If you met someone who claims that he/she spends time talking and listening to an invisible entity, which do you think is the better choice as to what should be done with him/her?
a) lock him/her up in an insane asylum?
OR
b) elect him/her President of the United States?
Wednesday, 31 August 2011
Tuesday, 30 August 2011
Talking to God
I am an atheist.
A tolerant, understanding individual with no desire to oblige anyone to believe anything that I believe (though it would be pleasant if some people did actually read my stuff and find it convincing), nor to be converted - not much chance of that given my analytical nature.
I did though grow up as a Christian. Both my parents were believers, both had Christian funerals.
What I do not remember from the first 17 years of my life are any of us having direct communications with God. You understand what is meant by a "communication" maybe?
You say something, he/she/it replies.
Actually you would pray, acknowledge your weaknesses and hope that this being would respond in a helpful fashion - that was about the size of it. I can say without batting an eyelid that in those 17 years that I was a believer, God never spoke to me directly once. Nor to my parents, nor to my sister. The fact that he/she/it did not speak to my parents rules out the possibility that all conversations were only permitted with adults and not with minors.
And you would imagine that maybe since I became an adult, he/she/it might have wanted me back in the fold and might have at least tried to persuade me directly to come back?
Nothing. Nichts. Rien. Niets. Not one word - in English, German, French or Dutch.
And yet, despite the fact that I am among the "great ignored" that this deity seems to have written off, and with whom he/she/it prefers to remain incommunicado, there is a group of people with whom he/she/it does speak - American conservative politicians and their supporters (like Glenn Beck).
Q: Shall we have a war in Iraq?
A: Of course, George, it is needed.
Q: Is this storm a sign of your wrath following all the budget overspending?
A: Of course it is, Michelle.
Q: Is this a sign like the plagues in Egypt at the time of Moses and really a blessing?
A: Of course it is, Glenn. Now use some of the 45 million I persuaded Rupert to give you, and go and stock up on some goodies, before I get really angry next time.
Curious thing about this God is that he/she/it is theoretically the same deity who talks to people who follow different belief systems (Judaism, Islam), in different languages and gives somewhat different instructions. There seems though to be something of an identity crisis here, and there are definitely mixed messages.
The pious in these other domains follow every word just as closely, and also seem to have no communication difficulties.
Q: Are these people here to prepare me for my end?
A: Of course, Osama, but I am making you a martyr as it is written that you should be.
usw usw usw .....
The world is a sad and difficult enough place without all this pretence, nonsense and sheer gullibility.
Our fallibility as humans makes us suspect to believe anything at times if we do not analyse cause and effect. Scientific research is incomplete and does not yet have all the answers. Economics is a very inexact science that seems incapable of providing any realistic solutions that work for our benefit. Politics seems to be permanently in the gutter. And so we turn to religion for the solution? And talk to this deity?
We are that stupid? We need to deny our own intelligence and depend upon a series of 2,000 year old myths to explain what needs doing now?
We are that stupid?????
And the only way to get out of the current economic, political and philosophical mess is to allow those American conservative politicians and their cronies who are on his/her/its wavelength to talk to this deity and come back to us with the prerequisite solutions?
Huh????
See the mess they left behind in Iraq. See the economic turmoil that their friends on Wall Street left behind in 2008. His/her/its messages are either not that clear, or something got badly lost in the interpretation.
A tolerant, understanding individual with no desire to oblige anyone to believe anything that I believe (though it would be pleasant if some people did actually read my stuff and find it convincing), nor to be converted - not much chance of that given my analytical nature.
I did though grow up as a Christian. Both my parents were believers, both had Christian funerals.
What I do not remember from the first 17 years of my life are any of us having direct communications with God. You understand what is meant by a "communication" maybe?
You say something, he/she/it replies.
Actually you would pray, acknowledge your weaknesses and hope that this being would respond in a helpful fashion - that was about the size of it. I can say without batting an eyelid that in those 17 years that I was a believer, God never spoke to me directly once. Nor to my parents, nor to my sister. The fact that he/she/it did not speak to my parents rules out the possibility that all conversations were only permitted with adults and not with minors.
And you would imagine that maybe since I became an adult, he/she/it might have wanted me back in the fold and might have at least tried to persuade me directly to come back?
Nothing. Nichts. Rien. Niets. Not one word - in English, German, French or Dutch.
And yet, despite the fact that I am among the "great ignored" that this deity seems to have written off, and with whom he/she/it prefers to remain incommunicado, there is a group of people with whom he/she/it does speak - American conservative politicians and their supporters (like Glenn Beck).
Q: Shall we have a war in Iraq?
A: Of course, George, it is needed.
Q: Is this storm a sign of your wrath following all the budget overspending?
A: Of course it is, Michelle.
Q: Is this a sign like the plagues in Egypt at the time of Moses and really a blessing?
A: Of course it is, Glenn. Now use some of the 45 million I persuaded Rupert to give you, and go and stock up on some goodies, before I get really angry next time.
Curious thing about this God is that he/she/it is theoretically the same deity who talks to people who follow different belief systems (Judaism, Islam), in different languages and gives somewhat different instructions. There seems though to be something of an identity crisis here, and there are definitely mixed messages.
The pious in these other domains follow every word just as closely, and also seem to have no communication difficulties.
Q: Are these people here to prepare me for my end?
A: Of course, Osama, but I am making you a martyr as it is written that you should be.
usw usw usw .....
The world is a sad and difficult enough place without all this pretence, nonsense and sheer gullibility.
