|
|
Let Them Eat….Nothing
The BBC reports that Israel is not only blocking Palestinians from making a living, it’s now blockading UN food aid from reaching the hungry. If, as Israel wants to insist, this is a war, then starving the populace would appear to be against the letter and the spirit of the Geneva Convention :
Section I. Provisions common to the territories of the parties to the conflict and to occupied territories
[...]
Art. 33. No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited.Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.
What’s not to understand there? But I forgot. Only anti-semites criticise Israel and so everything they do is A-OK. To say otherwise would be racist, wouldn’t it?
Tags: Israel Palestine
The Bottom Line
Here’s lefty blogger K-Punk, in full-on collision with the Business Mentality as manifested in academia.
On the one hand I feel like saying “Nyer nyer, now you know what the rest of us have been dealing with”, on the other I can’t help but admire his detached observation of a phenomenon that would’ve had me jumping over the desk and shouting.
I’ve met these people, and little else works.
Attack of the Capitalist Realist Straw Women
[...]
Last Friday, as a long, bitter and ultimately successful battle to wrest control of the union branch from managerialists was nearing its end, I was around the college to sound out staff views. I asked a couple of members of staff what they thought of the union, and suddenly found myself in a situation akin to that moment in a Horror or Science Fiction film when the protagonist discovers that the ‘people’ he is talking to are Not Like Us.
I had naively expected that more or less all lecturers would support the union in its struggles against the continuing implementation of the government’s authoritarian-bureaucratic ‘compliance’ agenda and the spread of neo-liberal ‘reforms’, if not out of principle then for reasons of personal expediency. But I found myself talking to (pod) people from my worst imaginings. Neo-liberal Stepford Wives. The effect was heightened by sleep deprivation and adrenal depletion: everything felt edgy but at the same time distant, disconnected, as if shot through a fish-eye lens. Words came at me very quickly, while my responses were desperately slow, in part because I was scarcely able to credit what was I was hearing.
Here were people who really, genuinely seemed to fully believe that ‘it isn’t for the union to criticise management. Management are there to manage. That is why there are managers and workers.’ (Interesting how, as Harvey suggests in his book on neoliberalism, the neoliberal ethic of ‘freedom’ is so often accompanied by an utterly credulous faith in authority.) The union shouldn’t raise the issue of the principal’s salary because ‘he is on a different contract to us. The market rewards different skills differently.’ Click, whirr. The union shouldn’t complain about increasingly invasive appraisal systems because vacant Stepford blink ‘that’s the real world, and we can’t change that here.’ ‘Where my husband works’ (uh-oh) mirthless Nanette Newman smile ‘all staff are appraised and if they fall into the bottom 20%, they will be sacked.’
Was this some kind of loathsome awake dream, in which Capitalist Realist Straw Women from my unconscious had assumed a corporeal form?
At this point, a member of middle management barreled into view, as rotundly pleased-as-punch with himself as a minor character from Dickens. ‘Yes,’ he boomed, (sounding for all the world like one of those puffed-up local dignitaries forever telling young Pip that he ’should be grateful to them what ‘ave brought ‘im up by ‘and’), ‘You should count yourself lucky that you’ve got this management! I think we should bring in performance-related-pay. If a student leaves your course, you should lose money from your wages, instantly!’
It’s always amusing when intellectuals come into contact with the petty-bourgeousie. Because their assumptions and outlook are so radically diffeent humour is almost bound to ensue. But the K-punk’s serious point is that we have so accepted the business paradigm of profit and loss into our general discourse to the extent that nobody appears to even question at all when the most inappropriate subjects are judged in the light of business language and morals.
What was interesting, theoretically-speaking, about what all three of them had to say was its complete lack of any ethical or even economic argument for the rapacious state of affairs they were cheerfully advocating. At most there was an implication that neo-liberalization would lead to greater efficiency. But the main appeal of their arguments was not to ‘improvement’ of any kind, but to ‘reality’.
An ideological position can never be really successful until it is naturalized, and it cannot be naturalized while it is still thought of as a value rather than a fact. In the case of the lecturers I was talking to, it seems that Capitalist Realism has been so successful in installing Business Ontology that there is no longer any question of evaluating it at all. Business assumptions are now transcendental presuppositions, defining the horizons of the thinkable. It is simply obvious that everything in society, including education, should be run as a business. It is simply obvious that no other criteria can come into play. Hence the reason that my flailing attempts to raise issues of ‘justice’ were not so much rebuffed as greeted with blank incomprehension.
