The Mighty CE is Civilisation!

More Seppuku = Less Samurai

When confronted by pain weigh your options. There are several things that can be done in order to stop pain. You can either remove the stimulus causing pain or you can increase the stimulus. It's typically advised to remove a stimulus, but there are benefits to an increase. Increasing the level of pain will render you incapable of being harmed beyond a certain point. Damage will be done, of course, but that is the limit of the damage. From that point on there is nothing to fear. If one were to have a finger severed, they could not have it severed again.

Damage is inevitable. Although avoiding damage is admirable it is sometimes unavoidable. As such one must be comfortable with accepting damage so that when it occurs one does not hesitate. Hesitation is a dead mind state in which nothing occurs. It is worse than damage. Hesitation is eradication.

Comfort leads to complacency. All actions that lead towards the betterment of self are uncomfortable by their very nature. It is not comfortable to work. It is not comfortable to learn. These tasks require effort. If you find yourself in a state of comfort you face stagnation. Do not let this happen.

Small actions lead to large ones. Learning something small leads to learning something large. By taking small steps every day you move large distances over time. Do not be discouraged by lack of speed. Be only discouraged by lack of movement.

Save the Bullies.
The anti-bullying movement has been gaining steam over the years. There has never been a time when bullying was encouraged, but now it's considered downright despicable. We've had a lot of marches, demonstrations, tweets and Facebook memes stating as much. Everyone is agreed that bullying is the worst thing ever.

And it's making us weaker.

In the times that have passed bullying was a right of passage. People would hurl abuse at people, they would grow up jaded and bitter, and then they'd achieve something with their lives while the bullies die of alcoholism. That was the system. It made for great people, too. There is no way in hell that Bill Gates got through high school without mountains of ridicule being levelled at him, even if he did have the ability to leap tall chairs in a single bound.

Ridicule has always been a part of growing up. It's nice to think that everyone should be accepted even though they're different but it doesn't happen, and it's absolute bullshit to pretend that it does. Kids are brutal little creatures that form social groups so that they can effectively brutalise loners and smaller social groups. I don't really have a problem with kids doing this, because it's exactly the same as what countries do to one another when you take a large enough look at the geo-political machinations of the world. The schoolyard is their world, and in every schoolyard is a bully/America.

It's good for kids to lean the lesson that America is a massive cunt of a country that yells at everyone else and throws its weight around, while it's secretly unable to take a shower at home because it's too poor. The schoolyard bully is the same thing. He or she will rein supreme for a few years, and then the global financial crisis of the real world will destroy them, and the clever Asian kid that actually studied at school will foreclose on the bully's house. Done deal. Lesson learnt.

The growing tide of anti-bully rhetoric is disturbing to me. It's very noble to try and protect children from being told that they're freaks and weirdos, and everyone has a lot of good intentions in mind when they do so. However, honestly ask yourself the following question:

Did you ever do anything in school that was a little bit weird and you're glad you don't do in public anymore?

I did! I did a shitload of weird things because I'm a pretty weird guy. I was relentlessly bullied for it and I came out the other side better for it. I haven't stopped being a weird guy, but I realised that if I was going to be a weird guy I was going to have to be able to beat a man into unconsciousness in order to defend my weirdness, or at least be socially acceptable enough in other ways so that my weirdness was forgivable. I became socialised as a result. As a result of the bullying I learnt to listen, to pick my targets, to accept what I can and can't connect with people about and to make a game of my differences so that others couldn't use them against me. It made me funny, yes, but it also made me attentive. I became a lot smarter than the bullies, and as a result of that I live in a house that doesn't have wheels on it, whereas the same cannot be said for them. Bullying made me what I am.

This isn't to say that I thank the bullies, because I don't. I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire (although I'd gladly piss on them if they weren't on fire, which is interesting). That doesn't mean that they didn't have anything of value to add to my knowledge as I was growing up, because they sure as fuck did. I learnt that some people are arseholes, and that there were a lot of arseholes out there. Being able to deal with arseholes is a valuable skill that needs to be learnt.

