It's pretty easy to make fun of Tom Cruise - especially with the whole couch -jumping incident and his Scientology issues, but he actually can act. He's also in two of the better recent science fiction films I'd seen: Oblivion, and Edge of Tomorrow.
Edge of Tomorrow suffered from a lot of issues at the studio level. No-one seemed to have any idea how to market it, and the Japanese short-novel the concept was borrowed from had an even less descriptive title (All You Need is Kill). It almost seemed that the tag line "Live, Die, Repeat" was the name of the movie, and you could be forgiven for thinking that looking at the posters. What you get is Groundhog Day as sci-fi action shootemup, and a damn smart one at that. For all of the other marketing failures, the tagline and the trailers promised us that, and the movie delivered in spades.
Cruise plays Bill Cage, a PR flack, and something of a coward, who ends up dropping into a D-Day style invasion of France to push back an alien invasion. Everything comes apart, but he manages to kill one alien before dying....
... and wakes up, the day before. He's literally stuck in a time loop, going back to the same point every time he dies.
The movie manages to play with the idea of trying, over and over again, trying to convince people the invasion will fail, to find a way past the invasion point, find the center of alien power, and disable it, with both a dark and deft sense of humor as needed. The action is over the top but true to character and the tone of the film, the armor worn in many of the scenes feels like something that could have stepped out of Warhammer 40K.
And at the end, Cage grows as a person, having to face his cowardice at a moment he really could lose it all.
Update - I've followed up with more thoughts on this movie here.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Friday, October 28, 2016
Thursday, October 27, 2016
Cocoons
Over on Gab, a recent post by Judge Dread @judgedread encapsulated a point I know I've made in the past:
CAs an aside, perhaps that's why they wear every petty slight and setback on their shoulders like a badge of honor? No, because then they'd realize it's part of life and get on with it.
I've pointed to it again and again, and I think it bears repeating, as it has lessons even for those who don't believe in carrying firearms. Eric Raymond's "Ethics from the Barrel of a Gun". There's a fair amount of explanation, go read the whole damn thing but the core of it is this:
Time preference also matters. A thug with a gun is still a thug, still violent, and isn't thinking out consequences. In a world with people who have a longer term outlook though, and are just as willing to be violent to protect themselves, the thugs tend to get weeded out.
We in the west live in cocoons - and those in the cocoons are too ignorant to easily distinguish between the wolves and the sheepdogs. We're isolated from the impersonal nature of the universe, from the realities of death to even feed ourselves, and anything that makes people uncomfortable is suppressed, the sheepdogs vilified instead of more raised.
Molyneux had a recent discussion with Vox that covers how r/K selection can be manipulated by those rabbits in their warm little burrows and cocoons.
The problem is one day the fences break down, the cocoons are ripped away, and reality comes to bite those who have not learned to govern themselves hard.
Cities breed liberalism because cities are the only place where you can survive with absolutely no contact with the realities of the natural world, and liberalism is above all else a denial of nature.What I find funny is that it's liberals who insist on passing on trite stories about how helping a butterfly out of its cocoon basically kills it, because it needs that struggle to properly expand its wings, to grow, to blossom as it were.
#Science
CAs an aside, perhaps that's why they wear every petty slight and setback on their shoulders like a badge of honor? No, because then they'd realize it's part of life and get on with it.
I've pointed to it again and again, and I think it bears repeating, as it has lessons even for those who don't believe in carrying firearms. Eric Raymond's "Ethics from the Barrel of a Gun". There's a fair amount of explanation, go read the whole damn thing but the core of it is this:
The first and most important of these lessons is this: it all comes down to you.These lessons can be extrapolated to any environment where day to day and moment to moment decisions can have fatal consequences, as a matter of daily, ongoing reality. The ocean doesn't care if you really wanted to put that o-ring in correctly or not - it just cares that in a sub at 400 feet, there's an opening it can squeeze through.
No one's finger is on the trigger but your own. All the talk-talk in your head, all the emotions in your heart, all the experiences of your past — these things may inform your choice, but they can't move your finger. All the socialization and rationalization and justification in the world, all the approval or disapproval of your neighbors — none of these things can pull the trigger either. They can change how you feel about the choice, but only you can actually make the choice. Only you. Only here. Only now. Fire, or not?
A second is this: never count on being able to undo your choices.
If you shoot someone through the heart, dead is dead. You can't take it back. There are no do-overs. Real choice is like that; you make it, you live with it — or die with it.
A third lesson is this: the universe doesn't care about motives.
If your gun has an accidental discharge while pointed an unsafe direction, the bullet will kill just as dead as if you had been aiming the shot. I didn't mean to may persuade others that you are less likely to repeat a behavior, but it won't bring a corpse back to life.
Time preference also matters. A thug with a gun is still a thug, still violent, and isn't thinking out consequences. In a world with people who have a longer term outlook though, and are just as willing to be violent to protect themselves, the thugs tend to get weeded out.
We in the west live in cocoons - and those in the cocoons are too ignorant to easily distinguish between the wolves and the sheepdogs. We're isolated from the impersonal nature of the universe, from the realities of death to even feed ourselves, and anything that makes people uncomfortable is suppressed, the sheepdogs vilified instead of more raised.
Molyneux had a recent discussion with Vox that covers how r/K selection can be manipulated by those rabbits in their warm little burrows and cocoons.
The problem is one day the fences break down, the cocoons are ripped away, and reality comes to bite those who have not learned to govern themselves hard.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Macdonough's Song
Few realize that Rudyard Kipling also wrote a couple of science fiction stories - With the Night Mail and As Easy as ABC. Both feature a international organization - the Aerial Board of Control - that managed all airship traffic and supressed nationalist tendencies. The second of the stories, As Easy as A. B. C. in particular deals with a a Board of Control ship supressing a democratic revolt in Chicago.
It's interesting on several fronts. Namely - this is presented as a supposedly a utopian setting. People live longer, the economy is stable, etc. yet people yearn for more. The system is breaking down, and even the rulers are disillusioned with the world they wrought. The rebels have a vitality that, even as the A.B.C. stamps them out, the world society lacks.
To me though, the strongest argument that internationalism wasn't Kipling's ideal, even if he supposed it would come about, was the song that - within the context of the stories - was banned.
Many people think of "If" when they think of Kipling. Others "Gods of the Copybook Headings". Among my Cherished favorites are "The 'Eathen", and "Sons of Martha", and many more besides.
My favorite is "MacDonough's Song."
It's interesting on several fronts. Namely - this is presented as a supposedly a utopian setting. People live longer, the economy is stable, etc. yet people yearn for more. The system is breaking down, and even the rulers are disillusioned with the world they wrought. The rebels have a vitality that, even as the A.B.C. stamps them out, the world society lacks.
To me though, the strongest argument that internationalism wasn't Kipling's ideal, even if he supposed it would come about, was the song that - within the context of the stories - was banned.
Many people think of "If" when they think of Kipling. Others "Gods of the Copybook Headings". Among my Cherished favorites are "The 'Eathen", and "Sons of Martha", and many more besides.
My favorite is "MacDonough's Song."
Macdonough's Song
"As easy as A B C"--A Diversity of Creatures" Whether the State can loose and bind In Heaven as well as on Earth: If it be wiser to kill mankind Before or after the birth-- These are matters of high concern Where State-kept schoolmen are; But Holy State (we have lived to learn) Endeth in Holy War. Whether The People be led by The Lord, Or lured by the loudest throat: If it be quicker to die by the sword Or cheaper to die by vote-- These are things we have dealt with once, (And they will not rise from their grave) For Holy People, however it runs, Endeth in wholly Slave. Whatsoever, for any cause, Seeketh to take or give Power above or beyond the Laws, Suffer it not to live! Holy State or Holy King-- Or Holy People's Will-- Have no truck with the senseless thing. Order the guns and kill! Saying --after--me:-- Once there was The People--Terror gave it birth; Once there was The People and it made a Hell of Earth Earth arose and crushed it. Listen, 0 ye slain! Once there was The People--it shall never be again!