Read more…
To which I can only respond, well they would say that wouldn’t they? There’ll always be a place in the capitalist hierarchy for good little managers, who’ll balance the books for the meagre reward of a pat on the head from a superior, a ticket to the annual dinner-dance and the warm glow of knowing they’ve kept those uppity working class types down.
Tags: “UK Politics
How Long, Oh Lord, How Long?
The Labour Loans scandal just gets bigger and bigger. The chorus of formerly friendly voices is becoming deafening - Blair should go, and soon. The bloodhounds are circling No. 10 as more and information is leaked by disgruntled senior Labourites whom Blair deliberately excluded from the information loop. Even Deputy PM Prescott didn’t know about the loans and the General Secretary was lied to.
The red target dot on Blair’s forehead is clear to see and the political snipers are just waiting for the order. I suspect it may come after Labour’s Nation Exec meeting on Tuesday.
What I wouldn’t give to be a fly on the wall…
Tags: UK politics Blair Corruption
Friday Saturday Lifeform Blogging -A Pigeon Blogs
St Patrick’s Day, and it’s a hard life on the streets of London for a flying rodent :
Pigeon?s Eye View
“Bit of a heavy one in the end last night - having slagged the plastic paddy pigeons I bumped into a few on Piccadilly Circus and ended up on the black stuff. One of ?em found a spilled tinny. Shame. Staggering everywhere - not a good look for a pigeon. Well embarassing. It doesn?t take alot. Couple a sips and we?re gone. So - bit of a dry beak and thumping head tbh. Mart had an early one so he?s fine.”
Read more of Britain’s only online pigeon diary and the only one I can find written in proper English by a bird . There is another blog called Angry Pigeon, but as far as I can tell, no winged pundits are involved in its production.
How much this blog reflects the view of the average pigeon on the street in unclear. Pigeons tend to be very moderate in their views, and generally restrict their public comments to ‘coo’ and variations thereof.
I’m beginning to suspect ‘Brian’ Pigeon is one of those self-appointed community leaders, whose blogging’s secretly funded by MI5 to sow dissent and despair amongst Britain’s avian population. Next thing we know there’ll be suicide pigeons in Trafalgar Square.
Why, oh why do pigeons hate our freedom?
Tags: Pigeons Blogging Ephemera London MI5
How Very Nicely Circular.
The eagle-eye of Avedon Carol spotted this connection:
“I was just jumping from link to link earlier and ran into this 1999 wedding announcement: Emma Gilbey, an author and journalist, was married yesterday to Bill Keller, the managing editor of The New York Times. The Rev. Robert J. Kennedy performed the ceremony at the Holy Name of Jesus Roman Catholic Church in Manhattan. [...] Mr. Keller, 50, graduated from Pomona College. He is the son of Adelaide and George M. Keller of San Mateo, Calif. The bridegroom’s father retired as the chairman and chief executive of the Chevron Corporation in San Francisco. Oh, I see!”
Interesting…let me get this straight so I understand. I wouldn’t want to make any false connections or anything.
Iraq-> Oil industry -> Chevron -> NYT Editor Bill Keller-> Judith Miller -> Scooter Libby + Bush+Cheney -> Oil industry-> Iraq
‘Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel within a wheel…‘
Conflicts of interest have always occurred in journalism and publishing, enough so that newspapers have to have very strict rules about disclosure of any such ties, as does the NYT.
Their own NYT Handbook on Ethical Journalism (.pdf) has this to say on the disclosure of potential family conflicts:
106. In a day when most families balance two careers, the legitimate activities of companions, spouses and other relatives can sometimes create journalistic conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts. They can crop up in civic or political life, professional pursuits and financial activity. A spouse or companion who runs for public office would obviously create the appearance of conflict for a political reporter or an editor involved in election coverage. A brother or a daughter in a high-profile job on Wall Street might produce the appearance of conflict for a business reporter or editor.
