So I was reading this article earlier today and I was slightly annoyed.
It was an opinion piece written by a Muslim-American who thought the "Everybody Draw Muhammad" Day event on Facebook was a bad idea, highly offensive to Muslims everywhere, and because of its highly inflammatory nature, we should forfeit our First Amendment rights on this particular issue.
To Hell with that.
Its not that I am culturally insensitive to the Prophet's place in the Muslim religion (one of these days, I'm gonna need to write about the folly of following a religious institution), I get that he is very important and is held in high regard. According to the author of this article, imagine comparing him to Martin Luther King Jr. Now hold on, MLK is just a man, and everyone is entitled to their opinions to MLK (no, I do not support Jim Crow, racial discrimination or anything of that sort) and is childish at best to downright forbid anyone from doing a satirical piece on him.
Here's a better example: Mao Zedong. HUUUUUUUUUGE cult of personality during his rule in China. Literally worshiped by the most populated country in the world (though mostly by the now elderly generation). Is it ok to do a satirical piece on this guy? Oh hell yeah, because this is someone from another continent away, and he's just a guy with a message. Wait....we seem to be coming full circle here, and now we are at the crossroad of hypocrisy.
I have no problem with free speech (though it always seem to have a volatile reaction when combined with freedom of assembly and freedom of religion) and I certainly don't have a problem with respecting another culture. But how far is too far? Can it be said that the author's request to not "add fuel to the fires of extremism on all sides" is asking for one group to restrict another group's rights?
I believe so.
The author's argument is not one against violence, bigotry, or cultural insensitivity. It is against the way the world as a whole interprets communication and the voicing of opinions. People should be more responsible about the information they acquire, but at the same time be more open to opposing viewpoints. In this particular case, I believe Muslims should be sensitive to the rights of free speech that other people have, and that not everyone shares their beliefs. At the same time, people should also understand that participating in the facebook event do so at the risk of pissing off the practitioners of Islam. But dammit, its everyone's right to partake/not to partake/piss off/to be pissed off.
We as a planet need to learn how to accept other people for who and what they are. There is no way in hell that everyone one day in the future is going to absolutely agree on every topic of possible discussion, and that honestly, is very creepy. We'd be like robots. There would be no sense of intellectual diversity. Not the point. World peace (if it is indeed possible) simply needs to be people getting along with everyone else enough long enough so we don't kill each other. No agreement is needed, we just need to accept other people as they come, not to get totally pissed off at other people, and don't kill each other.
Fuck, I'd kill for some pei daan sou yok jok right now....
Friday, May 21, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Devil's Advocate- Finals, Waiting Rooms, and checking out First Ladies
I hate finals.
It's more agonizing than getting your hair cut by government employees. Or waiting for service at the DMV. Not the part where you have to re-learn everything from the past semester (I laugh at the folks on the quarter system) but the fact that its like being in a waiting room.
Waiting rooms are the epitome of a society built on inefficiency. Its like when you're watching youtube, and you have to wait while your computer to fill its memory buffer with your video, all the while you're sitting there twiddling your thumbs to get to the next episode of "The Nanny". Or anyone of the numerous homegrown conspiracy theory "documentaries". In any case, if service was good enough, there wouldn't be a need for the buffer to exist, the data stream would literally be ported directly into your computer and translated onto the screen.
I know all you tech whizzes out there are like "well actually, when youtube streams shit to you, it actually does wait around in a buffer, its just service is faster than the play speed" and you have a point. Except it has nothing to do with my current metaphor, so take a hike.
When you're at the dentist, you just wanna get out of there as fast as possible, or at least, that's the general outlook on the practice of dentistry. Not me, i actually enjoy going to the dentist, someone gets to clean my teeth so I don't have to do it. Then again, I've never gotten bad gums, cavities, fillings, braces or anything of the sort, so I'm not exactly versed in the pains of dentistry. Except the x-ray process. It is the single most annoying experience of my life, having an x-ray backing stuck in my mouth with its slightly rounded (obviously wholesale) edges digging into the gummy crevasses meant only for edible shit. And the occasional pussy. But I suppose that can be filed under edible as well. Anyways, where was I...
Right, if it were for the Highlights, Time, and Sports Illustrated magazines in the waiting room, you'd be sweating it out, waiting for the inevitable moment that some dude with a set of picks and little mirror attached to a simple doo-hickey scrapes at the enamel lining of your teeth. And this only happens when the dentist is backed up yah? I mean, who really goes to the dentist early? I did- cause I loved the dentist that much, meant I was allowed out of the basement where my parents kept me when I wasn't at school or the shop. Kidding! But it would explain a few oddities. But really now...
If we're talking about the human aspect of doing a job, that hinks and shit comes up or something like that, isn't that the nature of the beast? That, despite your best intentions to keep a schedule, life just shits on you? Yeah man, I have no problem waiting cause of that. But is that the true reason for the existence of waiting rooms? Is this just not a positive externality?
Waiting rooms were created with the purpose of comforting the service provider that it is ok to keep someone waiting, that in the end, they will have someone to work on/with right away following their lazy servicing bums. This would be someone who isn't working as well as they can because all they are doing is buffering you, when maybe their play speed could be faster. Who knows. You're too busy getting junked by Newsweek.
Oh right, and how does this relate to finals? I just wanna be done with the semester now, let me go on a break already. It's like classes are over, yay! School's out! Oh, just kidding, you also got finals. This is my Newsweek, Highlights and Time.
In unrelated news, Gordon Brown stepped down from PM in Britain and the Conservative/Liberal-Democrat coalition buffet selection, David Cameron is taking over 10 Downing. I might get back to this later, but seeing how I'm not bringing my computer with me over my little furlough, might not be for some time. HELLLLOOOO A WEEKEND OF DEBAUCHERY, BAD DECISIONS, and MUSEUMS. Not in any particular order, nor at the same time. Fuck maybe I will bring my computer to figure out what it is exactly I'm gonna be doing this weekend. Oh right, PM Cameron, all I gotta say is, "dude. your wife has quite the nose" I definitely prefer Carla Bruni, French First Lady any day, but Samantha Cameron isn't terrible at 39 years of age, but somehow doesn't compare to Bruni who's 42. But I mean, see for yourself. And yes, I am skewing the pictures I show to with better pictures of Bruni and worse pictures of Cameron.
Bruni: http://www.glamourvanity.com/images/carla-bruni-sarkozy-cheating-on-husband.jpg
Cameron: http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_01/SamCameronG_468x698.jpg
(she's the one on the left mind you, dammn if she were the one on the right....)
Obviously there's no contest here, b/c everything put out by the small guy must be right compared to big corporate news.
On the other hand, you also gotta admire a woman with guns:
http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/csm-photo-galleries-images/photos-of-the-day-images/2010/0421/01/7762731-1-eng-US/01_full_600.jpg
Ok fine, I'll put a more comparable picture of Cameron up
http://images.buddytv.com/articles/jennifer-morrison-house.jpg
Sorry, couldn't resist. But really now:
http://www.gabrielleteare.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Richard-James-372x600.jpg
In any case, how insignificant is Sam Cam to me? I'm not gonna label her in this post. Kidding, she's more important than that. But I'm still not tagging her.
Nor do I have a rekindled love for finals.
or, as I like to call them,
Fuck
I
Never
Actually
Learned
Shit.
or as my school likes to call them, TEE's
Term
End
Exam
How drab. But its kinda catchy, spawns TEE phrases like TEE week, TEE-rat(ion)s, its TEE time!
Fuck TEE's.
It's more agonizing than getting your hair cut by government employees. Or waiting for service at the DMV. Not the part where you have to re-learn everything from the past semester (I laugh at the folks on the quarter system) but the fact that its like being in a waiting room.
