Clair McCleary

Harrogate, United Kingdom

About Clair

Bio

GCE "A" Level in Economics & Politics, Hons Degree (2) PhilosophySociology - but the course covered a lot of Anthropology. Some experience as a Legal Secretary.Interests current affairs, population, poverty, freedom, democracy, freedom of speech, surveillance culture, the secret state, loss of liberties and freedoms, the effects of globalisation creating a world-wide cheap labour force, to make millions for the few. The dangers of a new totalitarianism and loss of democracy. Favourite books, The Global Class War, by Faux. Spies Lies and Whistleblowers by Machon.Also "The Cost of Inequality" by Stewart Lansley.

Talk to me about

gaslighting; surveillance state; organised/gang stalking; self-funded operations; "The Global Class War" Faux; "The Cost of Inequality" Lansley; "The Biggest Gang" Hayes; freedom of speech.

Comments & conversations

Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity?
My sister did teacher training in the 1960's and studied a book on the work of a teacher in a country school, at a time when such children left school at 14 and went to work. This teacher adopted a creative technique with these children, working on the assumption that every child's potential had no upward ceiling. The children at this school soon outperformed same-age children at every comparable school. This drew the attention of his "superiors" who told him to stop doing what he was doing and return to conventional methods. I am sorry I do not remember the title nor author, and I believe the book has been out of print for at least 40 years.
Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
Stephen Coleman: The moral dangers of non-lethal weapons
You hit the nail on the head. It is the mind, and intentions of the person using the weapon that is the real issue. And you also draw attention to the rather bad attitude that people in authority have toward ordinary citizens. Put these weapons together with bad attitude, and the questionable values of their superiors (a political agenda?) - and what do we have - a state condoned bullying of any citizen at the whim of anyone in uniform? The rational use of these weapons would only work in a rational society, and we are not living in one. (You might find of interest the book "Britain's Biggest Gang" by Hayes.)
Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
Why is someone a "conspiracy theorist" merely because they question the government account of something? Isn't that plain old skepticism?
Here is my "conspiracy theory". If you look up organised stalking/gangstalking, such as on wikipedia, the account will give prominent position to the view that organised stalking does not exist, it is a delusion. And this seems to be the view promoted by the "authorities" whoever they happen to be. But this is a ridiculous viewpoint. We know that stalking exists. We know that bullying exists. We know that in the past, and in other countries, individuals, and various social groups have been targets of persecution - collective persecution. It is difficult for a single person to persecute one person, or an entire group (Jews, blacks, etc). And we know that any crime which can be commited by an individual, such as stalking, can just as easily be carried out by a group. So why should the authorities resist the view that gangstalking is a criminal fact. And promote the view that it is a personal delusion? Unless they are engaged in it. So my conspiracy theory is this. Not that gangstalking is a conspiracy theory held by delusional people, but a fact, and the conspiracy is the authorities pretending that it doesnt exist and making out that the victims are "crazy". Just like in Russia. any who complained of mistreatment by the state were defined as crazy and put away.
Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
George Papandreou: Imagine a European democracy without borders
Size may be a very relevant point. Might it be the case that above a certain size of population group, virtually everyone is disenfranchised, while huge power devolves to those at the top? The more people there are, the more powerless everyone becomes. Take an alternative example - the mass market. Where businesses have to compete for customers, where every customer counts, you get competitive prices and good service. But where customers are a glut, businesses can offer bad service and charge what they like, because the customer base is so big they can make easy profit. Without going as far as "Small is Beautiful" Schumacher, there must be an optimum size where democracy flourishes.
Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
Margaret Heffernan: The dangers of "willful blindness"
Brilliant perspective. Gayle Benefield has pinpointed a common behaviour that supports social injustice - ongoing, today and historically. Mistreatment of women historically - and today - it was just accepted as normal, until strong individuals kept challenging that viewpoint and forced it into public view. It is like a kind of social brainwashing that people go along with. It is embedded in businesses - there is a book about why things go wrong, why disasters have happened - and many times it came down to people high up in an institution refusing to recognise there was a problem, even when presented with the evidence. This is an ongoing problem for all of us. It is hard to swim against the current.
Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
Hans Rosling: Global population growth, box by box
You make a good point. Reducing child mortality SOMETIMES reduces the birthrate. But it depends on the culture. Working class communities in the early 20thcentury often had a birth rate of no children, or 1 child, as it was perceived that they could not afford more. But some cultures, when the child death rate went down, the families just increased in size because the culture (such as Roman Catholic) supported a high birth rate. Islamic cultures and some African and Asian cultures support a high birth rate as a matter of principle - not simply to ensure that 1 child will survive to adulthood.
Noface
Clair McCleary
Posted almost 2 years ago
Why is it OK for corporations to outsource work to countries that violate the corporation's home country labor laws?
Yes, I agree. I like your comment. Business is OK. But small businesses need to be encouraged. And big business needs to be curtailed by democracy. The Global Class War in part demonstrates that big business has it too much their own way, and far from being curtailed by democracy, are waging war on democracy to protect their own partisan interests.