107. To avoid such conflicts, staff members may not write about people to whom they are related by blood or marriage or with whom they have close personal relationships, or edit material about such people or make news judgments about them. For similar reasons, staff members should not recruit or directly supervise family members or close friends. Some exceptions are permissible ? in a foreign bureau, for instance, where a married couple form a team, or in the case of an article by afood writer profiling her brother the Yankee star, where the kinship is of genuine news interest.
I made a cursory search of the NYT since 1981 for ‘Chevron’ +’Oil’ and got 1884 hits so I think those’re definitely topics on which the paper reports. I then searched for ‘Chevron’+'Bill Keller’ and got at least 2 editorials by Keller in which Chevron is mentioned.
Unfortunately, they are both behind the paywall and that being so, there’s no clue as to whether they’re negative or positive about Chevron. But that’s not really the point, is it? The paper’s own ethics handbook is very clear about potential family conflicts - inform your superiors. Keller might argue that his father is retired and it’s not an issue, but it’s quite possible, even probable, that Keller’s dad has a handsome pension and stock options. And opinions about his old employers and their interests too, I expect. We’ve all been to those family dinners.
So did Keller inform his superior, the owner ‘Pinch’ Sulzberger, about this? Maybe he did. But even if he did, he’s not just any reporter. He’s the Editor - with the power to hire, fire, spike stories and use the paper to pontificate at will. Keller sets the whole editorial direction and tone for the paper. He has Influence.
I can’t find ( though it doesn’t mean it’s not out there, like I said, it was a cursory search) any statement in which he informs his paper’s readers of his family connection to the oil industry. But again, even if Keller did disclose somewhere - in these paranoid and dangerous times, when there’s an illegal war being waged about oil and an oil industry cabal is twisting the US Constitution so hard it’s broken, perhaps the ‘Paper of Record’’s readers could use a reminder of how the NYT is connected, even if remotely, to the oil industry.
Chevron 1998:
‘ ?Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas ? reserves I?d love Chevron to have access to,? enthused Chevron CEO Kenneth T. Derr in a 1998 speech at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco, in which he pronounced his strong support for sanctions.’
Chevron donations to Republicans: “15. ChevronTexaco. Donations 1999-2004 $2.5 million”
NYT integrity policy 1999:
? Reporters, editors, photographers and all members
of the news staff of The New York Times share a
common and essential interest in protecting the integrity
of the newspaper. As the news, editorial and business
leadership of the newspaper declared jointly in 1998:
?Our greatest strength is the authority and reputation of
The Times. We must do nothing that would undermine
or dilute it and everything possible to enhance it.? ?
Guidelines on Our Integrity, May 1999
Interestingly, Chevron is not the only family connection. Keller’s wife Emma Gilbey, former ABC news producer and power groupie, is reputedly an heiress to the Gilbey’s Gin fortune - and Gilbeys is owned by Diageo, which gives more to Republicans than Democrats. She was also John Kerry’s paramour at one time. But that’s just by the by.
Tags: US Media Newspapers New York Times Bill Keller
Geology Blogging
Late last year I posted about the Afar Depression and the continental rift splitting. Now Der Spiegel has noticed the story and the Huffpo has picked it up.
I told you geology was hip.
Tags: Geology
Moron Modes
“You think you know about living in an exclusive gated community. . . maybe down south in Florida? Well, you don?t know stuff. Let me tell you about the worlds MOST exclusive, the world?s ULTMATE Gated Community, the Green Zone. The Gates of the Green Zone are protected by Abrams and Bradley, that is, by M1 Abrams TANKs and M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles. You want protection, how about soldiers, Marines, Navy SeaBees, SEALs, some Air Force, Private Security?Ghurkas are everywhere?and also, your own personal weapons to include pistols and long rifles. 2nd amendment rights?heck, you?ve never seen so many weapons carried by so few in one housing area. Automatics out the kazoo ! You can?t make this stuff up, you just can?t. (You folks who?ve been there know what I?m talking about !!!!) So, we came up with this tee-shirt, copied but never equaled, to signify your having ?been there.? The UGC tee-shirt, the (un)Official tee of Green Zonians world-wide.”
Ha. Ahahaha. How my sides are splitting. I found these t-shirts via Instaspouse’s blog, where they are being marketed as : 
“For the well-dressed expat government employee and service member who lives and works in Iraq”
Every time you think these sick Republican fuckers can’t surprise you any more with their obscene war profiteering and blind arrogance, damned if they don’t go and do it again.
