Friday, April 20, 2012

Sack Boris

I think it's generally taken that anarchists don't take part in elections and election campaigns. I'm not sure why that is so - it's a bit like saying that atheists shouldn't read the Bible, sing hymns or celebrate Christmas; once you decide that religion is meaningless shite then even going to church isn't going to be a problem as long as you recognise it for what it is, a purely cultural phenomena and something that can be enjoyed on that basis only, and not as a philosophy to live your life by.

My argument has always been that anarchists may legitimately do what they need to do to achieve what we need to achieve which leads one down the sticky route of legitimising violence. and of course, contrary to all that Gandhi bollocks, violence is certainly required even if its only the sort of violence designed to repel the violence from the state that will be directed at us. Unfortunately for the idealists we do live in a physical universe and violent interaction of parts of that universe, even in the tree of life, is a fundamental part of that reality!

It also means, that in the cause of pragmatism, if we choose to hijack an election for our purposes then we may perfectly legitimately do so, as long as we make it clear that we are not playing their game, but we are disrupting their game. This I am seriously considering doing at the next general election! I may well stand as a "none of the above" candidate, if I can rally enough support for it.

While the forces of state oppression and corporate fascism are influencing and fixing elections then I think it ill behoves us to completely ignore the party political arena unfortunately, and especially while most people still look to "legitimate" and prescribed politics for their answers.

Yes, I've been pissing around with all sorts of ideas ever since Reclaim The Streets collapsed and the forces of democratic justice decided our democratic views were surplus to requirement.  I even joined the Green Party for a bit, but as of this week, I am poltically a completely free agent once again. Happy to work with the Green Party where I see that their cause is the same as mine, but not happy to play the game of parliament and the sham democracy our lords and masters see fit to allow us!

Before the next General election though - there is another election I would like to influence. That is the London mayoral election. Boris as mayor has been far more damaging than I ever expected and the situation just cannot continue. Boris must be ditched!!

Sack Boris oyster wallets

My personal take on this comes from suffering from poor air quality and grave concerns over whether I have somewhere affordable to live in the future (Johnson is offering nothing in his manifesto, not a fucking sausage).

Add to that concerns about my job, the environment in general, transport, cycle facilities (Boris being the only candidate not endorsing LCC demands fr better Dutch style facilities).

Environmental pledges

Boris Johnson's idea of a transport policy   and the most expensive bus in history

Boris's idea of managing pollution is to directly sabotage the monitoring system and to attack the regulators ... not actually giving a shit about those of us who are suffering.

In the next few days I hope to be putting together an argument for voting Green and putting Ken as your second preference - which is what I'll be doing.

As for Brian Paddick - the flakey ex policeman who may or may not have been an anarchist - what an utter wanker!! He too lacks credible policies - not much on transport, little on housing, and if you want to sort out racism in the Met electing an ex copper to do it would be a grave mistake. Anyway - who the fuck is stupid enough to trust a Lib Dem these days?

So, in conclusion, if you vote for Boris you're voting for 4 more years of waste, neglect, increasing pollution, and lost opportunity and basically voting in someone who doesn't really want the job and is using it as a politcal stepping stone; if you vote Paddick then you're voting for a vanity candidate with no credibilty. This really leave just two options left. The Greens and Ken Livingstone do have an agreement. They are urging their supporters to put the other down as a 2nd preference. My own instinct is to vote Green to enable the green party to have more clout in the next administration just because London is crying out for a better environment for all of us - I'm sick of seeing people around me getting sicker and sicker, not to mention myself!

So - vote green and put Ken down as 2nd preference, that way we may end up with the best of all worlds.

Livingstone's Energy Pledge:

Air Pollution:
This is a documentary "Pancevo Mrtav
Grad" which talks about Pancevo, the bigger industrial site of former
Yugoslavia holds headquarters. This town is also known for being the
most polluted in Europe. Meanwhile Pancevo people are getting cancer
and the kids crowd the hospitals because of very serious breathing

and there's the no arms fair pledge too!

Blamed for Bee Collapse, Monsanto Buys Leading Bee Research Firm -

Blamed for Bee Collapse, Monsanto Buys Leading Bee Research Firm -

This sort of thing is often held to be the stuff of conspiracy theorists - so let it be recorded that this did happen, and it is true. Monsanto is set on silencing evidence based criticism of its activities, and this may be a significant event in our journey towards complete ecological collapse of life in this planet!

Saturday, April 14, 2012

Mouse Crucified On A Cactus

I asked for a sign from Jesus and nothing arrived all over Easter. In vain I lived off toasties in the hope of an effigy appearing in one. Nothing. Then less than a week later, a mouse, an innocent creature, crucifies itself on a cactus! this is truly a sign from Jesus. This mouse died for my sins...He is the Mouseiah.

In a Godless unfeeling universe, such terrible cruelty is inevitable. Poor mousey, got stuck on cactus and died. We found him this morning already dead. Damn you God, damn you!! Why are you so cruel? 

