Rational Radical

I know there are millions of videos like this, and North America collectively lost about 10 IQ points after watching America’s Funniest Home Videos, but this particular link and this one are pretty darn funny. Plus, we don’t need to tolerate the inane comments from Bob Saget.

Although to be fair to Bob, he was pretty funny in the Aristocrats, although others were also funny, including Gilbert Gottfried’s version, which he also did during Hugh Hefner’s roast after people turned on him for doing a 9-11 joke “too soon” (here are other parts of that same routine) as well as Sarah Silverman’s and South Park’s version.  WARNING: These last six links are hugely “offensive” videos!

If THIS MAN can become the most powerful person on the planet, how have we survived this long???  I’ve provided other links in this previous post that further demonstrate the idiocy of a certain president.

PS

Yes, I know, he is not the actual powerful force (Cheney et al. are), but Bush does represent this powerful force and many Americans voted for him (maybe not enough to win the election honestly, but many did vote for him–TWICE!?!)

So as not to discriminate against American (and one Russian) model, here is an Israeli model (although the title is ironic…) and here are a bunch of non-model Americans who make the models look like rocket scientists.  Our civilization is doomed…

One of my contacts forwarded me this link to one of the funniest new programs on TV.  The title says it all.

The quality isn’t great in this video, but if you type in “most smartest model” on Youtube, you should find a number of representative clips.  Ah, the beautiful people, the beautiful people….

One of my field reporters notified me that a student running for some school government position at a local university is using the slogan, “Vote to brand Ryerson with more events” or something like that. What the heck does that even mean?

If I were a student, I know that I would vote against him on principle, given that he apparently believes students are such unintelligent sheep that they will vote for any meaningless catch phrase, simply because it contains a recent buzz word: branding. Fortunately, Ryerson students appear to be more intelligent than he gives them credit for, since they refused to elect his brother as president in a recent election. That is, his brother similarly tried to appeal to voters on the strength of meaningless slogans and his track record as some minor school council member (or whatever position he apparently held) who hosted several big events paid for by students’ tuition (to give him credit, apparently he also brought in some cash to the coffers).

But students were too savvy and knew that electing him as president would bring only more of the same childish and petty bickering and self-serving behaviours that had plagued the previous year. They similarly refused to elect his co-conspirator, who was even more ridiculous than he was–she even gave herself an A+ when asked to rate her work as student councilor (or whatever her position was); instead of tackling issues directly relevant to students, she spent students’ tuition supporting several of her pet causes while trying to make a name for herself. At the same time, she ignored several other groups whose behaviours were as unacceptable as the group she targeted. And she refused all calls to address this discrepancy. Pathetic.

Lest anyone call me biased, let me be clear that the same criticisms can be applied to these two students’ nemesis: the university’s soon to be ex-student-president, as well as her good friend who I believe was once a student president as well, and was just elected as VP (or something like that).  I hope those who are affected most strongly by these children will be critical in their evaluation of them.

Here are three quotes I recently received about youth:

1. “The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.”

2. “I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on the frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words. When I was a boy, we were taught to be discrete and respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise and impatient of restraint.”

3. “The world is passing through troublous times. The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as if they knew everything, and what passes for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for the girls, they are forward, immodest and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress.”

These are things I find myself ranting about these days, although I would add “many young people today believe they are ENTITLED because their parents failed in their duty as parents.” However, look below to see to whom each of the preceding quotes is attributed!

The first quote is attributed to Socrates (469-399 BC) by Plato, according to William L. Patty and Louise S. Johnson, Personality and Adjustment, p. 277 (1953).

The second is Hesiod, 8th century BC.

And the third is from a sermon preached by Peter the Hermit in AD 1274.

A recent Toronto Star article discussed how the CBC appears to have cancelled the Canadian series, Intelligence.  I’ve never seen the show, but the article’s claim is that it was cancelled “because the storyline hit a nerve in corporate ranks. It’s about the mass export of Canadian water to a thirsty U.S. amid the overall threat of economic integration.”

