Henry's Shit List

Greetings,

So, first question will be where the hell did this idea came from. Well, I was on one of my usual walks to get some air and some exercise, with music playing in my ears, as usual. A particular song came up on my playlist, that would be "Shitlist" by L7. So, I decided that I would begin one here, being that the ones that hit the top of mine are mostly of the political kind.

This will be a "work in progress" because I will likely come back and re-order, and add to it as time goes along depending on how I feel at the time. I have not put it on my Patreon site, because I want people to have access to it, nice and easily, not that I get many hits on this blog.

The question is always where to start and where to rank them, so I will go with the ones that affect my life the most...

1.  Politicians:
1. the kind of politicians who claim that there is too much money being spent on social programs, and yet have no problem with increasing their salaries, especially in the same financial year;
2. the kind of politicians who claim there is no money to increase payments for pensions of all kinds, and yet can give big fat contributions to wealthy corporate sponsors of their political campaigns;
2. Corporate Leaders (of all kinds): Congratulations you've won capitalism. How much is enough? Do you even know what your profits are doing to your workers? When your profits in a single year could solve the social issues in a country and you contribute less than 1% tax, and less than 1% back to the community. You're only No. 2 because the politicians maintain the system that allows you to do this.
3. Extremists: of all forms, here I mean you who are at the extreme perspective of any system of thought. In this group I include all forms of extreme thoughts as you refuse to see the issues you create from not seeing a "middle way". This is seen in the aspect of terrorists, but also in such things as radical environmentalists and feminists. The focus should be on the best benefit for humanity. You refuse to see any other way than your own.
4. Media Moguls: You're just as bad as your buddies above. You have taken it upon yourselves to decide what we should watch, what we should read, and what we should hear on a regular basis. Your purpose is  to encourage us to spend, to support your businesses and those of your corporate friends. Your other purpose is to facilitate the perpetuation of systems of abuse of those who are in a lower economic situation. Just to be clear that would be all of them, be they of a different colour, have disabilities, different religion, or different citizenship status. Isn't our society supposed to be becoming more Inclusive?
5. Celebrities: I think I would have to put most of them on this list to tell you the truth, because most of them have done nothing to deserve the celebrity they have, or done things which should result in their status being revoked. Notoriety is not renown, we should follow those who have renown, not those who have notoriety.
1. Sporting celebrities: supposed to be held up as examples for junior players of the sports yet they play the game with a focus on winning at all costs, not for the love of the game. The same can be said of the same kind of celebrities who also run amok in public, also setting a bad example for junior players.
2. The Rich: who have done nothing except been born into the correct family, this is what has made them supposedly famous. Why should we follow the example of someone just because they have a lot of money, especially when they set such bad examples?
3. Models: who represent such a small slice of the population, that set such high expectations for body-image. Yet, can they be blamed for this? Is it not also the industry they follow that pushes them to be like this? I would say it is more the case of what makes one shape of body better than another? How can one person feel superior because they are one body shape? Just to be clear on this one, it is as difficult to be Ken as it is to be Barbie.
4. Actors: who are stuck in the capitalist system. They demand ridiculous rates of pay, to maintain their lifestyles to which they have become accustomed. Once they attain this pay-grade, they believe they deserve it, and special consideration for everything. Again, where they set a bad example, are they people we should be following? Follow the actor who is truthful to their craft, rather than the one who is paid the most.
6. Selfish People: This is the broadest category ever. It covers people who simply can't think for anyone else but themselves. Many of the people already on my list can also be doubly included in this category as well. People on public transport who disregard simple courtesies.
1. Teenagers: Yes I sound like an old person. However, these individuals are becoming more and more self-entitled by the year. They talk about rights, never responsibilities. They have no care for anyone but themselves.
2. Drivers: In this category we include drivers who drive aggressively because it is more important for them to get somewhere than anyone else. 

So, this is the beginning of my list. I am sure there will be a lot more to come as I think about them. Yes, there are exceptions to every rule, and I also believe this. These are very broad brushes, but I don't feel like going through and spotting every single individual.

An update (10/04/24): I added Extremists to the list today, because they are the cause of a lot of harm in society through their extreme views. They are unwilling to see anything but their point of view concerning certain matters even if there are contradictory aspects in their view. This dogmatic approach is not useful to anyone.