Friday, April 13, 2012

Earliest trans memory?

Distinctly remember standing in the kitchen with me and my sister being made ready for school, think she was about 4, and i would have been 6. My mum was just straightening my sister's little pleated skirt and I said to my mum, all innocent like, that it'd be fun to go to school dressed in my sister's clothes. My mum said, alright then, and I went all shy and said noooo!. Wish I'd said yes!!

Pretty sure it was something that I'd been mulling around in my head for a while.

Then at age 8 or 9 me and my sister started playing dress-up with a bag of clothes that had suddenly appeared in the back room, with the full knowledge of my mum, though not my Dad, I used to put on the little dresses and pretend to be a girl; we'd perform little "plays" in front of the mirror and sometimes record them on a tape recorder.

When my Dad found out it was stopped - though he said nothing to me about it, ever.

After that I dressed up in whatever I could find, my mum's stuff, my sister's stuff, which briefly fitted me from age of about 8 to 12 or 13.

I never really thought about wanting to be a girl until after puberty though - i guess once it became clear that i was defintely going to be a big hairy man, I realised that that was what I defintely didn't want to be!! :(

Sunday, April 08, 2012

comment is free strike again

Fucking Guardian!! I don't know why I bother. I'm inflicted with the delusion that my viewpoint is as valid as anyone else's - but not on Guardian's Comment Is Free apparently.

so often I end up getting censored after making a valid point. If I was a climate change denier I'd be fine to post up any old untrue made up bollocks I liked. Even swearing and personal abuse is fine up to a point. Guardian doesn't mind that too much. But if you ever cut to the bone on a key and important issue that does not serve the Guardian's neo-Liberal agenda, then you're off.

This article dealt with the proposed execution of a middle class business woman in China.

My comment merely dealt with the fact that there seems to be more outrage being voiced over the proposed execution of a "nice" middle class business woman (white collar fraud) than I have seen over many, many executions both in China and in the USA. China executes political activists, China kills people for their beliefs! China kills people for being Tibetan and / or Buddhist. And yet we see this article agonising over the death of this proven criminal who may well have ruined many people's lives (note for binary people, this does not mean I support the death penalty for anyone and am not in anyway stating that I support the judicial murder of this young woman).

I also pointed out that the USA tends to execute black people, poor white people and people of low IQ in unrepresentatively high numbers. The comment has been removed by moderators. I have no idea why.

Before it was removed I got this comment in reply:

4 April 2012 5:39PM
No outrage over American executions though, because they mainly only kill the poor, blacks, low IQ and other disadvantaged people, not nice middle class business women.
In 2010, 12 states executed 46 inmates — 28 white, 13 black and 5 Hispanic. That's a 60% White 28% Black 10% Hispanic. Considering the states that still carry out the death penalty that's probably representative.
8th Amendment rules prevent under Federal law people with low IQ from being executed. States can't do that.

I have to answer it here and hope the nitwit who responded, Oozaveared (not me), finds it and reads it because the democrat republic of Guardian CIF prevented me from finding the thread until the it was closed for comments!

My poor claim just got ignored and they leapt straight for the race aspect. That was the first straw man!

Firstly - I am a bit baffled where he got his figures from as everywhere I've checked I see hispanic is not a race and hispanic people can be either white or black, or mixed race. So it's nice that he can be so certain about his 10% (binary people again, see?).

However, I'll go with his figures for now. I checked the racial make up of the US. Blacks in the US make up 13% of the overall population. Which proves right away my argument that blacks in the US tend to be executed in unrepresentatively high numbers - 28% of executions, only 13% of the population.

Maybe some of those "hispanics" were black too which would make it even higher. I'll be looking at his claim that 28% blacks might be representative of the states that still carry out death penalty, though i am dubious and also think this is a red herring as not everyone executed by a state is from that state. People do tend to move around for all sorts of reasons.

The next bit about the 8th amendment rules - he uses it to rather dismissively brush my claim away.

8th Amendment rules prevent under Federal law people with low IQ from being executed. States can't do that.

Oh, can't they? this from amnesty International. It's the first one that comes up on Google. The moron didn't even bother checking his facts before leaping in with his complacent nonsense!

So when you consider that what most of what Oozaveared wrote was complacent bollocks and what i wrote was provable even using Oozaveared's own figures, why THE FUCK were my comments removed Oh Great wise Lib Dem supporting FUCKING Guardian? Eh?

Saturday, April 07, 2012

God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible -- Almost : Discovery News

God's Wife Edited Out of the Bible -- Almost : Discovery News:

Modern Christians so hate women that they've even edited out their own god's wife. The architects of Christianity, not satisfied to have removed all traces of Jesus' family and reworked his wife, Mary, into a whore, they also decided to completely expurgate all references to Yahweh's powerful fertility godess wife.

