Sorry for the gap in posts, but real life got in the way. I'd like to say how I was bogged down with GCSE work, spending hours every night perfecting it, but the truth is that I've simply been addicted to some game on Facebook. Productive, isn't it?
Either way, it shows how easy it is to get sucked into these things. I like to think I've got a fairly strong willpower - I am certainly determined not to get sucked into that Black Hole called "Fashion". Yet after a couple of hours of joining Facebook - enforced due to a National Welsh Youth Organisation I belong to - I've already been hooked to some game recommended by some of my friends. And ok, "addicted" may be too strong a word, but it was definitely playable, even for someone who has a lot of much more power-demanding computer games. And judging by some of the scores on the Global High Score list, there are people who have played this game non-stop.
This may not seem very dramatic compared to the global problems at the moment, but let's take a moment to look at a much bigger picture. If we look at the absolute extreme example of a tyrants regime - an Orwellian society - we see that technology plays a vital part. Would the Thought Police ever have caught Winston Smith without all those cameras and microphones? And is this growing dependence on technology bringing us further to that state?
Before you get any ideas, I'll be the first to admit that this is all a bit far-fetched. Robots aren't going to take over, and Artificial Intelligence is a load of crap. Yet... what if we get a virus?
Technology is undoubted a good thing, and I'm not here to preach any "be careful" cliché that's already been rammed down your throats. But it is certainly easy to be hooked into that state of "bliss" - you just don't give a damn, because what's happening on your small box is good. And it is good. The only danger is whether we let this state build a wall around us.
Friday 26 October 2007
Tuesday 16 October 2007
For Want of the Price of Tea and a Slice, the Old Man Died.
Article
This brings up two points.
Firstly, how can shooting someone not be classed as a criminal offence? I may not live in America, and I understand that there are different laws (including that stupid law that lets people carry guns), but when someone gets away with shooting someone else, there should be some sort of bell that rings in everyone's mind. There is no way it can be justified as "self-defence". Had the woman simply phoned the police, there would be no need for any of that to happen. Better still, the woman could have actually been considerate, and let him use this basic facility that was denied to him.
Secondly, why had the man ended up in such a state? Let's not be prejudice and call him a drug addict. For all we know, he was simply down on his luck. He made a couple of bad decisions, and has paid for them. Good reason to shoot someone, isn't it?
As someone on the forum I found the article on said, "both these people were created by society". If people could be more accepting and generous to each other, and never fell the need to want a piece of metal used to kill, how much better would society be? Everyone would feel welcomed, no one would be betrayed by the government. There would be a roof over everyone's head, and no one would be discontent.
Ok, that may just be a distant utopia, and there are obviously a lot more problems around. But surely it's a start, right? When people don't extend a hand to you, maybe you should extend it first. It may not come to anything, but at least then you can say that you did your bit to help this person's life. I don't want to sound like a preacher, but helping others is one of the only ways we can sort out this mess we call modern life.
This brings up two points.
Firstly, how can shooting someone not be classed as a criminal offence? I may not live in America, and I understand that there are different laws (including that stupid law that lets people carry guns), but when someone gets away with shooting someone else, there should be some sort of bell that rings in everyone's mind. There is no way it can be justified as "self-defence". Had the woman simply phoned the police, there would be no need for any of that to happen. Better still, the woman could have actually been considerate, and let him use this basic facility that was denied to him.
Secondly, why had the man ended up in such a state? Let's not be prejudice and call him a drug addict. For all we know, he was simply down on his luck. He made a couple of bad decisions, and has paid for them. Good reason to shoot someone, isn't it?
As someone on the forum I found the article on said, "both these people were created by society". If people could be more accepting and generous to each other, and never fell the need to want a piece of metal used to kill, how much better would society be? Everyone would feel welcomed, no one would be betrayed by the government. There would be a roof over everyone's head, and no one would be discontent.