Our fallibility as humans makes us suspect to believe anything at times if we do not analyse cause and effect. Scientific research is incomplete and does not yet have all the answers. Economics is a very inexact science that seems incapable of providing any realistic solutions that work for our benefit. Politics seems to be permanently in the gutter. And so we turn to religion for the solution? And talk to this deity?
We are that stupid? We need to deny our own intelligence and depend upon a series of 2,000 year old myths to explain what needs doing now?
We are that stupid?????
And the only way to get out of the current economic, political and philosophical mess is to allow those American conservative politicians and their cronies who are on his/her/its wavelength to talk to this deity and come back to us with the prerequisite solutions?
Huh????
See the mess they left behind in Iraq. See the economic turmoil that their friends on Wall Street left behind in 2008. His/her/its messages are either not that clear, or something got badly lost in the interpretation.
Thursday, 25 August 2011
So being self-employed is really fun?
I have said it many, many times in my life and I still believe it.
If you have a permanent job with a company where you are valued, paid adequate recompensation, which allows you to stay out of debt and allows you to save a bit for the future, then life is as good as it is ever likely to get.
Especially given the version of capitalism which they have now foisted upon us whereby all jobs (even white-collar jobs) are meant to be dirt cheap, mostly to be outsourced to China and India, and everyone is supposed to live by speculation and on debt. Keine Zukunft! As I once saw written on a wall in Berlin - and were they right!!!!
I did not become self-employed particularly out of choice. After the fiasco with Procter and Gamble, I did not fancy putting myself on the dole queue again, and finding a suitable permanent job has become seemingly impossible.
I have proved to be pretty good at translating, though lacking some of the tools that I need (an up-to-date version of Microsoft Word for starters) has been a serious problem and has caused unnecessary panic on a couple of occasions.
The volume of work though is simply insufficient. I need €868 a month to break even. We are nowhere close to that at the moment. That excludes future accountancy and tax costs as well. So things need to improve in terms of volume.
20 pieces of work per month at €70 per day would be sufficient, and doable - and well within my capacity to produce quality work.
The question remains though whether we can find the work and how. Chasing people up is very much not my strength.
Then there is the willingness of the various companies to pay. The number of currently unpaid invoices is frightening. There is one character named "Ralph Williams" in the UK (I think - though he also knows Dutch, so he could well be a Dutch or Belgian national) who owes me 658 US$, and is showing every sign of simply being a scam merchant who has no intention of paying.
There are the warning signs - no official address or telephone number, merely an email address. And the usual excuses when you send an invoice. There are anyway warnings about a person of this name on one of the well-known Internet sites for translators, so I cannot be optimistic that he will pay up. The trouble is that when work is scarce, you have to take a risk with potential thieves and villains like this!
Another two months and I will not be able to pay the rent. And then? Back to the dole queue? Yes, well, that was not the intention. But as Burns's appropriate comment about the best laid plans of mice and men usw more than often applies in this world ....
If you have a permanent job with a company where you are valued, paid adequate recompensation, which allows you to stay out of debt and allows you to save a bit for the future, then life is as good as it is ever likely to get.
Especially given the version of capitalism which they have now foisted upon us whereby all jobs (even white-collar jobs) are meant to be dirt cheap, mostly to be outsourced to China and India, and everyone is supposed to live by speculation and on debt. Keine Zukunft! As I once saw written on a wall in Berlin - and were they right!!!!
I did not become self-employed particularly out of choice. After the fiasco with Procter and Gamble, I did not fancy putting myself on the dole queue again, and finding a suitable permanent job has become seemingly impossible.
I have proved to be pretty good at translating, though lacking some of the tools that I need (an up-to-date version of Microsoft Word for starters) has been a serious problem and has caused unnecessary panic on a couple of occasions.
The volume of work though is simply insufficient. I need €868 a month to break even. We are nowhere close to that at the moment. That excludes future accountancy and tax costs as well. So things need to improve in terms of volume.
20 pieces of work per month at €70 per day would be sufficient, and doable - and well within my capacity to produce quality work.
The question remains though whether we can find the work and how. Chasing people up is very much not my strength.
Then there is the willingness of the various companies to pay. The number of currently unpaid invoices is frightening. There is one character named "Ralph Williams" in the UK (I think - though he also knows Dutch, so he could well be a Dutch or Belgian national) who owes me 658 US$, and is showing every sign of simply being a scam merchant who has no intention of paying.
There are the warning signs - no official address or telephone number, merely an email address. And the usual excuses when you send an invoice. There are anyway warnings about a person of this name on one of the well-known Internet sites for translators, so I cannot be optimistic that he will pay up. The trouble is that when work is scarce, you have to take a risk with potential thieves and villains like this!
Another two months and I will not be able to pay the rent. And then? Back to the dole queue? Yes, well, that was not the intention. But as Burns's appropriate comment about the best laid plans of mice and men usw more than often applies in this world ....
Sunday, 21 August 2011
A quick guide to silly European stereotypes and Europe's ladies of the night - Part 4
No we haven't abandoned the European tour, we have just been elsewhere.
Anyway this one was always going to be difficult for me, as it is not easy for a British national who has left the UK to write about his native country and be impartial.
Which is the objective? Right?
OK. British stereotypes. Snobbish, plum in the throat, always think that they know better than know better than anyone else, still think that the Empire exists and the rest of the world is there to serve them, reserved, sexually inhibited .....
Good, well that is a small section of the country based principally in the South-East of the country dealt with.
The discomfort with foreigners is more widespread than that though. The xenophobic, neo-Fascist, British National Party has most of its support in the north of England (sad as that makes me, it is a fact that has to be faced), and anti-EU attitudes are fiercest in Yorkshire apparently.
