PC Review Blog

Check out these LED HDTVs images:

because we can


Image by ben matthews :::
I have no other outlet for this essay, so if you’re just here to see the photograph, then that’s just dandy, but if you have the time to read my essay, any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Because We Can

There are few genuine human rights – rights which we should fight for, die for if necessary. These include the right to life and political participation, right to subsistence and rights to peace and clean environment. 1 There are rights which we can expect, which our local government has provided us. Then there are the “rights” Which many of us expect because society implies that that they are essential, often incorrectly, sometimes illegally and almost always inappropriately.

We live in a state of entitlement at the moment. I suspect this is something which may apply generally to the world, especially the western “civilised” world but, as it is the place I know best, I know it applies to England. There is a new motto on the lips of almost everybody in this fair country – “because we can”. People no longer choose to think about the moral, ethical or financial factors involved in their decisions. If I want to do something, I feel entitled to it, and therefore I will do it.

This attitude, this state of entitlement, has become particularly obvious in the last few days – the cry of “because we can” has been heard over the airwaves, seen on screen, written in text, tweeted, facebooked, and I’m sure, even google plussed, not just by the easily targetable social groups that some areas of the media and society have chosen to blame. Now we have entered the post-event analysis of causes, the common theme is commentators using the riots as evidence of their own specific issues; “the riots are clear confirmation of my long-held view that {insert pre-existing world view here}” 2 This is endemic in our country, and is ruining the nation and the state that we live in.

The much maligned annual educational statistics offer a prime example. “It is estimated that at least 1 in 4 of our economically active adults is functionally innumerate … 22% of 16–19-year-olds are functionally innumerate” 3 "After 11 years of formal education, employers say they get kids coming to them who can’t read, who can’t write, who can’t communicate, and don’t have that work ethic."4 Is it the fault of the educators? Is it even the fault of the government? Or is this entitlement state also to blame? How many teachers out there have had students demanding that “they get them an A*”, as if the responsibility is that of the educator, not the educated? Work hard, and life will be your reward. If I had any belief that extending maths teaching from 5 to 16 to 5 to 18 would improve the aforementioned statistics, I would support this idea, but I know that just extending the course will do precisely nothing to extend the education. These children are being educated – there is no question that the education is there and is being provided. But if I teach the concept of differential equations to students who have spent their educated lives opting out with low attendance, submitting no homework, poor behaviour in class, they will not learn – they resist the teaching available. By the time they are 16, they would have had numerous maths teachers with many styles so no one teacher can be blamed. They will be just as unable to solve these equations as the child who has spent 2 terms learning how a compass point can be used to make patterns in a pencil tin lid. There is a huge portion of society out there that believes that leaving school before one has achieved any qualifications is justifiable, because the state will look after them – the benefits system will provide. Why shouldn’t we avoid all education? Because we can. Because it’s not my responsibility, and it’s my right to.

The situation is the same with smoking. Smoking is a legal right. Smoking is permissible in public in almost all countries. There are certain rules and regulations that have been introduced by various societies to try to curb the socially negative aspects of smoking, and taxes rise and rise on cigarettes to try to curb the purchase. Yet this is a habit which has not been suggested to have a link to various disease, but proven beyond almost all margins of statistical doubt to have both clinically and statistically significant links to disease, not even recently, but for over 60 years 5,6. It would be virtually impossible not to have been “educated” on the dangers of smoking, but it is easy to ignore this education, because we can. I condemn smoking, just as I am condemn the concept of “I smoke because I can, but I’m also going to demand free treatment because I can”. This tends to both follow and precede the need for lengthy, expensive and potentially preventable treatment for disease.

The same can also be said for alcohol. There are increasing numbers of the very young suffering illnesses related to long term alcohol abuse. They drank because they could. Because they did not understand that just because you can go out and get smashed and drink until you pass out, it doesn’t mean you should. Alcohol misuse appears to be the cause in around half of all violent crimes (1.2 million per annum) 7 There is a genuine issue with the state of entitlement when being allowed to drink means Friday night isn’t fun without a visit to A&E, or causing one. A recent study showed that 35% of the admissions to hospital (excluding long term care and pregnancy (although I suspect there is a significant proportion of them too)) is related to alcohol. This increases to 70% of admissions to A&E between the hours of midnight and 5am 8. The same report estimates the cost of alcohol to the NHS at £1.6 billion, although more recent estimates have been as high as £2.7 billion per annum.

I am a dentist when I am not writing and, while I shall not stand and bang my own drum too long, I see too many patients who believe that the upkeep of their teeth is my responsibility. The twice yearly (if they’re well behaved) cleaning of their teeth in my chair is the only time they are cleaned. Yet when it is suggested that their own participation in their own hygiene would improve matters they become indignant. Because they can.

