We are fighting not for the human rights of the people, but for the divine rights of mankind. In this and many other things we differ from the men of the Revolution. We do not want to be sansculottes, nor simple citizens, nor venal presidents; we want to found a democracy of gods, equal in majesty, in sanctity, and in bliss. You demand simple dress, austere morals, and unspiced pleasures, but we demand nectar, ambrosia, crimson robes, costly perfumes, luxury and splendour, the dancing of laughing nymphs, music and comedies.
<img src="http://larvatusprodeo.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/heinegr2.jpg"
Babbitt liked that smile, and hunted for conversation: “Saw a bang-up cabaret in New York: the ‘Good-Morning Cutie’ bunch at the Hotel Minton.”
“Yes, they’re pretty girls. I danced there one evening.”
“Oh. Like dancing?”
“Naturally. I like dancing and pretty women and good food better than anything else in the world. Most men do.”
“But gosh, Doane, I thought you fellows wanted to take all the good eats and everything away from us.”
“No. Not at all. What I’d like to see is the meetings of the Garment Workers held at the Ritz, with a dance afterward. Isn’t that reasonable?”
Of course having a rich and indulgent poetasting uncle did buy Heine some space to pen such phrases. Not that I disagree with the sentiments though. Hell, I’m not even pull some Schiller ‘Letters on Aesthetic Education’ on yer.
Basically ‘cos I’m more of a John Wilmot dude m’self. He knew how luxury and impiety always ended up paying the price for eachother’s company.
Stop me before I start sharing nasty sups from his cup.
Incidentally to my taste, the best thing in The Libertine is not Depp as Rochester but Malkovich as Chuck 2. “Don’t fuck up, Johnny.”
Or I could get gravid on Ovid.
And waiting for the Huysmans revival. Speculate on “À Rebours” the movie updated for the 21st century a la what “Le Grand Bouffe” did to Sade’s “Sodom” in the 20th century. I see lashings of webcams, nanoscent organs and Catherine Ringer on a Pacific atoll, reached only by private submarine.
I’m guessing by ambrosia, he didn’t mean this
2 cans pineapple chunks, drained
2 cans mandarin oranges, drained
2 jars maraschino, drained
1 can coconut flakes
1/2 bag mini marshmallows
4 oz. sour cream
16 oz. Cool Whip
apparently the recipe for crimson robes is nasty
Well, reading that recipe, I’m still no wiser as to whether you drink it, eat it, rub it in, insert it elswhere or spray it on recaltriant guests.
It’s got beef cheeks and that’s all I can say.
Perhaps I’ve said too much.
Is $58mill a lot for a submarine, Nabs?
I mean although I’m tempted to think I can’t afford to have one, maybe I should be thinking can I afford not to have one?
Beef cheeks? Wha…da…fa?
And now my random shuffle is playing this , the whiskey bottle is empty and I have to rise again in seven hours.
So au bientot.
Beef cheeks and coconut flakes hey? That’ll keep me lying awake in bed staring at the ceiling for a while until memories of reading Dickens once again tip me into deep slumber.
It’s actually pretty reasonable when you think how the Electric Boat Company of Groton, CT frequently stings the USN several billion for subs with no decent cocktail bar area.
Und wenn du lange in einen cheeks blickst, blickt der coconut flaken auch in dich hinein
Do they still use those Polaris tubes ? Because I’m thinking caged go-go dancers to get things humming.
…beef cheeks…coconut flakes…
What!?? Huh! Oh right!
Oh god no Ants, you’d be better off with Ohio class SSBNs packing Trident. Their launch tubes are a good 4 metres in diameter into which you could fit a decent double act…with pole.
Sure to be a few on the market soon. Just make sure you step a bit more livelier with your credit card than Roman Abramovich.
So Kim, this politics of pleasure thread must be unwinding pretty much the way you imagined right?
“So Kim, this politics of pleasure thread must be unwinding pretty much the way you imagined right?”
Well if Heine can demand “crimson robes, [...and] the dancing of laughing nymphs,” then I don’t see why you chaps can’t demand beef cheeks, coconut flakes, and caged go-go dancers in submarine tubes.
Hmm, “Caged Go-Go Dancers.” Wasn’t that the title of a Roger Corman movie?
