Posts

Showing posts from October, 2010

Popular culture from the 60s onward. What actually happened.

jh0nyzh3: why the f**k i was born in 1998 ? , f**k im in the wrong generation ed: I was born in '69 and loved & lived the rebellious 80s era. People came up with lots of their own styles, music, ideas. Now, its been taken over by the corporation and the only obvious sign of 'rebellion' are those jeans that ill-defies the law of gravity. Quite a let down isn't it (pun intended). However, i prefer the 70s and 60s as they were more advanced in radicalism. I like GnR, but i'm not going to fool myself into thinking that they can beat the old rockers like Led Zep, Deep Purple, Black Sabbath, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison... (youtube) *** Whilst i do extol the virtues of the 80s era, and dismiss those who make a religion out of ‘keeping up with the times’ as ‘people who know no better for not knowing better and thus not being developed enough to appreciate better’, I am well aware of the deficiencies of the 80s as well. The 80s was basically the last era o

ZZ Top, MTV, and Modernity

Yeah. I love these guys. That’s what i call style. Off-the-beaten-track, don’t-give-a-crap-about-trends, assertive....in other words, ‘cool’. BUT, (following placed as comments on youtube) ed: “Whilst i love ZZ top's semi-anarchist style, and the above vid, i do wonder how much of western music would be as popular without music videos to embellish what might otherwise be taken as just another run-of-the-mill tune.” TwinPower3000: I love how they molest him and then throw him out of the car. LOL I love this song... ed: Reverse the situation and show a girl getting molested and thrown out of the car and people'l be yelling 'sexploitation'! Anyway, I don't think the chicks 'molested' him. He came off without his boots. Perhaps a pedicure and foot reflexology. *** I suppose the existence and prominence of ‘rock icons’ is paved by the decline of philosophical ones. That is paralleled, and I suppose, symbiotically complemented by the reduction of the ‘

Fee-lanthropy

Image
One of the richest couples in the world, the Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda, have pledged to give away 95 per cent of their fortune to aid projects. Do you welcome the support of philanthropists or should governments do more? - bbc You could say that philanthropy is not unlike saying an 'our father' and '10 hail marys' as penance and then going out and doing what it takes to be given the same penance for absolution another day.  It is a small fee one pays to go out and screw the people for far more.  At the end of the day, viewing philanthropy as 'philanthropy' misdirects people from questioning after the justification for the existence of the filthy rich by way of getting us to thank them for giving back part of the loot.  Philanthropy serves to maintain a system that requires philanthropy as a means by which society is periodically relieved of the consequences of said system. In that, philanthropy is an investment by the rich to

BBC's, 'Have your Say' : Does multiculturalism work?

ed's comment on BBC's ' Have your Say ', I am from Singapore, and there, multiculturalism has failed. Not because multiculturalism is necessarily prone to failure, but because one particular culture - legalism-confucianism - has been imposed upon all through the media, government policies, immigration policies, etc. Over time, the chinese have been bred to appreciate no other way of thought or action other than the imposed, and thereafter internalised, one. Hence, multiculturalism died the death without even a whimper. The point here is not that multiculturalism does not work, but it requires the engendering, not of tolerance, but equal and mutual respect and appreciation. We also have to drop this 'indigenous therefore we are numero uno' nonsense. That isn't very far from, 'we are majority and we don't need to give a toss about you'. And that, in turn, isn't far from, 'racism as just a matter of preference'. Multiculturalism