Wednesday, April 04, 2012

Binary people

I've coined this phrase from my experiences of arguing with complete nitwits on Twitter. You say something bad about capitalism and you get an idiotic interjection to point out that communism was quite bad too. Sometimes they do this to make a point that capitalism shouldn't be criticised because the alternative is worse. THE alternative????!!! As if only two types of economic system are available off the shelf and that we as human beings, the most resourceful animal on earth could not possibly devise a third, or indeed many, alternatives if we put our minds to it, or that within the two kinds of systems that exist in the binary peoples' headspace there isn't actually an infinite number of different versions, or that it would be entirely impossible for us to discuss moving on to a post-economic era.

Usually the point they're making, I use the word "point" very loosely here, is just some illogical vague "point" that because communism is bad (with no evidence provided) then capitalism must be good, which amounts to if tea is bad then coffee is good, if salt is bad then pepper is good, of Oasis is bad then Blur are good (one for the teenagers there).

It's the same with anything though. These people see yes or no, black or white, good or bad. When I say Labour are shit I used to get accused of being a Tory. Now when I say Tories are shit I get a tirade of how terrible labour were in government. As if that was even relevant to my point!

The same people seem incapable of having an in depth argument about anything either. Try to analyse a film or a book that they enjoy, with a balanced critique, and they retort, 'why did you bloody watch it then?' Which is quite amusing cos if you criticise a film you haven't seen (I knew I didn't have to watch Pearl Harbor to know it was going to be shit. I was right.) they say you have no right to criticise it: catch 22.

Criticise this country and they will either say, well why don't you go and live in Russia/China/Cuba/Iran (all actual examples I've received). Criticise a city and they will either say, piss off then go live somewhere else, or fuck off, we don't want you here.

If I ever complained about the war in Iraq being illegal and unethical and, well, misguided in every possible way, I got told I was supporting Saddam Hussein and his massacre of the Kurds. WHAT? HOW??

In their world cyclists don't walk or drive, they just ride bikes (through red lights or on pavements), and motorists drive, do not ever walk or cycle and are firm upstanding good taxpaying people.

To men of this ilk women are all to be revered, placed on some sort of pedestal as if they're angels, but they must be pretty, available and be submissive, controlled and owned like cattle. The reverence of women is something you get throughout the male gender and it is so clearly the other side of the misogyny coin. A compliant female is to be revered and a "deviant" female is to be held against the perfect version and reviled! Most men move from the casual misogyny of youth to the teary eyed reverence of "good" women in their married years. Men who fall off the marriage wagon at any point often revert straight back to misogyny.

Anyone who challenges this binary gender position is to be sneered at or shunned. If a woman steps out of line she is a hairy feminist weirdo and if a man wants to be feminine in any way (wearing pink can be an issue for many men, let alone the wearing of skirts, soft fabrics, flower prints or slightly wide trousers, or "feminine" pursuits such as looking after children, creative crafts, having empathy, feeling emotion, personal grooming, etc. etc.) then he must be shunned and kept away from the god fearing folk.

For them, things are either 100% ticketty boo. Or 100% completely fucking shit. Presumably it's a waste of time saying good evening to them because to them it will either be day or night and nothing in between.

Intelligent people realise that nothing exists in this binary way. Everything - or at least near as dammit - exists in a spectrum. There are a multiplicity of ways to organise an economy, but all but two have been thoroughly stamped out and ignored. There are a multiplicity of gender positions one can take -from full on heterosexual to full on homosexuality. These two positions as well as male and female seem to be accepted these days. but not bisexuality, or any combination theirin, nor is transgendered very acceptable. though true to the binary view, men or women who are transgendered should always seek gender reassignment, then everyone will be (sort of) happy; don't try to mix things up though - trouble lies that way! If you don't fit into a box, and an offically sanctioned box at that, then FUCK OFF. Or go sit in the box marked "enemies of the Daily Mail".

Many cyclists drive. Many drivers cycle. We all fucking walk!! even motorists have to get out of their cars at some point.

No one is truly good and no one is evil. We are all just human beings trying to get on. some of us realise that hatred and exploitation of others should be challenged and others don't and completely embrace capitalism, vote Tory or LibDem (or Labour).

Increasingly I see things as those who support the status quo and those who don't. So maybe I'm guilty too. On the other hand - maybe it is that simple in this particular case? Or maybe I am a hypocrite? Well in my book that makes me human, but to the Binaries it probably makes me an evil dipshit.

Here's a perfect example of binary thinking in action as described by a Palestinian freedom fighter

I raise this point mainly as I don't seem to fit into many boxes - not happy about my gender, I recognise both feminine and masculine traits within me, and try to deny neither, I claim to be a male feminist, an anarchist, an atheist, I refuse to describe myself as either a pedestrian, cyclist or a motorist, I am both a tenant and a landlord, brought up working class and yet I feel more middle class, have in the past belonged to two political parties neither of which i vote for. I have been many things and many people through my short life so far, so I am particularly annoyed to have that experience denied by a bunch of nitwits!