---Rudyard Kipling
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
#Coincidentally There is No Truth in Pravda
The Didact recently brought up yet another recent case of "flash mob" violence where the article is strangely.... quiet... about describing the perpetrators.
Short version, 50 or so "youths" were arrested , with hundreds running around in groups from 20 to 50, ganging up on and beating up people in northern Philadelphia over the course of an evening. Just from the headline alone one would guess, based on who actually does these kind of things, as to the cultural or ethnic background of the perpetrators.
And as he points out, amazingly, somehow, it's never mentioned.
I've cut down on listening to Colin Flaherty anywhere near as much, not because he's wrong, but because though the names change from week to week of the victims and the perpetrators, the stories remain, sadly, year after year, the same. Frankly, if you haven't read at least one of his two books on the subject, White Girl Bleed a Lot, or Don't Make the Black Kids Angry - both based on actual quotes by people using or excusing violence, then do so, or dig through several months of the podcast.
Remember when I said that "three times is enemy action" means that there is a systemic problem? It could of course be a campaign of lies as the Trump-directed allegations of sexual impropriety, but it nevertheless means something is systemically wrong.
Colin mercilessly documents case, after case, after case, and the relevant statistics of crime vs population, of degrees of behavior. He darkly jokes that when people tell him "white people do it too" he'll challenge them to post articles of the same behavior by whites, and then when they run out keep posting. "White people do it too" - yet in white neighborhoods people are less cautious, take fewer steps to secure their valuables, because empirical experience shows that their stuff is far less likely to get stolen there.
Even Jesse Jackson would rather be followed by a crowd of rowdy white teens than black ones.
Also worth looking at is an Eric Raymond posting, Press silence, black privilege, and unintended consequences. Especially relevant line:
Short version, 50 or so "youths" were arrested , with hundreds running around in groups from 20 to 50, ganging up on and beating up people in northern Philadelphia over the course of an evening. Just from the headline alone one would guess, based on who actually does these kind of things, as to the cultural or ethnic background of the perpetrators.
And as he points out, amazingly, somehow, it's never mentioned.
I've cut down on listening to Colin Flaherty anywhere near as much, not because he's wrong, but because though the names change from week to week of the victims and the perpetrators, the stories remain, sadly, year after year, the same. Frankly, if you haven't read at least one of his two books on the subject, White Girl Bleed a Lot, or Don't Make the Black Kids Angry - both based on actual quotes by people using or excusing violence, then do so, or dig through several months of the podcast.
Remember when I said that "three times is enemy action" means that there is a systemic problem? It could of course be a campaign of lies as the Trump-directed allegations of sexual impropriety, but it nevertheless means something is systemically wrong.
Colin mercilessly documents case, after case, after case, and the relevant statistics of crime vs population, of degrees of behavior. He darkly jokes that when people tell him "white people do it too" he'll challenge them to post articles of the same behavior by whites, and then when they run out keep posting. "White people do it too" - yet in white neighborhoods people are less cautious, take fewer steps to secure their valuables, because empirical experience shows that their stuff is far less likely to get stolen there.
Even Jesse Jackson would rather be followed by a crowd of rowdy white teens than black ones.
Also worth looking at is an Eric Raymond posting, Press silence, black privilege, and unintended consequences. Especially relevant line:
I’m here to say what that article could have but did not: suppressio veri, when performed systematically enough, itself becomes a code that can be read. What the press is teaching Americans to assume, story after story, is that if “youths” commit public violence and they are not specified to be white, or hispanic, or asian — then it’s yet another black street gang on a wilding.The article and its comments are worth a read.
Monday, October 24, 2016
First South Carolina Nobly Made Her Stand...
I stole this title, from the irascible and blunt, but well read Tom Kratman, (if you have not yet read the freely available A State of Disobedience, do so. It's not his best book, but still), and his column over at everyjoe.
The short version?
Also, very importantly, how NOT to do it.
He'll be writing more on this topic.
And do yourself a favor, go read A Desert Called Peace, and every Carrerabook since. All his other stuff too, especially the Ringo/Aldenatta contributions, though the standalone Caliphate perhaps hits too close to home as an all-too-possible nightmare, sci fi tech excepting.
The short version?
an election that doesn’t see in office very soon a man or woman dedicated to obliterating the tyrannical administrative and bureaucratic state means the death of the republic, too. The difference is that, without Hillary, we may have a little more time while, with her, that would be it.The long version? Describing, using not only Hillary's own stated preferences, but what she, and after that, Obama, have actually done or tried to ram through, will almost certainly do to render the first and second amendments a moot point, and the entire concept of America a moot point by bringing in people who do not believe in America as anything but a place to loot for goodies.
Also, very importantly, how NOT to do it.
He'll be writing more on this topic.
And do yourself a favor, go read A Desert Called Peace, and every Carrerabook since. All his other stuff too, especially the Ringo/Aldenatta contributions, though the standalone Caliphate perhaps hits too close to home as an all-too-possible nightmare, sci fi tech excepting.
Sunday, October 23, 2016
Twitter: Moral Treason
Scott Adams recently covers his ongoing shadowban, the symptoms of which match those of other shadowbans: results easily visible on a users timeline not showing up in the regular "algorithm" timeline, or more significantly, in search results. He also covers how his Periscope numbers, "coincidentally" drop to zero (though he still is interacting with viewers who can still see his stream) when he starts discussing Trump. Finally, he finishes with this:
As I said before, if Twitter is suppressing my political speech, I consider it moral treason against the people of the United States even if it is allowed under their terms of service, and even though it is technically legal. I hope I’m wrong, and that my problems are simply technical in nature. Because if Twitter is doing what people say they are doing, and suppressing certain types of speech, the company needs to die for the good of the Republic.This goes well beyond what even Milo Y has said - that Twitter is entitled, on their service, on their servers, to allow or disallow whatever they want, but that Twitter has to own up to that, and stop saying they are part of the "free speech party". That the people at Twitter are duplicitous hacks who say one thing to bring users on, but do another when needed to support their team.
Like most leftists and SJW's, the only principle is "what helps me, right now". And yes, "right now" is important, because Hillary, and many SJW's, are willing to take any position that gives them momentary advantage no matter the long-term consequences to, among other things, their credibility, or to those they make promises to.
Moral treason. Ponder that for a bit. Actively working to prevent voters from informing each other and being informed, thus taking from the citizens the right to choose knowledgeably.
For all of those who want to start mouthing off about how Twitter is a private entity and can do as they wish, or grant service to those they wish - something Scott not only acknowledges, but a degree of free association that flies in the face of lawsuits over wedding cakes for same sex couples by selfsame mouthbreathers - he's hearkening to the more fundamental philosophical and moral position behind the first amendment. Again, Scott chooses his words carefully.
Sit back and think for a moment. We have an election where the Green Party, Anonymous, Wikileaks, the Alt- Right, the Tea Party, and non-establishment republicans are all working to take out Hillary (though not all support Trump, specifically), in the face of massive media, corporate, and government support and "rigging" - Scott is hardly the only voice that could be thought of as "liberal" or left that is working to sink Hillary and tacitly calling Trump the better choice.
Yeah, I've seen the recent videos from Anonymous targeting the Lizard Queen.
I'm cracking open some Jack and raising a glass to a well-deserved death on the part of Twitter, and every other SJW-converged IT outfit.
Interesting times, my friends.
Friday, October 21, 2016
Monster Mash
Scott writes an article on the current framing of both Hillary and Trump. All good points, but what I find interesting, much like his rhetorical shiv earlier this year of "endorsing Hillary for his personal safety" is the following:
Many of them are also SJW's, or die hard liberals and feminists, who are so conditioned by years of 'education" and media that they consider Trumps words about women letting him make a move and enjoying it a sign of a monstrous predator, and of building a wall "divisive" - such that it justifies people beating up Trump supporters and maybe the Republicans torched their own office (SJW's project much?).