I would like to think that, as we speak a much more traditional form of the English language than they do down south (for one thing we can pronounce "bath" and "cup" correctly), we might also be able to show more intelligent attitudes to the rest of the world. Sadly (in my exile), I am one of the exceptions apparently that proves the rule.
And for the country as a whole there have been disturbing examples of insularity during international crises. The city of Berlin took in more refugees from the Bosnian War than did the entire UK! And after Blair's mistaken escapade in Iraq, the UK also showed extreme reluctance to take in any of the refugees (2 million out of a population of 24 million, NB) from that conflict.
Great - prove your old imperialist credentials by invading a country halfway round the world, but do not take responsibilities for the human consequences and the tragedies that follow. Makes us look really good, right? Leave it instead to pariah states like Syria to look after!
That said after the 2004 tsunami the UK was one of the most generous donors in terms of help from private sources, so it is not always bad news. Merely something of a mish-mash.
Which conveniently brings me on to the subject of sex.
Few people elsewhere understand this, but prudishness and sexual inhibition are not significant features of the British psyche.
The percentage of teenagers under the age of consent who are sexually active is higher than in supposedly knowledgeable countries like Germany, the Netherlands or France. This is, in its way, reflected by the high number of teenage pregnancies (although ignorance may also play its part - not using birth control methods often results from lack of education).
Also since pornography was finally legalised in the UK (some 30 years after elsewhere in Western Europe), the UK has become one of the highest users of online porn services. Maybe their European counterparts regard it as "old hat" and are bored with it by now, while the British find it fairly novel - which may help explain the stats.
And as for the ladies of the night ... As a tourist assume you wanted to make a telephone call from a kiosk in London. Your first day in the city - what did you find? Dozens of postcards in the 'phone box from the city's prostitutes advertising their services - almost falling on top of you, there were so many!
Prostitution was always illegal (though there was a whole variety of very confused laws on the subject), but it was always also there, and in some weird places. There was an area in Birmingham called Bonsall Heath that had its own "little Amsterdam" - shop windows and all - back in the 1980s and 90s. Southampton, Sheffield, Manchester all had their notorious areas. And then, of all places, Ipswich hit the headlines a few years ago, when five girls (all drug addicts) who were working the streets there, were murdered.
The police didn't shut them down? Well the laws were applied, I recall reading of one girl in Birmingham who had started at the age of 15 and had been, at the last count, convicted of soliciting 104 times!
Pay the fine, back to the streets, all the same again. Weird, and it sounds a total waste of time.
The last that I heard on the subject was the previous Labour government decided that the Swedish/Norwegian solution of fining the customers was the way to go. Not sure whether that got pushed through as law. If so I shall be waiting, though not exactly with bated breath, for news of a British MP or judge or local police chief or journalist from the Murdoch press who has been caught offering money to one of these "girls"!
Anyway this one was always going to be difficult for me, as it is not easy for a British national who has left the UK to write about his native country and be impartial.
Which is the objective? Right?
OK. British stereotypes. Snobbish, plum in the throat, always think that they know better than know better than anyone else, still think that the Empire exists and the rest of the world is there to serve them, reserved, sexually inhibited .....
Good, well that is a small section of the country based principally in the South-East of the country dealt with.
The discomfort with foreigners is more widespread than that though. The xenophobic, neo-Fascist, British National Party has most of its support in the north of England (sad as that makes me, it is a fact that has to be faced), and anti-EU attitudes are fiercest in Yorkshire apparently.
I would like to think that, as we speak a much more traditional form of the English language than they do down south (for one thing we can pronounce "bath" and "cup" correctly), we might also be able to show more intelligent attitudes to the rest of the world. Sadly (in my exile), I am one of the exceptions apparently that proves the rule.
And for the country as a whole there have been disturbing examples of insularity during international crises. The city of Berlin took in more refugees from the Bosnian War than did the entire UK! And after Blair's mistaken escapade in Iraq, the UK also showed extreme reluctance to take in any of the refugees (2 million out of a population of 24 million, NB) from that conflict.
Great - prove your old imperialist credentials by invading a country halfway round the world, but do not take responsibilities for the human consequences and the tragedies that follow. Makes us look really good, right? Leave it instead to pariah states like Syria to look after!
That said after the 2004 tsunami the UK was one of the most generous donors in terms of help from private sources, so it is not always bad news. Merely something of a mish-mash.
Which conveniently brings me on to the subject of sex.
Few people elsewhere understand this, but prudishness and sexual inhibition are not significant features of the British psyche.
The percentage of teenagers under the age of consent who are sexually active is higher than in supposedly knowledgeable countries like Germany, the Netherlands or France. This is, in its way, reflected by the high number of teenage pregnancies (although ignorance may also play its part - not using birth control methods often results from lack of education).
Also since pornography was finally legalised in the UK (some 30 years after elsewhere in Western Europe), the UK has become one of the highest users of online porn services. Maybe their European counterparts regard it as "old hat" and are bored with it by now, while the British find it fairly novel - which may help explain the stats.
And as for the ladies of the night ... As a tourist assume you wanted to make a telephone call from a kiosk in London. Your first day in the city - what did you find? Dozens of postcards in the 'phone box from the city's prostitutes advertising their services - almost falling on top of you, there were so many!
Prostitution was always illegal (though there was a whole variety of very confused laws on the subject), but it was always also there, and in some weird places. There was an area in Birmingham called Bonsall Heath that had its own "little Amsterdam" - shop windows and all - back in the 1980s and 90s. Southampton, Sheffield, Manchester all had their notorious areas. And then, of all places, Ipswich hit the headlines a few years ago, when five girls (all drug addicts) who were working the streets there, were murdered.
