It's interesting to see most Europeans siding with Barack Obama and thinking John McCain to be a bad alternative.

Looking at the media in Finland (and I don't think this is only a Finnish phenomena) it's easy to see the journalists think people think Obama is the choice and only some minority conservative columnists dare to say McCain wouldn't be that bad either.

Looking at it from the U.S perspective I can see the difference: more tax-cuts for the rich  vs.  government backed programs for the poor , pro-life vs. pro-choice, off-shore drilling in Alaska / Texas vs. renewable energy commitments etc. They are big questions but they are mainly that for inside U.S. (although I'm just waiting to see the queues at the border to Canada filled with the poor, gays and abortion-makers) even if we secularised, socio-liberal and envirovmentalist Europeans would feel strongly about those issues.

But from Europe - or worldwide - does it make a difference when talking about the global politics? Is Obama indeed the candidate the rest of the world should and would love as the president of the U.S.?

Both candidates talk about getting rid of the dependency on "foreign oil" and of the global warming as the challenge of the generation (fine and dandy, the Europeans say, was about time the Americans cut their consumption - even if the Europeans aren't the pure-white angels in this themselves although the EU tries at least on paper to do something about it).

Both say the U.S. need to gain back the global respect and goodwill it had back on 2001 before the Bush adminstration blew it all off (wide applauds from Europe, it's finally changing whoever gets elected).

Both candidates say the U.S. must show leadership in the world and fight extremely hard on Israel's side (now some Europeans start to cough).

They both agree the U.S should secure their interests - even if it's only the interests of big American corporations in the first place - whatever the cost, at the same time blaming Russia for doing only exactly the same thing! (more coughs from Europe).

Barack Obama indeed suggest the U.S troops should strike to Pakistan if they had good intelligence on Al-Qaeda there and McCain says the U.S. might be around Iraq for the next hundred years - and neither denies the possibility of using military power against Iran (the Europeans are starting to feel really uncomfortable).

They both seem to think the U.S. interests run over any other interest of any other nation in the world as they are right in all matters also ethical or worldview-like (the coughs of the Europeans jam into the throats).

And one thinks what they think about Chinese and other Far-Eastern investment-banks owning half of the American assets and Banks... How will they explain it to their citicens - or to the world when the take-over finally comes?


We all know John McCain is an old fox - a maverick as he likes to portray himself - he knows the bussiness and can deal things around... the way the things have been dealt after the second world war. He's good at that and if the global politics will go the way they have done the last decades he would be a sure bet indeed. An idea many Europeans have totally overlooked.

But where is our favourite Obama in all of this? Having roots in Kenya, raised in far-East; has he something to say about global justice and equality? Is he talking about a reform in the way capitalism strangles people around the world and makes the rich even richer (by fex. exporting jobs oversees) and the poor even poorer? Sadly no - unless he is giving a speech in Detroit auto-workers meeting.

And it's not as an easy question as it might look like.

If Obama (or the EU) decide to subsidise the domestic market by aiding the local farmers fex. it means the developing countries are robbed from their opportunity. How could one raise cattle or grow crops in a small village in Senegal if the European union subsidised milk-powder from Holland is cheaper than what it takes to produce milk there? If the American government subsidise U.S. farmers to turn their crops into bio-diesel someonme needs to produce the food they are no longer producing; the place: huge (U.S. based) companies in Brasil are cutting the rest of the Amazon rainforest to grow maize and cattle...

I haven't heard Obama tackle these issues. Sure these are not issues with which you win in the U.S. elections to be sure. But as he has stood out as a candidate who has a backbone to talk for ethical problems one is a bit disappointed.

Not that John McCain would be any better on these issues. He would probably be even worse.





 

Current Mood: pensive

A young guy decided to end his days in a big-bang and took ten lives as he went. Another school-shooting in Finland that is (it is just less than a year another guy killed eight in his school).

As the caption shows I'm not sure how I feel. But the questions keep coming forwards - not only the impotent "why?" -ones, but real questions that need to be asked.


Many say the problem is that we don't have enough resources for the mentally disturbed people to get them into proper treatment. Yeah, true. And some of the finances have been cut down in the recent decades as tax-reductions are the word of the day. That's how a nation stays competitive they say... Is this the competitiveness they wish for? At least it's the outcome of that. 

But there are more deeper problems as well. Comparing to let's say seventies or eighties the number of mentally imbalanced people have drastically risen. So why is that?

