YOU DIDN'T THINK THIS WOULD ALL BE FUN AND GAMES, DID YOU?  There is work to be done, people.  Last time I checked; Yankee imperialism was at an all-time high, matched only by the complicity of its lapdogs of empire (yes, Canada, that includes you); capitalist exploitation was alienating and marginalizing more and more working people, especially in the global south but even in the advanced capitalist world; and the capacity of people to fight against oppression in all of its manifestations was under constant bombardment by the diverse forces of reaction that seek to maintain a status quo that limits the prospects for social justice and sustains the conditions upon which capital can be accumulated into the hands of the few at the expense of the many.  And yes, fuck, that was a run-on sentence and I'm not the least bit bothered.  Say it really fast at parties, I'm sure you'll make friends.

The point is, there is too much that is messed up in the world to document it all in one snarky text box.  But all joking aside, the Consumer Goods are here not just to entertain but to contribute to the growing mass of resistance to a wide variety of oppressive forces - with capitalist social-property relations at the top of that list.  Oh, I know it sounds so intense, and if you haven't spent a lot of time thinking about these things, you might be wondering 'what's so wrong with property?'  Sadly, it isn't hip to get too academic on the first date, but stick around awhile, and perhaps you'll draw a few conclusions on the matter.  Nothing is so simple that it can be explained in a few well-timed soundbytes, but neither is anything so complex that it cannot be understood at some level by anyone who has the will to do so.

As such, this section will be devoted to providing some context to the matters raised by the band as well as many others that escaped Mr. Shipley's watchful gaze.  As my technical skills improve, I'll try to create some sort of forum so that ours are not the only voices up here, but until then you'll have to settle for our aristocracy of information.  Solidarity!

IN THE NEWS

Ok, so here's how it's going to work.  This side of the page will be where we discuss matters that are immediately pressing concerns.  Over on the right hand side of the page, we'll be digging into more general thematic issues that aren't necessarily slapped all over the headlines, but have broader-term relevance.  With me so far?  (Don't worry, this kind of organization will soon prove far too much for me.)

April 1, 2007

"Spam, Spam, Spam, Spam, Eggs, Bacon, Torture and Spam"

Terry Jones, that classically short Welsh member of the Monty Python gang, wrote a wonderful satirical piece for the guardian yesterday, I thought it worth sharing.

"Call That Humiliation?
No hoods. No electric shocks. No beatings. These Iranians Clearly Are a Very Uncivilised Bunch"

by Terry Jones

I share the outrage expressed in the British press over the treatment of our naval personnel accused by Iran of illegally entering their waters. It is a disgrace. We would never dream of treating captives like this - allowing them to smoke cigarettes, for example, even though it has been proven that smoking kills. And as for compelling poor servicewoman Faye Turney to wear a black headscarf, and then allowing the picture to be posted around the world - have the Iranians no concept of civilised behaviour? For God’s sake, what’s wrong with putting a bag over her head? That’s what we do with the Muslims we capture: we put bags over their heads, so it’s hard to breathe. Then it’s perfectly acceptable to take photographs of them and circulate them to the press because the captives can’t be recognised and humiliated in the way these unfortunate British service people are.

It is also unacceptable that these British captives should be made to talk on television and say things that they may regret later. If the Iranians put duct tape over their mouths, like we do to our captives, they wouldn’t be able to talk at all. Of course they’d probably find it even harder to breathe - especially with a bag over their head - but at least they wouldn’t be humiliated.

And what’s all this about allowing the captives to write letters home saying they are all right? It’s time the Iranians fell into line with the rest of the civilised world: they should allow their captives the privacy of solitary confinement. That’s one of the many privileges the US grants to its captives in Guantánamo Bay.

The true mark of a civilised country is that it doesn’t rush into charging people whom it has arbitrarily arrested in places it’s just invaded. The inmates of Guantánamo, for example, have been enjoying all the privacy they want for almost five years, and the first inmate has only just been charged. What a contrast to the disgraceful Iranian rush to parade their captives before the cameras!

What’s more, it is clear that the Iranians are not giving their British prisoners any decent physical exercise. The US military make sure that their Iraqi captives enjoy PT. This takes the form of exciting “stress positions”, which the captives are expected to hold for hours on end so as to improve their stomach and calf muscles. A common exercise is where they are made to stand on the balls of their feet and then squat so that their thighs are parallel to the ground. This creates intense pain and, finally, muscle failure. It’s all good healthy fun and has the bonus that the captives will confess to anything to get out of it.