I hope that bullying never disappears from schools. It probably won't, either, as teachers are overworked and don't have the resources to deal with the problems in an effective manner. This is an important lesson, too, as kids have to learn that they're not always going to have someone around to help them, and that eventually they're going to have to learn to deal with their own problems. Bullying leads to self sufficiency. Self sufficiency leads to success, or a high school shooting if you're American.

I think the real point I'm trying to make here is that Americans are arseholes.

Twitter and Legislation
The recent Twitter event which ended in the hospitalisation of Charlotte Dawson has sparked calls in the media for tougher legislation surrounding cyber bullying. It's probably just the usually rally behind rhetoric that we see after something happens to someone that has a high public profile, but there is a chance that legislation will be changed as a result of this occurrence. If the law does get changed allow me to make one thing abundantly clear.

Nothing will change.

About a year ago the Victorian Parliament in Australia passed an anti-bullying law, ”Brodie's Law”, in response to the death of a 19 year old waitress who committed suicide after being bullied at work. You can check out the laws on stalking in Victoria in full right here, and it all sounds very good in theory. In practice, however, it's done fuck all. Why's that? There are several reasons, but let me lay them out for you in a bit more detail:

1) It's an indictable offence.

Indictable offences need to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. It's very easy to prove that a Twitter post occurred, and from which account it occurred, but it's very hard to prove who was behind the keyboard at the time, particularly because:

2) Most social media companies are based overseas.

On top of that they have strong inhibitions about releasing private information to legal authorities without a reason for doing so. A reason for doing so is called a warrant, and it needs to be a warrant that actually holds power over them. That's very hard to organise from overseas. Also:

3) You have to prove mens rea.

It's all well and good to say that someone did something, but proving that they did so maliciously isn't nearly as easy. In the Charlotte Dawson case there are a great many people telling her to go hang herself. Many of them only do it once. You wouldn't be arrested and charged for telling someone that you're having an argument on the street with to go hang themselves. Is it reasonable to think that a single comment towards a public figure is going to cause them to attempt self harm? Is it reasonable to think that ANY comment towards a public figure is going to have that effect? Is it reasonable to think that ANY comment towards a public figure is going to have a prolonged effect when the medium being utilised to make those comments includes a “block” button?

Those last few statements may seem unduly harsh, but rest assured that any defence lawyer worth their salt would ask far worse. At least they would in Victoria, which reminds me:

4) This is only a Victorian law.

Legislation regarding this sort of behaviour varies from state to state, and country to country. People from the U.S. were happy to comment on Dawson. How the hell are you going to charge them? The online world is far larger than the legal one. Let's say you do manage to find people that fall into the scope of the law:

5) It's an awful lot of investigation for little result.

Let's say that you do manage to get a case together, it gets brought to trial and dealt with my the court. It's highly unlikely that the person who made those comments is going to go to jail. Even in a case as high profile as this one with Dawson jail time is exceptionally unlikely. Hell, even an actual conviction is unlikely. It's a case that requires international investigation that's going to result in a fine and a stern word from a magistrate, at best, if it even manages to be proven in the first place.

This isn't to say that there shouldn't be safeguards against this sort of thing. There certainly should be. This legislation is in place for a reason, and there are other options such as intervention orders that can provide protection against this sort of behaviour. Those laws are already in place.

New laws will not change any of the above issues that I've brought up, particularly not the international issues. Procedural issues cannot be changed by making laws harsher. They can, however, be changed dramatically by making laws lighter. This may seem counter-intuitive, but allow me to explain. If there were a summary charge for cyber bullying it would resolve a great many of the above issues:

1) A summary offence only needs to be proven on a balance of probabilities.

If you can prove that someone owns a Twitter account it's pretty fair to expect that posts made from it were made by them. You're far more likely to land a conviction at this level. Also:

2) The penalties are basically the same as what people are getting now.

If you're going to walk away with a fine and a stern word either way, why make the system work harder to get the same result?