See, it’s the law of unintended consequences at work. Heine starts out wanting crimson robes, and before you know it, we wind up with Roger Corman movies.
Memorial to an anti-gay preacher who died of auto-erotic asphyxiation:
We gather here to eulogize
The Pastor and the Man
Old Gary Aldridge, often wise,
Though not his latest plan.
A member of the Christian nation,
Friend of Jerry Falwell,
His last attempt at masturbation
Didn’t go at all well.
For fifteen years, he’d preached the word
A Southern Baptist minister
His death–now, is it just absurd
Or something rather sinister?
How does a person come to wear
Not one wetsuit, but two?
(Although, I know, I should not care
I’m curious–aren’t you?)
I tend to think that, years ago,
He spied a rubber glove,
And wondered “Should I–well, you know–
When God and I make love?”
He tried it on, and found a tube,
Half hidden on his shelf,
Of KY–smiled, and murmered “Lube
Thy neighbor as thy self.”
And minutes later, hard at work,
He felt a little odd
Was this a sin, or just a quirk?
He talked it out with God.
“Is what I’m doing here a sin?
Or is my pleasure Thine?
Is this as bad as skin on skin?
Lord, please, give me a sign!”
So God produced a pamphlet: “Your
Vacation in Aruba!”
And pointed out–right there, page four–
The wetsuits used for SCUBA
See, God’s not really how you think
A deity might be
He’s got a wicked bondage kink
(Just ask His son, J. C.)
So Gary died, not steeped in sin
But following God’s plan;
So straight to Heaven–come on in!
And bring the wetsuits, man!
A story, sure, but it may yet
Explain what happened then.
The moral is, please don’t forget:
Your safeword is “Amen”.
From Pharyngula
Thank you, Kim, that quote has made my day. At this point I was going to quote Emma Goldman, but it turns out it was always a paraphrase. Still, the quotation here from ‘Living My Life’ reflects my feelings on the matter.
The trick seems to be in attaining happiness while living simply.
Buddhism feels very out of favour these days don’t you think?
Extinguishing desire and all that mullarcky.
Sorry to meta comment Kim but what gives with the reflections on desire following the environmental impact of fashion and so forth?
I prefer the idea that desire needs to be given greater value rather than extinguished. This does not necessarily contradict the idea of ‘living simply’: perhaps some things that we persist in desiring are not worthy of our desire?
The quotation *is* a little bit reminiscient (in advance) of the Hillsong doctrine: Jesus wants you to have nice things, etc. Just a little. I see the points made by both HK and Klaus.
Ambrosia salad with maraschinos?
Well I’ll be.
Sie sang vom irdischen Jammertal,
Von Freuden, die bald zerronnen,
Vom Jenseits, wo die Seele schwelgt
Verklärt in ew’gen Wonnen.
She sang of our earthly vale of tears,
Of joys that quickly fade;
And the Land Beyond where the soul delights,
Transfigured in ecstasy.
Sie sang das alte Entsagungslied,
Das Eiapopeia vom Himmel,
Womit man einlullt, wenn es greint,
Das Volk, den großen Lümmel.
She sang the old abnegation song
The lullaby about heaven,
That’s used in bitter times to lull
To sleep that great oaf, the People.
Ein neues Lied, ein besseres Lied,
O Freunde, will ich euch dichten!
Wir wollen hier auf Erden schon
Das Himmelreich errichten.
A new and better song, my friends
I propose to write for you,
We shall build right here on earth
That longed-for realm of heaven.
What if the nymphs don’t want to dance?
Freestyle unnattributed poetry huh? I’m in.
hookers and cocaine? I’m so tired of literary greats talking about chicks as pleasures to be consumed. Next????
Oh for the heady days of Romanticism. Unfortunately those of us who were born on the other side of the Holocaust will never get to relive those times. We know what is at the end of that road.
Thank you Nabs and thank you A Gnome Named Grimble Grumble. I’ve lived a life of contrary tastes with much dissatisfaction but now
my desires have been writ in flaming script.
cheers, anthony.
I wonder whether the Girls are Mad,
And I wonder whether they mean to Kill,
And I wonder if William Bond will die,
For assuredly he is very ill.
He went to church in a May morning,
Attended by Faeries, One Two & Three,
But an Angel of Providence drove them away,
And he returned home in misery.