The police didn't shut them down? Well the laws were applied, I recall reading of one girl in Birmingham who had started at the age of 15 and had been, at the last count, convicted of soliciting 104 times!
Pay the fine, back to the streets, all the same again. Weird, and it sounds a total waste of time.
The last that I heard on the subject was the previous Labour government decided that the Swedish/Norwegian solution of fining the customers was the way to go. Not sure whether that got pushed through as law. If so I shall be waiting, though not exactly with bated breath, for news of a British MP or judge or local police chief or journalist from the Murdoch press who has been caught offering money to one of these "girls"!
Thursday, 18 August 2011
Quick lesson in logic - Part 2
The second half of my conversation on logic the other day concerned the civil law.
One of the silly accusations that you get from most kinds of religious fundamentalists is the belief that atheists do not have any moral values and are all for illegality.
The question of what is moral is "open" anyway, but I have no problem having law and order out there. A society where anyone is allowed to kill anyone because they feel like it? Urghh! No thanks!
This is not because of any Biblical (or Koranic or wharrever) statement that "thou shalt not kill". It is rather that we need an ordered world to live in.
The civil law provides that. Unlike religious law, it is is democratic, it is all-inclusive, it applies to everyone, and it punishes real wrongdoers, not people who happen to have a different take on the world.
If we want to see religious law in the "Christian" world, why criticise the "Muslim" world for having Sharia Law, as awful as that is? It is apostasy in the "Muslim" world to renounce your faith, and the punishment for that is death. Consequently when you reach the logical conclusion that there is no God, and you happen to live in Riyadh .... either shut up, contain your feelings, or be prepared to feel a sharp edge running down your neck shortly!
Christian Law - mainly old Jewish Law, but anyway, do we accept everything written there, like what is in Deuteronomy ch 22, vv 20-21? Check it out some time. Not just Islam, folks ....
Ah, but the civil law allows all sorts of awful things like .... you name it. It does not seem to throw itself after "immorality". I agree that it has its flaws, but we can always see to it that the law can be changed. That is possible with religious law?
Oh, you can become an atheist in Riyadh, people voted to change the law? Really. And Deuteronomy ch 22 vv 20-1 doesn't really need to be a part of the law as most people do not want it?
Bending the rules, being selective .... as ever.
Eventually we should ensure that the place for any religion lies in the lives and homes of the people who believe in it. It involves their life and their belief system. It should not though be imposed upon the rest of society. The days of heresy should be over by now, the crime of apostasy should be buried in the medieval history books where it belongs.
And if we are concerned with moral behaviour, maybe it is time to remove the mote from our own eye first.
One of the silly accusations that you get from most kinds of religious fundamentalists is the belief that atheists do not have any moral values and are all for illegality.
The question of what is moral is "open" anyway, but I have no problem having law and order out there. A society where anyone is allowed to kill anyone because they feel like it? Urghh! No thanks!
This is not because of any Biblical (or Koranic or wharrever) statement that "thou shalt not kill". It is rather that we need an ordered world to live in.
The civil law provides that. Unlike religious law, it is is democratic, it is all-inclusive, it applies to everyone, and it punishes real wrongdoers, not people who happen to have a different take on the world.
If we want to see religious law in the "Christian" world, why criticise the "Muslim" world for having Sharia Law, as awful as that is? It is apostasy in the "Muslim" world to renounce your faith, and the punishment for that is death. Consequently when you reach the logical conclusion that there is no God, and you happen to live in Riyadh .... either shut up, contain your feelings, or be prepared to feel a sharp edge running down your neck shortly!
Christian Law - mainly old Jewish Law, but anyway, do we accept everything written there, like what is in Deuteronomy ch 22, vv 20-21? Check it out some time. Not just Islam, folks ....
Ah, but the civil law allows all sorts of awful things like .... you name it. It does not seem to throw itself after "immorality". I agree that it has its flaws, but we can always see to it that the law can be changed. That is possible with religious law?
Oh, you can become an atheist in Riyadh, people voted to change the law? Really. And Deuteronomy ch 22 vv 20-1 doesn't really need to be a part of the law as most people do not want it?
Bending the rules, being selective .... as ever.
Eventually we should ensure that the place for any religion lies in the lives and homes of the people who believe in it. It involves their life and their belief system. It should not though be imposed upon the rest of society. The days of heresy should be over by now, the crime of apostasy should be buried in the medieval history books where it belongs.
And if we are concerned with moral behaviour, maybe it is time to remove the mote from our own eye first.
Quick lesson in logic - Part 1
Particularly aimed at those into politics and religion.
The reasoning that if A does not work, B will automatically work is not logical.
If political party A is making a complete mess of things, it does not mean automatically that party B will do a good job. In fact it is just as likely that they will do as badly. In an entrenched two-party system, you unfortunately get stuck with this nonsense. Both parties are often, in fact usually, the next worst thing to totally useless, and choosing between them is virtually impossible. In Germany with five serious alternatives the problem does not exist so much, in the US and the UK .... well can you seriously expect things to improve? NIML.
Then for the person who the other day decided to lecture me on my (lack of) religious beliefs - I did anyway point out that this is how I see things personally, and I am not concerned with changing other people's beliefs. Still - if I turn round and tell people that I do not think (for reason A, B and C) that there is any God of any description, these are my personal conclusions. The logic comes back at me, you cannot be certain, there are many things that are unknown in the universe (logical so far) .... therefore God exists (and not merely God as per any religion, distinctly the Christian God). Such a quantum leap of thinking breaks every rule on logic going.