That is not to say, however, that I actually advocate that new laws be put in place. The above laws I quoted regarding stalking apply to both in person and online activities, so I don't see why there should be a law put in place specifically in regards to online activity when it would be perfectly legal to do that same thing to someone in person. I'm very happy that I live in a world where pensioners can call Tony Abbott a dickhead to his face and he just has to sit back and take it. Why should someone legislate against that occurring online?

Legislating that people should be nice to one another online is pissing into the wind. People have a right to free speech, even here in Australia, and to infringe on that is an exceptionally dangerous edge to walk along. I certainly don't see why it should be infringed upon because someone famous got hurt.

I am without fame, which I'm sometimes quite thankful for because I can be a raging arsehole at the best of times. If someone told me to go hang myself... no wait. When people tell me to go hang myself online I laugh about it, and if I feel particularly upset by their comments (which I don't) I utilise the block function. If people say that to me in person I don't beat them into unconsciousness. I don't expect or want protection from that sort of behaviour.

I realise that there are many people out there that are not egotistical arseholes like me. Their humility can leave them quite affected by online commentary, or commentary in general. I can't tell those people to be like me, because a world of people like me would be fucking horrible (although very pretty). The thing is legislation won't save them, for all the reasons I've explained.

If you are affected by online criticism, please use the block function. I know it seems like a cop out, but it really isn't. The strongest thing you can do when it comes to criticism is to ignore it and walk on by. If you constantly engage with someone that wants nothing more than to destroy your emotional well being you are going to take some damage in the process. Don't fall for it, just hit the block option and be done with it. It ends the confrontation.

Don't be so proud that you do yourself damage.


Memes, China, and the fall of the West
Sometimes white people don't really know what to do with their shame. It's not that they're inherently guilty of any crimes in and of themselves, but rather that they benefit from the crimes of the past. It's a difficult and tricky shame to bare, because with it goes a fair sense of pride. Yes, white people did horrifying things to millions of people, which is nasty, but they also managed to kick the crap out of millions of people, and kicking the crap out of millions of people is generally considered pretty awesome. White people ended up on the top of the cultural pile after a very turbulent period in history, and they did it by being total bastards. That's both awesome and crap at the same time.

I should mention now that I'm white. There are aspects of my ancestry that I find thoroughly entertaining. White people managed to slink and scrape their way through history by being a bunch of primitive screw ups. Whilst Asia was kicking goals in regards to education, culture and basic bloody hygiene, white people were living in filth and punching each other in the face. White people continued to do this for hundreds upon hundreds of years, and then got so good at punching each other in the face that they decided to punch everyone else in the world in the face instead. They weren't even that great at it, really. The Mongols were fucking brilliant at it. They ran around the world shooting people with arrows, assimilating cultures into their own, and figured out new ways to shoot people with arrows that now exploded. Genius. White people instead did things with pure tenacity. White people would just continually kick people in the face until they agreed to be Christians.

Naturally this isn't looked upon too kindly by the rest of the world. White people raped and pillaged their way to the top of the heap and left a lot of carnage in their wake. There are a lot of cultural achievements that have been lost in the sands of time simply because white people couldn't think of a way to kill people with them. To a large degree white people still think like that, and billions or eyes around the planet roll whenever they do so.

Things have changed, though. White people now pride intellectual achievement more than they used to and they bathe a lot more often. They also ended up at the head of a lot of cultures, and so the barbaric white person mindest of old is now just a Western mindset. The base mentality has also remained very similar. Sure, Westerners don't run around the world kicking people in the face until they agree to be Christian any more, instead they have to agree to be a democracy. Problem solving has remained largely the same in the Western mind. Hit it until it goes away, and if it doesn't hit it harder. If neither of those things work, try drugging it. If that's no good ignore it. If none of those things work, panic.

Panic can take many forms. In one form it's going completely crazy whenever someone says anything about Aboriginals, and in the same motion it can be going completely crazy whenever someone that's not a Westerner wins a gold medal at the Olympics. It's all panic, pure and simple. Either it's Westerners feeling that they have to protect everyone because “noblesse oblige”, or it's Westerners gobsmacked that other cultures can beat them fair and square.