He went not out to the Fields nor Green,
He went not out to the Village nor Town,
But he return’d home in a black, black Cloud,
And took to his Bed and there lay Down.
And an Angel of Providence at his Feet,
And an Angel of Providence at his Head,
And in the midst the black, black Cloud,
And in the midst the Sick Man on his Bed.
And on his left was sweet Mary Green,
And on his right was his sister Jane,
And their tears fell thro’ the black, black Cloud,
To drive away the Sick Mans pain.
“Oh William, if thou dost another love,
Dost another love better than poor Mary,
Go & take that other to be thy Wife,
And Mary Green shall her servant be!”
“Yes, Mary, I do another love,
Another I love far better than thee,
And I will have her to be my Wife,
Then what have I to do with thee?”
Mary trembl’d and Mary chill’d,
And Mary fell down on the right-hand floor,
Til William Bond and his sister Jane
Scarce could recover Mary more.
When Mary awoke and found her laid
At the right hand of her William dear,
At the right hand of his loved Bed,
And found her William Bond so near,
The Faeries that tended William Bond
Danced around her shining head,
They danced upon her Pillow white.
And the Angel of Providence left the bed.
I thought Love lived in the hot Sun-shine,
But oh! he lives in the moony light!
I thought Love lived in the bright of Day,
But sweet Love is the comforter of Night.
Seek Love in the pity of others’ Woe,
In the gentle relief of another’s Care,
In the dark of night and the winter’s snow,
In the Naked & Out-cast, seek love There.
(mad props to Mistah William Blake.)
The revolution will not be right back after a message about a white tornado, white lightning, or white people.
You will not have to worry about a dove in your bedroom, a tiger in your tank, or the giant in your toilet bowl.
The revolution will not go better with Coke.
The revolution will not fight the germs that may cause bad breath.
The revolution will put you in the driver’s seat.
Well, we don’t actually. We are still in the fog, pressing onwards.
“The revolution will not be right back after a message about a white tornado, white lightning, or white people.”
Because after the revolution, everyone who knows how to create the signals that allow us to “be right back” will be long gone. The revolution will, however, be right back after a message about (you guessed it) the revolution.
“You will not have to worry about a dove in your bedroom, a tiger in your tank, or the giant in your toilet bowl.”
Because after the revolution, you will no longer have a bedroom, a gas tank, or a toilet bowl. Unless by toilet bowl, you mean the glorious open sewage ditches built by the revolution.
“The revolution will not go better with Coke.”
Of course not. There will be no Coke, and no way of producing Coke. There will, however, be cocaine, the revolution’s only cash crop, and its only way of getting hard currency from white people. (Hey, remember white people? They left after the revolution.)
“The revolution will not fight the germs that may cause bad breath.”
The revolution will also not fight the germs that cause AIDS, malaria, dengue, hepatitis, and cholera. The revolution will not admit that germs cause these things. They were caused by Bulgarian nurses, whom we will kidnap, torture, and hold for ransom. (Hey, another source of hard currency for the revolution!)
“The revolution will put you in the driver’s seat.”
It sure will. Just ask all the satisfied drivers of Haiti, Cambodia, Congo, Johannesburg, North Korea…
This is the most enthralling thread I’ve read on LP.
In Soviet Russia, the cars drive you!
Pleasure instincts evolved in higher order mammals to direct our behaviour towards activity encouraging survival production and sexual reproduction. Obviously these pleasure heads have been working all to well given our species planetary domination and consumption patterns.
Nowadays our biological endowments are not altogether functional given our ecological environment and technological embodiments.
This is obviously so in the case of the pleasure we get from continual and extensive use of carbon-emitting transport (cars and planes). Fries the planet.
But the availability of high calorie food, toxic drugs and a pornographic media has certainly made the pursuit of pleasure a dubious goal of private policy. We have created a generation of fat, dopey sleaze bags.
I cant see this vicious trend getting much better given the unlimited individual autonomy which is the default principle regulating social life. Unless institutional authority steps in (which it has been doing).
And there is a good chance that our mechanised pleasure-seeking will be amplified in the not to distant future. Technology will likely produce more powerful drugs and nueral-implants giving every more vivid simulations of real life.
All very pleasurable. But all very solipsistic, narcissistic and nihilistic. Therefore immoral.