Ok, that may just be a distant utopia, and there are obviously a lot more problems around. But surely it's a start, right? When people don't extend a hand to you, maybe you should extend it first. It may not come to anything, but at least then you can say that you did your bit to help this person's life. I don't want to sound like a preacher, but helping others is one of the only ways we can sort out this mess we call modern life.
Friday 12 October 2007
There's Room For You Inside
Earlier in a history lesson, which I must confess is my favourite subject ( I've spent a month dressed up as a Roman working at an event with a museum), we were shown some photos of the KKK that my history teacher had dug up. And, before you ask, I know this was 80 years ago. The photos were of the members of a protest march down the street of an urban city, which wasn't named. And in one photo, the band of white going down a street stretched as far as the eye could see. That in itself was horrifying enough, but we were then shown another photo which showed that each of these members were confident enough to show their faces. Sick.
How can a government whose ideals were based on the principals of democracy, free speech and freedom, be so corrupt that it will ignore such an event? (As I've said - I'm Welsh, not American, so if you think I shouldn't be commenting, consider that America is the global superpower, and therefore has a global group of critics.) This also goes for the gangster issue, but that can be put down to the government's own stupidity, which is so common I think I can ignore it for now. But why have such an open immigration policy if you are only going to abuse and oppress the immigrants? Yes, that policy was modified, but it was too late.
As a Socialist, I have never blamed the policy on the problems that happened. I've always thought that it was the only immigration that made sense. However, I do blame the people. Before this goes further, I will just state that I'm not saying that all the people who were discriminated against are perfect, nor am I saying that all the WASPs were bad. But when such an overwhelming majority shows signs of racism like this, and the government does nothing, there is a problem. Either with the president, or his inferiors, someone must step in and try to sort it out. Why was the KKK given so much power and allowed to go for so long unopposed? What type of incompetence ignores such a thing?
Racism is a horrible thing. It's so unnecessary, so stupid and so sickening, it's hard to imagine that the same species that has developed so far managed to even conceive the notion. I don't want to preach here, or anywhere else, but it's hard to imagine that over two hundred years after slavery was abolished, and after a world war was fought over basic freedom, that people can still be racist. My only answer to the problem would be to discriminate the racists in the way that they discriminated others. They are the only people who deserve such a treatment.
How can a government whose ideals were based on the principals of democracy, free speech and freedom, be so corrupt that it will ignore such an event? (As I've said - I'm Welsh, not American, so if you think I shouldn't be commenting, consider that America is the global superpower, and therefore has a global group of critics.) This also goes for the gangster issue, but that can be put down to the government's own stupidity, which is so common I think I can ignore it for now. But why have such an open immigration policy if you are only going to abuse and oppress the immigrants? Yes, that policy was modified, but it was too late.
As a Socialist, I have never blamed the policy on the problems that happened. I've always thought that it was the only immigration that made sense. However, I do blame the people. Before this goes further, I will just state that I'm not saying that all the people who were discriminated against are perfect, nor am I saying that all the WASPs were bad. But when such an overwhelming majority shows signs of racism like this, and the government does nothing, there is a problem. Either with the president, or his inferiors, someone must step in and try to sort it out. Why was the KKK given so much power and allowed to go for so long unopposed? What type of incompetence ignores such a thing?
Racism is a horrible thing. It's so unnecessary, so stupid and so sickening, it's hard to imagine that the same species that has developed so far managed to even conceive the notion. I don't want to preach here, or anywhere else, but it's hard to imagine that over two hundred years after slavery was abolished, and after a world war was fought over basic freedom, that people can still be racist. My only answer to the problem would be to discriminate the racists in the way that they discriminated others. They are the only people who deserve such a treatment.
Thursday 11 October 2007
What God wants, God gets, God help us all.
Wow, post two. This might actually go somewhere...
This actually comes from a thought I had in one of those Religious Education lessons that completely miss the point. The topic was "Is it fair", and was supposed to get us questioning the world around us, and asses it obviously missing the point that I, and many others in the class, already do this. That ignorance - which is extremely common in these lessons - led me to partially ignore the task at hand, since I figured I'd already thought enough about it for now, and if I was asked a question, I was confident I could get a relevant statement from somewhere in my mind.
