LoveIan

Have been going through pictures and videos on Facebook - here's one from Spain that I quite like - will be uploading another from Spain soon(ish)

Disconnected

I've been in Wales for a week now, and I made the decision not to get internet in my flat. I don't know if it'll last for the whole summer, but I kind of like it.

I have a great flat in Cardiff Bay, with a park on one side, and the river on the other, the flat is gorgeous and in an amazing location, in an area where EVERYONE'S network is protected. So it feels a little strange not to be able to check my email/facebook/etc. constantly, but at the same time I really like it. And I've been so busy it hasn't driven me crazy - I've actually barely noticed.

Must get pictures up though.

I haven't even used my camera yet - and I've been here for a week. Wow

But I'm going to Spain tomorrow, going to be in an isolated villa for over a week - not really doing anything except relaxing and by the pool and with Sangria - so it'll be interesting to see how that goes. I'm looking forward to it.

Strikes, Piggy Flu, Coups, Economic Crises: Entropy can be comforting

I'm always amused when I see panicky media reports or panicky people. I don't know why, but I find there is something a bit comforting about chaos.

Maybe it's something to do with growing up in the popularized emo/indiekid generation, which is slightly related t the hippy generation. Hippies were marketed as carefree libertines, while emo brings the slightly sordid fun back to libertine-ism.

But it's not so much that as, just, the frequent reminder that entropy applies to social systems as much as it does to energy. Everything breaks down. Democracy, fascism, medical systems, and labour always breaks down in one way or another. And the more work and research I do, the more it seems like things are in constant disrepair, with a chipping facade of normality and orderliness.

Maybe it's the internet generation.

Everything is always changing - and I like that.

Even if my life seems to be in some state of disrepair - it doesn't even seem like a bad thing. Because it's not anything - it's just... shifting!

And this week (and next) I'm working pretty much constantly, but I'm only a few weeks away from three months in Britain being disorderly, disorganized, drunk, partying, frenetically social, and just having fun.

I have such a mix between creative and destructive urges. Not creation in an artistic or religious sense - but just to build things up, make order between things, and just make things work. And not necessarily destructive in an angry sense (although breaking things can be ALOT of fun, if you can learn to enjoy it. It's so much fun if you aren't doing it angrily) but just in a general chaotic sense.

Maybe call it Brahma and Siva - the Trimurti is actually a great metaphor for mental processes - better than Freud's.

But I find chaos so much more comforting. And it's important not to confuse enjoying chaos with enjoying violence because I think that's how that urge is commonly realized - as anger and pain and gossip - when it's really just an enjoyment of social entropy. But chaos is fantastic. It's nice to know that nothing is permanent, that things are deteriorating and changing - and I always find it so amusing that people get caught up in it.

In gossip, and chaotic happenings all over - and people immerse themselves in it, like it's real. Like it's part of their personality. But it's not really anything, it's just happening!

And as I type this I realize it's starting to sound a bit religious - more eastern religious, but it isn't. You may interpret it like that - but for me this is one of the primary realizations associated with atheism (or antitheism if you're sympathetic to that camp, which I am). But once you realize that a celestial and a terrestrial dictatorship are just as silly, but just as impermanent, then everything else isn't terrifying or threatening, or ominous, it's just amusing.

And outrage can be useful, but amusement is even better. It's the acknowledgement of something ridiculous; a mocking criticism; a condemnation; while being a measure of individual well-being. You can feel all those things -- and still be happy with the world and with people. The world is hilarious, and people are delightful. Seriously.

So next time you see chaos, feel the pull of entropy, or look at disorder - smile. It's all downhill, and it all unravels from here.

Love,

Ian

Sacha Baron Cohen's gay Austrian character "Bruno" sits on Eminem's face

This is hilarious. Eminem, the notoriously homophobic lily-white American rapper, just had Sacha Baron Cohen's are ass lowered onto his face at an awards show.

He did not look happy. Maybe it was planned, maybe it wasn't. But it's hilarious - it's exactly what Eminem deserves. I had to watch it a few times.

