"In A Society That Has Abolished All Adventure The Only Adventure Left Is To Abolish That Society"
(Link)
Now, this is clearly a quote that is implying that anarchy would be good, not that the people who quote it know that, they think it is just saying that people don't take enough risks or some shit like that. But either way, it is ridiculous! I mean, by abolishing society in favour of adventure, you are just going to create a different society, one that is completely adventurous, but it will become the norm and you will be left with another 'boring society'?
But it isn't really the 'plot holes' in the quote that annoy me, it is the people who use this quote as some form of inspiration behind their life, it all links back to my previous 'Teenagers refusing to grow up" post. It's the sort of people who think that to grow up and accept your place in society is boring, who think that getting a 9 till 5 job is selling out, people who think that the only thing to life is adventure but only if it is their idea of the word... you know, immature people. What these people need to realise is that 'adventure' does not mean 'going out and causing disturbances by being a moron'.
This is a reasonably short post because I have covered most of it before.. but people need to realise that society is a necessary part of life, also they need to see that 'society' and 'adventure' can actually go together. Their thirst for adventure is actually just typical teenage rebellion, but when you have rebelled against everything the only thing left to rebel against is rebellion itself.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Journalists (in New Zealand at least)
Now I don't know what it is like with journalists in other countries, but in New Zealand, something is going seriously wrong with the way they go about their jobs, or maybe it has always been happening and I have only started caring recently.. either way, it is damn annoying.
I don't have any journalist training, so I don't know if this is how they are trained, but my idea of their profession is that they should be there to research and present facts, not opinion. And if they do really need to present opinion, they shouldn't be sharing their own, but the ones they do share should be shared in a way that represents both/all sides of the story! I am so tired of news programmes in NZ trying to have bias, but not being able to make up their mind on which bias that is, they sort of just end up presenting stories which say "the government did this, which is bad. But the opposition was offering this.. which is also bad.. now, a story about ducks". STOP TRYING TO EMULATE AMERICAN NEWS! Our left and right wing parties don't lean that far in their respective directions, certainly not far enough to warrant news programmes with political favouritism.
But then, if they don't succeed in having a political bias, they decide it isn't worth having actual news on the news. Instead, they have a sop story, where someone got ripped off by someone or lost something or got kicked out of somewhere, accompanied by a tear jerking musical number and the most one sided investigative journalism the world has ever seen. Case and point, Close Up. Which is comprised entirely of stories like this. Designed to tell people what they are pre-disposed to hearing to provoke an emotional reaction (and a sense of satisfaction about the fact that someone on television agrees with their views eg. animals are good, activists are good, humans are bad, zoos are bad, aquariums are bad, corporations are bad, builders are bad, governments are bad). An example of this, tonight on Close-Up they were doing a story about NZ's national museum (Te Papa), who came out today saying that they would recommend that pregnant or menstruating women do not go on a behind-the-scenes tour of a Maori exhibition so to respect some cultural beliefs.. they weren't saying you can't, just that if you are pregnant or menstruating and want to respect their beliefs, you shouldn't.. but, mind you, only for that one behind the scenes tour, the rest of the museum is fine. However, in the build up to Close-Up tonight, we hear Mark Sainsbury's voice yelling "Tonight, why has our national museum told women to stay away!?!"..... Fuck you, Mark Sainsbury. You are an abomination, and yet you get praised as one of our top journalists?
Really, all I want is to be able to sit down and watch actual, well researched, news stories from New Zealand and from around the world presented to me in factual and non-bias way, preferably with an attempt at showing both sides of a story. Instead I get sensationalised news stories for 15 minutes, and then articles which can best be described as un-news-worthy crap for the next 45. But I am not sure who to blame. Is it us for putting so much pressure on them with ratings, or by having short attention spans? Maybe if we took away the yearly 'Best News Show' award, they might just stop fishing for ratings and start presenting the facts.
(Although, if you are in New Zealand and want good news, Prime News at 5.30 is pretty good. Short and, in my opinion, far superior to channel 1 or 3's news.)
I don't have any journalist training, so I don't know if this is how they are trained, but my idea of their profession is that they should be there to research and present facts, not opinion. And if they do really need to present opinion, they shouldn't be sharing their own, but the ones they do share should be shared in a way that represents both/all sides of the story! I am so tired of news programmes in NZ trying to have bias, but not being able to make up their mind on which bias that is, they sort of just end up presenting stories which say "the government did this, which is bad. But the opposition was offering this.. which is also bad.. now, a story about ducks". STOP TRYING TO EMULATE AMERICAN NEWS! Our left and right wing parties don't lean that far in their respective directions, certainly not far enough to warrant news programmes with political favouritism.
