I think Tim Hames has got it right in response to Matthew Parris’ ‘liferaft’ analogy.
Others can choose to condemn the Americans and head for the lifeboats, but not in my name. The offer of Mrs Beckett’s assistance is kind, Matthew, yet I do not seek the shelter of a liferaft. I will stay with the ship and take my chances. If the vessel does ultimately capsize, despite my expectations, I will throw a bottle over the side containing the message: “I still think that ‘we kicked the door in’ is a more noble sentiment than the Little Englander’s cry of ‘leave those foreigners to their misery’.”
Later
John
I think Digg.com needs to adopt SomethingAwful.com’s title header.
“The Internet makes you stupid”
Digg.com, for the uninitiated is a Web 2.0 news source, people submit links with short write ups from around the world and then according to how interesting the news is, people can “Digg” a story up or down. The cream rises to the top and the front page is constantly awash with interesting sites.
Digg is the anti-Slashdot. Its stories are constantly updating and generally ‘Duping’ is less of a problem because duped reports don’t often get ‘dugg’.
Unfortunately, whereas Slashdot had terrible reporting and fantastic commentary, Digg has fantastic news and terrible commentary. It’s like the Idiot Parade on that site a lot of the time.
Perhaps it’s because Slashdot’s modding system is far more heavily restricted or because it grew slowly and steadily as a site, attracting techies who knew that if they wanted their comment to be read, they had to post something especially intelligent, funny or interesting. Whatever the reason, Slashdot’s commentary, in spite of the undying memes (“I for one welcome our new
Digg on the other hand is like listening to an army of 6 year olds. Sure there’s a lot of voices, but even if there’s an especially erudite six year old, imparting some profound wisdom, you’re not likely to hear him amongst all the drivel.
I took the time to write a post on a pet area of Law - Conflict of Laws to comment on a Digg story, I made sure it was properly formatted, grammatically correct and proof read. It went up, got a whole bunch of Diggs (comments can be dug or buried by anyone) garnered some praise, then about 5 posts down the comments degenerated into more idiocy and name calling between posters.
I officially have fallen out of love with Digg. Back to Slashdot for my homepage.
Later
John
The documentary Who Killed the Electric Car is out on the web in its entirety so I thought I’d comment on it.
GM’s EV failed to reach the market. I’ll tell you why it failed:
It had a 90 mile range.
Who wants to buy a car that can’t drive cross-state?
All the conspiracy theories about Electric Cars being killed by GM’s relationship with ‘Big Oil’ ignore about a half dozen massively important points:
Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Hyundai, Audi etc
GM may be the largest Automobile company but there are literally dozens of non US car manufacturers who would kill to break into the clean-burn market. They’re not in the pay of ‘Big Oil’, they’re just run by sensible people.
Electric Cars require a lot more research for their battery life and performance - at the moment Tesla Motors are going the right way about it, aiming their car at the top end of the market where ALL new tech products have to start. The first Macintosh cost thousands of dollars, the first Cars were the preserve of the massively wealthy - these people blaze the trail for innovation and investment into the technology that makes consumer products (read: compromise) possible.
I’d much rather this technology was released when it was capable of meeting the massive compromises required to make it consumer-ready. Too many good ideas died because they were released at the wrong time or before they were ready. In the meantime, I’ll take a Tesla Roadster and let the masses burn their petroleum.
Later
John
Omar at Iraq the Model tackles the recent Lancet figures on Iraqi deaths.
I think his closing paragraphs sum things up well. He says what few dare:
When I read the report I can only feel apathy and inhumanity from those who did the count towards the victims and towards our suffering as a whole. I can tell they were so pleased when the equations their twisted minds designed led to those numbers and nothing can convince me that they did their so called research out of compassion or care.
To me their motives are clear, all they want is to prove that our struggle for freedom was the wrong thing to do. And they shamelessly use lies to do this…when they did not find the death they wanted to see on the ground, they faked it on paper! They disgust me…
This fake research is an insult to every man, woman and child who lost their lives. Behind every drop of blood is a noble story of sacrifice for a just cause that is struggling for living safe in freedom and prosperity.
Let those fools know that nothing will stop us from walking this road and nothing will stop our friends and allies from helping us reach safe shores. There’s simply no going back even if it cost us more and their fake statistics will not frighten us…our sacrifices, like I said, make us proud because our bloods are not digits in those ugly papers. Our sacrifices are paving the way for future generations to live the better life we couldn’t live.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I don’t need some cowardly U-Turn to be provided, I wasn’t “tricked” into supporting the war, I wasn’t mislead. I genuinely though and still do that deposing Saddam Hussein was the right thing to do.
Why? Because freedom comes at a blood price, one our ancestors paid unselfishly and willingly.
We live in the societies we cherish today because we are Free Men and Free Men and Women invent, discover, explore and they will continue to do so for as long as they live because, to employ the imagery of Orwell’s 1984, when that boot comes down from the sky to stamp on their faces they spit at it.
Those who seek to ignore the boot, ignore the actions and sacrifices of their ancestors. For the first time in the history of the Human Race, more people now live under democracies than under despotic dictatorships. That’s the legacy we have been left and I for one will not countenance leaving the status quo to my children.
I heard Sting’s “Russians” yesterday in my Party Shuffle playlist and despite being a very good song I couldn’t help marveling at its tone and message. “There’s no such thing as a winnable war, it’s a lie we don’t believe anymore/ Mr Reagan says we will protect you, I don’t subscribe to that point of view”. It conveyed what many people felt, an acceptance of global Communism as something which ought to be left alone. If not ignorant of the pleas from those trapped beneath its heel, such people were at the very least complacent in the face of them.
Well now we instead have millions of people who enjoy the rights and freedoms that are their birthrights as human beings. Complacency didn’t win them that, an adversarial economic policy and a belief in the fundamental rights of humanity did.
I know I’m wont to write soaring rhetoric and bombastic diatribes about the subject but it’s one I feel passionate about. I’m not a relativist. Human Rights are Human Rights.
Later
John
I support individual freedom and liberties. As such there is no problem with a woman volunteering to wear the Niqab in the United Kingdom.
However, I absolutely condemn any imposed dress code upon a woman, particularly one so comprehensively oppressive. If indeed the Niqab is a sign of submission to Allah why is it not mandated in the woman’s home? Simple - because it’s to signify submission to men.
Equally we chose our clothes to elicit reaction or at the very least with the knowledge that people will react according to them. T-Shirts, aggressive, ripped camouflage attire, formal wear: we know people will react differently to different clothing.
A full veil cuts a person off from the outside world, it’s introverted and exclusive. It signifies that the wearer doesn’t want any contact - we know this because that’s the way we dress ourselves when we’re feeling vulnerable or shy.
It’s nothing short of a declaration of indifference and represents a physical barrier to interaction. How is integration to be achieved when every venture into the outside world is undertaken behind a wall of fabric?
I met and spoke to many students at London Met who wore the Hijab, I made a few friends amongst them too. They were conversational and open people. I didn’t get so much as a hello from those who wore anything more restrictive than the Hijab.
Later
John