Scott is very deliberate in what he writes. Just like reading Vox Day (and I'd love to see them in a brainstorm together), you have to be damn careful that what you've understood is what he actually wrote, and it helps to be extremely aware of carried context and baggage. In part, because as Roosh notes, he admits he's playing head games with people.
Let's break down two critical concepts:
Whereas for Trump, he points out that some low degree sexisim and misogyny exists everywhere, and that not only are his voters OK with his flaws, but if you read between the lines, they're not assuming a lower degree of monsterhood than really exists.
TLDR: Hillary is painted as a crook, her supporters know she's a crook, and assume that it's a normal degree of crookedness and not the rampant abuse of power, incompetence, and trail of dead bodies, foreign and domestic, that have been left behind. Trump IS a monster, and one the establishment rightly fears, but not the one he's painted as, that voters are afraid of, and his supporters have a more realistic appreciation of what they're getting from him.
The biggest illusion this election is that we think the people on the other side can’t see the warts on their own candidate. But I think they do. Clinton supporters know she is crooked, but I think they assume it is a normal degree of crookedness for an American politician. Americans assume that even the “good” politicians are trading favors and breaking every rule that is inconvenient to them. I’ve never heard a Clinton supporter defend Clinton as being pure and honest. Her supporters like her despite her crookedness.I can say for certain that many Hillary supporters understand she's a crook.
Likewise, Trump supporters know what they are getting. They know he’s offensive. They know he’s under-informed on policies. They know he pays as little in taxes as possible. They know he uses bankruptcy laws when needed. They know he ignores facts that are inconvenient to his message. They just don’t care. They want to push the monster into Washington D.C., close the door, and let him break everything that needs to be broken. Demolition is usually the first step of building something new. And Trump also knows how to build things when he isn’t in monster mode.
Many of them are also SJW's, or die hard liberals and feminists, who are so conditioned by years of 'education" and media that they consider Trumps words about women letting him make a move and enjoying it a sign of a monstrous predator, and of building a wall "divisive" - such that it justifies people beating up Trump supporters and maybe the Republicans torched their own office (SJW's project much?).
Scott is very deliberate in what he writes. Just like reading Vox Day (and I'd love to see them in a brainstorm together), you have to be damn careful that what you've understood is what he actually wrote, and it helps to be extremely aware of carried context and baggage. In part, because as Roosh notes, he admits he's playing head games with people.
Let's break down two critical concepts:
The biggest illusion this election is that we think the people on the other side can’t see the warts on their own candidate. But I think they do. Clinton supporters know she is crooked, but I think they assume it is a normal degree of crookedness for an American politician. Americans assume that even the “good” politicians are trading favors and breaking every rule that is inconvenient to them. I’ve never heard a Clinton supporter defend Clinton as being pure and honest. Her supporters like her despite her crookedness.He's laid out earlier in the article all the horribly crooked things Hillary has been part of or directed. but the critical part is this: "but I think they assume it is a normal degree of crookedness for an American politician." He's saying that yes, they know she's crooked, even for an American politician, but they assume it's a normal level of psychopathy (and shows like House of Cards frankly don't help in alleviating that impression, even if Underwood is portrayed as being far, far worse than usual), and not something truly abusive and unhealthy.
Whereas for Trump, he points out that some low degree sexisim and misogyny exists everywhere, and that not only are his voters OK with his flaws, but if you read between the lines, they're not assuming a lower degree of monsterhood than really exists.
TLDR: Hillary is painted as a crook, her supporters know she's a crook, and assume that it's a normal degree of crookedness and not the rampant abuse of power, incompetence, and trail of dead bodies, foreign and domestic, that have been left behind. Trump IS a monster, and one the establishment rightly fears, but not the one he's painted as, that voters are afraid of, and his supporters have a more realistic appreciation of what they're getting from him.
What Is War Good For?
Aurini has been on fire recently, with some excellent videos and a great recent posting on Libertarianism being an effect, not a cause. That said, i believe I have to address one question he asked:
Of course the short, flippant answer any good leftist is "nothing". And it is of course all too easy to find neocons, closer to the truth, arguing simplistically about "protecting freedom"
Like Davis, I was in the military, and I was also a Marine brat. I'm also currently in a job position that is basically glorified overhead. I'm not paid to produce anything, I'm paid to keep the tools the producers use running. And I think in differentiating Firemen, etc. as risk mitigation, and Aurini as not, he's wrong - or vastly oversimplifying it to the point of being so.
Firemen come and put out a fire. Insurance deals with unforseen accidents and loss. They sometimes deliberately break things to do their job. Firemen break walls, doors, or burn strips of forest to make firebreaks. Surgeons cut people open to remove, repair, or add. Even in doing damage to save people and what they've built, warriors are not alone.
Let's step down to the lowest level. The individual. Yes, killing is bad. Yet we distinguish between types of killing: murder, manslaughter, self-defense (or defense of others).
Even in self defense, you are taking a life, and unless you are a sociopath, that will come back to haunt you. Yet I would argue that if someone is lining up my family for execution, ready to put a bullet in them one by one, loading the weapon, I have every right to take them out. Even if they have not yet fired a shot.
Killing, war, is destructive. It marks the soul, it tears down, even when used for defense. But there are indeed things that cost more, materially and spiritually, than the death and destruction that comes with war. And just like more individual violence, there will always be people and polities that are willing to use force to compel, even on the larger scale of using others to kill, and die. Without the willingness and readiness to go up against them, the only option is surrender.
War is what you use to vanquish an existential threat to hearth and home, your people, your soul. It inherently scars, but it is sometimes the only tool that will stop someone else from taking your life, your family, your dignity.
When asked why they named their album that includes the awesome cover of "Bad Company" War is the Answer, the band Five Finger Death Punch pointed out that everything in life is a struggle. Getting food is a struggle, even if we are so distanced and cocooned from the every day reality of killing plants and animals for sustenance.
Sometimes, war is the only answer.
War is distinct from other necessary evils that all societies must provide for – fire departments, for instance. Firemen produce nothing of value, and yet they’re an expense that must be paid to mitigate the damage done when fire inevitably breaks out. Courts, lawyers, and police officers are similarly unproductive, and yet equally necessary. Even on the individual level, we pay for insurance, we stock up for lean times, and we maintain a basic level of security on our homes, even though none of these create benefit – all they do is mitigate risk.OK.
But war is something different.
500 years ago you could have made a case for it; once upon a time, there was some profit to be found in it. The infrastructure was less sensitive, and easier to rebuild. The disparities of wealth allowed for substantial loot and plunder. Installing your own tribe as the new rulers was a distinct possibility, with concrete benefits. Granted, very few wars proved to be profitable for anybody, even back then – but at least there was a argument to be made for those pursuing rational self-interest.
That is no longer the case today.
War has not been profitable for anybody, for several centuries at least. Borders have barely changed because of it, political advantages have been temporary at best, and no matter how decisive the victory, the victors have come out of it in worse shape than when they entered. All victories are Pyrrhic victories in the modern world, and almost everybody knows this – and yet war still remains.
It is senseless, destructive, it benefits no-one, and we’d all be better off if we stopped waging it – and yet war still remains.
Of course the short, flippant answer any good leftist is "nothing". And it is of course all too easy to find neocons, closer to the truth, arguing simplistically about "protecting freedom"
Like Davis, I was in the military, and I was also a Marine brat. I'm also currently in a job position that is basically glorified overhead. I'm not paid to produce anything, I'm paid to keep the tools the producers use running. And I think in differentiating Firemen, etc. as risk mitigation, and Aurini as not, he's wrong - or vastly oversimplifying it to the point of being so.
Firemen come and put out a fire. Insurance deals with unforseen accidents and loss. They sometimes deliberately break things to do their job. Firemen break walls, doors, or burn strips of forest to make firebreaks. Surgeons cut people open to remove, repair, or add. Even in doing damage to save people and what they've built, warriors are not alone.