Here are the main points of the article, which should scare the sh*t out of you (those of you foolish enough to pay $1.00, $2.00 or even $10.00!!! for bottled water might also be pissed to learn that the companies who bottle that over-priced water pay NO MONEY for sucking us dry!!!):

- The problem is water is not protected in Canada, and most Canadians are blithely oblivious.

- “While there are many well-publicized statements and written documents indicating Canada’s water is not for sale, experts believe these have little or no legal force.”

- The Harper government has rejected attempts to implement a national strategy to protect water, whether from bulk export or large-scale diversion. In 2007, members of the standing committee on international affairs proposed talks with the U.S. and Mexico to exclude water from the scope of NAFTA. Conservative members rejected the plan.

- As well, New Democratic Party MP Peggy Nash…failed to get a motion through the Commons to recognize water “as a fundamental right” of Canadians, as well as prohibiting bulk export and imposing restrictions on new diversions.

“What’s really scandalous,” said Nash, “is this lack of stewardship over our water is occurring even as the government is negotiating a continental water policy in secret that offers up water as a fait accompli.“

- climate change could leave half the world’s cities without sufficient drinking water within 20 years. And growing shortages in American regions – the southwest, the Midwest farm belt and the southeast – are well documented.

- “By 2015, something like 35 per cent of cities within the continental U.S. will be undergoing serious water shortages,”

- Many experts…fear it’s already too late for Canada to control its water reserves.

- They argue that since water is not covered by NAFTA, it is unprotected and indistinguishable from any other commodity, service or investment and can be treated as such.

- All it takes to set a NAFTA precedent is for one province to allow bulk export and various NAFTA clauses – those dealing with “national treatment” and “proportional sharing” – kick in.

- “Once the taps have been turned on, they can’t be turned off.” In essence, no future Canadian government could legally provide water to its own citizens until American needs had been met – even in times of national emergency. Worse, “water export controls are prohibited” under NAFTA and the WTO.

- “Canada is also precluded from denying U.S. investors and service providers the same access to Canadian water it allows Canadian companies, communities and residents.”

Researchers have long sought to determine what, if any, impact sex, violence, etc. on TV and in other media have on people in real life. The research and conclusions have been anything but unequivocal (in other words, the jury is still out…), but this much appears to be true:

The Media help shape our norms and beliefs about what others think and do. If we are told that everyone is having sex at a young age, we believe it and think we should do so too, otherwise we are “different,” and most people don’t want to be “different,” no matter how much they claim to want to be; for instance, look at all the teens who “rebel” against their parents, society, etc., claiming to be different–yet they merely fall into some peer group that is doing its own thing and they by and large think and act like the group does. It’s just conforming to another group but it’s conformity all the same.

In any event, the one factor that seems to prevent mindless acceptance of supposed norms/beliefs/etc. presented in the Media is (early) education. Some schools provide this, but usually it’s too late and even then, such programs were deemed unnecessary by the Harris government in Ontario a number of years ago–Media Literacy classes were some of the first programs to get the axe under his vile, incompetent and mean-spirited regime.

But forget about schools.  Ask yourself this: How often did my parents sit down with me when watching TV–especially commercials–and help me understand what was going on?  Or asked me questions about what I thought about what I was watching?  Or had any intelligent discussion at all  about The Media? 

If you’re like most people, you’ll say very little, or very little of any value.  Especially today, where so many programs and commercials show people acting really mean toward each other and getting away with or benefiting from such reprehensible behaviours, it’s parents’ RESPONSIBILITY to immunize their children against such ugly, spiteful messages.

But very few parents do.  Worse yet, many parents are modeling for their children some pretty ugly, selfish, self-serving, hateful attitudes and behaviours themselves.

I don’t read the National Post for various reasons, but I was just sent this article that finally describes the Ryerson Facebook affair for what it is; I’d be tempted to say the editors read this site’s take on the story before writing their own article, but to be fair, theirs was published first…

In case the link is taken down, I’ve copied it below as well. At the very least, please check out the bold-printed parts.

This isn’t about Facebook

Editorial: Ryerson student scandal not really about social networking site

National Post Published: Monday, March 17, 2008

It’s about time someone made a point that has been lost in all the back-and-forth over Ryerson University’s “Facebook scandal.” That point is: The Facebook scandal doesn’t really have anything to do with Facebook.