Also why is that, that when in the earlier days someone losing the grip on their lives or turned down by the communities they were involved with just blew their own heads and didn't even think of it being cool to take others with them?


Many people offer a community spirit as the medicine for this. We should go back to tighter and smaller communities which would look after each other and we should not live in the faceless masses we do in big cities. Fine and dandy and looks romantically perfect.

But it's more than flawed. In Finland both of these incidents have taken place in small communities and small schools. A small community offers cosy safety... for those that community accepts. Getting derailed in or turned down by a tight community is hundred times tougher than being left alone in a loose multitude. Tight communities can be Heavens but they can be Hells as well. In a large enough community one can always be anonymous and find likewise people to go with.

And that brings on the next question. In a big enough "community" - like the internet - one is able to meet other potatoheads dreaming of a massacre and wetting their pants for the sheer thought of being as cool as Klebold was. And they can feed each others imaginations giving them the feeling they are loved and encouraged in what they think until they finally lose their last grip on reality and become ready to act like they do.

It's kind of a same phenomena the Al-Qaeda led Quaran-schools or fundamentalist christians in their same-minded sub-urbanised neighbourhood congregations do to their children. They indeed create a small and tight community which allows for no deviation from the rule. The only difference being that these internet communities sharing their killing plans and shooting videos are not living physically near each other but mentally they provide for each other, share a tight community.

...

Long live big cities, tolerance and the possibility to either stay unknown or to meet people and ideas you've not heard of before...

...


Why do the numbers of psychologically instable or downright destructive people arise then?


How many friends do you have in Facebook? Less than hundred? Bad. You're a nobody.

How many contacts do you have on your mobile? Less than two hundred. You're a loser.

Do you have the gear you ought to have? Have you experienced the things you ought to have?

Are you loved by millions as you ought to be? Are you celebrated and envied as you ought to be?


The bankers who initiated this whole sub-prime mortage wreck were only acting rationally and acting as they should, we say. And that will flow over the boundaries of and into one's personal sphere. Your personal economical / status success is the measure of your social life and thence of your deepest being. It will become you.

Sorry all you individualists, one is nothing alone but one needs the appreciation of others to be oneself. It just seems nowadays that in order to be accepted or appreciated one needs to be more than is possible to all - and with those capable of reaching the "heights" only few make it as it is in the end a game of chance. Anyone can win in a lottery but only one will do while million others don't.

I mean, it's true that in the world today anyone can be a millionaire or anyone can be a celebrity. Right. All those stories of  "from selling match-boxes to owning a bussiness empire" are surely true. But only a few can actually make it - and it's not a question of personal qualities as it is of chance.


Not everyone can become a millionaire by selling matches!
Not everyone can be a celebrity!

It's just conceptually impossible. If all were celebrities who would follow our fortunes? If all were rich were would our fortunes come from?


But today anyone not reaching for those positions is considered a loser. And anyone not accepting the ideal is a weirdo thrown out by the community. The pressure is on, more than ever - even if the phenomenon is not a new one to be sure.

...

But like the Beatles once sung: "All you need is love"...

And as the same band testified in an older song: "Can't buy me love"...

One really can't buy it even if more and more people seem to think we can (with money or with social fame)...

...


And we all take our own lives just too seriously! If I'm not the greatest person on earth right now I'm nothing and my life has no meaning! If I'm not the top one in this or that I'm nothing! If I'm not...


Sorry this became quite a pointless rant on everything that is wrong in this world... But maybe it alsop bears wittness to how things and ideas lead to one another and are interwoven. But anyhow, it felt good to just spell this out today. Tomorrow my rant would have been a bit different, I suppose. And after a month I could give you a balanced and reasoned analysis on the matter - but rest assured, that will never come to be..

 

Current Mood: sad

There will be a game of Dueling Wizards in the Barrow Downs starting on June the 1st.

So if you're reding this and have not yet joined the game you have a couple of days to do it...

The crowd (27 players) looks impressive at the moment but it could be even better if you joined.

Current Mood: happy

I just heard my student was picked into Finnish two person team for the international Philosophy Olympiads for youth! There was a half a year's extensive training period where they (the ministry of education philosophy board) had picked something like ten best from an essay-contest that was held last autumn and she got through that!

Cool! *add any positive superlative here*

I know she's talented, intelligent and has spirit but it really made my day to hear the news.

And btw. that means I'm going to Romania too as a coach and counsellor - and will partake in the international jury which grades the competition essays.