An update (23/05/24): I added Selfish People to the list today, because I just don't get it. I don't understand the kind of person who must put themselves first, must have before everyone else, must do before everyone else, who has no consideration for anyone else but themselves. Behind the wheel of a car, these people are dangerous. In public, they push in lines, stand in the middle of footpaths, have loud conversations in quiet areas, and generally make a nuisance out of themselves. This is the result of the decline in courtesy, the decline in consideration for other people in the world. Too much "me first."

Cheers,

Henry.

One Day Causes and One Day Politics

 Greetings,

So, Australia Day is upon us again, as per usual there is the protest about how Australia's indigenous people have been treated in the past. It should not be doubted that I think that they were treated poorly in the past, they were. Native peoples were treated poorly by colonial powers as a rule rather than an exception and this is seen throughout the world. Some were treated worse than others, but this is not the time nor the place to make comparison. This is an examination of the current protests, and protests in general, and their sustainability. Or more to the point, those who participate in them on a populist basis...

Why is that one day a year people feel that they can get all cross about how people have been treated, because it happens to be a particular celebration that day, yet they do nothing about the same cause for the rest of the year? I find this particularly populist and weak. We find this with many political issues and many causes. People will get on the bandwagon while it is popular, but as soon as it is out of the public eye, i.e. off the media, or finished for that particular day, then they stop making their complaints and demonstrations. This can be seen with many different political issues and many different causes.

I will cite a few causes to begin with... first let us begin with, the big one, Climate Change. This one seems to be on people's minds whenever there is a Climate Change Summit, or some government makes some decision about which way they are going on some paper, but then it dies down pretty quickly again. So, this one affects the entire planet. Yet, there is little said about it on a regular basis, only when the media picks up on some story and spreads it around the world for people to get agitated. So this one is left to the dedicated people, and us to recycle as we do normally.

Terrorism. Another global phenomenon. So everyone thinks that because COVID-19 has struck that the terrorists are all going to go back into hiding and give everyone a break? The extremists in countries are just going to put down their weapons? No, sorry, doesn't work like that. Even when the cameras are not pointed at the latest terrorist incident, they are still occurring. People don't get to hear about the thousands of terrorist incidents which happen in countries because they don't involve the right people, so there is no media coverage. Is anyone voicing protest about these incidents? Campaigning for their right to live in peace? 

Black Lives Matter. Months ago you could not go on social media without seeing posts about the horrid way people of colour were being treated by the law enforcement agencies in the United States. This spread all over the world, there was nowhere you could escape it. Now, you see the occasional bumper sticker, if you manage to get outside. The occasional post on social media, but this has died down. Not popular any more, who is doing anything about it?

Gun Control. One that always stirs the pot. There is a shooting at a shopping mall, or mostly at a school, mostly in the United States that gets screened around the world, thanks to the internet and the media, and people start looking at gun violence. Then they start trying to compare their own gun control laws with the United States. This one only rears its head when some person shoots lots of people. Other than that it is not popular enough, so who bothers?

Income Gap. Not as sexy as all the rest so it rarely gets media time. The media still has the policy, "If it bleeds, it leads." There is still an income gap, and it is only getting worse. The gap between the rich and the poor is not a gap it is a trench and it gets wider and wider and the politicians do not want to know, "In Australia there is no official measurement of the extent of poverty." (Parliament of Australia) Where is the fight and protest for them? Where is the argument for these people? Where is the action?

These are five causes which have been pointed out, all of which are current. Yet there is no media coverage. There is no social media coverage for them. There is only what is popular to complain or be offended about today, depending on what celebration day it is. If people were serious they would continue their protest beyond the single day causes, beyond the popular protest, beyond the popular media coverage and make it part of their lives, take political action, but most don't and most won't. This is the problem with the world. People care only when it is convenient and when it is popular, then it is forgotten. Words are cheap. When action is asked, then you find out who cares. There are a lot of keyboard warriors out there, few real ones.

Cheers,

Henry.

Too Many "-ists" ... and Mostly Extreme"-ists"

Greetings,

There has been much said in the media about politics and religion over the past months, indeed over the past years. It seems that we are in a period of history in which tension, in one form or another, is the "normal" state of being. Is it any wonder that we have global rates of suicide increasing every year? Politics and religion seem to, once again, or even permanently have been mixed up together.