I find the Aboriginal Memes Facebook group particularly problematic, in that the loudest voices in opposition of the group were Westerners. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not. I don't think anything's ever really been achieved with censorship, and I've always found that if you yell, “Don't say that!” at someone as loud as you can, you don't stop them saying it, you only stop them saying it to you. The group was always based on Meme Generator to begin with, and that's still going strong. The real issue isn't the group, though, but rather that people consider the shutting down of a Facebook group a major victory when the underlying issues haven't been discussed in any way shape or form. Hitting the “Like” button on the Anti-Aboriginal Memes Facebook group doesn't actually achieve anything other than sweeping something under the rug, and despite being male I don't believe that's how you clean a room.

Yet at the same time as screaming that you can't say anything about Aboriginals, the same people will scream that Chinese swimmers are all on magical drugs that don't appear in drug screenings. The stuff that people have been saying about Ye Shiwen has been astounding. My favourite argument is that she couldn't possibly have swum faster than a male did in the same stretch, because God forbid that someone Chinese and (gasp) a woman is actually the best swimmer in the world while competing at the Olympics, a place where people that are the best in the world at what they do gather. It would be nice to say that the same would be said of any breakout success coming to the Olympics, but the arguments weren't nearly as vicious when Phelps won all those medals in 2004, and the U.S. has one hell of a history of doping, just as the Chinese do.

I find all of that amusing more than anything else. It's nice to see that the Western mindset is still as brutally retarded and self centred as it always has been, because constants are comforting when times change as much as they do. I don't think it will get us very far in the new world, though. Times are changing, cultural power is shifting, and I'm not sure that being a bunch of brutal, self-centred idiots will allow us to reap the cultural rewards it once did. The fortunes may love a fool, but tend to frown upon countries full of them.

I am a Westerner. I come from a long line of egotistical idiots. I hope I don't fuck up the world as it changes.

Batman Didn't Make It
A lot of people have been talking about the Colorado massacre conducted at the Aurora cinema complex by James Holmes, the self professed “Joker”, has been in the news a lot. And rightly so. The event is horrifying in a great many ways and I'm sure that people need to be able to talk about it in order to fully realise the shock and terror that many people are no doubt facing as a result of this. That doesn't go for just the victims and the witnesses to the shooting, either, but also to the general public. Many people will likely have trouble feeling the same sense of ease in a cinema again. Something like this is unlikely to occur ever again, no doubt, but it's very hard to be logical with fear.

Hence, we talk. The media wheels turn and the latest real life villain is dressed up to be put on display. Every good story needs a good villain, and this guy is a doozy.

I'm left wondering, though, why it's this story in particular that sets our teeth on edge. It's not as though this is the only large bodycount that went on in the world in the last few days. More people have been killed in Baghdad, a whole bunch of Chinese people are drowning, and Syria is fucked. The drama is out there for anyone to see if you have a mind to look for it, yet our eyes are drawn to this one. The media will brush over those other topics using nothing by wide shots, and only go for a close up on this story. The one with “The Joker” in it.

Drowning Chinese, exploding Syrians and the fact that everyone in Baghdad seems to have made a national sport out of exploding is all fair fodder for the amusement of most westerners. I'm largely okay with that, too, as I think that when things get so bad that you're unable to laugh at them you're never going to be in a position in which you can recover from it. Laughter is the key to recovery, in my view. I can't cite you thousands of academic articles on the topic or anything like that, but I can see a change in people that have gone through genuinely terrible things. I can see them letting go of the pain as they finally allow themselves to admit that being involved in an armed robbery conducted by absolute morons is pretty damned entertaining, or something to that effect. The actual event is irrelevant, the laughter is not.

I've made jokes about this, though, and it's like smacking a bear in the head with a cattle prod. I'm not entirely sure why that is. When Australians can't laugh at dead Americans something is really wrong.

Would this story be generating the same sort of a sensation if it had have been performed by someone in India attempting to take on the persona of Gabbar Singh from Sholay? It would be nice (if that's the term) to think that it would do, but I seriously doubt it. The element of enjoying a relaxing evening at a show and having it interrupted by an act of pure horror isn't the only thing that's making people's eyebrows raise, otherwise people would be making a great many more comparisons to Moscow. I can't help but think that the ire generated by this event is in many ways dependent on the colour of the skin and the accent of the voices of the people that were killed. Twelve dead white people put a lot more strain on the cultural psyche than fifty to sixty Asians and Arabs.

Maybe it's the killer. A guy that has no criminal history, is quite brilliant, and decides to dye his hair red and go on a rampage whilst claiming to be, “The Joker” is a pretty newsworthy event in and of itself, but that's not all there is to it. Yes, this guy is exceptionally interesting and the central stage of his act only helps to increase the notoriety of his persona, but is that all there is to this being on everyone's minds? A lot of the news reports centre in on the victims and their stories rather than the killer himself, which is quite unlike the Norway attacks were Brevick took centre stage almost immediately.

Then again, maybe it's something even easier than all of that. We had a bunch of people heading to a cinema to see a movie about someone that goes above and beyond the call of duty to save the lives of regular people, just like were sitting in that theatre, from exceptional villains, just the like guy that ended up at that theatre. Hollywood was telling the story of a great defender, and when a villain stepped right out of the pages of those comic books to actually attack real people, there was no Batman. There was just the awful reality that in the real world, bad guys have a tendency to win.

Personally, though, I'm pretty sure everyone's upset because white people died.

Although one should openly air their grievances to test their relevance, it should be noted that not all such dialogues will be engaged in. Silence is a powerful tool of dismissal. If, once a grievance is aired, silence is the reply, then those that are silent are your enemies. If they are in your way, move against them.


Strength is attained by doing something you cannot do until you can do it.

Jesus, Voltron and Captain Planet
Jesus did gather all his disciples together, and did say to them, “My friends, there will come a time when I am no longer around to protect you with my superior kung fu abilities, and you will then face your enemies on your own.”

To which there was much lamenting.

Jesus did then say, “When these times occur, it is best for you to turn the other cheek.”

But Peter did say, “But Lord, what if they really piss you off.”

“Turn the other cheek, Peter,” said Jesus.

To which Peter did say, “But I only have two, Lord!”

To which Jesus did say, “Ah yes, you have a point there. I must go and pray.”

And so it was then that Jesus did pray, and did then come back to his disciples.

“Good news, everyone,” said Jesus, “The Lord has seen fit to grant you extra power by which to defend yourselves.”

And there was much rejoicing.

“Firstly, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas and Thaddaeus will be granted the use of five robotic lions!”

And it was then that the heavens did open up, and five brightly coloured robotic lions did descend from the heavens and did land upon the ground with an all mighty thud. It was then that Bartholomew did look upon the lions and proclaimed, “Bitchen!”

“I get the green one!” said Philip.

“This does remind me,” said Jesus, “You shall all get an outfit to wear that is the same colour as the lion you choose.”

Andrew simply stood there with his mouth agape, but he did seem quite happy nonetheless.

“Bitchen!” said Bartholomew again.

Thaddaeus ran up to the blue lion, and did embrace it.

Thaddeaus did then ask, “What shall we use these lions for?”

To which Jesus did reply, “To fight Satan.”

Philip did then ask, “And how shall we know it is Satan?”

And Jesus did say, “Satan takes on many forms. Sometimes it is that of a snake. Sometimes it is that of a man. And sometimes it is of King Zarkon and his son Lotor who create giant robeasts to terrorise the people of Jerusalem.”

And Philip did say, “So which one will it be for us?”

To which Jesus did say, “Just fight giant robots with them, okay?”

To which Andrew did say, “But Lord, although these lions be large, they are by no means giant! How are we to fight a giant robot with these?”

To which Jesus did say, “Do not despair, for these five lions can join together to form a giant robot with a sword that shoots lighting. And I shall call this robot, Ron.”

Thomas did then say, “Isn't Ron a bit of a bland name for a giant robot that shoots lighting?”

To which Jesus did say, “Ah yes, that's a good point. Yet, as it is lighitng it shoots, let us call it Volt-Ron.”