Anyway, after the teacher came around, and I was forced to give her some crap about how this overly capitalistic society was to blame, I resigned myself to actually look at the notes in front of us. Written down were the stances of the two major religions - Christianity and Islam. Ok, I thought, I'm a Socialist, let's look at this with an open mind. And what I read was the most hypocritical crap I'd ever seen.
Let's put things into prospective - Judaism belive in an entity called "God". This "God" is all-seeing, etc. Then some figure called "Jesus Christ" comes along. This "Jesus" says a lot of nice things and is nailed to a tree for it (sorry, I had to make a reference to The Hitchhicker's Guide to the Galaxy). Anyway, some of these Jews believe him, and split off, forming "Christianity". Then, later on, some guy called "Mohammed" does the same thing, and a new branch called "Islam" forms. These three main branches then split up even further. They go to war with each other, shun each other, consider each other blasphemers, etc. Yet they fail to see that they are essentially all the same. So what if the Jews don't believe in Jesus, it's the same god, right?
So why is it right for us to follow their example when being taught about "What is fair"? Why should I follow Christian Aid's example when their churches are paved with gold?
The fact of the matter is, no one can claim to be this "perfect entity", that only does good, and isn't hypocritical. We can strive for it, and we should strive for it, but it'll never happen. To play the cliché card, "Power corrupts". And religion has become too powerful. And there is very little that can be done. I may be an atheist, but I'm not going to stop people believing in something. To be honest, I'd like to think that there was something , some sort of "God" up there, but I just can't. So to stop people thinking what they want is as bad as evangelism, which I'm morally opposed to. No one's forcing you to read this.
This actually comes from a thought I had in one of those Religious Education lessons that completely miss the point. The topic was "Is it fair", and was supposed to get us questioning the world around us, and asses it obviously missing the point that I, and many others in the class, already do this. That ignorance - which is extremely common in these lessons - led me to partially ignore the task at hand, since I figured I'd already thought enough about it for now, and if I was asked a question, I was confident I could get a relevant statement from somewhere in my mind.
Anyway, after the teacher came around, and I was forced to give her some crap about how this overly capitalistic society was to blame, I resigned myself to actually look at the notes in front of us. Written down were the stances of the two major religions - Christianity and Islam. Ok, I thought, I'm a Socialist, let's look at this with an open mind. And what I read was the most hypocritical crap I'd ever seen.
Let's put things into prospective - Judaism belive in an entity called "God". This "God" is all-seeing, etc. Then some figure called "Jesus Christ" comes along. This "Jesus" says a lot of nice things and is nailed to a tree for it (sorry, I had to make a reference to The Hitchhicker's Guide to the Galaxy). Anyway, some of these Jews believe him, and split off, forming "Christianity". Then, later on, some guy called "Mohammed" does the same thing, and a new branch called "Islam" forms. These three main branches then split up even further. They go to war with each other, shun each other, consider each other blasphemers, etc. Yet they fail to see that they are essentially all the same. So what if the Jews don't believe in Jesus, it's the same god, right?
So why is it right for us to follow their example when being taught about "What is fair"? Why should I follow Christian Aid's example when their churches are paved with gold?
The fact of the matter is, no one can claim to be this "perfect entity", that only does good, and isn't hypocritical. We can strive for it, and we should strive for it, but it'll never happen. To play the cliché card, "Power corrupts". And religion has become too powerful. And there is very little that can be done. I may be an atheist, but I'm not going to stop people believing in something. To be honest, I'd like to think that there was something , some sort of "God" up there, but I just can't. So to stop people thinking what they want is as bad as evangelism, which I'm morally opposed to. No one's forcing you to read this.