A logical conclusion to the argument is that agnosticism is the only acceptable solution. Somehow though a confused version of Descartes has emerged. I believe, therefore it is true. I believe there is a God, therefore there is a God ....
Believe all you want, by all means (as long as you do not try to impose this belief on other people by force), but do try and persuade me that this is a logical argument.
The second part of this discussion will follow in the next posting.
The reasoning that if A does not work, B will automatically work is not logical.
If political party A is making a complete mess of things, it does not mean automatically that party B will do a good job. In fact it is just as likely that they will do as badly. In an entrenched two-party system, you unfortunately get stuck with this nonsense. Both parties are often, in fact usually, the next worst thing to totally useless, and choosing between them is virtually impossible. In Germany with five serious alternatives the problem does not exist so much, in the US and the UK .... well can you seriously expect things to improve? NIML.
Then for the person who the other day decided to lecture me on my (lack of) religious beliefs - I did anyway point out that this is how I see things personally, and I am not concerned with changing other people's beliefs. Still - if I turn round and tell people that I do not think (for reason A, B and C) that there is any God of any description, these are my personal conclusions. The logic comes back at me, you cannot be certain, there are many things that are unknown in the universe (logical so far) .... therefore God exists (and not merely God as per any religion, distinctly the Christian God). Such a quantum leap of thinking breaks every rule on logic going.
A logical conclusion to the argument is that agnosticism is the only acceptable solution. Somehow though a confused version of Descartes has emerged. I believe, therefore it is true. I believe there is a God, therefore there is a God ....
Believe all you want, by all means (as long as you do not try to impose this belief on other people by force), but do try and persuade me that this is a logical argument.
The second part of this discussion will follow in the next posting.
Sunday, 14 August 2011
The Republican Choices for American President - as seen from Europe
I have not been that impressed with Obama. About the one thing that sounds slightly positive about him is that at least he is not Bush. Oh, and the leading Islamofascist, Bin Laden, was killed on his watch.
That is really about it. There will be no Iraq in his legacy, and no maintaining principle for the sake of it, even when the principle is as ludicrous and as cock-eyed as it gets.
But his achievements at home seem minimal (yes, he did inherit a crisis, but the solution was never clearly thought out, and about the only reasoning behind it is that things could have been even worse - logically that may be correct, but ....). Internationally he has not been that easily spotted. Unlike Bush and all his faux pas committed on foreign soil, Obama has rarely been seen.
The world is a safer place? I wouldn't know about that. Economically the decline continues for most of us, and really what is needed is a serious upturn, not the prevention of decline.
So would we get this from President Bachman, Perry, Palin, Pawlenty, Romney? Excuse me while I break into hysterical laughter at the thought.
What we would get would be the same as we got from Bush (substitute Iran for Iraq, have a war there for starters, fascinating that the USA may be broke, but it can always borrow tons more money to start an aggressive war somewhere) - praying to a God (who is Christian, maybe Jewish, but definitely not Muslim. Hindu and other South and East Asian Gods do not qualify, and in Romney's case work out whether this God is quite the same as with the others) to get all the answers.
Back to WW1 where both sides were praying to the same God for support. You ought to be surprised that after WW1 anyone in Germany and Austria continued to believe in this deity that deceived them and let them lose!
Economically would they solve the problems that they have created for themselves? As I happen to believe that the only way out is the recreation of the industrial base producing quality goods while paying at least a living wage (and breaking the insidious debt culture) .... It will not happen either in the USA or in Europe, so in that respect whoever is picked is irrelevant.
The only interesting candidate is Ron Paul, who would shake the whole thing up entirely, and would at least stop embracing the militaristic foreign policy that the others would adopt.
Whether his economic platform would work in principle remains an open question though. The whole platform upon which things work now would be shaken to the rafters. Whether this could work in practice is an open question.
And probably is not really worth considering anyway, as the GOP establishment would go out of its way not to support him, as he stands so much against what they have represented for years.
As for the new favourite, a President Bachman sounds like that her first priority would be to set out a policy to cure homosexuality. The prospect that Americans would elect someone fighting for that argument as any sort of priority, probably indicates just how tired, stale and utterly stupid the whole process has become. Sadly.
That is really about it. There will be no Iraq in his legacy, and no maintaining principle for the sake of it, even when the principle is as ludicrous and as cock-eyed as it gets.
But his achievements at home seem minimal (yes, he did inherit a crisis, but the solution was never clearly thought out, and about the only reasoning behind it is that things could have been even worse - logically that may be correct, but ....). Internationally he has not been that easily spotted. Unlike Bush and all his faux pas committed on foreign soil, Obama has rarely been seen.
The world is a safer place? I wouldn't know about that. Economically the decline continues for most of us, and really what is needed is a serious upturn, not the prevention of decline.
So would we get this from President Bachman, Perry, Palin, Pawlenty, Romney? Excuse me while I break into hysterical laughter at the thought.
What we would get would be the same as we got from Bush (substitute Iran for Iraq, have a war there for starters, fascinating that the USA may be broke, but it can always borrow tons more money to start an aggressive war somewhere) - praying to a God (who is Christian, maybe Jewish, but definitely not Muslim. Hindu and other South and East Asian Gods do not qualify, and in Romney's case work out whether this God is quite the same as with the others) to get all the answers.
Back to WW1 where both sides were praying to the same God for support. You ought to be surprised that after WW1 anyone in Germany and Austria continued to believe in this deity that deceived them and let them lose!
Economically would they solve the problems that they have created for themselves? As I happen to believe that the only way out is the recreation of the industrial base producing quality goods while paying at least a living wage (and breaking the insidious debt culture) .... It will not happen either in the USA or in Europe, so in that respect whoever is picked is irrelevant.