Let's step down to the lowest level. The individual. Yes, killing is bad. Yet we distinguish between types of killing: murder, manslaughter, self-defense (or defense of others).
Even in self defense, you are taking a life, and unless you are a sociopath, that will come back to haunt you. Yet I would argue that if someone is lining up my family for execution, ready to put a bullet in them one by one, loading the weapon, I have every right to take them out. Even if they have not yet fired a shot.
Killing, war, is destructive. It marks the soul, it tears down, even when used for defense. But there are indeed things that cost more, materially and spiritually, than the death and destruction that comes with war. And just like more individual violence, there will always be people and polities that are willing to use force to compel, even on the larger scale of using others to kill, and die. Without the willingness and readiness to go up against them, the only option is surrender.
War is what you use to vanquish an existential threat to hearth and home, your people, your soul. It inherently scars, but it is sometimes the only tool that will stop someone else from taking your life, your family, your dignity.
When asked why they named their album that includes the awesome cover of "Bad Company" War is the Answer, the band Five Finger Death Punch pointed out that everything in life is a struggle. Getting food is a struggle, even if we are so distanced and cocooned from the every day reality of killing plants and animals for sustenance.
Sometimes, war is the only answer.
Thursday, October 20, 2016
The Eathen
I sortof knew Kipling did poetry, if only because of the scraps of doggerel found in The Jungle Book and Just So Stories. Yet somehow, until nearly high school, and picking up a copy of the fourth volume of the "There Will Be War" series by Pournelle (because I already loved the collected short stories in "The Mercenary" and hey, the cover looked cool...), I had completely avoided discovering he was a fucking poet of the first order.
And then I read "The 'Eathen"
Poetry is meant to be read aloud, and you can't help, due to his punctuation, to read this in anything but a better or worse approximation of an english accent.
And then I read "The 'Eathen"
Poetry is meant to be read aloud, and you can't help, due to his punctuation, to read this in anything but a better or worse approximation of an english accent.
The 'eathen The 'eathen in 'is blindness bows down to wood an' stone; 'E don't obey no orders unless they is 'is own; 'E keeps 'is side-arms awful: 'e leaves 'em all about, An' then comes up the Regiment an' pokes the 'eathen out. All along o' dirtiness, all along o' mess, All along o' doin' things rather-more-or-less, All along of abby-nay, kul, an' hazar-ho, Mind you keep your rifle an' yourself jus' so! The young recruit is 'aughty -- 'e draf's from Gawd knows where; They bid 'im show 'is stockin's an' lay 'is mattress square; 'E calls it bloomin' nonsense -- 'e doesn't know, no more -- An' then up comes 'is Company an'kicks'im round the floor! The young recruit is 'ammered -- 'e takes it very hard; 'E 'angs 'is 'ead an' mutters -- 'e sulks about the yard; 'E talks o' "cruel tyrants" which 'e'll swing for by-an'-by, An' the others 'ears an' mocks 'im, an' the boy goes orf to cry. The young recruit is silly -- 'e thinks o' suicide. 'E's lost 'is gutter-devil; 'e 'asn't got 'is pride; But day by day they kicks 'im, which 'elps 'im on a bit, Till 'e finds 'isself one mornin' with a full an' proper kit. Gettin' clear o' dirtiness, gettin' done with mess, Gettin' shut o' doin' things rather-more-or-less; Not so fond of abby-nay, kul, nor hazar-ho, Learns to keep 'is ripe an "isself jus'so! The young recruit is 'appy -- 'e throws a chest to suit; You see 'im grow mustaches; you 'ear 'im slap' is boot. 'E learns to drop the "bloodies" from every word 'e slings, An 'e shows an 'ealthy brisket when 'e strips for bars an' rings. The cruel-tyrant-sergeants they watch 'im 'arf a year; They watch 'im with 'is comrades, they watch 'im with 'is beer; They watch 'im with the women at the regimental dance, And the cruel-tyrant-sergeants send 'is name along for "Lance." An' now 'e's 'arf o' nothin', an' all a private yet, 'Is room they up an' rags 'im to see what they will get. They rags 'im low an' cunnin', each dirty trick they can, But 'e learns to sweat 'is temper an 'e learns to sweat 'is man. An', last, a Colour-Sergeant, as such to be obeyed, 'E schools 'is men at cricket, 'e tells 'em on parade, They sees 'im quick an 'andy, uncommon set an' smart, An' so 'e talks to orficers which 'ave the Core at 'eart. 'E learns to do 'is watchin' without it showin' plain; 'E learns to save a dummy, an' shove 'im straight again; 'E learns to check a ranker that's buyin' leave to shirk; An 'e learns to make men like 'im so they'll learn to like their work. An' when it comes to marchin' he'll see their socks are right, An' when it comes: to action 'e shows 'em how to sight. 'E knows their ways of thinkin' and just what's in their mind; 'E knows when they are takin' on an' when they've fell be'ind. 'E knows each talkin' corp'ral that leads a squad astray; 'E feels 'is innards 'eavin', 'is bowels givin' way; 'E sees the blue-white faces all tryin 'ard to grin, An 'e stands an' waits an' suffers till it's time to cap'em in. An' now the hugly bullets come peckin' through the dust, An' no one wants to face 'em, but every beggar must; So, like a man in irons, which isn't glad to go, They moves 'em off by companies uncommon stiff an' slow. Of all 'is five years' schoolin' they don't remember much Excep' the not retreatin', the step an' keepin' touch. It looks like teachin' wasted when they duck an' spread an 'op -- But if 'e 'adn't learned 'em they'd be all about the shop. An' now it's "'Oo goes backward?" an' now it's "'Oo comes on?" And now it's "Get the doolies," an' now the Captain's gone; An' now it's bloody murder, but all the while they 'ear 'Is voice, the same as barrick-drill, a-shepherdin' the rear. 'E's just as sick as they are, 'is 'eart is like to split, But 'e works 'em, works 'em, works 'em till he feels them take the bit; The rest is 'oldin' steady till the watchful bugles play, An 'e lifts 'em, lifts 'em, lifts 'em through the charge that wins the day! The 'eathen in 'is blindness bows down to wood an' stone -- 'E don't obey no orders unless they is 'is own. The 'eathen in 'is blindness must end where 'e began But the backbone of the Army is the Non-commissioned Man! Keep away from dirtiness -- keep away from mess, Don't get into doin' things rather-more-or-less! Let's ha' done with abby-nay, kul, and hazar-ho; Mind you keep your rifle an' yourself jus' so!
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
It's Not About You Defining Yourself
One would think that, after years of having shows like "Glee" rammed down our throats, that the left, and the entire LGBTXYBBQ community, are all concerned about allowing people to define themselves, even in the face of defying traditional norms.
Of course, it's been noted in the past that if you don't match those definitions that they set for what a "minority" should be, you're not a "real" [whatever].
Sarah Palin is not a real woman, and so forth.
So once again, we see this play out. It's not about you defining yourself, it's about them defining the terms, and what is allowable.
Of course, it's been noted in the past that if you don't match those definitions that they set for what a "minority" should be, you're not a "real" [whatever].
Sarah Palin is not a real woman, and so forth.
So once again, we see this play out. It's not about you defining yourself, it's about them defining the terms, and what is allowable.
That brings us to Peter Thiel. At the convention in Cleveland in July, Thiel was the first person in the history of the party to declare his homosexuality on stage to an audience of people who have historically opposed same-sex marriage, among other LGBT rights.Remember, it's not about freedom, it's about control. Their control.
Some Republicans and media portrayed Thiel’s statement as progress: The party had embraced an out gay man, and the convention had reflected the diverse ideological identities of LGBT Americans. But his statement also challenged that 1970s notion of a gay identity.
By the logic of gay liberation, Thiel is an example of a man who has sex with other men, but not a gay man.
Tuesday, October 18, 2016
On "Not Giving a Fuck"
Money quote - one out of many.
Just go read it. Seriously.
SUBTLETY #2: TO NOT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT ADVERSITY, YOU MUST FIRST GIVE A FUCK ABOUT SOMETHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN ADVERSITYI find it interesting that it echoes the importance of aspiration, reaching for something greater, in achieving anything worthwhile.
Just go read it. Seriously.
The System Isn't Rigged, Because We Said So.
Vox recently posted on how the system is rigged.
What astounds me though, are the cuckservatives. A guy I knew since high school - and that's a long time ago these days, keeps posting "TROLOLOL" and "still not the Onion" comments on social media every time a new article comes up negative about Trump.
This guy is supposedly, from the rest of his stream, a true believer libertarian/conservative, and he's hardly the only supposed conservative out there posting this kind of shit, taking joy in anything that befalls Trump. And I'm getting to the point I want to punch him in the fucking face.
I know I used to be annoying and far more gamma, and in some way still am, even leaving aside talking over people's heads a lot without even meaning to, but what the ever loving hell man? It's less the "stop shooting at your own side" - as bad as that is, than it is the joy taken in someone's downfall. Especially the downfall of someone who is at least shooting at your enemies.
How blind with hatred do you have to be to be told the system is rigged, and instead buy into the media narrative that it isn't, by a media you otherwise admit is biased and full of liberal scum? To not even give it credit for being metaphorically correct given the blatant collusion of the press as exposed by Wikileaks?
I won't even go into the white knighting from the self same guy, all to similar to Republican cucks who lined up to pull out their virtue and wave it in everyone's faces over the raunchy bus talk, without ever pushing back on the supposed "sexual assault", or how it was portrayed by the same media that tried to sell us rape hoaxes time and again.
It's likely the moderates will be easier to convince - at least they aren't entrenched in their opinions.
What astounds me though, are the cuckservatives. A guy I knew since high school - and that's a long time ago these days, keeps posting "TROLOLOL" and "still not the Onion" comments on social media every time a new article comes up negative about Trump.
This guy is supposedly, from the rest of his stream, a true believer libertarian/conservative, and he's hardly the only supposed conservative out there posting this kind of shit, taking joy in anything that befalls Trump. And I'm getting to the point I want to punch him in the fucking face.
I know I used to be annoying and far more gamma, and in some way still am, even leaving aside talking over people's heads a lot without even meaning to, but what the ever loving hell man? It's less the "stop shooting at your own side" - as bad as that is, than it is the joy taken in someone's downfall. Especially the downfall of someone who is at least shooting at your enemies.
How blind with hatred do you have to be to be told the system is rigged, and instead buy into the media narrative that it isn't, by a media you otherwise admit is biased and full of liberal scum? To not even give it credit for being metaphorically correct given the blatant collusion of the press as exposed by Wikileaks?
I won't even go into the white knighting from the self same guy, all to similar to Republican cucks who lined up to pull out their virtue and wave it in everyone's faces over the raunchy bus talk, without ever pushing back on the supposed "sexual assault", or how it was portrayed by the same media that tried to sell us rape hoaxes time and again.
It's likely the moderates will be easier to convince - at least they aren't entrenched in their opinions.
Monday, October 17, 2016
Walkout on Amy Schumer
From Tampa:
TAMPA - About 200 people walked out of Amy Schumer's comedy show at the Amalie Arena in Tampa Sunday when she mocked Donald Trump as, among other things, an "orange, sexual-assaulting, fake- college-starting monster."I only have one question - who in gods name found her funny enough to go to the show in the first place? She's a vapid one-note cow who's schtick is what a fucking disaster she is. Even Lawson's "Furiously Happy" book about a sad, self-destructive woman is funnier, as much as it makes me cringe out of sympathy for everyone around her.
A Bit of Metal for Monday
I promise to get back to the song-by-song overview of The Last Stand, but while I'm getting things together, a bit of big-hair 80's style glam and gloriousness alongside some seriously great Nightwish:
Which due to the very 80's look of the video, made me think of the Scorpions:
Which due to the very 80's look of the video, made me think of the Scorpions:
and
Monday Art: Frederic Remington
Remington is known for his western paintings, and deservedly so. The Lookout, the first of the two below, was used for the cover of Peter Grant's "Brings the Lightning"
North Carolina - and Nazis
This weekend a Republican headquarters in North Carolina was firebombed with a molotov cocktail. Spray - painted were a swastika and the phrase “Nazi Republicans get out of town or else”.
Those used to hanging around Vox Day, and those with an understanding of history, will immediately look at this behavior and recognize "SJW's always project". The very people casting accusations that their opponents are Nazis are, of course, the ones engaging in Nazi tactics.
Nominal "Conservatives" don't entirely get it either. "This is how you get brownshirts" was one comment I'd seen - and when it was pointed out that we obviously already had said brownshirts engaged in violence, there was acknowledgment, but then "maybe blackshirts then, as Trump is so fascist."
Europe especially, but many in the US as well, have learned the wrong fucking lesson from world war two. The problem with the German National Socialist Workers Party was the "socialism" part, not the nationalism part. Socialism and fascism borrowed the concepts of teamwork and working together , but with society placed above the individual as a matter of law, with a central bureaucratic control. Calling for America to recognize itself as a nation, calling for people to work together and join a cause, is not the same thing as fascism.
Even more amazing, I've talked to several Hillary supporters. "Holy shit", "I can't believe it" - surprise was the norm, they never expected it. A few commented on how polarized and divisive, angry political language, but couldn't recognize how much of it was directed against the right, the degree that support for BLM and other causes has made "conservatives", christians, etc. fair game for violence.
Those used to hanging around Vox Day, and those with an understanding of history, will immediately look at this behavior and recognize "SJW's always project". The very people casting accusations that their opponents are Nazis are, of course, the ones engaging in Nazi tactics.
Nominal "Conservatives" don't entirely get it either. "This is how you get brownshirts" was one comment I'd seen - and when it was pointed out that we obviously already had said brownshirts engaged in violence, there was acknowledgment, but then "maybe blackshirts then, as Trump is so fascist."
Europe especially, but many in the US as well, have learned the wrong fucking lesson from world war two. The problem with the German National Socialist Workers Party was the "socialism" part, not the nationalism part. Socialism and fascism borrowed the concepts of teamwork and working together , but with society placed above the individual as a matter of law, with a central bureaucratic control. Calling for America to recognize itself as a nation, calling for people to work together and join a cause, is not the same thing as fascism.
Even more amazing, I've talked to several Hillary supporters. "Holy shit", "I can't believe it" - surprise was the norm, they never expected it. A few commented on how polarized and divisive, angry political language, but couldn't recognize how much of it was directed against the right, the degree that support for BLM and other causes has made "conservatives", christians, etc. fair game for violence.
Saturday, October 15, 2016
Three Times is Enemy Action...
There's the old rule of thumb. Once is a fluke, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.
The amazing part is that it holds true even in large systems - with thousands of nodes - and no concerted guiding intelligence. If you get three instances of a program bug cropping up among thousands of computers, you know at that point there is a systemic problem, and that it can't be written off to a vagary of the hardware, a temporary memory glitch, etc.
This is important because when you tell people the press lies and is in the tank for liberals, most imagine you're talking some form of kooky conspiracy theory, when most of the time we're dealing with what Eric Raymond calls a "pro" spiracy. People with common intellectual belies, perspectives, and aims independently taking similar actions because they have similar goals.
Sortof like Islam.
For that matter, "prospiracy" would be an excellent term to apply to 4GW.
So we get to the press.
Usually the press is more subtle. You can only tell the lies not by what is factually incorrect - or at least incorrect due to pure ignorance - but by the ongoing and widespread pattern of what is omitted. A perfect example would be a series CNN's Amanpour did on the middle east, where the episode on Palestine was carefully constructed to gloss over a number of facts they didn't manage to leave out, in addition to spending time on softball questions of PLA members.
Little things, like glossing over where the Palestinian "sesame street" style show was being produced, what parts of town had the best infrastructure available to Palestinians, the unwillingness to repair damage instead of letting it revert, and other details, that contradicted the narrative of Israeli oppression.
Sometimes there are bigger scandals. How many major papers in the last decade had to fire reporters for simply making shit up?
But there are three cases where you can point to the press getting caught out in blatant lies, manufacturing of the news, and gross misrepresentation.
First I'll mention is Dan Rather's "Fake but accurate". A news report that was intended to knock Bush out of the re-election bid hinged on a "discovered" document purporting to show Bush lied about his medical status, as I recall. The important part was this document, generated in the 70's, was not monospaced. it wasn't even the very rough style of proportional type available in a staggeringly rare percentage of hideously expensive typewriters that would not have been used for such orders.
No, it was properly kerned and spaced for a Micosoft Word .doc file. It was a match. Not only that, but due to vagaries in type handling, it was a better - perfect - match for the same text generated in the Mac version of MS Word 2004 vice the Windows version.
The second was 2008. A black man, not an Obama supporter, was at a rally in Arizona, well away from the route then-candidate Obama would take, with an AR-style rifle on a sling. ABC videotaped him, then broadcast just a few frames of that video, cropped to only show his shirt and the AR receiver, not his skin color, to talk about (implied racist) angry white protestors endangering Obama along his route.
The third was this year, and CNN again. In Milwaukee, Sherelle Smith, the sister of the man killed by a police was addressing the crowd of fellow blacks. Per CNN, it was a "call for peace", and they showed the following segment:
“Burning down shit ain’t going to help nothing. Y’all burning down shit we need in our community.The problem was that they stopped the clip right there, conveniently ommitting what immediately followed:
Take that shit to the suburbs. Burn that shit down. We need our weave. I don’t wear it, but we need it.”You really cannot get more blatant than that. Cropping or editing footage to claim it;s the exact opposite of what it shows. That, my dear friends, is Anita Sarkeesian "Feminist Frequency" level of pissing on your boots and claiming it's raining.
The press lies. It lies by omission, by what it selects, and by what it edits.
And if anyone doubts that they have an agenda, and that they collude with the left, Wikileaks has put a rest to that.
Friday, October 14, 2016
#Coincidentally - Muslim vote
Just a coincidence I'm sure:
Nope.
Not at all.
"the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) released its national survey Thursday, reporting that 72 percent of Muslim voters surveyed say they will cast their vote for Clinton on November 8, with 4 percent intending to vote for Trump and 12 percent undecided."I can't imagine a single reason in the world why this would be the case.
Nope.
Not at all.
Bonus Eye Candy
I haven't been by DragonCon for a few years (need to fix that), but one of the fun aspects, other than seeing my favorite authors, and the concerts, was all the girls dressed up as their favorite characters (and a few original ones, like a zombie Strawberry Shortcake). Lots of people go out of their way to create utterly fantastic costumes, and the women who do so are usually well worth looking at.
In that spirit...
In that spirit...
On Chronic Kinglessness
Free Northerner has some interesting thoughts on how today, nobody has power:
This is the secret of politics and modern society: nobody is in charge, no one has power, and nobody is running the show: not the people, not the corporations, not the politicians, not the bureaucrats, not the courts, not the military, not the journalists, not the bankers, not the white male patriarchs, not the SJW’s, not the Jews, not Davos, not the Bilderbergs, not the Tri-lateral Commission, not the Illuminati, and not the lizard-people.Go take a look....
Everybody likes to posit that some bogeyman composed of people they dislike is in charge and running, ruining, things behind the scenes because that is comforting. Even if a conspiracy is leading to disaster, at least we’re being led. Even if they are evil incarnate, at least they know what they’re doing and are leading society in a specific direction. It is comforting to know someone is in charge, even if we hate them.
But we’re not that lucky. There is no one who really knows what they’re doing and no one is in charge. Everybody has just a little bit of power, some have more some less, to accomplish tiny things, so nobody has any real power to accomplish anything. Our system is vieled anarchy.
Society’s moving the way it is not because anyone is willing it, but because society’s movement has taken on an inertia of its own, and continues moving along this inertial path whatever actual people may desire. It has almost become a will of its own, some have taken to calling it an egregore, but it’s not really mystical or mysterious. It moves because that’s the way it has moved, so people follow it along and continue to move it, so it moves.
We have the rule of law, but the law is unknown and unconstrained by man.
Context is Everything
Before we get into the rest of this discussion, watch these two videos. Ignore the obvious checkbox demographics, because these two ads make a very clever point - the same words, delivered in different contexts, can mean something completely different.
These, among other things, makes clear the importance of "frame", by the way. Even if you wrote out these scenes, completely stripped out the body language, the intonation, and simply described the setting and who was speaking, the differences in meaning would be clear.
The frame for the latest Trump scandals is that Trump is a rapist. I know personally that a lot of Hillbots are lapping up the "he's a sexual predator" line. This is because a) the press told them to, and b) despite many of them buying and enjoying "50 Shades", despite the fact I know from direct personal experience of some of them walking in on conversations that they fantasize and say incredibly crude things about sex and sexual desires and men, and that women are "like that" in general, they cannot accept that a guy wants women, will approach them, or admit that they can that easily submit to a rich, powerful, or charismatic man.
Cue up of course the followup, too-good-to-be-true, #coincidentally timed confessions of how Trump abused or groped them, despite details like time, place, or degree of intimacy with the Trump clan being under credible dispute or even completely impossible.
It's still in play, for a number of reasons, but a number of the undereducated women voters the Democrats love (unless they become noncompliant - see wikileaks) - even the churchian "conservatives" - are ready to swallow the feminist spiel about how men discussing how they want women, or brag about approaching women, or discussing the truth that anyone who understands groupies are a real thing knows, is tantamount to rape and being a predator. How this degrades women.
And it's all in the context. Sadly, we've been trained out of even seeing that context, as a recent SNL skit mocking it as "locker room" talk acted like it doesn't happen at all. The modern progressive frame is that men are not allowed to say anything that upsets women, even in private, if the women ever find out about it.
This despite another skit in that same episode only "working" as a joke on the point that women will debase themselves before the socially powerful of the moment.
Oh, and sadly, if anything, SNL is only even more predictable than they used to be. Both the "news" skit and the Stranger Things-based skit rely heavily on the tropes of white privilege.
So it comes around to "how do we deal with it.?"
Honestly, not sure. To the extent possible with not losing your livelihood, especially if you have family, etc., push back against the frame. Call them out on hypocrisy of their own actions. As much as it's tempting to point to the Veritas videos of Hillary staffers, it's not as visceral as pointing out their own conversations about men. And even then, being liberals, they will likely "feel" there's an excuse for their own behavior, but Trump is evil.
The iconic example of such has got to be the FLOTUS talking about "human decency" in regards to the Trump comments, who takes her daughters to Jay-Z concerts and raps "Get Your Freak On" alongside Missy Elliot. But hey, it's their "culture", or some BS.
These, among other things, makes clear the importance of "frame", by the way. Even if you wrote out these scenes, completely stripped out the body language, the intonation, and simply described the setting and who was speaking, the differences in meaning would be clear.
The frame for the latest Trump scandals is that Trump is a rapist. I know personally that a lot of Hillbots are lapping up the "he's a sexual predator" line. This is because a) the press told them to, and b) despite many of them buying and enjoying "50 Shades", despite the fact I know from direct personal experience of some of them walking in on conversations that they fantasize and say incredibly crude things about sex and sexual desires and men, and that women are "like that" in general, they cannot accept that a guy wants women, will approach them, or admit that they can that easily submit to a rich, powerful, or charismatic man.
Cue up of course the followup, too-good-to-be-true, #coincidentally timed confessions of how Trump abused or groped them, despite details like time, place, or degree of intimacy with the Trump clan being under credible dispute or even completely impossible.
It's still in play, for a number of reasons, but a number of the undereducated women voters the Democrats love (unless they become noncompliant - see wikileaks) - even the churchian "conservatives" - are ready to swallow the feminist spiel about how men discussing how they want women, or brag about approaching women, or discussing the truth that anyone who understands groupies are a real thing knows, is tantamount to rape and being a predator. How this degrades women.
And it's all in the context. Sadly, we've been trained out of even seeing that context, as a recent SNL skit mocking it as "locker room" talk acted like it doesn't happen at all. The modern progressive frame is that men are not allowed to say anything that upsets women, even in private, if the women ever find out about it.
This despite another skit in that same episode only "working" as a joke on the point that women will debase themselves before the socially powerful of the moment.
Oh, and sadly, if anything, SNL is only even more predictable than they used to be. Both the "news" skit and the Stranger Things-based skit rely heavily on the tropes of white privilege.
So it comes around to "how do we deal with it.?"
Honestly, not sure. To the extent possible with not losing your livelihood, especially if you have family, etc., push back against the frame. Call them out on hypocrisy of their own actions. As much as it's tempting to point to the Veritas videos of Hillary staffers, it's not as visceral as pointing out their own conversations about men. And even then, being liberals, they will likely "feel" there's an excuse for their own behavior, but Trump is evil.
The iconic example of such has got to be the FLOTUS talking about "human decency" in regards to the Trump comments, who takes her daughters to Jay-Z concerts and raps "Get Your Freak On" alongside Missy Elliot. But hey, it's their "culture", or some BS.
Thursday, October 13, 2016
Charlie Daniels - on Politicians
I discovered this statement by Charlie Daniels courtesy of Peter Grant.
And when the people are changed, not just by the vagaries of time and cultural shifts, but by importing people who do not believe as the existing culture does, with different values of everything from what constitutes fair dealing, to theft, to rape, down to the most important of whether man is responsible for himself or is to be ruled by his "betters"?
What then?
I know from my own family and other's I've seen, even of European descent, that some attitudes, whether subconsciously transmitted or genetically averaged by population, carry on, and surface, and are antithetical to the ideals of free Englishmen and the Bill of Rights.
Any conversation about what is wrong in America usually starts and ends with scathing criticism of the men and women we send to the National and State Capitols to represent us and handle the business of running our nation. And while it's true that a wide river of guilt as deep as a horse's bridle flows out of Washington, DC and the various and sundry centers of political power around this nation, can we take a deep breath, pause and consider a much overlooked but pertinent fact?I'd like to address one point. "Politicians are a reflection of the people who put them in office".
A nation's greatness is not reckoned by the caliber of its politicians, but conversely the greatness of its politicians is reckoned by the caliber of its people. Politicians are a reflection of the people who put them in office, the end product of our needs, our desires, our greed, our selfishness, our ever-increasing permissive attitude toward society, our willingness to tolerate issues and policies we know are detrimental to the nation as long as it doesn't effect us directly.
And when the people are changed, not just by the vagaries of time and cultural shifts, but by importing people who do not believe as the existing culture does, with different values of everything from what constitutes fair dealing, to theft, to rape, down to the most important of whether man is responsible for himself or is to be ruled by his "betters"?
What then?
I know from my own family and other's I've seen, even of European descent, that some attitudes, whether subconsciously transmitted or genetically averaged by population, carry on, and surface, and are antithetical to the ideals of free Englishmen and the Bill of Rights.
More on John Wick
There are only so many movies that I consider effectively "perfect." Movies so tightly done, with good acting, good editing, every piece has its place, and even knowing the twists you can watch them over and over again.
One for me is "The Usual Suspects".
Another is John Wick.
OK, it's not flawless. It's certainly not terribly "original". But, and this is a huge but, it delivers exactly what it promises, with excellent pacing, interesting characters that behave exactly how you'd expect people to behave, and utterly fantastic fight scenes.
It's all in the details. It's a consummate action movie, down to the droll way that body disposal is ordered as if ordering catering for an event.
The fights are choreographed to a "T", and not the showy stuff you usually get, epic as that can be, but tight, fast, vicious, claustrophobic, and obeying for the most part physics, people's ability to track, and the laws of ammo shortages on all sides.
The characters, from the sniper played by Willem DeFoe, to Ms Perkins are all slightly larger than life. And Ms. Perkins is athletic, but against men usually gets by on wits and feminine wiles, which she wields very effectively. The dialog is simultaneously wonderfully over the top, utterly sincere, and understated, blended as needed.
And every piece in the story has its place. Better yet, the logic and tropes of action films are played out to their logical conclusions, and for once, the rules that inconvenience the "good" guy also affect the bad guys as well.
So yes, I'm looking forward to the sequel, fingers crossed.
One for me is "The Usual Suspects".
Another is John Wick.
OK, it's not flawless. It's certainly not terribly "original". But, and this is a huge but, it delivers exactly what it promises, with excellent pacing, interesting characters that behave exactly how you'd expect people to behave, and utterly fantastic fight scenes.
It's all in the details. It's a consummate action movie, down to the droll way that body disposal is ordered as if ordering catering for an event.
The fights are choreographed to a "T", and not the showy stuff you usually get, epic as that can be, but tight, fast, vicious, claustrophobic, and obeying for the most part physics, people's ability to track, and the laws of ammo shortages on all sides.
The characters, from the sniper played by Willem DeFoe, to Ms Perkins are all slightly larger than life. And Ms. Perkins is athletic, but against men usually gets by on wits and feminine wiles, which she wields very effectively. The dialog is simultaneously wonderfully over the top, utterly sincere, and understated, blended as needed.
And every piece in the story has its place. Better yet, the logic and tropes of action films are played out to their logical conclusions, and for once, the rules that inconvenience the "good" guy also affect the bad guys as well.
So yes, I'm looking forward to the sequel, fingers crossed.
Monday, October 10, 2016
Monday Art: Michael Whelan
Outside of the realm of classical art, there are a number of artists who are primarily famous for their fantasy and Sci Fi artwork and book covers. Vallejo, Sweet, and of course, Michael Whelan.
Saturday, October 8, 2016
More John Wick
Posting has been light the last couple days as I'm about 350 miles from where I normally reside and making plans to get back home with dogs and family after a mildly oversized storm system came through. I'm fortunate, my home was above flood lines, and thanks to a recently replaced transformer around the block I still have power (in 2004 I got to watch my neighbors lights - on a different transformer - for two days before power came on with Gaston...). Certainly better than some towns in West VA.
Nevertheless, checking in, I saw the Didact has posted this piece of awesomeness:
Yes, the boys are back, and whoever is doing the editing for the Amazon trailers knows exactly what made that show so awesome. That level of epic masculine awesomeness is too dangerous to be experienced without the intermediary of a TV screen.
So - following that sweet trailer I caught this:
I'm torn. I love, love, love the first John Wick movie. The tone, the action, the pacing, make it a movie I'll watch twice in a row. The moment where the mob boss chews out Leguizamo's chop shop manager, and is informed that the mob boss's son was stupid enough to steal John Wick's car, and kill his dog, and just... stops.. "oh". The comeuppance to the crooks who violated neutral ground (the first time I remember said sanctuary ever being an issue for anyone but the good guy...). The interplay between Wick and the mob boss at the end.
I fucking love that movie. Keanu, everyone in it, nailed it.
And I'm not sure, despite how cool the trailer looks, that this one will "work". It could - but it may also suffer from sequelitis.
We'll see.
Friday, October 7, 2016
Thursday, October 6, 2016
Two Cellos: Thunderstruck
As the Didact has observed, my tastes in metal run more toward symphonic. This is in large part because my musical background included several years of violin, and before that, a couple years of piano, a southern upbringing, and a northern European heritage steeped in both classical and folk music. That said, I've found it's consistently easier for better metal bands to incorporate symphonic elements into their music, with many metal bands already doing more complex music than the pop norm, than anemic, washed out sounding attempts of classical and orchestral musicians to do rock.
So a couple years back I stumbled into a group dubbing itself "two cellos" that apparently became popularized after one of their renditions of a Michael Jackson song showed up on Glee.
Guys, they are two damn fine musicians, and consistently able to deliver the goods on rock and metal standards like "Thunderstruck", other AC/DC tracks (they cover a lot of them), Guns N Roses, "Voodoo People" by The Prodigy, and so on. Is it perfect? No - good rock music is often made to suit the instruments, the sound of the instrument evokes the mood.
But it's damned impressive, and not just in a "dog walks at all" sense.
The official live video for "Thunderstruck":
Oh, and a complete concert:
So a couple years back I stumbled into a group dubbing itself "two cellos" that apparently became popularized after one of their renditions of a Michael Jackson song showed up on Glee.
Guys, they are two damn fine musicians, and consistently able to deliver the goods on rock and metal standards like "Thunderstruck", other AC/DC tracks (they cover a lot of them), Guns N Roses, "Voodoo People" by The Prodigy, and so on. Is it perfect? No - good rock music is often made to suit the instruments, the sound of the instrument evokes the mood.
But it's damned impressive, and not just in a "dog walks at all" sense.
The official live video for "Thunderstruck":
Oh, and a complete concert:
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
The Personal is Political, and Halloween
Just in case, despite all of the recent election coverage, gamergate, the ousting of Brendan Eich, etc., anyone is still convinced that SJW's and their snow-flakiness is restricted to college campuses, we are reminded, yet again, of exactly how petty SJW's can be. They simply cannot leave anything be, but just have to crap all over everything, and once they've shat one nest, they'll seek out new places to crap all over until everyone is as miserable as they are.
What is it this time? Halloween costumes, again. The notable thing here isn't so much the SJW outrage, or that the outrage has been focused at "cultural appropriation", or even that they decided that posting fake reviews at Amazon was appropriate. Nope, it's the fact that an activist organization is paying people to post those fake reviews - and many of those reviews are pastes from the same template.
More info here...
The costume in question? Here...
What is it this time? Halloween costumes, again. The notable thing here isn't so much the SJW outrage, or that the outrage has been focused at "cultural appropriation", or even that they decided that posting fake reviews at Amazon was appropriate. Nope, it's the fact that an activist organization is paying people to post those fake reviews - and many of those reviews are pastes from the same template.
More info here...
The costume in question? Here...
More Boom - or Things I Will Not Work With
I can't do this justice, it just has to be read to be believed. I only had a partial semester's exposure to organic chem in college, but that or a vague memory of high school chem should give you enough context to find the article side-splittingly funny. A couple choice quotes from "What This Here Compound Needs Is Some Hydrogen Peroxide":
Saying “this compounds doesn’t have enough nitro groups” is, for most chemists, like saying “You know, this lab doesn’t have enough flying glass in it” – pretty much the same observation, in the end.
and:
Recall that this is the compound whose cocrystal with TNT is actually less dangerous than the pure starting material itself, and yeah, I know that sounds like the guy at the pet store packing a starved Komodo dragon into the carrier with your new dog, just to calm him down some. But there it is.Now to go through the rest of this series...
More Awesomeness Now Available
Anyone already a fan of Larry Correia's Monster Hunter and Grimnoir novels (if not, what's wrong with you?) probably knows he's also been doing an entirely different series with Mike Kupari that can best be described as a technothriller/adventure romance.
Imagine if a Tom Clancy book existed in a parallel universe where midnight coast to coast was more correct than you'd think, many modern conspiracy theories were real, subtle bits of magic and Lovecraftian horror are hinted at, but not anywhere near as loopy as Loki's Child or the Shroedinger's Cat books.
I can't say much without spoiling the series if you haven't read it, so go fix that forthwith, then buy Alliance of Shadows.
Imagine if a Tom Clancy book existed in a parallel universe where midnight coast to coast was more correct than you'd think, many modern conspiracy theories were real, subtle bits of magic and Lovecraftian horror are hinted at, but not anywhere near as loopy as Loki's Child or the Shroedinger's Cat books.
I can't say much without spoiling the series if you haven't read it, so go fix that forthwith, then buy Alliance of Shadows.
Kerbal Space Program
Well - bad news. One of my favorite "games" - Kerbal Space Program - has lost a large chunk of it's development team over at Squad. After thanking the professionalism, etc. of the dev team, Squad posted the following:
“But this is not all! Here at Squad we’re looking into the future and we have great and ambitious plans for the KSP franchise and even more!Looks like they're trying to rehire.
Completely unknown at this time is how much of the driving vision of KSP was due to any of the leaving members, and how well future development work will fare. I have my fingers crossed.
Why, you ask?
KSP is an old school sandbox game that matches the insane level of detail of most flight simulators with orbital mechanics, and cute little green guys who die in rocket crashes. Which will happen. A lot. Did I mention crashes? It demands patience, has a steep learning curve, and the high you get when you finally, finally, land a Kerbonaut on the "Mun" is worth every second of it. The crowd playing the game develops delta-vee charts for various booster configs so you can calculate needed fuel tankage and thrusters for various payloads and mission profiles, develops plugins for everything from increased detail to autopilot systems to even more insanely realistic physics.
Tuesday, October 4, 2016
Kipling: Study of an Elevation, In Indian Ink
Even back in my blue-pill and, bluntly, somewhat gamma days, I read this poem in high school and recognized what a sad, jealous, petty, sack of shit the narrator of this poem was.
Study of an Elevation, In Indian Ink
This ditty is a string of lies.
But-how the deuce did Gubbins rise?
Potiphar Gubbins, C.E.
Stands at the top of the tree;
And I muse in my bed on the reasons that led
To the hoisting of Potiphar G.
Potiphar Gubbins, C.E.,
Is seven years junior to Me;
Each bridge that he makes either buckles or breaks,
And his work is as rough as he.
Potiphar Gubbins, C.E.,
Is coarse as a chimpanzee;
And I can't understand why you gave him your hand,
Lovely Mehitabel Lee.
Potiphar Gubbins, C.E.,
Is dear to the Powers that Be;
For They bow and They smile in an affable style,
Which is seldom accorded to Me.
Potiphar Gubbins, C.E.,
Is certain as certain can be
Of a highly paid post which is claimed by a host
Of seniors -- including Me.
Careless and lazy is he,
Greatly inferior to Me.
That is the spell that you manage so well,
Commonplace Potiphar G.?
Lovely Mehitabel Lee,
Let me inquire of thee,
Should I have riz to where Potiphar is,
Hadst thou been mated to Me?
-Rudyard Kipling
What a Week
I go away for a few days, and when I come back from what I thought would be a quiet weekend on the news front at least, there are a lot of things to let slide.
Seriously, Tim Burton, the brilliantly hit-or-miss director of endless movies about outcast freaks was taken to task for insufficient dieversity (and no, I'm not linking to the Verge....)? I don't think he's figured out yet that liberals, especially SJW's, are not the tolerant ones, nor do they care about artistic vision, only their vision.
Duke starts a re-education campus course on toxic masculinity? Of course, they insist it isn't....
In a piece of true glory though, I finally found a use for personal pronouns....
A conservative student at the University of Michigan brilliantly worked the school’s new pronoun policy in a way that shows just how absurd things have gotten on college campuses. From now on, Grant Stroble’s professors have to address him as “His Majesty.”Remember when I said one of Apple's few advantages was that they had internal "tribal" knowledge of how their product was developed, assembled, and programmed from top to bottom? Well - so much for that one....
BEIJING—Apple Inc.’s first research center in China will be a $45 million facility located in the capital to develop hardware, the site’s landlord said, announcing some of the first details of the project.No, they're not moving everything offsite, but now it's not just manufacturing but company-critical research stuff is now moving to places not here, not at the center of the company, and subject to the whims of third parties. It's a core competency of theirs. I know Michael Crichton had a few choice words about the long-term wisdom of such moves in his book Airframe.
Monday, October 3, 2016
Thanks.... For Nothing
I'm back, safe and sound, and I'll be putting some thoughts down related to the trip itself soon. In the meantime, I came back to this brilliant, and only mildly understated bit of satire:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)