PROFILE: Sunday Times Rich List.

29 04 2008

Never thought they’d be a day I’d agree with Dominic Lawson but fiddle me silly-the man has point! thank god someone has highlighted the ridiculousness of this fucking LIE of a list!

Hit it Dr Williams!

“A couple of days ahead of publication of this Book of Mammon, Dr Rowan Williams was interviewed by the BBC’s John Humphrys; Dr Williams told Mr Humphrys that, “The more you have a disproportion between what people are earning and what they appear to be worth, the more we have astronomical sums with no clear rationale behind them, the less credibility the whole thing has.” The Archbishop of Canterbury added that this “disproportion” resulted in “a degree of envy and cynicism … that leads people to feel alienated from the rest of society.””


I’m no women of the cloth but I feel like praising the lord right here and right now with a firm clutch of me ‘ands, as I site here divulging my dry but reasonable M&S coronation chicken. This whole rubbish has pissed me off no end!

“The Archbishop of Canterbury is doing his duty by warning about an increase in envy. It is one of the seven deadly sins; but we would not nowadays think that it was right for a clergyman to blame male lust on women for becoming “too attractive”, or indeed for the physically ill-favoured to blame the more shapely for any feelings of jealousy which they might have.”

There’s a few digs at the past Labour government-of course this is Lawson-but the premise is there. The tone of the piece is more economical with a dash of cultural anthropology, which is good but it thus often diverts away from The Sunday Times/Society’s cultural need to pathologically lie so we have to feel even worse about ourselves as a country.

The British psyche has been fragile for a very long, long time and I’m sorry but the 80’s were simply an illusion in representing our successful state of being. In fact-we this list would not exist if it wasn’t for the 80’s.

Ultimately, Lawson has some strong arguments, if you ignore his snide remarks about this, him and that-and as a former editor, what you get gives the sense of an incredibly clinical and superficial undertone.

But at least he’s had the guts to bloody say something, even though it may SCREAM agenda!

Article via The Independent




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: