Just to prove to myself that I can write something non-ranting I will attempt to do so.
There is a nice tree in the garden.
There.

Boxing Day 2

Now I am drunk this blog doesn't seem so terribly scandalous and I might publish it.

Excellent Quotes by Chomsky

Here are some interesting words of Noam Chomsky that I particularly like.

"How does one recognize propaganda? What are some techniques to resist it?

There are no techniques, just ordinary common sense. If you hear that Iraq is a threat to our existence, but Kuwait doesn't seem to regard it as a threat to its existence and nobody else in the world does, any sane person will begin to ask, where is the evidence?
As soon as you ask this, the argument collapses.
But you have to be willing to develop an attitude of critical examination toward whatever is presented to you....

The Italian socialist Antonio Gramsci wrote, "A main obstacle to change is the reproduction by the dominated forces of elements of the hegemonic ideology. It is an important and urgent task to develop alternative interpretations of reality."
How does someone develop "alternative interpretations of reality"?

I deeply respect Gramsci, but I think it's possible to paraphrase that comment - namely, just tell the truth. Instead of repeating ideological fanaticism, dismantle it, try to find out the truth and tell the truth.
It's something any one of us can do. Remember intellectuals internalise the conception that they have to make things sound complicated. Otherwise what are they around for? It's worth asking yourself what's really so complicated?
Gramsci is a very admirable person but take that statement and try to translate it into simple English. How complicated is it to understand the truth or to know how to act?"

Noam Chomsky.

Monday 27th November 2006 - 6 tinnies -The Sun

Monday, November 27, 2006

Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Can of panda pop. Pasty.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Stick a burger in themicrowave.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.I know people who have lived like this.It may be an improvement on my life in some ways.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. oops.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Smoke a joint. oops no. trying to give that up. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down. Get up. Six tinnies. Lie down.

I know people who live like this. For years. Bit of an improvement on my life in some ways though.

Been thinking about forgiveness.

I believe in forgiveness of everything for everyone.
There is nothing that cannot be forgiven.
I think vengefulness is the worst thing in the world.
Apart from anything else it legitimises the original offence by repeating it.
I believe in forgiveness even when the person has committed a serious offence.
That's precisely what forgiveness is for.
What's the point in forgiveness if you don't forgive serious offences and only less serious ones?
Justice not vengeance.

I don't believe in the death penalty in any circumstances.
Blair's eqivocation on this is very revealing.
Utterly incredible as well.
The only position he can take if he opposes the death penalty is to oppose Saddam Hussein's execution. That's the only position.
But with Bliar we have "doublethink" in action.
Blair is a liar. And an idiot.
I can't work him out to be honest.

I do believe that suicide is a civil right and that Ian Huntley for example should be allowed to end his life if he wants to.
I believe that no one has the right to so much as lay a finger on Ian Huntley.

I believe that that is also the attitude that a civilised society should inculcate in people.

Not the attitudes reflected in what goes for news in the rags we have. I find the tabloid press to be the most evil element in our society not people like Ian Huntley who are portrayed as monsters by the press. The press makes them into more than what they are.


I have contempt for "news" papers like The Sun and The Star.
No country in the world has such childish shite that passes for news.
Not even the USA.
The two most disgusting words in the English language aren't "Gerry Adams" as the scummy rag once claimed - they are "The Sun".

The Sun claims to have a dear place in the nation's heart etc...Bullshit. "The Sun - We Love It" they claimed in their sexist adverts about tits. "No We Fucking Don't" :)
The Sun in its present form is a few decades old and is in no way a national institution.It's a load of right wing shite.
They say they are reflecting society's views and giving people what they want.
Most definitely wrong on both counts.

"The Sun" and "The Star" have glorified (state) terrorism on many occasions:-

"GOTCHA!"
"BANGDAD!"
"SERBS YOU RIGHT!"
"TALIBAN TERMINATOR".....

In other words The Sun glorifies terrorism - something that other people are not allowed to do. But if The Sun or The Star do it then it is OK.
Despicable.


The headline of The Sun on 16th January 1991 was indeed "Bangdad!".
This headline alone will always make me think of this newspaper as the lowest of the low.
But of course I forgive them.

Sunday, November 26, 2006
Sun 26 Nov 06....
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Sat 25th November 2006
Hello. Worked quite hard today. Quite knackered.
Deleted because I do not feel that I can say what I really feel and think.
Why should that be?
Why should it matter what I say or think?....
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Thursday 23rd November 2006.
Had to delete it because it was too sensible.

Bolloxia

So there you go. Bolloxia - the new name for everything.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pontifications. December 2006

December 2006.

