 sq km (give or take a football pitch either side) – has garnered a world-wide reputation for being the largest slum in Africa with at least 1 million residents.
A first assumption you’d make is that the government in Kenya or some form of reliable public body or statistics agency actually did a head count and figured out that the number of folks who live in Kibera topped 1 million.

The veracity of such an assumption is not lost to those wondering whether you can fit that number of folks in an area (which can be measured accurately and not estimated) the size of Kibera. In mid 2008, Stefano Marras, a mapping specialist, took the plunge and decided to scientifically quantify a reliable estimate of Kiberas population. Marras wrote in summary to his mapping exercise

“…looking upon the data reported, and considering that type, dimension and distribution of the buildings observed in Kianda is typically the same in the whole slum of Kibera, it is possible to make a guess about the numerical dimension of its population. Considering that its area of Kibera is set between 2.3 and 2.5 sq km, the total population living in the slum can be most likely estimated between 220,000 and 250,000 people”.

So why the over-inflated estimates of those confined to the hardship of slum dwelling in Africa’s most renowned informal settlement. Conventional wisdom would suggest there are many parties that benefit. Politicians for one, have become seasoned tacticians unmoved about using the plight of poverty stricken slum dwellers to further their own political ambitions. Kenyan politicians don’t hold this monopoly – look around at the influence of politics in the slums of Asia or even right across the world in South America – say in Venezuela where Hugo Chavez enjoys absolute support for his socialist agenda from majority of their slum dwelling population.

Other players who benefit from the inflated population estimates are NGOs, the manifestation of the cynicism and fallacy that is the aid and development industry. The survival of this industry (clearly a topic for another post on its own merit) is dependent on the perpetuation of poverty at its highest extremes. The sustainability of this poverty helps fund mortgages and lifestyles for development experts on all manner of disciplines who believe it’s their destiny to change the world.

It can also be argued that the residents of Kibera themselves may benefit from the inflated figures as they solicit sympathy and funding from aid sources to celebrities of the ilk of Chris Rock and Simon Cowell. It’s a twisted interpretation of the tenets of Darwin’s survival of the fittest theory. Short of getting a job – the aid and development industry will fund this madness.

The media are also complicit in this spin of convenience. Some Kenyan journalists (if I can be allowed to qualify this generalization) in particular are known for their misguided enthusiasm and sensationalism in their reporting of events – so the accolade of having ‘Africa’s biggest slum’ falls right down their street.

Truth is – Kibera is probably just Nairobi’s biggest slum. And if you think about it, a similar exercise would probably factor down the population estimates of other Nairobi slums.

One interesting question is about how money flows within the slum. Marras estimates that over 96% of folks in Kianda area alone pay rent to someone – and this easily aggregates to a monthly income of around £45,000. Even in Europe, that is a windfall – and the capital gains tax alone on this income can fund some basic public services in the area. Who gets this money?

Renato Sesana, an Italian journalist and missionary observes:
“Marras did this work with funds from a scholarship, using an amount that in the average project financed by any European country would fall under “contingencies” or “stationery”. Yet he has accomplished a task of great value and that is scientifically outstanding, such that from now onwards, no government or NGO project conducted in Kibera can afford to disregard his data”.

The thing is this though – the more the unchallenged and convenient assumptions go on about Kibera, the faster the slum realities become a self fulfilling prophecy.

On the 3rd of Feb, I wrote Chickens come home to roost as the credit crunched bite back. As they say in football – when the home supporters get antsy about their team’s usually lousy performance, “the natives are getting restless”. Not surprising though, as human nature has a habit of defaulting us to protectionism when we’re faced with adversity that we don’t understand.

The British are now making concerted noises about the fact that the number of foreign workers in the land of the queen has doubled in the last 10 years to 3.8 million. I’m not sure yet whether this is the primary fact that irks those shouting about it – or its the fact that over 66% of these foreign workers were born outside the European union.

These noises are of course amplified in the background of British folks losing jobs left, right and centre – and for the most part, the average Jo Public is still trying to understand the magnitude of this beast they’re calling the credit crunch.

I’ve never been one to believe statistics after my maths lecturer in college taught me how statistics can be used to manipulate any message we want – and politicians can be uncanny at blowing smoke up our arses with statistics to boot.

Case in point a certain Marion Berry as Mayor of Washington DC shamelessly saying “Apart from the murders and killings, the crime rate in DC has really gone down”.

I think that the suggested percentage rise of foreign workers against the locals is neither here nor there (although some would argue otherwise), but it provides classic fodder for opposition politicians who are quickly developing a dangerous brand of “let’s blame the bastards in office” game – especially when the stakes are really high.

It’s a dangerous game because the pawns in the game are vulnerable people who have lost their jobs, their savings, their livelihoods, and the future doesn’t look as bright as Orange told them it was going to be.

It’s a dangerous game because the only alternative the opposition politicians have in lieu of viable and tangible policies that rival the “bastards in office” – is to scare the hell out of voters and then tell them who’s to blame for the mess they’re in.

The irony is that British politicians don’t hold the monopoly of this sadistic tactic – it’s almost like shafting electorates in the period before elections is a God given right for politicians world over.
Isn’t it also ironic that on a good day, the same politicians peddle the virtues of globalization and its benefits to the world with free movement of people and ideas – and on a bad day, they go postal on our arses with controversial messages laced with elements of protectionism that perpetuate “a”them vs. Us” state of affairs?

As sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, globalization in its current rendition of economic migration and free movement of people dictates that you get a taste of it in your own backyard.
The west has had its rampant gallivanting around the world for hundreds of years “conquering” most of it for its own purposes of survival – and it’s difficult to see in this day and age how they’re going to change the fact that there’s folks from the rest of the world and the former empire who want and demand a piece of that action – with some having the belief that its their God given right.

Politicians should stop saber rattling in the name of initiating debate as economic migration is a fate accompli as long as they continue their neo-colonial and imperialistic actions and attitudes and using an unsavoury brand of diplomacy to dictate a new world order.
Of course, many will tell you to refer to this as aid and development assistance to the 3rd world. How dare you call it neo-colonial imperialism.