Waiting rooms are the epitome of a society built on inefficiency. Its like when you're watching youtube, and you have to wait while your computer to fill its memory buffer with your video, all the while you're sitting there twiddling your thumbs to get to the next episode of "The Nanny". Or anyone of the numerous homegrown conspiracy theory "documentaries". In any case, if service was good enough, there wouldn't be a need for the buffer to exist, the data stream would literally be ported directly into your computer and translated onto the screen.
I know all you tech whizzes out there are like "well actually, when youtube streams shit to you, it actually does wait around in a buffer, its just service is faster than the play speed" and you have a point. Except it has nothing to do with my current metaphor, so take a hike.
When you're at the dentist, you just wanna get out of there as fast as possible, or at least, that's the general outlook on the practice of dentistry. Not me, i actually enjoy going to the dentist, someone gets to clean my teeth so I don't have to do it. Then again, I've never gotten bad gums, cavities, fillings, braces or anything of the sort, so I'm not exactly versed in the pains of dentistry. Except the x-ray process. It is the single most annoying experience of my life, having an x-ray backing stuck in my mouth with its slightly rounded (obviously wholesale) edges digging into the gummy crevasses meant only for edible shit. And the occasional pussy. But I suppose that can be filed under edible as well. Anyways, where was I...
Right, if it were for the Highlights, Time, and Sports Illustrated magazines in the waiting room, you'd be sweating it out, waiting for the inevitable moment that some dude with a set of picks and little mirror attached to a simple doo-hickey scrapes at the enamel lining of your teeth. And this only happens when the dentist is backed up yah? I mean, who really goes to the dentist early? I did- cause I loved the dentist that much, meant I was allowed out of the basement where my parents kept me when I wasn't at school or the shop. Kidding! But it would explain a few oddities. But really now...
If we're talking about the human aspect of doing a job, that hinks and shit comes up or something like that, isn't that the nature of the beast? That, despite your best intentions to keep a schedule, life just shits on you? Yeah man, I have no problem waiting cause of that. But is that the true reason for the existence of waiting rooms? Is this just not a positive externality?
Waiting rooms were created with the purpose of comforting the service provider that it is ok to keep someone waiting, that in the end, they will have someone to work on/with right away following their lazy servicing bums. This would be someone who isn't working as well as they can because all they are doing is buffering you, when maybe their play speed could be faster. Who knows. You're too busy getting junked by Newsweek.
Oh right, and how does this relate to finals? I just wanna be done with the semester now, let me go on a break already. It's like classes are over, yay! School's out! Oh, just kidding, you also got finals. This is my Newsweek, Highlights and Time.
In unrelated news, Gordon Brown stepped down from PM in Britain and the Conservative/Liberal-Democrat coalition buffet selection, David Cameron is taking over 10 Downing. I might get back to this later, but seeing how I'm not bringing my computer with me over my little furlough, might not be for some time. HELLLLOOOO A WEEKEND OF DEBAUCHERY, BAD DECISIONS, and MUSEUMS. Not in any particular order, nor at the same time. Fuck maybe I will bring my computer to figure out what it is exactly I'm gonna be doing this weekend. Oh right, PM Cameron, all I gotta say is, "dude. your wife has quite the nose" I definitely prefer Carla Bruni, French First Lady any day, but Samantha Cameron isn't terrible at 39 years of age, but somehow doesn't compare to Bruni who's 42. But I mean, see for yourself. And yes, I am skewing the pictures I show to with better pictures of Bruni and worse pictures of Cameron.
Bruni: http://www.glamourvanity.com/images/carla-bruni-sarkozy-cheating-on-husband.jpg
Cameron: http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/10_01/SamCameronG_468x698.jpg
(she's the one on the left mind you, dammn if she were the one on the right....)
Obviously there's no contest here, b/c everything put out by the small guy must be right compared to big corporate news.