The only interesting candidate is Ron Paul, who would shake the whole thing up entirely, and would at least stop embracing the militaristic foreign policy that the others would adopt.
Whether his economic platform would work in principle remains an open question though. The whole platform upon which things work now would be shaken to the rafters. Whether this could work in practice is an open question.
And probably is not really worth considering anyway, as the GOP establishment would go out of its way not to support him, as he stands so much against what they have represented for years.
As for the new favourite, a President Bachman sounds like that her first priority would be to set out a policy to cure homosexuality. The prospect that Americans would elect someone fighting for that argument as any sort of priority, probably indicates just how tired, stale and utterly stupid the whole process has become. Sadly.
Wednesday, 10 August 2011
OK - time for the proverbial three wishes answer
Every chat site there is comes up with this once in a while, so it is time for answers from my supremely fascinating blog - the one with all the important answers (cough, splutter, choke) ....
Anyway I will take the usual liberties in stretching the facts (or how do you turn three into 4.7?).
So your fairy godmother (sounds like a drag queen from an English pantomime - anyway) turns up, wand in hand, and offers you three wishes. Sorry, offers ME three wishes (let's get it right - who else matters???? I have that on good authority from an American conservative I was talking to online yesterday. If you are not greedy and selfish, there must be something wrong with you. OK?)
What would I (!!!!!!) choose?
1. To be permanently 25 (intellectual peak, physical peak, all the moodiness of youth behind you .... cough, splutter, choke).
2. To be the proverbial God's gift to women (actually as an atheist I need an alternative phrase to "God's gift", but you get the picture?). This also implies (not an additional wish, hence! Add evil grin smiley here!) that you have the physical means to keep them all happy. (Falls into a proverbial faint at the thought).
3. To have a job in line with my expectations (ho, ho, how to include about six wishes in one statement - job satisfaction, interesting work in a location where you would like to be, adequate salary which will keep you out of debt, boss you would like to work for usw.).
Not in the list? A house (a 3 to 4 room apartment would do, can be rented, as long as I can afford it. When I was 25 I was out much of the time anyway), car (can't drive, no interest in learning), children (cough, splutter, choke, cough again, choke again ....), all the other material possessions that people crave. Not really. Happy with my choice.
Anyone know an effective, 100% competent fairy godmother? I need her (????) services, and QUICKLY!
Anyway I will take the usual liberties in stretching the facts (or how do you turn three into 4.7?).
So your fairy godmother (sounds like a drag queen from an English pantomime - anyway) turns up, wand in hand, and offers you three wishes. Sorry, offers ME three wishes (let's get it right - who else matters???? I have that on good authority from an American conservative I was talking to online yesterday. If you are not greedy and selfish, there must be something wrong with you. OK?)
What would I (!!!!!!) choose?
1. To be permanently 25 (intellectual peak, physical peak, all the moodiness of youth behind you .... cough, splutter, choke).
2. To be the proverbial God's gift to women (actually as an atheist I need an alternative phrase to "God's gift", but you get the picture?). This also implies (not an additional wish, hence! Add evil grin smiley here!) that you have the physical means to keep them all happy. (Falls into a proverbial faint at the thought).
3. To have a job in line with my expectations (ho, ho, how to include about six wishes in one statement - job satisfaction, interesting work in a location where you would like to be, adequate salary which will keep you out of debt, boss you would like to work for usw.).
Not in the list? A house (a 3 to 4 room apartment would do, can be rented, as long as I can afford it. When I was 25 I was out much of the time anyway), car (can't drive, no interest in learning), children (cough, splutter, choke, cough again, choke again ....), all the other material possessions that people crave. Not really. Happy with my choice.
Anyone know an effective, 100% competent fairy godmother? I need her (????) services, and QUICKLY!
Monday, 8 August 2011
Hair, ears, calves and shins
Anything strange about that combination?
Throw in shoulders occasionally.
Throw in (facial) cheeks, mouths, teeth and chins - oh and necks even more occasionally. And in some fairly desperate places - eyes.
Confused still?
OK, ask yourself what a Muslim woman covers up (or is obliged to cover up) what a non-Muslim woman does not?
Assuming that they have to cover up, for modesty's sake, those parts that may make a man uncontrollably desirous of a woman. The parts that obviously get him roused and must obviously need to be hidden.
Hair, ears, calves and shins ..... Yes, well, as an aging male, I suppose that they might have been interesting once upon a time, though I cannot imagine that as a young man they would have reduced to me a state of uncontrollable arousal!
Throw in shoulders occasionally.
Throw in (facial) cheeks, mouths, teeth and chins - oh and necks even more occasionally. And in some fairly desperate places - eyes.
Confused still?
OK, ask yourself what a Muslim woman covers up (or is obliged to cover up) what a non-Muslim woman does not?
Assuming that they have to cover up, for modesty's sake, those parts that may make a man uncontrollably desirous of a woman. The parts that obviously get him roused and must obviously need to be hidden.
Hair, ears, calves and shins ..... Yes, well, as an aging male, I suppose that they might have been interesting once upon a time, though I cannot imagine that as a young man they would have reduced to me a state of uncontrollable arousal!
Thursday, 4 August 2011
So what would the Americans have made of Bertholt Brecht?
It is 50 years ago now, approximately.
The American singer, Bobby Darin - always something of a misfit in the American pop music industry - had a hit with "Mack The Knife". It was a song with unusual lyrics to say the least, and a song with an interesting history.
