Well, I mean, probably. It's distinctly possible it's going to suck. It definitely won't be as good as Ritual de lo Habitual, let's all just admit that to ourselves right now. Eric Avery isn't involved, they're all like 40 now and Dave Navarro went from being an awesome guitarist and all around rad guy to being a big joke. This is gonna suck, no one should care. Jane's Addiction lived from 1988 to 1992, never reunited, Strays was a Perry Farrell solo record featuring Dave and Stephen. This is the history I subscribe to.
So, the actual post now. Yeah, fooled you, didn't I? Thought I was going to get all snarky about music? Well, you were wrong, I have a real bitch, again. And it's about socio-political ejaculations. Man, I must hate my readers. All 2 of them.
This whole alternate past/present thing to suit your ideology thing has to stop. It's making discussion impossible. I'm going to say it plain and simple, so no-one misunderstands: There is a certain way stuff happened/is happening. It didn't happen/isn't happening any other way. History is only up for debate if you're a moron. I hope that clears the air.
Oooooooh dear, I can hear some complaints coming from the direction of the whiny retards. "But isn't history written by the winners?" No, retard, history isn't written by anyone. Historical texts referring to past events are written, and they may be accurate or inaccurate, but the events themselves are eternal and unchanging. They happened a certain way and that's just the way it's going to be. Obviously for ancient history, it's difficult to exactly pin down, but for quite a while, western culture has been meticulously documenting everything from both sides such that we have a definitive record of what's fact and what isn't.
Which brings me to Daniel Pipes being a fucking moron. On Q&A on the 22nd of August, 2011, he said that "Israel is an economic powerhouse" and that the nation is "beset on all sides by foreign powers trying to annihilate them." But... and to quote the smarmy yankee dipshit, "maybe you should do some research." You've presented a warped view of reality that completely misrepresents Israel's actions on a global scale, then proceeded to be the most condescending wanker you possibly could be about it. Go on, justify Israel's gradual encroachment into Palestine, or their bombing of mosques and schools, driving Palestine into further economic unrest, making it more unstable and less able to combat the terrorist groups inside it that attack Israel in the first place. FUCK.
Liberals do this too, but it's generally in a much more banal, "it wasn't all that bad" kinda way. But at any rate, it's frustrating, because it makes any kind of objective debate impossible. Do you call the USA "a failed experiment in classical liberal economic policies" or "a prime example of why the market should be completely free"? I know what I'd call it, but you could just as easily go the other way. Of course, my solution to this is to just hand history, politics and basically the running of everything that isn't the arts over to scientists and mathematicians. They work exclusively with cold, hard facts and numbers, and nothing gets by them. Conservative commentators blow, scientists rule. It's the 3rd law of thermodynamics or something.
No comments:
Post a Comment