On the other hand, you also gotta admire a woman with guns:
http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/images/csm-photo-galleries-images/photos-of-the-day-images/2010/0421/01/7762731-1-eng-US/01_full_600.jpg
Ok fine, I'll put a more comparable picture of Cameron up
http://images.buddytv.com/articles/jennifer-morrison-house.jpg
Sorry, couldn't resist. But really now:
http://www.gabrielleteare.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Richard-James-372x600.jpg
In any case, how insignificant is Sam Cam to me? I'm not gonna label her in this post. Kidding, she's more important than that. But I'm still not tagging her.
Nor do I have a rekindled love for finals.
or, as I like to call them,
Fuck
I
Never
Actually
Learned
Shit.
or as my school likes to call them, TEE's
Term
End
Exam
How drab. But its kinda catchy, spawns TEE phrases like TEE week, TEE-rat(ion)s, its TEE time!
Fuck TEE's.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
"Be the change you want to see"
Words according to Gandhi. Well I've got news for you dude, change is relative to the scope of your imagination, both in the good way and bad, but how far you see is definitely a limiting factor.
An example of this is the Army. The Army is a great micro-ish society that I can use to make a point, though these efforts will undoubtedly be compounded by the very mission orientated nature of the Army. But then again, should society not strive towards that goal? Anyways, the Army's premier source of officer commission is obviously West Point, their little crown jewel. Anyways, the racial composition of West Point is engineered to reflect the diversity of the Army as a whole. It does beg the question though, if the Army's goal here is to promote diversity, then wouldn't it make sense to create more role models for people of ethnicity to enlist and join? But then, that brings in a whole other issue of competency, but more on that particular topic later. So should the Army be modeling its officer corps to reflect its enlisted ranks or use it to drive diversity in the enlisted ranks?
So Obama just nominated Elena Kagan to fill John Paul Steven's impending vacancy. Solicitor General Kagan, is yet another alumni of the fabulously well entrenched elite level establishment. She is a graduate of Harvard Law (c/o 86, not that you really care), first female Dean of HLS, was the government's lawyer for a while, but interestingly enough has never served in a judicial capacity before.
Being 50 years of age, she is young as shit. Considering the lifetime appointment of a SC Justice, that's at least 20 years of interpreting the constitutionality of well....anything of consequence I suppose. That's two additional presidential administrations, in a time where issues like choice, immigration, personal rights, government intervention in the economy, claims of "national security" and a whole host of other stuff that may crop up in the next two decades would find themselves partially determined by that woman.
Which is a pretty clever ploy on Obama's part. He would be betting on her lifespan on the bench to land back on a Democratic president, assuming we stay on the sin/cos curves that have defined our national political trend.
In the short run, Kagan's nomination would not tip the scales in any particular way seeing how she is middle of the road in most cases. However, the Court will shift in the years to come, and being a long term anchor on the court, her influence may pay off for liberals in the future.
But anyways, I couldn't really care less if she got appointed or not, her way of thinking and her processes are locked in. Let's talk about her education. Or, more accurately, the people who run our country.
If nominated, the Supreme Court would be comprised of Yale or Harvard Law students. Check this out:
An example of this is the Army. The Army is a great micro-ish society that I can use to make a point, though these efforts will undoubtedly be compounded by the very mission orientated nature of the Army. But then again, should society not strive towards that goal? Anyways, the Army's premier source of officer commission is obviously West Point, their little crown jewel. Anyways, the racial composition of West Point is engineered to reflect the diversity of the Army as a whole. It does beg the question though, if the Army's goal here is to promote diversity, then wouldn't it make sense to create more role models for people of ethnicity to enlist and join? But then, that brings in a whole other issue of competency, but more on that particular topic later. So should the Army be modeling its officer corps to reflect its enlisted ranks or use it to drive diversity in the enlisted ranks?