So we need to find some way to conserve the better angels of our nature from the moral wasteland that our institutional rules and instrumental tools are creating.
“We have created a generation of fat, dopey sleaze bags.”
If the hat fits Jack?
“Nowadays our biological endowments are not altogether functional given our ecological environment and technological embodiments.”
Speak for your self Jack,mine work just fine.
“I cant see this vicious trend getting much better given the unlimited individual autonomy which is the default principle regulating social life. Unless institutional authority steps in (which it has been doing).”
No more Lady Chatterly’s Lover for Strocibot.
Gaz on 13 October 2007 at 8:11 pm
I am very-fit, clean-living and happily-married, if you must know. We all live and learn. Eh tu?
Gaz on 13 October 2007 at 8:14 pm
We have only your word on that. YOu should provide some independent testimony. By the sound of things your endowments run with only your hands on the wheel.
Gaz on 13 October 2007 at 8:17 pm
Its not all about me. Mix the post-modern subculture of pleasure seeking with the remants of pre-modern multicultures and you get catastrophe. This is evident in the problems besetting Aboriginal, Lebansese and Sudanese youth. Perhaps if you got your hand off it and got out more (Bedford Stuy, Top End, West Sydney) you might get street savvy about this stuff.
Savonarola.
How’s that Bonfire of the Vanities project getting along, Jack?
Katz on 14 October 2007 at 7:38 am
Its more a bonfire of profanities, not that you could tell the difference.
Katz’s comment is revealing in that it show that, in the world view of the Wets, the banning of grog, drugs and porn in anomic Aboriginal communities is morally equivalent to a religious fundamentalist destroying priceless works of art from antiquity and modernity.
Speaks volumes for the aesthetics and ethics of the thoroughly post-modern liberal.
No Jack, it’s destruction of choice.
And do you have privileged access to the records of the Anomic Communities Branding Authority?
Precisely when did the ACBA brand every Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory as “anomic”?
What criteria did the ACBA use to arrive at this determination?
But more fundamentally, doubtless there are many Northern Territory Aborigines who are at least as capable as you are of enjoying a quiet drink and perhaps a quick flip through a stick mag.
Therefore, since when was collective punishment an operational principle of Australian public administration?
“Perhaps if you got your hand off it and got out more (Bedford Stuy, Top End, West Sydney) you might get street savvy about this stuff.”
Jack, that you are a star L.P. verbal masturbater ,is not in doubt, so I will let that one go through to the keeper.
“I am very-fit, clean-living and happily-married,”
Indeed Jack,and we have only your word for that.
Gaz on 14 October 2007 at 12:05 pm
No, Basic Fitness Asessments do not lie. Some commmenters, it appears, have no such compunction.
Katz on 14 October 2007 at 12:00 pm
A “quiet drink and a quick flip through a stick mag” is droll understatement of the moronic inferno that rages in some parts of this troubled province.
If I had my druthers I would have led a much less vicious life. Just last night I see Paul Stewart, another one of my party animal drinking buddies and school chums, coming out of hospital with a transplanted liver. Given a couple of years to live. What a waste.
Katz says:
That remote Aboriginal communities are anomic sticks out like dogs balls to anyone who has visited these places. The problem is that the “custodians of the law” tribal elders have died out whilst the middle-aged became victims of the sit down money philosophy. So the “gangsta youngers” have gone feral, letting their pleasure heads burn in a reprise of Lord of the Flies.
It happens every time the ascetic tribal multiculturalism meets the hedonistic global subculturalism eg Raskols in Moresby, Lebanese in West Sydney, Sudanese in Northern Melbourne.
Katz says:
It is not a “punishment” to be deprived of toxic substances or to have the writ of the law extend beyond the company store.
I bow to Jack as an expert on the protrusive qualities of canine testicles.
It was once widely believed that freedom was bad for black folks the world over. Strocchers appears to be a late hold-out on this position.
Strocchi wants to ignore the rights of thousands of NT Aborigines who simply want the same right of refusal that Strocchi denied himself during his salad days.
As St Augustine said: “Lord, make me good. But not yet.”
Katz on 14 October 2007 at 1:25 pm
Freedom delivered too quickly or at too large a scale can end in tears. The authority for this statement is no less than JS Mill. Or is he to be dismissed as another cursed inhabitant of the despotic Strocchiverse?