And this brings me to my final point. It is clear from her TV appearance that servicewoman Turney has been put under pressure. The newspapers have persuaded behavioural psychologists to examine the footage and they all conclude that she is “unhappy and stressed”.

What is so appalling is the underhand way in which the Iranians have got her “unhappy and stressed”. She shows no signs of electrocution or burn marks and there are no signs of beating on her face. This is unacceptable. If captives are to be put under duress, such as by forcing them into compromising sexual positions, or having electric shocks to their genitals, they should be photographed, as they were in Abu Ghraib. The photographs should then be circulated around the civilised world so that everyone can see exactly what has been going on.

As Stephen Glover pointed out in the Daily Mail, perhaps it would not be right to bomb Iran in retaliation for the humiliation of our servicemen, but clearly the Iranian people must be made to suffer - whether by beefing up sanctions, as the Mail suggests, or simply by getting President Bush to hurry up and invade, as he intends to anyway, and bring democracy and western values to the country, as he has in Iraq.

March 20, 2007

"I can hear the glass cracking!"

It's hard to know exactly where to start with this sort of thing, but here goes.  First off, I should probably turn off my mock narrator voice here, since it's important to be very clear about whose opinion is being proferred here.  I'm speaking for everyone in the band, ever.  Current members, former members, part-time members, the guy that did the sound for us at the Albert, his girlfriend, her parents, my parents, your parents, Arnold Palmer, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, all three of the Stooges and everyone who's ever had the nickname 'buzz.'  You may hold any and all of these people responsible, if you disagree.

Alright, so I noticed a newsbit today that caught my attention and I think I'll make it the first entry here.  In this article from the AP, it was announced that the Grand Canyon Skywalk will soon be open, allowing tourists the chance to experience the canyon on a more intense level on part of the Hualapai Indian Reservation in Arizona.  The article was interesting, in itself, for its own confusion on how to report on the subject.  For one thing, they can't seem to decide if they are going to call the Hualapai representatives 'Elders' or if they are going to give use a nice, comfortable business term like 'chairman.'  You can feel the uncomfortable way in which the article tries to grapple with what must be a somewhat confusing situation - these "tribal" people (a term generally used to imply some sort of 'backwardness,' of a people from an earlier part in the 'evolutionary progression' of humanity) don't typically operate in the world of big business. 

One can see, quite easily I think, the conflicted position that the people on the Hualapai Reservation are in.  On the one hand, of course, playing along with wealthy (and mostly white) tourists must be somewhat degrading to the dignity of people who have traditionally shown a great deal more respect to their colonial conquerers than was ever shown in return.  That said, marginalization on barren desert lands in Arizona makes it pretty hard to scratch out an existence, and pragmatists among them have obviously seen fit to make the socio-cultural sacrifice in a desperate effort to alleviate the dreadful conditions faced by many on the reservation. 

Of course, many in the mainstream circuits will applaud the 'rational' business decision and display it as a sign that everyone in America has the opportunity to cash in on free-market 'opportunities.'  Others, as the article mentions, have judged the decision sanctimoniously for its assault on the natural environment.  While I'm certainly inclined to agree that building a silly glass walkway in the Grand Canyon is a stupid desecration of an area of natural beauty, I'm struck by the reaction against the people of Hualapai - this article quotes a former park ranger calling them hypocrites who are only interested in filling the "tribal treasury."  No doubt the increase in tourism will bring with it an increase in environmental damage - white people in North America have proven time and time again that throwing the plastic wrappers from granola bars onto the ground is ok, as long as you don't do it on your own property.

But should the Hualapai be blamed for the fact that suburb-dwellers from Seattle are going to further choke the air with their SUVs once the new skywalk is opened?  What can be expected of people who have been placed in a situation where they rely on gimmicky tourist attractions in order to support themselves?  As one council member noted, the impoverished conditions on the reservation are largely ignored by the state and its media, so they must do something. 

Whatever one thinks of the skywalk itself, it seems absurd (though, by now, not surprising) to lay the blame for its drawbacks on the people who are in the weakest position of all the players involved.  What about the company that designed and invested in the project?  They'll make heaps of cash and claim that they've done a good deed by bringing business to the 'poor, backwards Indians' who just don't understand capitalism.  Lucky fucks.