“Bitchen!” said Bartholomew again, who hadn't really been paying attention.

To which there was much rejoicing, bar from Thomas, who did then say, “Lord, am I really to pilot one of these robotic lions?”

To which Jesus did reply, “It is so.”

And then Thomas did say, “I don't think I can do it, Lord.”

To which Jesus did say, “Thomas, it is seen that you will suffer great injury upon piloting Volt-Ron, and it is then that Mary shall take your place wearing a pink outfit, which will completely ruin the colour scheme.”

Thomas did then say, “Ha! You're such a joker, Lord. A woman, piloting a robot? Ridiculous. What if it needed to be parallel parked?”

It was then that Thomas did go to the black lion, and he looked upon it so until Mary showed him how to open it.

Jesus did then say, “James and Matthew?”

“Which James?” said both James.

To which Jesus did say, “James the Less.”

To which James the Less did say, “I would really prefer that you didn't call me that.”

To which Jesus did say, “Very well, from this day forth James the Less shall be called Jimmy, and James the Great shall be called Jimbo.”

“This makes much more sense!” said Jimbo.

“Indeed,” said Jesus, “I'm quite shocked that I didn't do it earlier.”

Jimmy did nod his head in approval.

Jesus did then say, “Jimmy and Matthew, as you are brothers the both of you shall work together from now on, and your powers will come from each other when you both say, ‘Wonder Twin powers, activate!” Jimmy, you shall then be given the power to turn into any animal at all, be it of the heavens above, the sea below, or the earth that we walk upon, or something that someone made up once. And to you, Matthew, will be given the power to turn into water of any form, be it cold, hot, or otherwise.”

“Wonder Twin powers, activate!” said James and Matthew, and then James did promptly turn into a monkey, and did begin to dance like a monkey. Matthew did not look as elated, however, and said, “But Lord, if I am to be water, should there not be a bucket for me?”

And Jesus did then say “You shall have a bucket, and to carry it I shall give you this space monkey.”

And it was then that Jesus did then hand a blue space monkey to Matthew, who did rejoice. Matthew did then hold the monkey aloft, and said, “I shall call you Gleek!”

And Jesus did say, “Gleek is a good name for a space monkey.”

“Bitchen!” said Bartholomew, who was still looking at his robotic lion, and wasn’t really paying attention.

It was then that Jesus did turn to the remaining disciples, and said onto them, “And to you remaining five I shall render great powers, and great responsibility, for you must combine your powers when the fate of the planet is at stake. Firstly, come forward Peter.”

And thus Peter did come forward, and Jesus did say unto him, “As I have called you Peter, and you have been my rock, I shall give unto you this ring that contains within it the power of earth.”

“What does it do, Lord?” asked Peter.

To which Jesus did say, “It can shake the very earth upon which we walk, and cause great mounds of rock to part and shift, as well as rise into the air.”

“Awesome!” said Peter.

Jesus did then say, “To you, Jimbo, who I found as a fisherman, I give the power of your origins, water.”

“What does it do, Lord?” asked Jimbo.

To which Jesus did say, “It can cause great tidal waves, great storms, and can freeze things.”

“Is it any good for fishing, Lord?” asked Jimbo.

To which Jesus did say, “VERY good for fishing.”

“Awesome!” said Jimbo.

Jesus did then say, “To you, John, whose words will flow across the earth as fast as whispers on the wind, I give the power of wind.”

“What does it do, Lord?” asked John.

To which Jesus did say, “It can blow houses down, cause great tornados, and you can fly.”

“Awesome!” said John.

Jesus did then say, “And to you, Simon, whose fiery passion of a zealot is now the fiery passion of our cause, I give unto you the power of fire.”

“What does it do, Lord?” asked Simon.

To which Jesus did say, “Well if burns things, of course! What did you think it would do?”

“Awesome!” said Simon.

Then Jesus did then turn to the last of his disciples, and said, “And to you, Judas...”

To which Thaddeaus did say, “Who me, Lord?”

To which Jesus did say, “No I call you Thaddeaus to stop this confusion.”

