Flatlands

Flatlands
The fact that I've only heard two albums made in 2010 that I've not been involved with is made bearable by the fact that one of them is the final Flatlands release. For the uninitiated, Flatlands were one of the most original and unrelentingly heavy English bands. After years of touring, two albums and a number of EPs, splits etc. they split up in the summer and have moved on to other things.

Their self-titled EP is a fitting obituary for the band. The crushing riffs, accompanied by trademark screams that one can only assume are on the subject of the Lincolnshire countryside, fade into equally haunting clean passages. All the elements that have helped to make Flatlands the most exciting English band for the past few years are present and accounted for. One of the main developments in Flatlands' later work is the incorporation of guitarist Gareth Hughes clean vocals and, while the vocals on the final track (South by South Holland) bear more than a passing resemblance to many iLiKETRAiNS songs, these efforts help to add another dynamic to the Flatlands sound.

The breakup of Flatlands subsequent to the recording of this EP serves to add poignancy to their final recordings. And really, who couldn't love a band with a song called "This is Woodhall Sparta". 9

The International Court Jester

On this week's BBC Question Time, the final question was (as far as I can recall) "Julian Assange - hero or villain?". The general consensus among the panel was "villain" though the NUS president and Amir Kahn shrouded their vague approval in some freedom of speech-based rhetoric. While I feel that the Wikileaks disclosures increase international uncertainty and I'm confused by the particular dogma of "freedom of information" that supposedly guides the Wikileaks movement, I think that the portrayal of Assange as a villain based on the Wikileaks revelations alone is misguided.

Firstly, a quick note on the use of language. The "hero or villain" dichotomy seems to have spiraled out of control in relation to the Wikileaks story. The hero-villain rhetoric is most familiar to journalists (three Guardian articles on December 9th described someone as a villain and two as a hero) but the actors within the story aren't shying away from the hero talk. Julian Assange described the source of the leaks as an "unparalleled hero". Those in favour of and in opposition to Wikileaks are keen to smother the detail of the story in a good vs. evil narrative.

There is no question that if the allegations of sexual assault against Assange are true then villain would be a suitable title however, curiously, none of the members of the Question Time panel chose to mention this. The claim made by many of the panel that the Wikileaks disclosures constitute an act of villainy credits Assange with villainous motives. A quick google search throws up this definition - a cruelly malicious person who is involved in or devoted to wickedness or crime; scoundrel. Assange doesn't seem to be a man "devoted to wickedness" but rather someone bent on pursuing a grudge held (rightly or wrongly) against the American government by the means available to him. Assange is the global equivalent of the disgruntled court jester who has just stumbled upon the royal arsenal. To credit him with villainy is to abstract and distort the motives behind the Wikileaks disclosures into the realm of good vs. evil when, in fact, the vendetta is a deeply personal one. Assange clearly has no regard for the consequences of his actions on the stability of international diplomacy (his answer to "JAnthony" in a recent Guardian Q & A session shows his disdain for well thought-out observations on the topic - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2010/dec/03/julian-assange-wikileaks) and probably has little interest in the impact of the disclosures on the affairs of many of the nations involved.

Villainy is judged, not by the impact of actions, but by the motives from which they originate. Branding Assange as a villain is unhelpful in understanding what lies behind Wikileaks and ultimately the opinion of the president of the NUS and Liam Fox is unlikely to sway those calling for Assange's assassination or Assange himself either way.

North Korean Swaggering and Robert J. Art's Four Purposes of Force

Where do the recent North Koren military strikes on South Korea fit into Robert J. Art's four purposes of force?

There is little sense in giving a full description of each of Art's purposes of force as they are set out clearly and concisely in his seminal article, To What Ends Military Power (Art, R. J., 1980). A brief overview however is useful in order to save time in consulting the original article. Defensive purposes serve to either defend against attack or reduce the amount of damage that would be sustained should an attack occur. When force is exercised with Deterrence in mind, one seeks to prevent another from carrying out an action by threatening them with punishment. Compellence is the use of force in order to change the behaviour of another; this can be either getting an adversary to stop something that they are currently doing or to do something that they currently aren't. The final purpose of power, swaggering, is defined as "the deployment of military power for purposes other than defence, deterrence or compellence and, as Art states, it is partially a residual category. Despite this, Art attaches to the swaggering category a number of characteristics that serve to shed some light on the recent North Korean military action. Swaggering has as its primary objective the acquisition of prestige (the enhancing of a nation's imagine in the eyes of others). Art supposes that this could have a positive knock-on effect of increasing a state's deterrence, defence and compellence capabilities. Swaggering is normally manifested in military exercises or the development of the most technological advanced weapons. Curiously, Art claims that "almost always involves only the peaceful use of force" (ibid, p.10), presumably leaving swaggering open to involve (in some exceptional cases) the physical use of force and yet later, when laying out the four purposes in a table, Art restricts the swaggering purpose to the use of peaceful force.