Apparently Mandela stacked the first post-apartheid election in favour of the white minority. He was frightened that too much freedom too soon for the ANC would cause civil unrest. Was he too trying to keep the darkies under foot?
Freedom is bad where it leads to bad consequences. And vice-versa. This is the philosophy of those who inhabit the reality-based community. You are welcome to it.
Thus where freedom causes great public harm we inhibit it, whether black white or brindle. Such as the freedom to drive gas guzzling cars, for instance.
Civil freedom seems to work for most Aboriginal Australians who have more or less integrated into urban life. This is probably the majority.
But I think constraint is justified for the minority of Australian Aboriginals who are ship-wrecked between their ascetic pre-modern tribal multiculture and the mixed blessings of hedonistic post-modern global subcultures.
Horses for courses and vice-versa. Or socio-biological realism if you like.
You still haven’t justified destroying freedom of all NT Aborigines because of the alleged failings of some NT Aborigines.
You haven’t explained why all NT inhabitants aren’t subject to the same regime.
This isn’t surprising, because you can’t.
Katz on 14 October 2007 at 2:34 pm
My rotten double standards are exposed. Its also true that I cannot justify “destroying the freedom” of all Australians to smoke crack, drive at 100 kmh down side streets and pack concealed pieces. Even though its probable that a majority of Australians could indulge in these vices without creating major problems.
But I still support these outrageous oppressions on us all because a minority given this freedom will do more harm than good. Particularly to themselves.
NT residents in urban jurisdiction are less afflicted so they are not being subjected to martial law. The Feds can resume control of remote Aboriginal communities as they have the constitutional power to do so. I daresay that power exists for good reason.
It is hard lines for NT Aboriginals who are still making a go of it. But they will have to put up with it for the good of their less fortunate bretheren. (By and large the upstanding members are taking this pretty well.)
Laws are not put there for the God-fearing, clean-living and law-abiding. ASuch folk do the right thing because it is moral, not because it is legal.
Laws are put down by the state to keep the unruly minority at bay. This includes the devil whispering in our ear.
Playing the civil rights violin and chanting the liberal mantra runs falls on partially deaf ears, at least as far as this little black duck is concerned. The evidence of the past generation is overwhelming that freedom can be abused. How else can you explain all the lard-arses waddling about.* Or did Howard’s henchmen force-feed them McDonald’s?
* Poignant full disclosure: My BMI at a historic high of 28. On the way down.
Not relevant Strocchers. No one has the right to do these things. There are laws against this behaviour that apply to everyone, not just Aborigines.
Whereas you are supporting the imposition of discriminatory laws upon a sub-set of adult, voting, tax-paying Australian citizens.
Katz on 14 October 2007 at 3:34 pm
Perhaps. This kind of high-flown rhetoric has been a staple of political discourse for way too long. Im over it.
I accept that discrimination may be justified if it is to the advantage of a class that is generally acknowledged to have special needs. For example, handicapped people, pregnant women, children and so on. Aboriginals in remote communities seem to fall into this class.
Moreover the political system is already set up for this kind of governmental action. The Constitution gives the AUS govt the power to make laws for “the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws.” The referrendum framers were thinking of Aboriginals when they amended it thus.
And the Commonwealth has the power to administer the Northern Territories, which is effectively a municipal office of the federal authority. It can and should use that power as the situation calls for it. eg Cyclone Tracy.
The issue goes way beyond a prosaic dispute over political demarcation and administration. It goes to the heart of whats wrong with small-l liberalism and why so few people share the outrage of Fairfax press, legal fraternity and the Netroots activists at Howards conservative authoritarianism.
Both Kant and Mill, the foundational thought of modern liberalism, understood the double-entry nature of political instruments was crucial for citizenship. That is to say they knew that for every right there is a duty, for every entitlement there is obligation, for every power there is responsbility.
But post-modern liberals have a lop-sided attitude towards the constitution of liberty. They want to have their liberal rights cake, but hold the “corporal” duties. The days of issuing blank cheques to such a crowd are over.
The current crop of city-bound Aboriginal political activists, and their cheer-leaders in the liberal-Left latte suburbs, are crying foul. I can restrain my sympathy. They had their chance and blew it.
They failed to make their program work because it was based on a utopian fantasy (Noble Savage communes + Swedish welfare and lawfare). Game over.