Originally, it was a German song - called "Mackie Messer". I spent a fair bit of time scouting round the web a couple of years ago seeing if I could find the original. Sure enough - a greying old black and white movie from the early thirties with the delightful Lotte Lenya singing (don't expect to find it now, incidentally - YouTube have had to remove it under copyright laws. You know - everyone is really fascinated at the prospect of buying a vintage 80 year old movie!).
Lotte Lenya was an Austrian born actress who had become established in Berlin, married the composer, Kurt Weill (who wrote the music for Mackie Messer, and had collaboarated musically with Brecht since 1927), and appeared in most of the dramas in Berlin in the late 20s and early 30s written and produced by Bertholt Brecht. The song comes from "Die Dreigroschenoper" ("The Threepenny Opera" in English).
Brecht wrote the words of the song needless to say, as he wrote the plays, but he was never an easy man to define. He was though, without question, a committed Marxist. He was curiously, originally from Bavaria, but Berlin (which still preferred the Communist Party to Hitler's NSDAP in both the last two elections of the Weimar Republic in 1932) suited him better. His epic drama productions were themselves very revolutionary in style, and combined drama with politics.
Come 1933, came Hitler. Brecht, Weill and Lenya (who had now divorced) all saw no future for themselves in Germany, and all left. Lenya spent some time in Paris, Weill (not merely a committed socialist, but also Jewish) left almost immediately after Hitler took power and headed for Paris and then London. Brecht meanwhile headed off for Denmark.
Curiously, given all their political leanings, they were to end up in the United States - Weill and Lenya reconciling with each other and remarrying.
Quite why the USA - except for the fact that it was a long way from Hitler's Fascist "paradise"? (Author's note - that is meant to be extremely satirical, you should know by now what I think of Fascists, and "scum" is too kind a word!). Difficult to say.
Their fortunes there were mixed. Weill experienced some difficulties at first, but became accepted by the musical establishment. He was to colloborate in musical works with no less than Ira Gershwin among others, and he had established a successful career for himself by the time he died, quite young at the age of 50 in 1950.
Lenya became a successful Broadway actress, and seemed to settle reasonably successfully into what might seem to be have appeared at first, an alien culture with a completely different belief system.
Brecht? Well, why the USA rather that the USSR? That is the first question. The point with Brecht is that he was a committed "Marxist". He was not a committed "Stalinist". And yes, there is a difference. It is not even that convincing an argument that Brecht believed in the "Communist Party" either.
He lived in Hollywood throughout the war years, without ever really mastering English, was brought be the US House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1947, where his lack of English skills almost reduced the proceedings to a farce, and as the war was now over, left again for Europe.
His beliefs were just about as opposed to all things American as can be imagined, it takes some believing that he would have wanted to go there at all. It also would have shaken all but the ivory tower academics in the US that he was in the country at all. He epitomised the attitudes that Americans generally at once hate and fear. That anyone so fiercely anti-capitalist could possibly attract any sympathy on Main Street?
It is fascinating in its way, although it is also interesting that he wrote some of his best work while living there. Perhaps there is something to be said for living among the enemy!
That he was to go and live in East Germany should not be so surprising. That he was iconised by the regime there should also not come as a surprise. That he regarded it as Stalinist and actually tacitally supported the uprising in 1953 should really not be too surprising. Either.
Maybe some people are never really born to be satisfied with their lot. Maybe some people will go on looking for the answers that will never be available. Perhaps some people are simply too brilliant for the world and its mediocrities. At times I know and understand this all too well myself. Brecht definitely did.
Still depart at this point singing the following lyrics:
Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne
und die trägt er im Gesicht
und Macheath, der hat ein Messer
doch das Messer sieht man nicht ....
quoted without copyright, but would Brecht have approved of copyright restrictions, I wonder? I wait for the day meanwhile that I can see Lotte Lenya singing this on YouTube .... again!
The American singer, Bobby Darin - always something of a misfit in the American pop music industry - had a hit with "Mack The Knife". It was a song with unusual lyrics to say the least, and a song with an interesting history.
Originally, it was a German song - called "Mackie Messer". I spent a fair bit of time scouting round the web a couple of years ago seeing if I could find the original. Sure enough - a greying old black and white movie from the early thirties with the delightful Lotte Lenya singing (don't expect to find it now, incidentally - YouTube have had to remove it under copyright laws. You know - everyone is really fascinated at the prospect of buying a vintage 80 year old movie!).
Lotte Lenya was an Austrian born actress who had become established in Berlin, married the composer, Kurt Weill (who wrote the music for Mackie Messer, and had collaboarated musically with Brecht since 1927), and appeared in most of the dramas in Berlin in the late 20s and early 30s written and produced by Bertholt Brecht. The song comes from "Die Dreigroschenoper" ("The Threepenny Opera" in English).
Brecht wrote the words of the song needless to say, as he wrote the plays, but he was never an easy man to define. He was though, without question, a committed Marxist. He was curiously, originally from Bavaria, but Berlin (which still preferred the Communist Party to Hitler's NSDAP in both the last two elections of the Weimar Republic in 1932) suited him better. His epic drama productions were themselves very revolutionary in style, and combined drama with politics.
Come 1933, came Hitler. Brecht, Weill and Lenya (who had now divorced) all saw no future for themselves in Germany, and all left. Lenya spent some time in Paris, Weill (not merely a committed socialist, but also Jewish) left almost immediately after Hitler took power and headed for Paris and then London. Brecht meanwhile headed off for Denmark.
Curiously, given all their political leanings, they were to end up in the United States - Weill and Lenya reconciling with each other and remarrying.