Pontification

I reckon at the moment I would describe myself as pacifistIC and anarchistIC.

Not tout court pacifist and anarchist.

In other words I TEND TOWARDS pacifism and anarchism.

The reason I am not sure if I am an anarchist or not is simple.

Anarchism is opposed to the state, government and coercive authority.

The essential principle of anarchism, according to Emma Goldman, is "individual autonomy".

Anarchism is not opposed to organisation.

If the organisation is consented to by those it affects.

Now what if the state is nothing more than an organisation?

I am not really sure about all this.

If it is an organisation that involves coercive authority then anarchism objects. But what if it does not?......

------------------

America

First written by me in 1992:

Still applies in 2009:

AMERICA MUST BECOME A TRUE FRIEND OF THE EARTH BEFORE SHE EVEN CONSIDERS TRYING TO REACH MARS.

MARS, THE GOD OF WAR, IS A GOD SHE MUST NO LONGER WORSHIP.

-----------------------------------------------

The Soda and Lime Think Tank

Welcome to what used to be called the Soda and Lime think tank.

So named because (whilst this may sound counter-intuitive) you can in fact think just as well while sober as while pissed.

You see it was originally called the Five Pints of Guinness Think Tank.

Which..sounds better than Compass or Civitas or Ecclesia or Bolloxia.

Incidentally I claim to have coined the word "bolloxia - the new name for everything". (c)

I mean why shouldn't I hawk my intellectual wares. I mean look at what goes by the name of intelligent commentary.

It is almost exclusively right wing/pro-capitalist/pro-business.

I don't think like that. I am against capitalism. I think it is a wrong direction.

I mean Melanie Phillips? ....text deleted...

Claire Fox from the Institute of Ideas... text deleted....

They all seem to be ex-communists turned general right wing/let's buy a property in Bulgaria/let's abandon centuries of thought/..bland rightwing types...

Can I have a job at a thinktank please? I think I'd be good. I can't?

Why not? Because you are far too sensible and leftwing.

Haven't you heard all think tanks are pretty much right wing.

Why should that be?

Dunno.

I am thinking of writing a blog about my experience of internet dating.

If it qualifies for the word "experience".

-------

"A reasonable man adapts himself to his environment. An unreasonable man persists in attempting to adapt his environment to suit himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

George Bernard Shaw.

--------------------------------

I seriously cannot see how anyone can reasonably accept things as they are right now...

Monday, December 04, 2006

It is the season of peace and good will to all men.

So what is Tony Blair's message to the world this Advent? :

"The bombs we've got at the moment aren't big enough.

Let's build a big feck off bomb. Happy Christmas!"

----------

Basically it's a bit tricky to say to other countries "Hey we don't want you to have nuclear weapons" when we have them ourselves.

I believe in nuclear disarmament.-

--------

Once again I am thinking of putting up all the old blogs, yes even those ones.

And then going public in the international blogosphere with them.

--------------

I support freedom of speech. Even for myself.

==========

I am reading and greatly enjoying "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins.

Dawkins defines "theism" but does he define "religion"?

He seems to allow a form of religion - what he seems to call Einsteinian religion.

Is it mystical or spiritual this sort of awe at the natural world as revealed by science?

I don't think religion can only be explained in a Darwinian way as Dawkins says because it is a feature seemingly universal to the species.

Maybe it's just a case of a characteristic of our species is that we can attempt explain things and have philosophies. Surely that is what a religion is - just a philosophy, an interpretation of the world.

I did not feel that this book proves beyond reasonable doubt that God does not exist. I know that it doesn't pretend to do so.

I know of an anarchist pamphlet called "May the farce be with you: A light-hearted look at why God does not exist". I found this pamphlet has a far more convincing case for atheism than even Dawkins. Must dig it out. It was much stronger on why God cannot by definition exist...

[The best literature available is usually to be found among anarchists.]

God if he/she/it exists at some point gave us a reason which compels us to conclude that atheism is the correct position.

One thing you come slap up against is that a religion is not just a set of propositions but a cultural phenomenon, an institution, a part of social dynamics.

It is also a thought pattern and an ideology.

Hence it is the province of study for psychology and social science as much as for natural science.

There is no evidence for God. And there is no possible way that the supernatural can exist. Therefore God cannot exist.

I am most definitely on the side of Enlightenment and reason and not superstition and other bullshit.

I can tell Richard Dawkins right now why people prefer astrology to astronomy etc. Because it rocks and is fun apart from anything else.

Is a world without theism/religion possible? Are humans religious animals?

Believing that you are the sole aribter of what constitutes reason is maybe dangerous.