Obviously a publicity stunt for his upcoming movie Bruno (coming out July 10).

Embedding is disabled, but the trailer is here.

Looks pretty funny.

Polemicist: What is polemics?

I've seen a few different definitions of polemicist - but essentially it's just one phoneme short of a polemic.

But essentially polemics is - argument, controversy, contentious discourse, I could go on and try to be very academic in creating unnecessary forms of words to describe it.

But I changed some of my subtitles, because although LoveIan is forever, the subtitles may change. So I thought what few words I could use to represent me "Rockstar, fashion guru, and polemicist!" HA! I'm not actually musical at all, but as Buddhists recommend living with Buddha-mind, I try and live my life with rockstar-mind. Fashion guru is fairly obvious, so I won't explain that.

I'll just clarify why I'm posting this right now.

Shameless pride (a deadly sin).

If you google 'polemicist' now, I will show up on the first page. There are few pleasures in life that you can enjoy on your own. Masturbation is one; googling yourself is another. So, not going to lie, I just have a massive googlegasm.

According to the new glorious leader of all technology I am one of the top ten polemicist in the New World.

Yeah, cheers, thanks alot.

So just to clarify here are a few specific definitions of polemicist:

"a writer who argues in opposition to others (especially in theology)"

"As such, a polemic text on a topic is often written specifically to dispute or refute a position or theory that is widely viewed to be beyond reproach."

"The art of destroying another person’s belief system through argumentation."

Partially more of an aspiration. Thanks for encouraging my dreams wise overlords at google.

Now it's time to google myself a little more.

California gay marriage ban - not necessarily a bad thing.

I actually don't think this is a big deal, and I think people who are outraged should get over it, and need to look at it from a different perspective.

First, yes it is a civil right violation - but there are FAR more serious violations of civil rights that are going on in the US, and I understand that minority groups are concerned with rights for their group - but there are bigger issues.

Now, equal legal rights for same sex couples is important. But marriage isn't. Here's why:

Marriage is basically a religious institution. The legal part of marriage is just about the legal rights of couples (which need to be available to same sex couples). Marriage is a symbolic thing that might be important to some people - but it shouldn't be. Putting the focus on demanding gay marriage be recognized is based on the assumption that the church and state have the authority to recognize and sanction their relationship. They don't.

I don't recognize that the church or the state have the authority or the right to 'recognize' my relationships. Legal rights, yes.

The actual marriage part is not important - I can understand how some people see it as an important symbol of human rights. But it isn't.

The biggest argument ignorant people have about same sex marriage is that it will "undermine the institution of marriage." That's ridiculous because by changing marriage to allow same sex couples it is actually reinforcing and strengthening the institution of marriage. Same sex couples have the opportunity to undermine marriage by not recognizing the external authority to institutionalize a relationship.

Take the basic legal rights that need to be available to everyone. Empower yourself by not recognizing unnecessary impositions of external authority.

Craig Ferguson, Puppets do Britney Spears

I have to post this because this is likely the best American television moment that has ever occurred between 12:00am and 4:00pm.

Just this performance alone deserves and Emmy or Golden Globe or whatever awards they give to TV shows.

 

(The new YouTube formats don't always fit that well into this blog format, so you may just want to go here)

I thought it was amazing though - I've watched it three times already. If you don't enjoy it, you're probably dead inside.

I'll post another thing that I love. It's in the first 20 seconds - but I'd suggest watching more.

(Or here)

Yeah. Legend. It's one of the only shows worth turning on a TV for. And Gossip Girl - it's all about the GG and the CF.

Piggy [Swine (H1N1)] Flu: Be afraid! (Maybe).

I love things like this. They amuse me on so many levels.

First, is the absolute panic that people get in over this. The media and the government tend to get cautious (or, alarmist, if that's the word you would like to use). But to be fair they are in a terrible conundrum. If they don't raise the alarm people will be furious that the government hasn't done enough. If there is action taken, and nothing comes of it then it's an over-reaction and it's panic-mongering, and it's horrible. I love reading letters to the editor, because everyone is always OUTRAGED! It doesn't matter which side they're on, there are always so many outraged, angry people. People don't get it. There are so many people that just can't chill. People who don't realize that it doesn't matter who you're angry at - which little issue you are angry at the government about, death is still going to happen.