So Obama just nominated Elena Kagan to fill John Paul Steven's impending vacancy. Solicitor General Kagan, is yet another alumni of the fabulously well entrenched elite level establishment. She is a graduate of Harvard Law (c/o 86, not that you really care), first female Dean of HLS, was the government's lawyer for a while, but interestingly enough has never served in a judicial capacity before.
Being 50 years of age, she is young as shit. Considering the lifetime appointment of a SC Justice, that's at least 20 years of interpreting the constitutionality of well....anything of consequence I suppose. That's two additional presidential administrations, in a time where issues like choice, immigration, personal rights, government intervention in the economy, claims of "national security" and a whole host of other stuff that may crop up in the next two decades would find themselves partially determined by that woman.
Which is a pretty clever ploy on Obama's part. He would be betting on her lifespan on the bench to land back on a Democratic president, assuming we stay on the sin/cos curves that have defined our national political trend.
In the short run, Kagan's nomination would not tip the scales in any particular way seeing how she is middle of the road in most cases. However, the Court will shift in the years to come, and being a long term anchor on the court, her influence may pay off for liberals in the future.
But anyways, I couldn't really care less if she got appointed or not, her way of thinking and her processes are locked in. Let's talk about her education. Or, more accurately, the people who run our country.
If nominated, the Supreme Court would be comprised of Yale or Harvard Law students. Check this out:
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Harvard College '76, Harvard Law '79
Justice Antonin Scalia, Harvard Law '60
Justice Anthony Kennedy, Harvard Law '61
Justice Clarence Thomas, Yale Law '74
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, attended Harvard Law where she was an editor of the Law Review and received a recommendation from its Dean
Justice Stephen Breyer, Harvard Law '64
Justice Samuel Alito, Yale Law '75
Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Yale Law '79
(source: http://cmclymer.xanga.com/726869793/harvard-and-yales-dominance-of-government/)
But wait! What does this all mean?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_law_schools_in_the_United_States
There are, a FUCK TON of other law schools in America, and there are quite a few that are respectable and comparable to Yale and Harvard, such as these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_school_rankings_in_the_United_States#Schools_that_consistently_rank_in_the_top_14
But yet, it only seems like we're dipping into these two schools to interpret our constitution at the highest level. Imagine the hard-ons YLS and HLS profs must get knowing they're effectively planting the seeds that will one day steer our country. Or don't. I would also imagine these profs are somewhat old. Reminds me of a joke about a student who would do anything in a class to get a better grade....well, almost anything. Another time maybe, when I don't have a final the next morning.
So the question really is, do we draw from these two schools because they are the absolute best? Is it harmful to only draw from this elite (even by Ivy league standards) selection pool? Are we limiting ourselves to what we see by only drawing from this limited education source?
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Fuck papers
So my one of my best friends is complaining about her paper, and a whimsical conversation ensues.
B.: I need to write this mofo *whines/grumbles*
me: its like a band-aid, the faster you rip it, the sooner you get it over with
B.: like bad sex?
me: you have a recurring fear of bad sex don't you?
B.: eh
me: well, in the case of bad sex, you fake an orgasm, though you can't really fake your way through a paper
B.: its called BS
me: touche.
fuck papers. I'm writing a psuedo-paper of my own now, and its not fun either....though to be honest, how often do you fake your way through papers (or orgasms)? Is most writing today done by our youth just utter BS, regurgitated from secondary sources? It sure seems like that's the case in the US...
B.: I need to write this mofo *whines/grumbles*
me: its like a band-aid, the faster you rip it, the sooner you get it over with
B.: like bad sex?
me: you have a recurring fear of bad sex don't you?
B.: eh
me: well, in the case of bad sex, you fake an orgasm, though you can't really fake your way through a paper
B.: its called BS
me: touche.
fuck papers. I'm writing a psuedo-paper of my own now, and its not fun either....though to be honest, how often do you fake your way through papers (or orgasms)? Is most writing today done by our youth just utter BS, regurgitated from secondary sources? It sure seems like that's the case in the US...