“Apparently Mandela stacked the first post-apartheid election in favour of the white minority. He was frightened that too much freedom too soon for the ANC would cause civil unrest. Was he too trying to keep the darkies under foot?’
Careful Jack, keep that up and the men in the white coats will come for you.
Gaz on 14 October 2007 at 5:30 pm
Well me, Nelson Mandela and JS Mill all deserve to be committed to the same loony bin. The one marked “real world”.
This sympathetic but honest report on the SA elections drops some broad hints about what went down during the long electoral tally count.
The ANC was heading for such a landslide it probably would have been able to write its own constitution. Leading to absolute power to the ANC and a probable Mugabe scenario. But the larger white minority would probably have opted for civil war rather than face that fate.
Mandela appears to have the foresight to avoid this unfortunate turn of events, at least at that critical juncture. Oh yeah, the phrase “tyranny of the majority” was taken from Mill, of course. Great minds…
Fairy tales about the ease with which you can combine diverse nationalities, especially those at different stages of development, into a unified represenational system of government are fine to lull ideological suckers to sleep. Such as gaz.
Those who deal with the real world, whether scientists like Mill or statesman like Mandela, have to deal with things as they are. Not as they might be in liberal morality plays.
That’s a massive mischaracterisation – Mill was nowhere near symmetrical in his talk about liberty and responsibility.
Mill’s threshold of responsibility was very low, and as far as I’m aware, 19th century colonies were the only ones who didn’t pass the test… And this one statement seemed incongruous with almost everything else he said. Certainly all citizens of Britain, regardless of how uneducated they were, had to be given responsibility first, and THEN they would learn how to use it.
David on 14 October 2007 at 6:40 pm
No. Your reading of Mill is a standard rehash of wishy-washy Wet Left-liberal palaver. His wariness about the too rapid or too wide extension of liberal institutions was a consistent theme.
Mill was first and foremost an orthodox economist and was forever warning about the need to balance the books. This went for politics and economics.
He was also the author of the phrase “tyranny of the majority”. So he saw the downside of unlimited freedom.
He also predicted the ideological contradiction between liberal multiculturalism and political egalitarianism.
Mill was far wiser than his ostensible followers. Post-modern liberals are ideological degenerates.
Thanks for telling me Mill was an economist who thought the books need to be balanced. Everybody knows this, but the relevance is?
The tyranny of the majority was not a danger of excess freedom – quite the opposite. It’s the risk that the populist masses will go in for authoritarianism. Basically, the belief you attack “luvvies” for.
Once again, please provide some evidence about Mill balancing off every liberty with responsibility. You are distorting Mill into his diametrical opposite.
In the Subjection of Women he made it very clear that we must FIRST give freedom, THEN hope the people “learn” how to use the freedom.
Where exactly is the “high-flown rhetoric” in that statement?
The first statement after the quote in my last post was actually a quote of Jack.
[fixed - tigtog]
But Jack, all handicapped people, children, pregnant women, etc., are conceded to be handicapped in the same ways.
You have not proven that all Northern Territory Aborigines are handicapped in the same way. You have merely assumed it on no evidence whatsoever. As I have said twice already, and as you keep ignoring, there are countless Aborigines in the Northern Territory who are quite capable of holding their drink, gazing at filthy pictures, etc., acts that don’t break any laws, without running amok. And yet these individuals are being treated as if it is inevitable that they will run amok.
So someone’s gotta draw the line somewhere right? Ok, you’ve got 7.83 freedom right now. I think it’s just enough for the next three years. Then we can move up to around 8.4.
What I find particularly amusing about the Jack Strocchis and all the other cranky old blokes out there (Hello Birdy) in their literal and metaphorical sheds, polishing, stroking, pinstriping and then stridently declaiming their pet social/economic/political/geo-political theories based on their autodidactic and so intensely soliphistic explorations, endevours, findings, etc, is how tetchy and very untheoretical they get when it’s pointed out that real life often gets rather messy, unquantitive and unpredictable and really doesn’t lend itself to propping up their grandly gilted conclusions that they constantly claim are based on real life observation.
These kinda of cranky one-note natterers have as much chance of being as influential and endorsed as a eunuch’s complaint about shabby art direction on a porn site.