If you'd asked me a few days ago I would have sweared my occupation to the lowest hell because there is just too much work and stress... Now the worst workloads are behind me and then comes this.

Funny how easily one's head can be turned.

Current Mood: rejuvenated

Good to be on an unfamilyfriendly site!

After a day at work I had a late meeting and after that we dropped into a pub to have two pints. I was getting home after 9 pm. hungry like a wolf when I discovered at the bus-station that I didn't have my mobilephone with me. I ran back to the pub but the phone was nowhere to be found. The bartender lent me his phone and I tried to call it only to find out that my phone was "taken"... so someone was busy talking with it.

Okay. Cool down and call the operator to close the account. Nice and dandy. But easier said than done. It took a little over hour to get through to the operator... If someone was calling some porn-numbers it might have cost a few Euros / minute... so sixty minutes... OMG.

Well, who tells you to forget your phone into the bench of a pub (it certainly wasn't on the table as I would have noticed it when leaving)... no one. But all the numbers and stuff it will take time to get back... and the cost...

Gah. I feel so fucked up. Vituttaa to say it in plain Finnish.

Current Mood: frustrated

Paul Greengrass' film "Bloody Sunday" was just shown on Finnish television.

I must say it was an impressive film.

The director clearly had his sympathies on the Catholics (aka the people of Derry) and against the Unionists (at least the British army and the politicians). Sure. But I also believe he was trying to give an objective view about the things that happened on that unfortunate day whatever his personal ties were. At least he managed to make it look convincing and believable. I'm not wishing to discuss the author though - he made the "United 93" which I have yet to see but after this one I will really wish to see it soon.

But I know there are many Brits around here and I'd like to know what do you think about the film, or how are you taught in school about the "Bloody Sunday", or how your media portrays the story?

Another thing that striked me was the current interest of the story. The film was made in 2001 so long before 9/11 but somehow it's moral point looks terribly accurate. Answer a low-level violence against a greater power with institutionalised force and what you get is innocents dying and fertile recruiting grounds for extremists. Sounds familiar in 2007? 

My friend and colleague died last Saturday.



I heard it first as a rumour in our summer cottage and after some calling on the phone and hours of heavy waiting it was confirmed to me. He was somethnig like 5 years older than me, so about 45. The healthiest person I knew, energetic, full of life and music, a father of two children. We had occasionally made music together, sat long nights in bars talking the world a better place, co-worked in our jobs... And *puff* and he's no more.



It's just incredible. Myself with my near-suicidal habits of smoking, drinking and eating unhealthily (not fast food but really greasy-buttery-salty-delicious slow food) am just going on fine and he the healthy man just died away. He had had a high fever just a few days before he went to a holiday-trip to the Mediterranian - and died there soon after he got there.



I'm old enough to understand that people do die and they can die for curious or unforeseen reasons. I'm also atheistic or agnostic enough not to meddle any God-stuff with death. Death happens. It happens randomly in a sense we can't foresee it coming in many instances although sometimes we can (old people, very ill people). But still one's mind constantly forms the question "why".



It's a stupid or nonsensical question if we ask for a reason ("why it was he who had to go?"), while being possibly fathomable but not so important emotionally if we ask for causes (the fever he suffered earlier etc.). But somehow - I think - we people are adjusted to a moral universe where the death of someone who was dear to you, was a good man, was a healthy man is just downright wrong and shouldn't have happened. It's hard to fight one's instincts and feelings they bring forwards with them.

Current Mood: sad

I saw Volo's entry and thought the subject should earn more entries...




So what is news? According to the old joke in Finnish journalist circles it goes like "A  dog biting a man is no news but a man biting a dog is".




I woke up  around the mid-day today and had two cups of coffee with the newspaper and then we (myself & Lommy's little sis) took showers and went to see the latest HP movie after which we got into a Nepalese restaurant and ate well, then we got shopping for the ingredients of an ox-tail soup (it will be a Bortsch-soup in the end and I only make the basis for it in advance tomorrow) for saturday as I need to make the "bouillon" tomorrow ready for weekend party from the raw materials. In the evening we chatted about this and that and watched a nature document on Mangusts on TV.  In the evening Lommy's sis  continued reading the new HP and I myself hanged over the cellphone organising the party to come at weekend for hours... and at last Lommy's sis was sleepy enough I got online...





Was that news? Local news? National news? International news? No it wasn't as it was too normal, too everydaylike.