To which Thaddeaus did say, “But my name's Judas, too.”

And Jesus did say, “I know, but I call you Thaddeaus. And you already have a robotic lion.”

“Okay, I just thought I might get something cooler,” said Thaddeaus.

To which Jesus did say, “Are you not happy with your robotic lion?”

To which Thaddeaus did say, “No, no, it's pretty cool.”

But Jesus was not convinced and said, “Look, you can swap with Judas if you want to afterwards, okay?”

To which Thaddeaus did say, “Okay.”

Then Jesus did turn to Judas and said, “And to you, Judas, who has always been the most trustworthy and heartfelt of all my disciples, I give the power of heart.”

“What does it do, Lord?” asked Judas.

To which Jesus did say, “Well, it brings out the good in people, and you can talk to animals.”

“Does it do anything else, Lord?” asked Judas, “Like make people’s hearts explode?”

“No,” said Jesus, “It just brings out the good in people.”

“So if someone is trying to kill me, I can use this and they won’t?” asked Judas.

“Well not exactly,” said Jesus, “If they’re thoroughly evil they don’t have any good to bring out, so it wouldn’t work on them.”

“That sucks!” said Judas.

“Ha ha!” said Peter, “My power is far cooler than yours!”

“Mine too!” said Jimbo.

“Bitchen!” said Bartholomew, who was still looking at his lion and not paying attention.

“Now wait everyone,” said Jesus, “By your powers combined, I shall return as Captain Planet, the protector of the world.”

“Screw that!” said Judas, “I want a cool power! How about we swap, Thaddeaus?”

To which Thaddeaus did say, “No, no, I'm happy with the lion.”

Judas did then turn to the rest of the disciples, and said onto them, “Does anyone want to swap?”

But alas, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas and Thaddaeus were too busy looking at their giant robotic lions to pay him any attention, and so he did turn to Jimmy and Matthew, who did say, “Wonder Twin powers, activate!” and then Jimmy turned into a hyena and began to laugh at Judas, whilst Matthew turned into water and put himself into a bucket.

Judas did say to Matthew, “Surely you would want to trade?”

To which Matthew did say, “No way! I have a space monkey!”

Judas did then turn to Jesus and said, “Can I at least have a space monkey, Lord?”

To which Jesus did say, “You can have a monkey, but it’s not a space monkey as I’ve given that one away already.”

Jesus did then hand Judas a monkey, who did look at Judas quizzically before pulling on his hair and screeching.

Judas did then say, “This sucks, I’m going to trade in this damned ring!”

Jimbo did then say onto Judas, “I bet you can’t even get thirty pieces of silver for it!”

And then there was much rejoicing.

Occupy Drugs for Children
So it looks like the media is finally getting onto the fact that having a whole bunch of homeless people in the one place leads to drug use, which isn't such a great thing when you have kids hanging around. That's what Occupy Melbourne is currently becoming known for. I'm most entertained by the comment on that posting, with people claiming that the Salvation Army is secretly working for the "1%" because they (gasp) own property. I guess that when you're an unemployed homeless drug addict owning property would seem like something only evil people would do, particularly when you're high on drugs and in the company of children.

None of this should really come as a surprise. When a group like Occupy Melbourne comes together with no real central theme it's inevitable that someone else will come along and hijack the whole affair. People like the Socialist Alliance have a strong history of doing this sort of thing. It must be working out for them, too, as Communists tend to come dead last when it comes to actual elections. That's people power right there. In the last federal election they received fewer votes than the Climate Sceptics. People that are wilfully ignorant enough to disregard decades worth of scientific research are more popular than Communists, so supporting movements like Occupy Melbourne is a tried and tested political tool for generating support... for the people you're protesting against.


Sure, the Socialist Alliance did manage to get someone elected to the Yarra City Council, but so what? The Yarra City Council is so pathetic it actually gave me money, which is a pretty solid argument for why they don't actually matter.

