Through a glass, rosily

by hakmao, 17 March 2008

Recent remarks by the odious buffoon George Galloway and also Spiked Online editor, Brendan O’Neill–a man being devoured by his own neck, the appearance which reinforces the pulmonate qualities of his arguments–contend that opposition to the Iranian theocracy’s continuing judicial murder of homosexuals and illegal detention and persecution of trade unionists lends a ‘pink tinge’ to the ‘khaki war machine’* (Galloway), and that support for Tibetan self-determination constitutes racism, a patronising romanticising of ‘child-like’ Tibetans and a fear/hatred of modernity–continuing Chinese occupation being necessary to save Tibetans from lapsing into barbarism, obscurantism and superstition** (Galloway and O’Neill). The argument is–to use the philosophical term–complete bollocks. For these two and the others who support this line there are no contradictions, merely questions which are binary–they have no thesis, there is no antithesis, and most certainly no synthesis.

Whenever A and B are in opposition to one another, anyone who attacks or criticises A is accused of aiding and abetting B. And it is often true, objectively and on a short-term analysis, that he is making things easier for B. Therefore, say the supporters of A, shut up and don’t criticize: or at least criticize ‘constructively,’ which in practice always means favourably. And from this it is only a short step to arguing that the suppression and distortion of known facts is the highest duty of a journalist.

George Orwell–Tribune, 23 November 1945

* A phrase with which Galloway seems inordinately pleased, given the relish with which he repeats it.

** Not that Galloway is averse to barbarism, obscurantism and superstition, himself–merely [what he considers] the wrong sort of barbarism, obscurantism and superstition.

Something that Happened

by Neil, 17 March 2008

On the 13th March 1958 Guy Debord wrote a letter to Ralph Rumney.

Dear Ralph

We have realized that we haven’t had news from you for quite a long time; that you still haven’t done any real work with us; and that, nevertheless, you do not hesitate to mention your collaboration with the Situationist International concerning your “quiet” exposition in Milan.

We find you quite sympathetic, it is true, but you must know that it isn’t our habit to prolong (for a long time) negligence in certain affairs in which you have chosen, as we have, to be involved.

We thus take steps towards dissipating the equivocal:

In case you would still like to participate in what we do, it will suffice for you to send us, by the end of March [1958]:

1) The text[1] intended for our journal, which is at the printer.[2]

2) A satisfactory report on your activities in the last few months.

After 31 March, it will be useless: the journal will indicate precisely the participants in our action.[3]
Cordially,
[Asger] Jorn, [Guy] Debord

Further details are in Guy Debord’s letters. Rullsenberg informs me that Ralph Rumney was the son-in-law of Peggy Guggenheim. Only connect.

I think Debord utters the same sentiment as Will in this post. Opinion as to who said it better is divided.

Here’s a new one

by Will, 17 March 2008

How Did I Get Iraq Wrong?

I didn’t

By Christopher Hitchens

Nothing has happened in the world today — nothing at all — fuck all in fact

by Will, 17 March 2008

Pretend there is a new post here by one of the so-called contributors to this blog and it is posted here.

Go on — do it — for a laugh like.

Lazy fucking cunts.