But then, if they don't succeed in having a political bias, they decide it isn't worth having actual news on the news. Instead, they have a sop story, where someone got ripped off by someone or lost something or got kicked out of somewhere, accompanied by a tear jerking musical number and the most one sided investigative journalism the world has ever seen. Case and point, Close Up. Which is comprised entirely of stories like this. Designed to tell people what they are pre-disposed to hearing to provoke an emotional reaction (and a sense of satisfaction about the fact that someone on television agrees with their views eg. animals are good, activists are good, humans are bad, zoos are bad, aquariums are bad, corporations are bad, builders are bad, governments are bad). An example of this, tonight on Close-Up they were doing a story about NZ's national museum (Te Papa), who came out today saying that they would recommend that pregnant or menstruating women do not go on a behind-the-scenes tour of a Maori exhibition so to respect some cultural beliefs.. they weren't saying you can't, just that if you are pregnant or menstruating and want to respect their beliefs, you shouldn't.. but, mind you, only for that one behind the scenes tour, the rest of the museum is fine. However, in the build up to Close-Up tonight, we hear Mark Sainsbury's voice yelling "Tonight, why has our national museum told women to stay away!?!"..... Fuck you, Mark Sainsbury. You are an abomination, and yet you get praised as one of our top journalists?
Really, all I want is to be able to sit down and watch actual, well researched, news stories from New Zealand and from around the world presented to me in factual and non-bias way, preferably with an attempt at showing both sides of a story. Instead I get sensationalised news stories for 15 minutes, and then articles which can best be described as un-news-worthy crap for the next 45. But I am not sure who to blame. Is it us for putting so much pressure on them with ratings, or by having short attention spans? Maybe if we took away the yearly 'Best News Show' award, they might just stop fishing for ratings and start presenting the facts.
(Although, if you are in New Zealand and want good news, Prime News at 5.30 is pretty good. Short and, in my opinion, far superior to channel 1 or 3's news.)
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Opposition to cubicle dairy farming
*Sigh*.. People and their views about animal rights, huh? I blame Disney.
Righto, a little back-story for anyone who doesn't know what cubicle farming is. It really depends who you ask.. For example, if you ask me, it is a cheaper, more efficient (and in some cases better for the animals) way to get the products that we love. And simply involves housing farm animals in indoor cubicles.. However, if you ask S.A.F.E or Greenpeace or any of those hippy types, they will probably describe it as more similar to Auschwitz... but with animals.. and probably say that cubicle farms are worse, you know, because they value animals more than humans.
Aaaanyway, recently (yesterday) three companies revived attempts to secure land-rights for some large-scale cubicle farms. And as expected, there have been outcries from usual spouters of animal-rights propaganda. But again, that is to be expected, as they will not be happy until man-animal marriages are legalised and everyone drinks their own urine (I assume).
Arguing against 'factory farming' does not make sense to me, especially when it comes to dairy farming. The reason for this is that it is better for the damn cows! They are housed indoors only for eight months of the year, the eight coldest months of the year. This is beneficial (especially in the areas where the farms are planned) because cows do not actually have much resistance to cold or wet weather, due to their lack of insulation (e.g. wool). So it actually makes sense, for the benefit of the animals, to keep them indoors during the cold times of the year. In fact, if they had any concept of the word 'prefer', the cows would probably prefer it.
Also, it is potentially better for the environment. Having taken (and failed) year 11 geography in high-school, I think I know a little about the environmental effects of dairy farming. And one of the downsides of high-density outdoor farming during the winter is the damage that is done to the ground. Damage which is very difficult to reverse and damage which makes it unlikely for anything to grow on that piece of ground. But having the cattle indoors during the time when that land is saturated would surely help to prevent this issue, making for more pasture in the warm/dry seasons - more milk produced. Another environmental problem caused by dairy farming is effluent run off into waterways, which I don't really feel the need to explain, nor do I think I need to explain why indoor farms could drastically lower run-off. But the only reason I care about that is because I don't want to be drinking shit.