So what are the news? Billions of people on this planet lead their life everyday meeting acquaintances, doing their everyday things, going on with their everyday bussinesses, meeting the same people people and accidentally some new ones. And in the evening they do what they usually do and get to sleep sooner or later than they're used to do it. So  why don't we hear anything about them in the news? Why doesn't BBC tell us of the day of Mr. Young from Singapore when he had the normal day - or of Ms. Gunilla Bäckström an ordinary houseviwe from Åmal, Sweden, or that of Saraya Rashid in Quandahar, Afghanistan?




Because they are no news! News are the things that break the rule, the things that are extraordinary!




Compare the following news:
1) A suicide bomber blasted himself in the queue to a movie theatre in Soho (London, GB) killing 4 people and wounding several others.
2) A suicide bomber blasted himself in the queue to a movie theatre in Tikrit (iraq) killing  40 people and wounding a host of others.

Which one of these would be news to reach our minds with full swing today and twenty-four -hour coverage? 




So the news are the exception to the rule, something that is not normal. The news tell us of violence and dramatic affairs as they are not the standard of life (not counting Iraq, Palestine and other troubled spaces).



God forbid myself to see the headline of the newspaper that cries with screaming letters: A youth got to school unharmed today in Kallio, Helsinki (Finland)!



So long as the front pages of the papers and the first articles of the news -programmes on TV tell us of conflict and death we can still think that most of us people are reasonable and moral persons. The day someone being nice breks the news you should be aware!

Current Mood: curious

We have been making a textbook on political philosophy this summer and that process has made me think and rethink a host of issues yet again. One thing I would like to share with you is the following.

Even the staunchest socialist will have to admit that most of the human history has economically worked under some kind of market-based conditions and that it has not been a totally flawed system. The thing which Adam Smith so vigorously argues in his “The Wealth of the Nations” (18^th century) is that when the markets are as open as possible they will work for the good of all guided by the “invisible hand” of the markets, providing the best products with lowest cost to all.

Now there seems to be an initial sense in this. Let’s say we have two caféterias in the street next to each other. How can the owner of Café 1 get people to choose his cafeteria over the Café 2? He can try to offer the public better products (tastier coffee and pastries, wider variety of them, or excellent service, nicer athmosphere etc.) or take a lower prices (compromising one’s profits per product he can gain more value by selling more). The owner of Café 2 has the same basic options. That’s called competition.

Looking at this simple case shows the good side of competition. To get the customers in the owner needs to offer better products with lesser prices and the public will get more value for their money. And it’s good for the environment as well as no one wishes to waste materials… In this kind of competitive environment a Café’s owner can’t pick ridiculous amounts of profit or sell bad products – unlike if there were only one Caféteria in the street with no competition and people would have no choice to boo to the overexpensive and lousy product.

So far so good.

But what if the owner of Café 1 decided to boost his profit by paying his workers less than his competitor? In a general situation where there are more workers available than there are workingplaces to work that is possible (there is a competitive situation here as well between the labourforce en masse vs. the employers). That would enable him to sell cheap while still making a nice profit. The political struggle of the trade unions cancelled that possibility for most of the 20^th century Western world. Sadly the situation is much uglier today.

But there are new twists to this story as well. Now what if…, the owner of Café 2 ponders to himself. What if the people would love to come into my Coffeeshop and not to the Café 1 not because I have lower prices or a better products but because it would be cool to come to my place? (That’s one kind of a value as well, I must admit, but…) So even if I’d make poor products and take a high price from them the people would still flock to my shop? Now how to do that? With mode and fashion – what’s hip and cool - that’s possible.          

A third problem coincidences with the second one – even if I need to leave my story about the Coffeeshops at this point. Let’s take a shoemaker. In older times a shoemaker made a shoe for someone and the shoes lasted “from father to a son” as they were of high quality. Now the problem for the shoemaker is that once you sell a pair of boots to a family you will not get an opportunity to sell that family too many others. Maybe another pair of boots and a few pairs of lighter shoes for summers – but anyhow the sales are low. And in earlier times people would have complained if a boot didn’t last for decades.

So how to overcome this nasty situation and to sell more and thence make greater profit? The solution is pretty similar with the earlier case. If one could get people to think that they need new boots even if the earlier ones are still in good shape? So we need to make people think that old boots are bad even if they’re just okay. So the fashions need to change so that people wearing last fall’s boots are unsexy and fallen behind the times… And when the industry has educated people to by new boots twice or thrice a year it doesn’t matter anymore if they’re well made or not as they’re not supposed to last for decades anyway. So why not make them in cheaper ways (and less well) as people will buy new ones in any case? Just look how long your boots today will last... and compare to your Grannie's shoes!  