There just seems to be too much of each within the other. Religion seems to have gone political and politics have become, in many instances, of a religious nature, or at least based on a particular religion. This is not even the real problem. It is just scratching the surface of the problem in my view. The problem is extremism.

The problem is extremism in all of its forms. It does not matter whether it is religious extremism of political extremism. When a position is taken where there the options are "Us" and "Them" and nothing in between there becomes no place for negotiation no place where compromise can be made so agreement can be had. I has been said that uncompromising people are easy to admire. They are also easy to hate as well, and this is also the problem, such extremism breeds with it the seeds of hate.

What there is are too many "-ists" that people tie themselves to and too many radicals of these "-ists", and it does not matter what form of "-ist" it is. Once a radical position is taken where everything concerns this particular "-ist" and can be turned to be about this particular "-ist" then there are problems. Once the views about this "-ist" become radicalised there are problems because there is very little room to move, the word extrem-ist becomes appropriate.

The easy one, at this point in history to point at is fundamental-ist. For the most part when this word is used the first thought is regard to Muslims, and the various acts of terror which have been more recently perpetrated around the world. But, a person must be cautious because the same word can also be applied to Christian, and then a person can talk about Waco, Texas and the Branch Davidians. With regard to fundamental-ists, there are very few religions that can claim absolute purity that they have not had theirs.

So, religion and fundamental-ists, are not a great thing, but the "-ists" of politics are not so squeaky clean either. So we can point to the obvious "dangerous" one anarch-ist, had most of their "fun" back in the nineteenth century with a small spate of activity which was claimed anarchist in the 1960s. There were social-ist terrorists who went on sprees throughout the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. These are but a few examples, of course there is also the environmental-ist, which for most people brings to thought the peace-loving flower-children, but not all of them were. The history books are dotted with examples of what is called eco-terrorism. In each case the radical element of these "-ists" took it upon themselves to perform criminal acts to make their points. In all cases they are extrem-ists.

Where does this leave us? The most important "-ist" that people should be concerned with is coex-ist. This is not possible where there are lines drawn and two distinct sides and "Us" and "Them" determined. In every case there must be room for negotiation and compromise on both sides. There needs to be room for at least the acceptance of the other's point of view, even if there is no agreement. Extremism in all its forms is damaging. Extreme positions about subjects leave little room for negotiation and differing points of view.

"Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking
and evidence (rationalism and empiricism) over acceptance of dogma or superstition." - Wikipedia

A new definition for humanism needs to be coined, focussing on the individual whose focus is on humanity, and the humanity in each individual. This is the sort of thought that we need to day a thought process which overrides politics and religion and focuses on the common aspects of humanity to find the commonality amongst us all. This individual would in their most radical form be of a sort to seek what universal commonality can be found amongst all and how to achieve this.

In light of recent occurrences in New Zealand, we must take a stand against all forms of terrorism regardless of its cause, political or religious. This is to demonstrate to those who would attempt to use such methods that it is not a legitimate means of  getting what they want. Thus we must take a stand against all forms of terror tactics which would attempt to subvert our way of life or our thoughts.

Each form of terror tactic feeds another which feeds another in an endless cycle of  fear and oppression, it is up to us to take a stand against it NOW. The easiest way of taking this stand is through denial. We deny the terrorist their names in public. We deny them publication of their manifestos. We deny them publication of their acts.

What this also means that we need to take a stand against much of our modern media who use such sensationalist stories to prop up their ratings. They would claim that they are merely informing their public of what is happening with regard to the incident and the results of it, but it is not. If this was the case then why does the same story get played over and over again? Why does every story for the next week get related back to the same incident? Having such material in our faces does nothing but increase the tension in our communities. Switch them off. Having such material causes distress to those who may have been involved or who know those who were involved. Don't share their stories. Terrorism feeds on publicity and modern media is feeding it. Don't feed it, starve it. Let our media outlets know that will not be party to it.

If you need to talk about the incidents, talk about the victims and the families. These are the people who need our support. Deny the terrorist name and fame. Let them be forgotten. Let the real heroes of the day be remembered. The greatest effect of the stand can only be achieve through unity. Not one faith, or one colour or one gender, or one ethnicity, but the unity of all humanity.

Cheers,

Henry.