But be that as it may, why are you wasting your brillant insights on a thankless, petty, evil-minded blogosphere Jack? All you’ve achieved over the past few years is to turn yourself into a bipartisan figure of derision and an ongoing punchline. Your big ideas have convinced no one and converted even less online.
So stop wasting time on us and get out there to put your big thoughts to work in the big world. You keep talking like a player but so far you’re just manifested yourself online as a patzer. Go for it. I’m sure your ‘beautiful losers’ can spare you for a while.
At the very least, I’m sure you’ve got a bumper book of gutbusting theory stuck inside you, straining to get out.
Incidentally, missed you at the QCV-IDI first anniversary pissup last week.
OK, since I took pleasure out of a driveby mocking of Jack, it’s only politic I deliver something in return to pleasure the rest of you.
Voila! The longest legs in showbiz, ever. (NB: Semi Safe For Work)
Helmut Newton meets Weimer Republic cabaret, artfully yet unwittingly anticipating the rise of camgirls while still making on its own terms an interesting point about the politics of providing pleasure for others through technology.
“The ANC was heading for such a landslide it probably would have been able to write its own constitution. Leading to absolute power to the ANC and a probable Mugabe scenario. But the larger white minority would probably have opted for civil war rather than face that fate.”
Jack, I would not normally reply to such a facile comment, using the electoral result of an “Arpartheid South Africa ” as a case in point, to prove five fifths of five eighths of F.A. However, now you have mentioned it, South Africa has been in a perpetual state of civil war since before and after, the election of Nelson Mandela.Of course, now the civil war no longer has the Boer on black,but black on black,backed by the same masters in London, who have run South Africa for a hundred years.
Like Australia, and you are indeed correct pointing out the absolute abject misery and poverty of the Aboriginal race,their situation has nothing to do with,
“Fairy tales about the ease with which you can combine diverse nationalities, especially those at different stages of development, into a unified represenational system of government are fine to lull ideological suckers to sleep. Such as gaz.”
Jack,with all your tertiary education you understand nothing,you write paragraphs adnauseam, of absolute (to the real people) meaningless shite, and your air of superiority,sticks out like dogs nuts.
You have never,and I will run that by you again, never been and seen, any Aboriginal community’s in the real world, and would not have a clue,how they ended up in the situation they are in, because if you had,you would not be blaming the post modern latte left for their problems.
John Howard and the other left overs of “Medevil Bully Boys” are and will always be, the cause and effect of the plight of indigenous races the world over,and you can waffle all you like. this is the reality.
The feigned indignation of Howard and co of late of the Aboriginal plight, is indeed sickening, these fuckers compassion is about getting reelected, end of story.So Jack peddle your high brow bollicks to some fucker who will listen like oh I dunno Maggie Thatcher mayhaps.
jack’s unified theory of the good ole days:
when women didn’t get a bashing from the old man after coming home from the pub blind drunk having run over some sod in the holden special.
when girls didn’t get pack raped in parks after dark or when priests/scout masters/teachers didn’t sexually assault their charges who didnt didnt have any idea of what was happening, or when poppy/uncle frank didn’t put their hands in the little one’s pants.
when fights in pubs never took place on most friday nights and a couple of others.
when harassing/molesting young female workers didn’t happen in most workplaces and where women weren’t overlooked for promotion.
when men didn’t knock back 4 schooners at lunch.
when gangs didn’t have regular brawls (that would keep the MSM yapping for a month these days).
when gangsters didn’t regularly burn down businesses for insurance.
when the cops didn’t run state-wide rackets.
when gays weren’t chased or bashed or constantly not teased.
when mentally ill patients didn’t get restrained and brutalised from breakfast to dinnertime nor not experimented on
when girls didn’t go septic from backyard abortions or didn’t scrub away their sins nor reappear after nine months.
when indigenous australians weren’t called dirty abos and didnt live in humpies on the wrong side of town and not not allowed in the pubs, in shops, in swimming pools.
and the real good old, old days, when the per capita intake of legal heroin wasn’t the highest in the western world.
but people were skinnier on the whole.
just keep remembering how to breath, jack.
“jack’s unified theory of the good ole days:”
Yes indeed Amen to all of that.
While I laud Jack’s BMI, I find his “person in charge of stationary cabinet at the office” approach to freedom somewhat wanting.
oops, feel free to insert “moving experience” jokes.