North Korean Swaggering
In order to be fully confident of knowing what purpose a state is employing force for one must have knowledge of their motives. As Art states, we can never be fully sure of a state's motives and official statements cannot be relied upon. In the case of North Korea it is especially difficult to assess motives as the sources of information are particularly limited. The North Korean artillery strike on Yeonpyeong island has been defended by the state run media outlet as an act of retaliation against South Korean military exercises near the border. These exercises have been a typical feature of North-South relations and in this case there were no shells fired in the direction of North Korean waters. While North Korea would no doubt classify their actions as either defence or compellence, the usual lack of North Korean military response to these exercises suggests an alternative motive, prestige. As a handover of power is currently underway in North Korea, there is an incentive for the leadership to display to the international community that there will be no seachange in North Korean attitudes to South Korea and showcase its military power and willing. A broadening of the concept of swaggering outlined by Art is necessary to improve the analytic comprehensiveness of his four purposes. As his definition stands, the North Korean military action cannot be seen as swaggering and must be viewed in light of one of the other three purposes. It fails to fit into either of the three categories unless North Korea has undergone a change in policy that deems that military exercises near the border warrant immediate military action, if this is the case then future exercises will likely be met with the same response. The North Korean actions are best understood as a form of "physical force swaggering" that is not accounted for in Art's framework.


It is important to note that Art himself admits that his four purposes are not "descriptively accurate but he claims that they are analytically exhaustive. My argument is that the analytical utility of 'swaggering' (one of the four purposes) is threatened by Art's view that swaggering is non-physical by nature. Art's purposes of force fail to account for the "physical force swaggering" of North Korea's recent military strikes against South Korea. The restriction of swaggering to non-physical strategies limits the term's explanatory power and undermines Art's assertion that his four categories "analytically exhaust the functions that force can serve" (ibid, p.5).

The Papal Union Congress

It's taken two days for me to realise that for the duration of the Pope's visit to the UK I will not be able to watch the news. It seems that, while many either oppose or are entirely indifferent to the Pope's state-funded visit to the UK, Mark Thompson sees it as so important an event that the BBC News channel has been given over to coverage of the various prayer services Pope Benedict is leading. Fortunately, where BBC News has failed, BBC Parliament has pulled through in dramatic style with coverage of that once-yearly masterclass in polemics, the Trades Union Congress. The gaffes and controversial throwaway comments of Benedict's visit to the UK are replaced by the nervous man stood on the podium with a Dragon's Den style panel to his right, fumbling his way through a defence of employment rights against an increasingly hostile judiciary. In what is essentially a Dave-style rerun of Taff Vale, the TUC (or the bit of it that I watched while cooking breakfast) is discussing the role of judges in the area of employment. Obviously fueled by the judgment earlier this year that ruled the ballot calling for a strike of British Airways staff as illegal, the TUC feels that its legal rights are threatened. Appeals against strike action that has been determined by ballot are becoming commonplace and appear to be a threat to the continued functioning of the Trade Union movement. The solution is simple; employers launch judicial appeals against "illegal" ballots when the result supports a strike action, in turn the TUC should, in its 142nd year, launch a legal appeal against every ballot that doesn't result in industrial action. If the ballot is illegal then the result shouldn't matter, the ballots that condemn strike action are just as illegal as those that uphold it so why not just invert the results and you've got a nice representative system; the usually peaceful unions would be on almost permanent sympathy strike for the more disruptive ones. Granted, under this new system it would be nearly impossible to get hold of knitting accessories and the Association for Clinical Biochemistry would be picketing your local University chemistry department but at least Unite wouldn't go on strike again. Adam Zejma.

Bikini Kill - The CD Version of the First Two Records

When reading the liner notes to The CD Version of the First Two Records it's easy to get the impression that Bikini Kill were a band constantly under attack from the deadly duo of men and the media and intensive listening only serves to confirm this feeling. As the hollers that open the album calling the (presumably female) listener to revolution ("girl style") give way to the angular, cutting riff of Double Dare Ya you realise that for the next half an hour you'll be wading through punk attitude fueled by feminist fury. For a band that prided itself on its ad-hoc musicianship and sketchy but passionate performances, the first half of the album (the Bikini Kill EP) forms a surprisingly coherent slab of well-executed punk rock. Wailing pop-hooks are expertly mixed with howls of sisterly revolution and biting guitar riffs reminiscent of contemporaries Sonic Youth who don't escape reference in the bold closing track Thurston Hearts the Who. I'm still unclear as to whether any of the lyrics for Thurston Hearts the Who are sung (or spoken) in the track itself but both the abstract live jam featuring Tobi Vail giving an impromptu lesson in the art of post-punk, feminist rhetoric and the lyrics contained in the liner notes showcase Bikini Kill at their satirical best. The last seven tracks (originally released as Bikini Kill's part of the Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah EP) lack the blend of pop hooks and ferocious consistency that makes the self-titled EP stand a mile out from many other riot grrrl bands. Towards the end of the album, Rebel Girl stands out from the crowd of mediocre songs only for the album to end on a sour note with Outta Me proving that Bikini Kill were at their best when they were at their most punk.

I can't help but feel slightly uncomfortable and a little bit guilty getting this much pleasure out of something that so clearly isn't intended for men but Bikini Kill shot themselves in the foot by making music that is so instantly addictive that it doesn't matter if you agree with the message or not. While the Yeah Yeah Yeah Yeah part of the album is largely disappointing, Rebel Girl makes its inclusion worthwhile and the strength of the first 6 tracks means that this is rapidly becoming one of my most played albums of the last few months. If Thurston doesn't heart Bikini Kill then he really should (grrrl style). 8.