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
In case you were wondering
I'm going to be doing my own html coding so the page will probably look disheveled for a while...or maybe it'll look that way forever. who knows. I'm lazy like that
First things first
So. It appears that I've caved in and created a blog. But then again, I'm pretty sure loads of people say that crap line everyday. But I'd be lying if I said that this is my first blog. I had one ages ago, back when I was say, 14? Y'know one of those early teen crazes...things.
So without leaving too much of a digital fingerprint (I am, and will always continue to be, a privacy nut), here's the quick and dirty about me. I'm currently in college, but not your usual college; it's really more of an academy that likes to masquerade as a college from time to time. Life here is restrictive, boring in the colloquial sense, but there's always something to do.
But ultimately I'm not totally satisfied with myself here, for many reasons I'll probably bitch about later. Most of the reasoning is philosophical, and that's probably one of things I'll get around to blogging about. In a way, this is a release valve for me, so that I don't get bogged down thinking about particular incidents.
So I suppose I should explain the name of the blog "The Moratorium on Brains". It is the name of my favorite chapter from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Fascinating book in the sense that it challenged many of my preconceived notions about the value of life, what sort of premium is placed on life, and on the side, business, economics and a good dose of storytelling. I highly recommend it to anyone to read whether you know of Rand, or not, whether you agree with her views, or not. It's quite an experience.
Anyways, the chapter to me represents the importance of freedom, liberty and human (not defined colloquially anyways) rights. I don't agree with all the claims that the chapter makes, but it does beg discussion. Three things are brought up in this chapter: Living your beliefs, you should keep only what you earn, and think for yourself.
Also, in real life, I tend to talk and think in the third person, but without referring to myself by my first name. I speculate, I argue as the devil's advocate (though given the political nature of my school, I don't really have a whole lot of choice in the matter, not that it isn't fun). But here, I can argue my thoughts, but I still have a bit of the third person in there, so it'll be a literary experience attempting to, (and thus far, I believe I have failed) write in the second person. Yes, the second person point of view exists:
So without leaving too much of a digital fingerprint (I am, and will always continue to be, a privacy nut), here's the quick and dirty about me. I'm currently in college, but not your usual college; it's really more of an academy that likes to masquerade as a college from time to time. Life here is restrictive, boring in the colloquial sense, but there's always something to do.
But ultimately I'm not totally satisfied with myself here, for many reasons I'll probably bitch about later. Most of the reasoning is philosophical, and that's probably one of things I'll get around to blogging about. In a way, this is a release valve for me, so that I don't get bogged down thinking about particular incidents.
So I suppose I should explain the name of the blog "The Moratorium on Brains". It is the name of my favorite chapter from Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Fascinating book in the sense that it challenged many of my preconceived notions about the value of life, what sort of premium is placed on life, and on the side, business, economics and a good dose of storytelling. I highly recommend it to anyone to read whether you know of Rand, or not, whether you agree with her views, or not. It's quite an experience.
Anyways, the chapter to me represents the importance of freedom, liberty and human (not defined colloquially anyways) rights. I don't agree with all the claims that the chapter makes, but it does beg discussion. Three things are brought up in this chapter: Living your beliefs, you should keep only what you earn, and think for yourself.
Also, in real life, I tend to talk and think in the third person, but without referring to myself by my first name. I speculate, I argue as the devil's advocate (though given the political nature of my school, I don't really have a whole lot of choice in the matter, not that it isn't fun). But here, I can argue my thoughts, but I still have a bit of the third person in there, so it'll be a literary experience attempting to, (and thus far, I believe I have failed) write in the second person. Yes, the second person point of view exists:
The second-person narrative is a narrative mode in which the protagonist or another main character is referred to by employment of second-person personal pronouns and other kinds of addressing forms, for example the English second-person pronoun "you". (Wikipedia.com)Frack. Now I can't get out of this block quote mode I used to cite good ol' Wiki. But for now, I'm signing off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)