An engineering professor at the Toronto school gave his students a specific instruction that their take-home assignments should be done independently. One of those students, Chris Avenir, allegedly ignored the instruction, joined an existing study group devoted to the class, and invited everyone in it to “input solutions” to the assignments so they could be shared. He got caught, was given an F in the course, and is currently appealing his expulsion for academic misconduct. The fact that the study group was a Facebook group has nothing to do with the nature of the offence or the controversy over Mr. Avenir’s punishment.

Ten years ago, it’s what journalists would be cluelessly calling an “e-mail scandal”. Twenty years ago it would have been a generic “computer cheating scandal.” Forty years ago, maybe it would be described as a “mimeograph scandal .” (”Dear Sir: cannot something be done about these ignominious, strange-scented contraptions?”)

There exists a ridiculous tendency for behind-the-curve scribes to seize upon new media as somehow responsible, in themselves, for humans doing the kind of things humans have always done. In the Ryerson case, this tendency has descended to the level of low comedy. Facebook really, truly doesn’t do anything to facilitate information-sharing that e-mail and older online applications like Usenet don’t. The only semi-relevant difference is that Facebook is so new that users make false assumptions about the security of the information they upload to it.

Predictably, some people are demanding that those false assumptions be honoured as facts. The Ryerson Students’ Union is, according to the Ryersonian newspaper, “fighting to make sure students can’t be punished for what they do or say on Facebook” — even if what they’re doing is cheating on an assignment for a Ryerson University class. We have a funny feeling the student union will lose this battle.

The technological angle is causing everyone to overlook the vastly more meaningful development symbolized by the affair. Apparently, in the year 2008, professors find it necessary to specify that homework problems in an engineering class should be solved by the student, rather than copied from a brighter classmate. Not only that, but doing so apparently provokes a widespread reaction akin to “Pfft, whatever.” And not only that, but when someone is caught defying the direct instruction, and accused of cheating, hundreds of his fellow students will rally behind him and declare him a victim of gross injustice.

Call us predictable, but we suspect it just might be the case that a feel-good primary education system that emphasizes collaboration over individual effort, and self-esteem over knowledge, has left a few Ryerson undergraduates poorly prepared for life in hard, advanced disciplines such as engineering.

It is scarcely possible not to think so, given claims like this high-pitched whine from Chris-DidntCheat.com, a website for Mr. Avenir’s supporters: “Students don’t have a chance to learn because we are too busy completing assignments!”

According to this world view, there is some way of qualifying for the terrifying responsibilities of engineering other than sitting down as an individual and solving difficult quantitative problems assigned by an engineering professor. If there is one, we would be happy to hear about it. But if it were generally adopted, we are not sure we would ever again feel safe crossing a bridge, flushing a toilet, or even booting up our computers to access that mysterious, soul-corrupting site known as “Facebook.”

Although I am disgusted at the recent violent and deadly attacks against the Chinese living in Tibet, I sympathize with Tibetans and wonder when the world powers will have the moral strength to call on China to end its oppression of this resolute nation (the US is at least trying to look like the have a bit of a conscience).

Of course, the only thing China is worried about is bad publicity before/during the 2008 Olympics.   And the very fact that China was granted this opportunity proves the ignorance, incompetence, irrelevance, and utter lack of morals of the IOC, the extremely corrupt heads of the Olympics who have done everything possible to rob this once noble athletic tradition of everything it is supposed to represent.

And of course, as long as China continues to pump out more and more consumers to whom the immoral/corrupt/greedy multinational companies can sell their products, and more and more workers to be exploited directly and indirectly by these same companies (as well as Chinese companies), these multinationals’ bed-mates–various governments around the world–will continue to turn a blind eye to the horrible crimes China commits against its own citizens and the planet.  Was anyone naive enough to think any of this would change following the brief spurts of anger and concern over the wave of deadly products exported from China last year?

And how many people truly understand that what we’ve witnessed since last year is only the tip of the iceberg?  When millions of young children (and adults) work for slave wages in toxic environments that are killing their bodies and the earth’s air, soil and water, how can you not expect the products they create and ship to be deadly on so many levels?