Or just Take a look at the game consoles… In 90’s the Playstation was marketed with the argument that as the PC’s are always developing here you have a platform that stays the same and you can come back to your favourite games time after time and the game developers have a known ground-mechanics on which to operate. What is it now, Playstation3, Wii, X-Box2… ? And I’m just afraid that after I “need” to upgrade my computer and will get the new Vista-system (with all the bugs it will evidently have for the next ten years) the new one will not play my favourite PC-games anymore (like what happened when I last time changed my computer to a XP-machine). And a dvd-player starts to be a thing of the past as well as you’d now need to choose between the Blue Ray or the HDVD (or whatever it is)… So buying the same movies once again? But why? What is it we gain with buying all this stuff?

The invisible hand seems to be maimed now. It’s no more guaranting us the people better products with lesser prices. We have ourselves given away our chance to make a difference by running after different fashions. And just look at the history of fashion and behold. Fashions in 17^th century France or 18^th century Britain did involve only the small percentage of the highest classes and lasted decades but now with the quartile economy even fashions change at least four times a year – and they are imposed on everyone.

Nice idea Mr. Smith. It really is. Sadly it doesn’t work anymore.

Current Mood: okay

I think this issue has been discussed a throng of times but I would still like to come back to it due to my recent experiences. Or to be true, Lommy's experiences...


In the last werewolf-game Lommy had written the word "damn" into one of her posts. The mod had edited it to "darn" and reminded her via PM that the BD is a family-friendly site after all. It was the most courteous PM and there's nothing in the style of the involvement of the mod that would have caused any alarm... but Hallo!


Just reading the RPG's gives one some quite gory depictions of violence but writing the word "damn" goes off the limits of  family-friendliness? I'm not even suggesting to mention the policy on the depictions of intimate relations...


But it's the same picture everywhere. You can't depict or show love and tenderness between people if it involves taking some of the clothes off but you can harshly undress and torture someone with all the licence and slice or hack to pieces as well. 


Makes me wonder everytime I think of it.


Referring to this I would like to say that unlike tgwbs who had his poll whether the 'Downers are leftist or rightist I think we could rather use the frame of the three great ideologies that sprung forwards some three hundred years ago (they're not perfectly up to date as the unholy-alliances have been formed after their birth and a lot of problems have arisen since then). So are the 'Downers liberal, conservative or socialist? How would you answer that?


Given this frame I would say that the 'Downs is not so much "rightist" but conservative in the dull meaning of the term where appearances matter but not the substance (I mean a case can be argued for conservatism as well in the tone of Winston Churchill: "those who aren't radicals in their youth are heartless but those who aren't conservative in their autumn years are senseless" kind of way at least).


This is no criticism to my dear fellow 'Downers whom I aprreciate much but a kind of pointing towards certain issues that in general seem to pervade the Forum .


~*~


A second night in a row when I'm awake even though the morning has broken already... Damn holidays and the rhythm they get one into!

 

Current Mood: tired

Lommy's meme

Current Mood: indifferent

I'm not sure I actually believe I'm doing this... But it sure has been the slowest day for a long time and I don't think I can see any other diversion to duck the megazillion of essays I'd have to read if I were a more decent person...

But I guess you share the experience when a day just goes on and on with nothing happening. The time kind of crawls. It's funny indeed as the default setting of my days is the busy-busy--more busy-mode. 

Hah.

Our teachers band has been training the programme for the last day at school. We're going to play CCR's classic "Up Around the Bend" (as a Hanoi Rocks version eg. more heavy/glamrock style), Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" and a punk-rock classic from Finland performed in the eighties by an artist whose name would be literally translated as "Clown Million". As an encore we have rehearsed "Summer in the City". 

It's a lot of fun to play music with colleagues. It's a lots of fun to play music anyhow, with anyone.
 
And this brings me back to the subject. Time, that is.

Music is organised time. St. Augustine said that he knows what time is in general but if he's asked about it he doesn't know how to answer.  

Music gives time a measure, a beat. Like a heartbeat or the vibration of the atom. But it also gives it a structure and harmony. So humans try to mold the universe to their liking by manipulating time itself via the means of music? I mean what is the magic of music? Why are we so taken by it? Is it a metaphysical endeavour?

Maybe I have played and listened too little music today.   

Current Mood: numb