More Iraq fashion news: red is in this season. Did it ever go out of style?
Tags: Republican Fuckwittery
War On Women : Missouri Battlefront Report
We knew this would come….Hillary Clinton can try and do ‘bipartisan’Congressional deals on birth control all she wants, but we all know what they’re really up to - the fundies will not be happy until women shut up and get back in the kitchen. Clinton might as well just spit in the wind as try to attract moderates. This is open warfare on women by fundies . On this issue there are no moderates.
Low-income women would be affected
House OKs birth control funding ban
By KIT WAGAR
The Star?s Jefferson City correspondent
>JEFFERSON CITY ? The Missouri House voted Wednesday to ban state funding of contraceptives for low-income women and to prohibit state-funded programs from referring those women to other programs.
Critics jumped on the proposal, saying it would lead to more abortions and more unwanted children on welfare.
But the proposal?s sponsor, Republican Rep. Susan Phillips of Kansas City, said contraceptive services were an inappropriate use of tax dollars. ?If doctors want to give contraception privately or personally, they can,? Phillips said. ?But we don?t need to pay for contraception with taxpayer funds.?
Rep Phillips is Chair of the family and Children committee.
Tell her what you think.
Rep. Susan C. Phillips
Address: 201 West Capitol Avenue Kansas City MO 64151
7713 N Lucerne Ct, Room 313-2 Jefferson City MO 65101
Capitol Ph: 573-751-2071 Home Ph: 816-587-3379
Capitol Fax: 573-522-8622 Home Fax: 816-587-2418
Tags: War On Women Birth Control Family Planning Right To Choose
Revolution, One Snark At A time
Go Fug Yourself:
December 19, 2005
Random Fug II
This dress is somewhat unflattering, rather see-through, and wholly hideous — I mean, lady, I GET IT, you have breasts, and that’s great, but if you’re so determined to show them off then just call Lil’ Kim in prison and ask if you can borrow something — but there is another reason I wish that this Lina person hadn’t worn it.
Quite frankly, her navel scares the life out of me.
[...]
I’m a little behind the curve on this one, but there’s an interesting thread about Go Fug Yourself at Majikthise. Lindsay made a strong defence of FGY after Feminist blogger and law professor Ann Bartow posted about her incomprehension of the site’s humour. Much bashing of feminism and feminist law professors and stout defence of FGY ensued, including from me.
I admit to being a serial Fugger. FGY is hilarious. It has the wit of Private Eye allied with the fashion sense of Diana Vreeland. That mordant humour is brought wickedly to bear on the many, many faux pas of overexposed ( in so many ways) celebrities, celebrity wannabes and has-beens. I’m reproducing my comment from the thread as I’d only write something very similar again in this post ( and waste not, want not) :
…Having a socialist viewpoint doesn’t make me blind to the semiotics of clothing or suddenly turn me into someone with zero aesthetic judgement, despite the caricatures of us Euro-pinkos as soulless, communistic robots who dress all in black and wear weird glasses.
Yes, clothes are ephemeral but they’re not trivial at all. They say everything about us and our cultures and outlooks.
That said, I find reading FGY is like sitting on the top of the bus with your best girlfriends and critiquing everyone walking down the street. We all do it - FGY just enable us to have all of the lovely internets for our unwitting subjects.
If the subjects don’t like it - tough. They wanted to be in the public eye and this is the public eye, take it or leave it. They can’t pick and choose, though they might try.
And besides, there’s nothing more satisfying to a socialist than the game of epater les bourgeouis - ie, taking the piss out of the rich. They rub their excesses in our faces - are we just supposed to sit back and let them?
Not on your nelly.
I enjoy GFY the same way I enjoy reading Wodehouse or Trollope, Nancy Mitford or EF Benson - it’s the current-day version of those authors’ surgical skewerings of social snobbery and arrive-ism. Lighten up, people and professors. Any and all criticism of the privileged only serves the cause of the protelariat. Or something. And if you think GFY is anti-woman and disempowering, then you haven’t seen the comments at The Superficial yet.
Lefties unite, for trivial bitchery and beyond!
Tags: Blogs Media Celebrities
|
|
Recent Comments