Gutted.

It goes beyond that though - the politics get so much more exciting. THE PIG FARMERS. I love this - I understand how the piggy farmers feel, but I still think it's funny. Initially it gets picked up as swine flu - so people all of a sudden get scared of pigs. A Muslim country kill hundreds of thousands of pigs. Pork sales PLUMMET! Everyone is afraid of pigs. So the swine lobby rears its snout, and interferes to government. In the meantime, Steven Harper [Canadian Prime Minsters] tries to remove any undue prejudice against pigs and calls it 'Mexican Flu.'

THEN, the Mexican ambassador makes public statements condemning this, the pig farmers condemn the other naming, public relations nightmare go all around making ambassadors and farmers wake up in cold sweats about jargon and catchphrases, and they all lobby governments and assail media associations to have this "epidemic"  renamed.

Eventually "H1N1" is a term that is generally accepted [grammarians and numericists everywhere are outraged - but their lobby is not strong enough].

And thus we have a new name for a strain of flu that has killed HUNDRED of people (while the regular flu has killed hundreds of thousands already this year, in North America alone).

And this is the process of disease semanticism.

It's hard not to love this world.

Miss [Insert geographic region] scandal.

A beauty pageant (see "scholarship program") contest recently condemned gay marriage.

Honestly, I haven't been too bothered, but I just heard the best statement about this:

"She's not an arbiter of social justice, her main skill is looking good in a bikini!" (Craig Ferguson). But it's true. I know we can criticise "public" figures for the opinions they express, but I would actually rather advocate her right to say it than criticise what she says. Actually I'd like to do both, but whatever.

Let her say it - criticize the opinions, use it for a conversation topic, but don't question her right to say it. Because she can and she should be able to. The fact that her nipples have become a bigger (heh) story than her social views speaks for itself. On a few levels.

I don't want to go on about this, because it's not a particularly interesting issue. Except for the attitudes that seem to come out of this. But:

"She's not an arbiter of social justice, her main skill is looking good in a bikini!"

So don't worry. She can say what she wants - and so can you*.

*See government restrictions

Angels in Christian mythology: Because just one imaginary friend isn't enough.

I accidently stumbled across this book after doing some googles:

"Angels (and demons): what do we really know about them" (by Peter Kreeft). I read a bit, for a laugh because the title caught my interest. But I had trouble understanding how some people actually believe this - and by the circular logic and ridiculous conclusions that are drawn. I've been reading alot of academic journals and research papers lately (honours research project - funtimes) and after reading parts of this book I found it laughable.

The guy asserts the study of angels (aptly named angelology) is a science like any other, but that it's a science that also requires faith. So you have to BELIEVE. Maybe if I clap my hands and truly believe I can grow up to study faeries - or heffalumps and woozles.

Kreeft suggests that people are more suspicious of angelology than natural sciences are because it deals with the supernatural. Um, yes. The claim is that these are beings of god (completely invisible obviously - like all imaginary friends) and that every human that is alive or has ever lived has his own angel. And here is an example of what he calls deduction [which anyone who has any knowledge of the scientific method can get a good laugh about this]:

"If any one of the points of this theory were false, the data would be different. For instance, if angels could not assume bodies, they could not eat. However in Scripture they do on occasion eat (see Gen 19:3); therefore they can assume bodies."

AHA! Genius. See how convincing his logic is. The bible said A; B requires A; and B should mean C. Therefore C is unquestionably true.

Oh and by the way, there are angels everywhere. Always - there is an angel with you right now apparently. Basically the monotheistic Stasi. Imaginary, but just as intrusive - they even get involved in politics!

The book answers all the questions you could possible have about angels - seriously one heading is, "Are angels involved in politics?" The answer is a resounding yes, by the way.

Another question/heading: "What do angels do all day? Don't they get bored?

I love the implications of this!