Quite why the USA - except for the fact that it was a long way from Hitler's Fascist "paradise"? (Author's note - that is meant to be extremely satirical, you should know by now what I think of Fascists, and "scum" is too kind a word!). Difficult to say.
Their fortunes there were mixed. Weill experienced some difficulties at first, but became accepted by the musical establishment. He was to colloborate in musical works with no less than Ira Gershwin among others, and he had established a successful career for himself by the time he died, quite young at the age of 50 in 1950.
Lenya became a successful Broadway actress, and seemed to settle reasonably successfully into what might seem to be have appeared at first, an alien culture with a completely different belief system.
Brecht? Well, why the USA rather that the USSR? That is the first question. The point with Brecht is that he was a committed "Marxist". He was not a committed "Stalinist". And yes, there is a difference. It is not even that convincing an argument that Brecht believed in the "Communist Party" either.
He lived in Hollywood throughout the war years, without ever really mastering English, was brought be the US House Committee on Un-American Activities in 1947, where his lack of English skills almost reduced the proceedings to a farce, and as the war was now over, left again for Europe.
His beliefs were just about as opposed to all things American as can be imagined, it takes some believing that he would have wanted to go there at all. It also would have shaken all but the ivory tower academics in the US that he was in the country at all. He epitomised the attitudes that Americans generally at once hate and fear. That anyone so fiercely anti-capitalist could possibly attract any sympathy on Main Street?
It is fascinating in its way, although it is also interesting that he wrote some of his best work while living there. Perhaps there is something to be said for living among the enemy!
That he was to go and live in East Germany should not be so surprising. That he was iconised by the regime there should also not come as a surprise. That he regarded it as Stalinist and actually tacitally supported the uprising in 1953 should really not be too surprising. Either.
Maybe some people are never really born to be satisfied with their lot. Maybe some people will go on looking for the answers that will never be available. Perhaps some people are simply too brilliant for the world and its mediocrities. At times I know and understand this all too well myself. Brecht definitely did.
Still depart at this point singing the following lyrics:
Und der Haifisch, der hat Zähne
und die trägt er im Gesicht
und Macheath, der hat ein Messer
doch das Messer sieht man nicht ....
quoted without copyright, but would Brecht have approved of copyright restrictions, I wonder? I wait for the day meanwhile that I can see Lotte Lenya singing this on YouTube .... again!
Tuesday, 2 August 2011
Down the road to oblivion
When I was born, there were fewer than two billion people on this planet. Today there are some seven billion.
Those people all need space to live, they need feeding, they need clothing, they need medical care, they need sewerage and clean water, they need heating in cold countries (in winter at least), cooling systems in hot countries.
And this with an international economic system that is broken and cannot provide a decent living standard for a massive number of people on the planet, even in the developed world.
Meanwhile we are watching a massive number of other species being gradually eradicated. The tiger is the poster child for this, but check out elephant populations, look at the fish in the North Sea, and the once common house sparrow.
And yet in parts of the world people (egged on by ignorance or religious dogma) have eleven to twelve to thirteen children, and no hope of a decent lifestyle for any of them.
About the only saving grace is the craze for boys. The massive disproportion of boys to girls in certain parts of the world (including the grotesque infanticide of little girls) will lead eventually to a slowing down in the birth rate, as well as leaving a large number of restless young men who cannot find a female partner when they reach adulthood (and as some of these countries with a disproportionate male/female bias are Muslim countries where men can have four wives .... Try the arithmetic some time!).
Meanwhile the only tigers and elephants left will be living in zoos. Imagine human beings being locked up in cages, and thousands of other species watching them "play" and "feed" and ....
Am I the only person out there who thinks that things have already gone badly wrong and nobody is allowed to criticise the situation and what has caused it? And as I have also ranted on enough in this blog on the need to eradicate poverty and unemployment and debt, it is not that I am unconcerned or do not care!
The problem is serious though. We can continue to close our eyes, send up prayers to some non-existent deity, and hope against hope. But really given the lack of intelligence being applied in this situation (often because some powerful individuals want us to remain indifferent), we need far more than hope to resolve the situation.
Those people all need space to live, they need feeding, they need clothing, they need medical care, they need sewerage and clean water, they need heating in cold countries (in winter at least), cooling systems in hot countries.
And this with an international economic system that is broken and cannot provide a decent living standard for a massive number of people on the planet, even in the developed world.
Meanwhile we are watching a massive number of other species being gradually eradicated. The tiger is the poster child for this, but check out elephant populations, look at the fish in the North Sea, and the once common house sparrow.
And yet in parts of the world people (egged on by ignorance or religious dogma) have eleven to twelve to thirteen children, and no hope of a decent lifestyle for any of them.
About the only saving grace is the craze for boys. The massive disproportion of boys to girls in certain parts of the world (including the grotesque infanticide of little girls) will lead eventually to a slowing down in the birth rate, as well as leaving a large number of restless young men who cannot find a female partner when they reach adulthood (and as some of these countries with a disproportionate male/female bias are Muslim countries where men can have four wives .... Try the arithmetic some time!).
Meanwhile the only tigers and elephants left will be living in zoos. Imagine human beings being locked up in cages, and thousands of other species watching them "play" and "feed" and ....
Am I the only person out there who thinks that things have already gone badly wrong and nobody is allowed to criticise the situation and what has caused it? And as I have also ranted on enough in this blog on the need to eradicate poverty and unemployment and debt, it is not that I am unconcerned or do not care!
The problem is serious though. We can continue to close our eyes, send up prayers to some non-existent deity, and hope against hope. But really given the lack of intelligence being applied in this situation (often because some powerful individuals want us to remain indifferent), we need far more than hope to resolve the situation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)