Tuesday 9 October 2007
Yma o Hyd
I guess the first post is always the hardest. Anyone who's actually reading this knows nothing about me, and if you're still reading, I'll be surprised. I guess I should start with the basics. I'm 16 years old (go - discriminate me, I dare you), and I attend Rhydfelen, South Wales' first Welsh medium comprehensive school. Those on the ball will have therefore guess where I live. And if you don't now where Wales is, you will by the time I've finished with you. Ok, that's the dodgy introduction over. I might as well start saying something relevant, or the people who aren't even reading will have gone.
I created this blog after a particularly violent conversation on MSN Messenger. There must have been about 10-15 people there, and, as far as I could tell, all but two (myself and my friend who had added me), were fascists. And, despite my insistence that I was Welsh (I even started speaking Welsh, although that might have made things worse...), they were adamant that I was from Pakistan. I was then branded an "immigrant", the irony being that the Celts were on the British Isles long before the Anglo-Saxons (I also happened to be the only person using proper English, and not this "txt" newspeak). And out of that conversation, three aspects stood out:
Patriotism: Everyone in that conversation was patriotic. Myself, for standing up for my homeland, and not allowing their comments to dent what I felt. Them for insisting that I leave the country. And the blog title, "Yma o Hyd" is the title of a Dafydd Iwan song, a Welsh patriotic song. It translates as "Still Here", and it's meaning is that despite all the oppression the Welsh have suffered, we are "Still Here".
Socialism/Capitalism: Right, I'll say it now - I'm a Socialist. Not a Communist, I wouldn't go that extreme, but left wing enough to see Capitalism as selfish, arrogant, and greedy. Not hard to guess who was what in that conversation, especially after they all declared to vote for the National Front. Sad fools.
Pessimism: I was never going to convince them. Yes, I'm a pessimist and a cynic, but it was easy to see that these people would just refuse to acknowledge my arguments, or my opinions. Which is the worst thing you want to do to me.
Either way, it made me realise that there was more wrong with the world than I had ever considered before. Yes, I know that every government is corrupt, and they always have been. Yet there was always that voice of "reason", of optimism that held me back. No longer.
I doubt this blog will be extensively read, if at all, but if just one person reads it, and agrees to do something about it, surely that's all that matters?
Ah, crap, that was a cliché...
I created this blog after a particularly violent conversation on MSN Messenger. There must have been about 10-15 people there, and, as far as I could tell, all but two (myself and my friend who had added me), were fascists. And, despite my insistence that I was Welsh (I even started speaking Welsh, although that might have made things worse...), they were adamant that I was from Pakistan. I was then branded an "immigrant", the irony being that the Celts were on the British Isles long before the Anglo-Saxons (I also happened to be the only person using proper English, and not this "txt" newspeak). And out of that conversation, three aspects stood out:
Patriotism: Everyone in that conversation was patriotic. Myself, for standing up for my homeland, and not allowing their comments to dent what I felt. Them for insisting that I leave the country. And the blog title, "Yma o Hyd" is the title of a Dafydd Iwan song, a Welsh patriotic song. It translates as "Still Here", and it's meaning is that despite all the oppression the Welsh have suffered, we are "Still Here".
Socialism/Capitalism: Right, I'll say it now - I'm a Socialist. Not a Communist, I wouldn't go that extreme, but left wing enough to see Capitalism as selfish, arrogant, and greedy. Not hard to guess who was what in that conversation, especially after they all declared to vote for the National Front. Sad fools.
Pessimism: I was never going to convince them. Yes, I'm a pessimist and a cynic, but it was easy to see that these people would just refuse to acknowledge my arguments, or my opinions. Which is the worst thing you want to do to me.
Either way, it made me realise that there was more wrong with the world than I had ever considered before. Yes, I know that every government is corrupt, and they always have been. Yet there was always that voice of "reason", of optimism that held me back. No longer.
I doubt this blog will be extensively read, if at all, but if just one person reads it, and agrees to do something about it, surely that's all that matters?
Ah, crap, that was a cliché...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)