But making the effort to be reasonable and deliberately trying to be rational and reasonable is a good thing.

I will say more about all this later.

God this sounds pompous. Can't be helped.

Alistair G Student Profile

=========================================================================

Happy
Monday 11th December 2006.

This is my new locale.

I have suddenly realised that all of this blog might be bullshit.:)

Anyway.

I am sort of stuck here:

ALI G: I is here with none other than me main man Tony Benn. So Mr.Benn you keep banging on about the right to work? What about the right NOT to work? ....What if you just want to chill?
MR. TONY BENN:.....

What is the answer to this question?

Is there a right not to work:)?

Everyone is free and they are free to chose not to work but this pretty much goes against human nature and will obviously have some kind of implications for the person who choses not to work.

I think Mr Benn said that people want to work and have the right to a job.....
Yeah but.... do you have the right to work? or the right not to work?

I suppose what happens in real practice is what ought to happen in a funny kind of way:
i.e.
I suppose the only work you have to do is what needs to be done for you to survive....

But surely that's the whole point. Surely it is the case that if the only work done was the work that needed to be done in order for us to survive then surely there would be a great deal less work to be done...... ??




------




Saturday, December 09, 2006
Sat 09 Dec
Right well where were we.
er.
flipping heck lighten up.
anyway
Here's something I texted to Question Time the other day with great urgency.
I don't think anyone really answered it.
"If Iraq is now a sovereign democracy then surely it is up to their government whether our forces stay or go."
Does Iraq have the constitutional right to ask the US and England to leave?
That's the question I want answered. There's certainly an answer but I'm not likely to hear it on the news.
Anyway. My hibernation is in full swing.
....
I am trying to work out why the government is laying into benefit thieves.
It's a drop in the ocean compared to tax fraud. But rich people are powerful so we don't want to stop them dodging tax.
They want to get people off benefits to save money.
Because socio-economic power is moving from the state to businessmen basically and so the state needs all the money it can get.
?

More likely that they don't want anyone getting the idea that rich people don't deserve or didn't earn their fortunes. And that you have to work and get a job and that you don't get something for nothing in this world... etc.


-----

Someone said to me the other day "caffeine bleeds the body of nutrients."
Now if that is 100% true why can't I find anywhere that says it on the internet?
What's the truth about caffeine? Why all the confusion?
I read a leaflet in the doctor's surgery saying coffee in moderation is not bad for you. 3 or 4 strong cups a day is fine, it says. I thought, "Great". I love it thought it makes me feel a bit shite in some ways. Anyway on closer inspection this leaflet was made by the Coffee Organisation of Britain or whatever. Kerching etc. Hmm...

...

Universities June 17 2006.

Saturday, June 17, 2006

Universities

"If students are making calculations about what degree is going to get them the best job and the best opportunity in life this is "no bad thing.""

Bill Rammell, MP.
Minister for lifelong learning, further and higher education.
The Guardian, Feb 18th 2006.

It seems that this man doesn't understand the significance of a thousand years of civilisation.
A degree is not and never was ABOUT getting a job. A degree does not "get you a job".

A degree is about getting a degree. It is about education. It is about education for its own sake. Universities are not about getting people jobs. They are about learning, gaining skills, and research for its own sake.
If I so desired I should be allowed to study mediaeval theology and then become a monk and hence earn no money.
If I so desired I should be able to study philosophy and then work in a kebab shop for the rest of my life and hence earn only a small amount of money.
How much money does someone need to study philosophy? Books, paper, pens, time.
Nothing very expensive there.
You say who will pay for the degree? Well, if I were to study medicine with the intention of becoming a doctor then society would benefit and hence society should pay.
The argument that is put forward for "tuition fees" even by "left-wingers" is that IF your degree enables you to get a job that earns a lot of money, then you should be asked to "put something back in".
This argument falls down because there is NO causal link between degree and income. It is too big an if.
Well there is no if.

We very often hear about "entrepreneurs" or "self-made men" who by some miracle:) have made vast sums of money without ever having been to university (wow!) or even nursery school:).

Should these people "put something back in"???
It is of benefit to society that universities exist that study, teach and research all kinds of knowledge. Hence society should pay for it.

That's basically how it has been for a thousand years or so.The real reason for the introduction of "tuition fees" is rampant capitalism and money-worshipping and the relentless commercialisation of absolutely everything.Universities are no doubt now seen as an "industry" like everything else.

They exist for profit and not for the search for knowledge for its own sake.

Civilisation stands in peril. :)

.......And what about all those people whose courses are paid for by the state - NVQs, so I am led to believe, for example plumbing - and whose qualifications help get them what can be very well paid jobs, for example as plumbers?