An attempt to conduct what is the first real power of any citizen: skepticism of established dogma and ideology; disdain for establishment rhetoric; and contempt for the confederacy of dunces that have somehow become our leaders.
Topics shall include current events, propaganda analysis, political science, philosophy, and biological research.
Richard Branson is a billionaire UK entrepreneur and businessman, who is known for his numerous business ventures and his high energy style.
Last week he was in Vancouver, British Columbia touting Virgin Airlines service from the city, along with BC Premier Christy Clark. Based on news reports, Branson apparently invited the "delightful" Premier (his words) to come Kite-surfing on his back with him. However, it appears that he had initially failed to mention the dress code and placed the picture below as an example of the requirements on his blog!
What every businessman yearns to be!
Clark's liberal government has nearly zero chance of being re-elected next year and she personally has extraordinary low polling numbers amongst the electorate. In response to Branson's bravado she gave the following response:
I think when you meet with the CEO of a billion dollar company who wants
to do business with your province, you can get a little bit more
respectful treatment than that.
Frankly she missed the boat (or kite-surf) on this one. She should of ran with it and told the public that as a divorced woman she'd enjoy frolicking in the waves like that, but her duty is to country first and helping local businesses be more cocky like Branson in the global marketplace, unlike the wealth destroying socialists of the NDP or the anti-tax crackpots of the BC Conservative party.
---
If there was a better advertisement for capitalism and the benefits of the free market system over the sclerotic and dismal prospects of socialism, I'd like to see it. Mothers, make sure your sons grow up to be businessmen!
When I was younger I never read any of F. Scott Fitzgerald's works . Occasionally I'd come across references to his works and not think much of it. Like most non-liberal arts students, I've yet to read most of the great classics and haven't motivated myself or found the time to engage in understanding them. I remember an episode, that is probably all too familiar, in the CBS comedy King of Queens, where Carrie takes time off to "find herself" and stakes out reading The Great Gatsby. The episode ends with her never reading the book and her husband Doug, the clownish and portly parcel deliveryman, musing to Carrie, "don't you think the Great Gatsby was lost before he came a magician!"
The irony isn't in whether Gatsby was once lost or a magician, because on some abstract level both are true. Instead, the irony resides in Gatsby's own devotion to a single cause and his need to re-create himself from a simpler and less glamorous past. When prodded in the novel about being unable to "repeat the past", Gatsby retorts incredulously, “Why of course you can!”
Most people live their lives blinded to the opportunities and realities around them. While they know there is an entire world of possibilities, they also know that pursuing those dreams is difficult and in the end, there is no more guarantee that pursuing those objectives will make them any more happy or successful. So they compromise and accept certain realities and condemn themselves to much smaller lives; just like Carrie in the above example. Gatsby on the other hand, has been on the other side of paradise, where the grass isn't greener, where the lights are dimmer, and hopes go unfulfilled.
With the upcoming release in December 2012 of Baz Lurhmann's film adaptation, there has been some discussion of this seminal work. The Great Gatsby has been described as a story of "lasting power and beauty" that is rooted in "illusions and self-delusion." Like America in both the roaring twenties -in which the story is set- and its current situation, the book is filled with the surfeit of wealth, tumultuous descents, and everyday violence.
America is now full of millions of bankrupt Gatsbys who bought their
dream homes with no money down. Meanwhile, the derivatives market was
the very embodiment of American fantasy and self-deception, built on as
flimsy a foundation as Gatsby’s wealth. The promised gold of the Reagan
years, burnished to a shine in the new millennium, has turned a grimy
yellow.
It is precisely these attributes that made the story then and now so engaging. The rise and fall of ambitious men who have seduced an even less sophisticated public on their perceived virtues. An opportunistic elite too absorbed in extracting from society marginal gains, to understand the larger problems unfolding around them. And, of course, a public incapable of fully engaging the world around them, but all too willing to blame others for any sleight that has befallen them. In each of the classes of people a central conceit is revealed: the moment an individual thinks that they are firmly ahead, they also become cognizant, for however a brief a moment, that the game has been rigged and that they've always been determined to be the loser. It may not be fair; it is not even remotely intelligent, but that is how the game of life is played.
Others have questioned whether Fitzgerald's story could ever be adequately brought to film. Ta-Nehisi Coates of The Atlantic magazine discusses his thoughts on this issue:
As in so many of the books I love, I found the plot in Gatsby to almost
be beside the point. Whenever I see it translated to cinema, the
film-maker inevitably crafts a story of doomed romance between Daisy and
Gatsby. It's obviously true that Gatsby holds some sort of flame for
Daisy, but what makes the book run (for me) is the ambiguity of that
flame. Does he really love her? Or is she just another
possession signaling the climb up? I always felt that last point—the
climb up—was much more important than the romance.
As in all things, where the truth begins and the illusion of reality ends is not always a clear line. Gatsby's successes and failures are driven by both factors. What is certain, is that the recurrent theme that is portrayed in Gatsby remains a great lesson to us all in our own sometimes feeble attempts of improving ourselves.
Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by
year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter —
tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther.... And one
fine morning —
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
----
The first trailer from Warner Bros. Pictures.