There are socio-economic links here as well, primarily around the politics of cuts, welfare and benefits. While I have a basic knowledge of the issues surrounding who is claiming benefits, who can be and who shouldn’t be, I feel that I would expose myself potentially by expressing too strong a view on these issues. Suffice to say, the cry of “because we can” rings on the lips of many who perhaps are not using the system quite as it was intended.

In the news over the last few days, it may have been noticed that amid the turbulent markets, the surprise news that Apple is now the most valuable company in the world, starvation and famine in Somalia, that the National bank of Greece was the best performing bank and continuing uprising for democracy in Syria, there was a small incident of civil unrest in England. As I write this there are estimates of tens of millions pounds of damage, 5 dead, countless injured, some severely, more than 1000 people arrested 9. There was an initial peaceful protest over human and civil rights relating to a shooting. This quickly led to mass unrest, arson, looting and thuggery. The images that have been seen repeatedly are vile, disgusting and show some of the worst in human nature. An explicit discussion of the incident is not necessary here – there are hundreds of better sources for that information than me. What links in with this is the general attitude of the thugs, the criminals, the arsonists, the looters; why act the way you have? Because we can.

There are recordings of 14 year olds claiming that they were “retaking their taxes”, 18 year olds saying that if you can, why wouldn’t you steal hundreds of pounds worth of electronics and fashion goods. Be aware, these are not essential supplies that are being looted – this is luxury goods, which people feel entitled to, because they are available. If one can simply smash a window and grab one, why pay? If one can beat a 68 year old man to the brink of death, why not? Run 3 young boys over, killing them? Why not? Shall we burn down a 150 year old family business? Of course! And why? Because we can. These are not people with a message, a cause, moral reasoning for what they are doing. That much was obvious when they attacked the media. If you look at almost every past disturbance with a real cause behind it, the rioters, rebels, insurgents, call them what you will, will protect the media, because they know that is the best way of getting their message spread. When you attack the messenger, you clearly have no message.

So who should be responsible for curbing these behaviours? Who should back up the rights with responsibilities? Who should teach society (and it’s not just the young) that there are repercussions to every action? Parents need to teach their children that poor, antisocial behaviour is not tolerated? If your child comes home with a new 50” HDTV, they should be punished, not cherished for providing your house with another distraction from the poor behaviour. But there’s the rub. What if the parents do not know? What if they joined their children in looting and violence? If they have never learnt to control their children? If their parents, or their parents before them failed to impart these life lessons? We may be onto our nth generation of ASBO parents – their ignorance is not a whole excuse, but they cannot expect to teach something that they do not know themselves.

As a society we need to do something about this, not leave it solely to the parents. Teachers can help, but only with the respect and trust of both the students and the parents. If a child is punished for something at school, be it late or poor attendance, or physical and verbal abuse of both students and staff, shockingly becoming more prevalent, then the punishment needs to be supported, if not backed up at school. Too many parents, instead of supporting these issues, challenge and appeal against any and all forms of punishment, citing that “little timmy wouldn’t possibly sexually harass their teacher, it’s just not in his nature”. Except that it is, and he does it, because he can, because he will get away with it. Teachers are not blameless either – many incidents go totally unreported, simply because it’s easier not to bother with the hassle that will come from it. This then spreads up the line. The same can be said for extracurricular law makers – police will tolerate surprising levels of antisocial behaviour, because it is easier to ignore it – an arrest means paperwork, time off the street, lower police presence, and more antisocial behaviour. It is simply an excuse. I do not have the answers. I wish I did, but as a society we can work together to solve this.

So why should we try to resolve these issues? Why should we try to curb antisocial behaviour, binge drinking, rioting? Why should we stop people harming our communities and people within our community? Why should we care? Because we can.

Ben Matthews.

1. United Nations, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
2. T. Harford, @timHarford twitter feed, 10 August 2011
3. C. Vorderman (Chair) “A world-class mathematics education for all our young people” August 2011
4. David Frost, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce, speaking on the BBC, July 2011
5. Doll, R. and A.B. Hill, Smoking and carcinoma of the lung. Preliminary report.British Medical Journal, 1950: p. ii:739-48
6. Wynder EL, G.E.A., Tobacco smoking as a possible etiologic factor in bronchogenic carcinoma. JAMA, 1950. 143: p. 329-36
7. Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy for England, March 2004
8. Strategy Unit Alcohol Harm Reduction Project – Interim Analytical Report – September 2003
9. BBC news website, 11 August 2011.