So the last (and main) reason that I believe it is ridonculous to oppose them comes down to my personal views on animal rights. Now, I am going to get this out of the way first, I am not an advocate for animal cruelty.. but I think I have a different idea of what 'animal cruelty' entails than most, and I also see farm animals as tools rather than animals. It is much the same as the way that ancient Greeks/Romans saw their slaves, just with less moral wrongness... Anyway, to me, the animals are the property of the farmers, they need them to earn their living, and they need them to provide us with the delicious delicious dairy products(/meat/eggs in other cases). So right there you have a farmer's motive to not kill the animals, also the healthier the animals are, the better product they will produce - motivation to keep them reasonably healthy. It is much the same as how a farmer isn't going to go key his own tractor.
I think the thing that really annoys me is that it seems to me that people are only like 'no caged animals' for show.. Studies show that massive majorities of people are against animal cruelty and prefer free-range farming... but free-range eggs only make up 10% of the sale numbers when it comes to eggs. And that is why I despise animal activists.. The ones who are serious about it should be classed as clinically insane, and the rest of them are just like "oh man, I hate farms, fuck those guys", then go home and have a steak for tea. If you are against factory farming, eat free-range products, if you are against farming in general, be a vegetarian, otherwise shut the hell up.
Righto, a little back-story for anyone who doesn't know what cubicle farming is. It really depends who you ask.. For example, if you ask me, it is a cheaper, more efficient (and in some cases better for the animals) way to get the products that we love. And simply involves housing farm animals in indoor cubicles.. However, if you ask S.A.F.E or Greenpeace or any of those hippy types, they will probably describe it as more similar to Auschwitz... but with animals.. and probably say that cubicle farms are worse, you know, because they value animals more than humans.
Aaaanyway, recently (yesterday) three companies revived attempts to secure land-rights for some large-scale cubicle farms. And as expected, there have been outcries from usual spouters of animal-rights propaganda. But again, that is to be expected, as they will not be happy until man-animal marriages are legalised and everyone drinks their own urine (I assume).
Arguing against 'factory farming' does not make sense to me, especially when it comes to dairy farming. The reason for this is that it is better for the damn cows! They are housed indoors only for eight months of the year, the eight coldest months of the year. This is beneficial (especially in the areas where the farms are planned) because cows do not actually have much resistance to cold or wet weather, due to their lack of insulation (e.g. wool). So it actually makes sense, for the benefit of the animals, to keep them indoors during the cold times of the year. In fact, if they had any concept of the word 'prefer', the cows would probably prefer it.
Also, it is potentially better for the environment. Having taken (and failed) year 11 geography in high-school, I think I know a little about the environmental effects of dairy farming. And one of the downsides of high-density outdoor farming during the winter is the damage that is done to the ground. Damage which is very difficult to reverse and damage which makes it unlikely for anything to grow on that piece of ground. But having the cattle indoors during the time when that land is saturated would surely help to prevent this issue, making for more pasture in the warm/dry seasons - more milk produced. Another environmental problem caused by dairy farming is effluent run off into waterways, which I don't really feel the need to explain, nor do I think I need to explain why indoor farms could drastically lower run-off. But the only reason I care about that is because I don't want to be drinking shit.
So the last (and main) reason that I believe it is ridonculous to oppose them comes down to my personal views on animal rights. Now, I am going to get this out of the way first, I am not an advocate for animal cruelty.. but I think I have a different idea of what 'animal cruelty' entails than most, and I also see farm animals as tools rather than animals. It is much the same as the way that ancient Greeks/Romans saw their slaves, just with less moral wrongness... Anyway, to me, the animals are the property of the farmers, they need them to earn their living, and they need them to provide us with the delicious delicious dairy products(/meat/eggs in other cases). So right there you have a farmer's motive to not kill the animals, also the healthier the animals are, the better product they will produce - motivation to keep them reasonably healthy. It is much the same as how a farmer isn't going to go key his own tractor.
I think the thing that really annoys me is that it seems to me that people are only like 'no caged animals' for show.. Studies show that massive majorities of people are against animal cruelty and prefer free-range farming... but free-range eggs only make up 10% of the sale numbers when it comes to eggs. And that is why I despise animal activists.. The ones who are serious about it should be classed as clinically insane, and the rest of them are just like "oh man, I hate farms, fuck those guys", then go home and have a steak for tea. If you are against factory farming, eat free-range products, if you are against farming in general, be a vegetarian, otherwise shut the hell up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)