Studies have shown that people who experience extremes of any emotion, not just anger, are unpredictable and could potentially destabilise society. Such people need help to even themselves out, be that in the form of drugs or behavioural conditioning. Such treatments will be available on the NHS for anyone who is referred by their GP, their spouse, their work colleagues, and friends. Do you know anyone who is extremely emotional? If you do call this number...

As to the Miss Bimbo thing, its being too ironic for its own good. Its a satire aimed at the very industries which promise us eternal youth and the perfect figure. Any parent who lets their kid play it without knowing and explaining this to them should be force fed diet pills and undergo plastic surgery and see how good for them it is.

The top headlines from BT Yahoo January 2010:

Govt. hails new Dept. of Happiness a resounding success. Ms. Anne Oyonce, Secretary for the Dept. of Happiness, gleefully told our reporter that:

"Happiness is up, anger is down and we have the stats to prove it*".

After slapping everyone present heartily on the back and passing out sweets, Ms. Anne Oyonce went on to say -

"Following the success of the Happiness Initiatives of 2009 we can now boldly, but joyfully pass the necessary legislation for the all new Dept. of Love, this Dept. will, I'm sure deal with the chronic hate that exists in our society"

* Application for statistical data relating to the Dept. of Happiness carries a three year minimum happiness inspection from the Dept. of Happiness to assess the applicants unhappiness with the said Dept.. All costs will be met by the applicant.

Oddly enough, I was musing on the topic of anger this morning. I was at Kings Cross railway station, having disembarked my regular commuter train and, spotting an open emergency exit gate, nipped through it, thereby neatly bypassing the ticket barriers, inspectors etc.

NB: I hold a valid season ticket, for which I pay a hefty sum each year. I just don't like the barrier experience.

And that's what got me thinking about anger. Perhaps we (whoever "we" is) are getting angrier. But what if anger is a rational response to the seemingly endless succession of petty indignities to which we're expected to submit each and every day?

Walter, Update...

Ms Anne Oyance, Minister for Happiness, was arrested in a dawn raid this morning, by the Protectors of the Public Health force.
She is charged with illegal possession of Sweets and dealing in same.
The Prime Minister, Ed Balls, was said to be extremely angry.

Anger has been studied in relation to Alzheimer's disease. It is often displayed by Alzheimer's patients and was originally assumed to be part of the disease. But later it was discovered to be a perfectly normal human response to loss of control of 'life circumstances'. In 1975 Martin Seligman published a theory of learned helplessness that studies how 'taught' helplessness leads to various behaviors. The Alzheimer's patients were not showing symptoms of the disease, but a normal response to the disease's consequences.

From this book on page 63:

According to Seligman, the first stages in the process of becoming helpless are to react with frustration and anger. In the case study above, Mr Mansel may become aggressive, perhaps shouting at others or damaging property. In the past, such problems were often regarded as due to 'confusion', 'age' or dementia. Seligman explains that aggression can be a last attempt to maintain control - when nothing else works you can lose your temper. In a 'stressed' care environment Mr Mansel's anger is unlikely to get him the attention he needs. Instead he may be labelled as disturbed or difficult and isolated further.

Underscore mine.

Rising levels of anger are the predictable response to the enforced helplessness of nanny-statism.

When I typed 'taught' in single quotes, I should have typed enforced without the quotes. And 'enforced' is a word of my choice, not necessarily of either authors'.

RAB, further update

Mr Balls said this afternoon that he wanted to apologise for something or other but was unsure of what.

Oy once, oy twice...

test

Mandrill's first paragraph was ironic - and would be understood to be ironic by the vast majority of polticians, Civil Servants and Local Governent Officers.

For, contrary to what is often thought the politicians and administrators are NOT fools - and they are mostly NOT power mad either.

However, if Mandrill's first paragraph was turned into policy it would be acted upon - by the same politicians and administrators, even thought they knew such a policy to be insane.

This is because there are massive costs both to government organizations and the to the indivduals in them (both politicians and administrators) for not acting on policy.

"But how do things become policy" - in all sorts of ways, of which open debate by Parliament is the least common.

By the way the origins of all this go back way beyond the European Union (although it made things worse).

To give just one example of a book on how policy can be given the force of law - Chief Justice Hewitt's "The New Despotism" (1929).

A fashion influences someone somewhere - this get made into policy, policy has the force of law (via statutory instruments and so on) so it must be followed - even if most politicians and administrators know the policy to be insane.

It is very easy to get a new intervention into (i.e. an attack on) civil society to be made into policy - and very difficult indeed to get rid of a policy.