Saturday, 1 September 2018

Maajid Nawaz's juvenile nature and intellect means he gets carried away.

Maureen Lipman came on Maajid Nawaz's LBC talk-show this afternoon (Sat 1/9/2018).

Nawaz asked her directly, "Do you agree with me that the Labour Party is now institutionally racist?"

She dodged the question with her answer, "I agree that we do need a third party [due to Labour's antisemitism]."

Nawaz gets carried away, so much so that he can end up spouting such ridiculous stuff ("Labour institutionally racist") that even very conservative anti-Corbyn Jews (Lipman in this instance) will distance themselves from him.

He needs to be careful. Not a single other presenter/journalist, anywhere, has gone further than 'Labour has a problem with antisemitism.'

Nawaz is looking very juvenile. He looks as though he's trying to earn brownie points with the Zionist lobby with the message, 'Look at me! I'm attacking Corbyn harder than anyone else!"

Tuesday, 31 July 2018

Why should Israel be singled out?

Isn't the Labour Party (e.g. Corbyn) missing this simple slam dunk counter-argument regarding 'Labour and anti-Semitism'?
Leaders and countries are routinely compared to the Nazis, e.g. Saddam and his Baath Party, the Saudi regime, Iran and Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Trump and America, the Tories, Gaddafi, Putin, ... .
The comparison is often invalid or stupid. But the whole point of a free-speech society is that people must be allowed to say anything, no matter how seemingly ridiculous.
So it makes no sense to single Israel out (in UK political debate) as the *one* nation that cannot be compared to the Nazis.

Tuesday, 24 July 2018

Urghh! The heat!

Urghh! This heat is so stifling - killing the energy to do anything.

Well, the scientists have been warning us (global warming) for a few decades now.

Very ironic, then, that, just as we are in the middle of this heat wave, today the government announces its go-ahead for fracking in Lancashire, i.e. acceleration of the very process (fossil-fuel consumption) that is crippling us.

Friday, 20 July 2018

Oh dear, Jonathan Pie ...

Oh dear, Jonathan Pie revealing himself as merely a tool of western propaganda - parroting all the lies of our media about Russia and Putin.

Pie apparently has faith in our intelligence services and press - the very institutions who lie to us industri
ally about Iraq, Libya, Syria, Israel, Venezuela, ... (the list is endless).

Until you gain some real knowledge, Pie, your 'anger', whilst mildly amusing, is just an affectation, simply your *shtick*, not based on any substance.

Sunday, 17 June 2018

Why are people so ignorant and stupid?

A friend of mine (David) has penned some speculations on how future generations will view us.

Here are some of the questions that he suggests will strike them about us.

'How could you have been so unfeeling towards people with mental disorders?', 'How could you have been so blind to the barbarity of the meat industry?' (I've paraphrased that one.), 'How could you have been so indifferent to the financially insecure?'

I have cited just a tiny sample of the issues David raised because it's not tenable to discuss more than one or two questions at a time.

Firstly, there is a thematic question that underlies all the questions (not just the tiny sample I've cited) that he raises.

That question (in the minds of future generations about us) is, How could we (today) be so ignorant and foolish with regard our natural (ecosphere) and social environments?

I think that's quite an easy question to answer because ignorance and stupidity are simply a question of one's sources of (dis)information, which reveals the source of the problem, because most people get their info from the mainstream media, e.g. BBC.

Indifference to the poor is something that is promoted by our media. The propaganda is persistently pushed that rich people are rich, and poor people poor, because that is the consequence of living in a meritocracy. That is: the *lie* is persistently promoted that we live in a *meritocracy*.

The meat industry is a good question but, again, it comes back to the media. If there were more documentaries (or dramas or anything) based on the meat industry, that would quickly kill it. There are plenty of dramas set in workplaces, such as police departments, schools and hospitals. And these even boost recruitment to those areas of work because (young) viewers get a feel for day-to-day life there. But day-to-day life in the meat industry, e.g. abattoirs, is a horror show. That is why there is no such drama on tv, because that would kill recruitment. And that is also why there are hardly any documentaries about the meat industry - because that would kill consumption of the product.

So the underlying thematic question regarding people's lack of enlightenment is simply down to an overall rotten media.

Wednesday, 21 March 2018

Russell Brand and Jordan Peterson in conversation. Pure bullshit from both, stemming from narcissism.

I have always felt troubled by Rusell Brand for the years that I've known of him, and by Jordan Peterson for the months that I've known of him.

Brand: the problem to my mind is that his 'personal journey' is so central to his life that he loses the faculty of objectivity and can thus take seriously w*nkers, e.g. Ed Miliband, Jordan Peterson.

Peterson: is a pseudo-intellectual who simply provides fancy packaging for the far-right mantra that 'individual responsibility', not government policy, is what causes people to suffer.

Brand is all about the self, e.g. drugs, addiction, obsession, insecurity, meditation and concomitant 'new age' sh!t. And because, as a 'clinical psychologist', the subject of the 'self' is what Peterson also 'thinks' (masturbates) about, Brand takes him seriously.

Here they both are, w*nking each other off:

Here's another clip. I haven't watched it but the title itself alludes to Peterson's fakeness:

'The problem with false celebrity'

No real intellectual would associate himself with such a stupid illogical title.

Celebrity is false in itself. There is no such thing as 'true' or 'genuine' celebrity.

Also, if you characterise something as 'false' in the first place, then there is no problem left to discuss because you have already identified it - falseness. The title should be 'What makes celebrity false'.

The title alludes to Peterson's narcissism and ego. He is himself a celebrity. But, although he is a pseudo intellectual, he nevertheless has sufficient intelligence to recognise that 'intellectual' and 'celebrity' don't really go together. But he likes being a celebrity. So he must find a way to square the circle. He does that by pretending that there are two kinds of celebrity, true and false (or good and bad). And then he can imply that he is a 'true' (good)celebrity, which is his strategy for avoiding discomfort about being a celebrity which, he knows, conflicts with being an intellectual.

Peterson is indeed a true celebrity (in my book), but a fake intellectual.

And that is the quality that he shares with Brand and why the two of them can hand-job each other - a couple of celebrities coming together to behave like intellectuals.