Canadians used to pride ourselves at being more versed in the nuances of global affairs and politics than our American brethren to the south. Politics, like hockey, has been a constant in our lives. The general population across the nation has always been aware of the pretentious and duplicitous musings of politicians and has punished those engaging in American styled demagoguery; until now.
In the above election ad, Michael Ignatieff discusses the level of apathy and disinterest in politics that has taken hold of Canadians. Some have referred to the above full throated stance as his Howard Dean moment. Maybe? However, we should remind ourselves that Dr. Dean was attacked from multiple flanks for standing up for beliefs that were fundamentally democratic and liberal. What those in opposition are really saying is that they want their team, the blue team, regardless of competence or adherence to accountablity, to win; even if it means jettisoning democratic values and principles to do so.
I think this is exactly what accountable government and liberal democracy is all about. As I've said before, Mr. Ignatieff's performance as Leader of the Opposition has been at best wanting. However, this call-to-arms of all Canadians to bring down the corpulent and criminally negligent Conservative party of Canada is what needs to be said. Every voter needs to carefully understand what is at stake to our democracy, if Stephen Harper and the Conservative party dimwits are elected to run the government again.
I'm loathe to affiliate myself with Mr. Ignatieff, who has in my opinion been one of the most incompetent leaders of Canada's Liberal party in years. Given how bad things have been since Jean Chretien was pushed out of office, that is not an insignificant matter.
However, I cannot stand Mr. Harper and all the faux-patriots and ignoramuses of the Canadian Conservative Party. Their deceit, incompetence, indifference to the truth and their slavish want for power and authority over the lives of Canadians, is unbearable. Why the opposition parties haven't been taking the boots to the crotches of these so-called conservatives is beyond my understanding. Everyone knows Harper is a thug. So why then engage in a strategy where they play the role of the village idiot who gets his ass kicked every morning by the town bully.
If these right-wing wannabe crypto-fascists want to go medieval on us, the people, then I have no problem with the opposition parties dragging Harper's bloated and corpulent carcass across the television screen.
A reporter in Arizona tells us, "KNST tells me they took that billboard down at 9:30 a.m. Monday morning." Not quite quick enough to beat the internet.
If images and statements associated with violence didn't have anything to do with what recently happened in Tuscon, why did they take the sign down? Shouldn't these same people re-double, in fact "re-load" their campaign against the evil liberal empire and stand their ground in their honest attempt to sell hatred and violence to the indolent and ignorant?
When are Americans going to stand up to the extremists in the right and label those who pursue a violent and nihilistic vision of politics as the real "anti-Americans!"
The above link is to a recent interview (29 November 2010) between Charlie Rose and Charles Ferguson who produced the well reviewed documentary on the origins of the financial collapse of 2008 and the subsequent global bailout of the financial industry by governments across the world.
He states specifically, "the film is about the systemic corruption of the United States by the financial industry and the consequences of that systemic corruption."
In the interview Ferguson makes it clear that the corruption of America and its legislative and regulatory processes are profound. He makes the case that much of what happened would not have occurred if the businessmen behind these monolithic investment banks were not so incompetent and blinded by greed and the US government had not abdicated its role, as an agent for fairness, in properly regulating the whole industry. The actions taken by the government was to save the banks and the elite bankers, while allowing the rest of the population to fend for itself. The bankers, with the exception of Lehman Brothers, were not made to make any sacrifices.
Ferguson further contends that "massive criminal fraud" was undertaken. Despite the nauseating proclamations by the financial industry and their media stooges, it is clear that both government and the largest corporations in America engaged in what may stand as the largest criminal event of the past quarter century. The reality is that none of these people, given the political climate and entrenched corruption of government, will be held accountable for their actions in destroying trillions of dollars of wealth, eliminating millions of jobs, and pushing families off the cliff. When ordinary people lose their health care, lose their homes, lose their life savings, and end up destitute, the same people who caused this mayhem will snicker and call the rest of the population parasites!
I've said it numerous times on this blog, that only when people recognize the true nature of corporations in their society and begin to combat the force of coruption through monied politics, will things change.
"Yeah that's right... seven Inches of dark hot meat?"
Burger King over the past few years has made a marketing decision to pursue the hunter class of consumers; "young men after the largest possible amount of meat and grease, who aren't so concerned with cost." There aren't any Thai salads, leafy goodness, or nutrition, just plain old meaty excess.
Sexualization of advertisement is hardly new. Tarted up 'Bratz' dolls for young girls, chesty Hooter's girls serving chicken wings, and Viagra for grandpa commercials are the norm. So it's hardly worth noting when a company goes after the pimple-faced and fatty-kid demographic, whose only encounter with the opposite sex involves them stalking one in a virtual X-Box game. Aware that providing "There's something in Mary" DVD's in happy-meals may not go over well with the general public, they decided to go to the next level.
Initially the ad looks more like a satire of machismo culture that would better fit Argentina rather than the American Midwest. I'm sure the Andrea Dworkin crowd is already making the claim that this ad promotes "wife-beating" and infidelity. On the other hand, I wonder if South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is a fan of this ad? Either way, other than creating hype for the BK franchise, I'm not sure promoting heart-stopping and artery clogging meat-on-a-stick really does much for the rest of us.