Back to my original point, Occupy Melbourne was hijacked by the Socialists for a time, but they've largely lost interest in the whole deal after they worked out that a prolonged protest is really hard and that the media stops paying attention to it after awhile. What you're left with are a few homeless people that have to sleep somewhere so it may as well be there, and people that can't count. It's hardly a movement. It's not having an impact on global finances. About the only thing it is doing is making the police better at evicting people, so I guess there is a positive after all.

This post is over.

The idea that I could be a responsible adult is as reprehensible to me as it is to anyone that knows me. I have all the calling cards that lead one to claim such a title, being a house, stable employment, a partner that doesn't always try to kill me and I can sustain myself for weeks on end without resorting to fast food, yet still the idea that I am responsible is alien to me. Hopefully it's also alien to everyone else, and thus no one will ever think to grant me with responsibility.

Superhero movies have been piping on about power and responsibility ever since Spiderman. Spiderman 3 was an excellent example of what occurs when one disregards responsibility in favour of a terrible dance scene. With great power comes great responsibility the movies claim, but what the hell does responsibility mean anyway? In movies it seems to be the capacity to beat up bad people, but I don't think that could hold true to most people day to day. It doesn't even seem responsible in the light of the movies. I'm pretty sure there are better ways to deal with people you have a problem with than punching the shit out of them. If someone's really such a problem that violence is necessary, perhaps shooting them at a distance would be a more responsible approach?

Most Hollywood takes on responsibility seems to revolve around the strong helping the weak. That's all well and good, and it's certainly charitable, but is it in fact responsible? If we continually lift the weak from their ruts are they not simply becoming dependent on our strength rather than developing their own? Is it more responsible to give a homeless guy spare change, or to walk on by? Either way he'll still be homeless tomorrow, but if you take the charitable/responsible course of action he'll also be drunk.

It seems to me that responsibility is largely to do with opinion and myth. It's all very well to say that something should or shouldn't be a certain way, but without enough strength behind you to back up your position there isn't much you can do to make it so. When you've strength behind you the rules are yours for the making. So responsibility, essentially, comes down to picking the winning side of an ideological stance and hitting the opposing side until it submits to your will.

Ha! I guess I am responsible.

This post is over.

God Save the Queen from Anti-Carbon Tax Idiots
The Queen was in Melbourne the other day, trying to soak up some of the vibes that come from the world's most liveable city. Perhaps that's how she manages to live so long. In any case she was here and I didn't go to see her, so I can't say for sure that she didn't drain a little bit of life from all those that went to view her, but some of those children looked pretty damn tired.

The Occupy Melbourne people had decided not to protest while the Queen was in town in a remarkable display of civic understanding. They stated that protesting while the Queen was in town would undermine what they're trying to achieve, which is interesting because it implies that they actually know what that is. So they put it to the vote and in the end they democratically decided not to ruin the Queen's trip. All 250 of them. It could also be that 250 people realised that if they disrupted the Queen's stay when the thousands of people that came out to see her didn't want them to, that they may have to face an actual popular movement and have the crap beaten out of them.

In any case, it was a wise move, and managed to have people pay them a bit of respect for a change for acting so nobly.

The morons protesting against the carbon tax, however, acted in a somewhat less noble fashion.

Before I go on I would like to just reiterate the fact that these people are indeed a-grade fuck-wits. People that don't believe that global warming is taking place are on a level of idiocy so high that they should have long ago died from lack of oxygen. The human brain needs oxygen in order to operate, which is why a lack of oxygen is no problem for these lobotomised cunt-monkeys. The science is in, and has been for a damned long time. If you don't agree with that you should be put down.

So there were fifty "people" with banners asking the Queen to stop the carbon tax. These people went out of their way to make an arse of themselves when the proposed anti-social elements of society had decided that protesting while the Queen was about was in poor taste. That's like Alan Jones walking into a gay sauna while Bob Downe decides to take his mother out to dinner, which now I think about it is the exact sort of thing Alan Jones would do.

Go for your life, Occupy Melbourne. You may not have any solid arguments and you may not be all that intelligent, but at least you're not anti-carbon tax.

Thanks, Lizzy, for showing the people of Australia who the real scum are in the current Australian political scene.


Log in

No account? Create an account