Friday 13 January 2017

Untitled Aphorism #2

What do we mean when we talk of the superman? The ubermensch so to speak. Putting aside the frankly ludicrous notion thrust upon us by post world war 2 populism and paranoia of naziism which we must condemn, it is thus: the individual who has risen above philosophy - or more precisely, he who has realised the flaws in the philosophy of the past and moves into the new philosophy.

Fundamental, to me at least, is the recognition that mankind views the universe through his own eyes. That there is an absolute reality is objectively speaking, completely correct. However, the fact that observation is through this jaded mask of experience, culture and pathos, it may incline us to miss the absolute reality of the universe and insert a certain degree of relativistic truth in it's place that would, outwardly, appear as absolute truth.

So how to find the absolute truth - the fabric of reality that is not coloured by experience? Is this even possible to do? First, we must reject all that has gone before, and move ourselves back to first principles. But this has been done before. Ultimately this is self-effacing, as the only reason that one would go back is because of the experience of what has gone before.

So where do we move from here? - This is difficult to say. The truly evolved superman would realise the above and have an idea of where to move next.

Tuesday 13 December 2016

Untitled Aphorism #1

What kind of future have I been left. I had plans you know. Finish my PhD. Do a post-doc in Germany or the Netherlands. Come back. Teach. Live and learn. Not too fussed about research but want the security of an academic position.

Now what? Is my nationality toxic? Am I British for Britain? I don't like that type of exclusivity. I live on a planet not an island.

Everything I ever learned seems to be a lie these days. Equal rights, equal opportunities, equal pay, equal representation? No. Take the common factor away. Replace with exclusive. That's better. Sod intellect, meritocracy or freedom. Replace with pathos, aristocracy and oppression. Oppression of who? The oppressors of course. Isn't that a contradiction? Seemingly. But natural if one believes in true doublethink.

Was my education so far removed, so distant? Am I perched on my ivory tower? Unable to connect with the common man. This certainly supports my disconnect with reality. I believe in logic. Is logic even real or is it just pathos masquerading as civility? Difficult to conclude there. Certainly logic is self supporting and circular.

Does anything truly matter? Is matter even real? What even do I mean by matter. 

Sunday 23 October 2016

Far too late.

The left wing squabbled
About who, was the most politically correct;
The most modest and humble in the face of opposition and yet,
still opposed to oppression.

Whilst the populist mad men riled the working man,
against his neighbour.
Told them that it was only people who
weren't from here, that caused oppression.

And when they realised,
that being politically correct no longer got them voted,
and that they should have listened all along,
to the person who spoke his left wing mind.

It was far too late.

Monday 14 March 2016

Upon freedom of the press...

At present in Britain, the tone du jour is the so-called "Brexit" referendum, called for June this year. A referendum seemingly called by the Conservative Party to claim back votes that might've been lost to EU sceptic party UKIP.
Now, for some time in Britain, there has existed the claim that we are being overrun with immigrants. Being that I am middle class, work in science and university educated I don't see this. I've never seen it. I grew up in a village in Northamptonshire. A village where we could count the people of differing ethnicities on one hand. A village where, upon reading the record of the "Board School", there was a delightful account of the time the "Negro came from Northampton."
But, also I've never seen immigration as a problem. I've lived in Bradford and Leicester which are 2 of Britain's most ethnically diverse cities. I've always embraced multiculturalism, sought to learn more about my neighbours and enjoyed the benefits of living with different people. It creates a global atmosphere in my own back garden, so to speak.
My childhood was interspersed with long phone calls with "Uncle" Ghulam in Kashmir, and I learned the Arabic greetings before I started at secondary school. And I loved it. It wasn't cultural misappropriation, it was necessary to allow cohesive discourse with those who I lived with. I knew my Hindu Gods, and aspects of Brahma by the time I was 10 and I made my first Holy Communion in the Roman Catholic church at the age of 11.
Now building back to my initial point, I have encountered in more recent times, an alarming streak of xenophobia running through this country. The type that we mock our elderly relatives for, is rearing it's ugly head. But why should it be? I mean, we seem cohesive. Living in Leicester, I always enjoyed seeing the men in the town in their mosque hats, and occasionally bumping into a Dominican Friar. There was no "us and them", it was all us.
Yet, certain newspapers and internet media seem to fan the flames. The Daily Mail runs a non-story with the headline "THE NARBOROUGH ROAD IN LEICESTER. OVERRUN WITH 40 SHOPS FROM 60 DIFFERENT NATIONALITIES"
and the comments,
"It's political correctness gone stark raving mad."
"White people are a minority in Britain"
"My Grandad died in the 2nd world war for this..."
This statements can be handwaved away. The vast errors can be pointed out. Now, it seems as if the press wants to link the exit from the European union with the "immigration problem" - which it isn't.
But why are they doing this? What do they have to gain. Well, the press are unfortunately now in the employ of the power hungry ones. They understand that the European Union, with it's regulations that do such pointless things as securing maternity pay and equal rights for men and women and fair working hours and prevents child labour. Oh only the cornerstones of civilisation. But not something that really sits well if you're trying to turn a profit.
And that's really what it comes down to. They are fostering their own interests at the expense of their fellow man. It is how history has always been. We have hoped that perhaps it had been overthrown but the foul taint of monarchy and plutocracy are rearing their ugly claws once again.
And it is for this reason that a free press is so essential. To call out the media in the employ of big business. It is why magazines like Private Eye are so important. It is why inquisition like institutions like the recent enquiry into the actions of the News of the World are appalling. They tear down any semblance of a sane and free democracy.
"EVERYTHING FINE" reports newspaper in employ of authority.
Tony Benn said "The people in power don't want the public to know too much as they might challenge what they decide themselves."
If we know this, and we understand it, we must move to protect our free press before it is totally bought under the control of the Murdoch's and the oligarchs who have no interest in morality, freedom or society but in turning a cheap profit at the expense of human misery and life.

Thursday 11 February 2016

Aphorism on the state of politics

I am not a political theorist, or even an expert in politics. However, I shall comment as little more than an outsider on these matters.
It occurs to me that politics in this country is fundamentally broken. New Labour stripped away any semblance of a right and a left. However, where New Labour succeeded was as an institution.
So the principle problem with right wing politics is the contempt that it appears to hold the electorate with. The outcome of right wing politics is logically to ensure a free market, however the means employed to get to this stage is to rely on fear and misinformation to coerce a public, viewed as fools, into submission. This can have the unexpected side effect of collapsing into totalitarianism when not balanced by democracy.
Conversely, left wing politics succeeds in that it does not view those who vote for it with contempt, but fails fundamentally as it has lost its moral compass. The foolish electorate, unfortunately, require morality to be spelled out. When a left wing government does this, it becomes right wing in that it will view its electorate as fools to be goaded but when it doesn't do this it can never succeed as no one will support a cause that has no morality.

Tuesday 22 December 2015

100 Days of Corbyn

So a lot of (most Conservative) people keep saying that Jeremy Corbyn is unelectable and ridiculous and he should step down.

May I ask, if he's unelectable, then why are you worrying? Why bother with a smear campaign if he won't win in any case? Unless you view the British electorate with such contempt as to think they are not capable of making decisions by themselves.

In fact if anything, the continuous rhetoric of how unelectable he is, the constant smears, surely show how much of a threat he actually is.

I like short blog posts...

Tuesday 15 December 2015

"This Government makes me happier and happier." Said No Ordinary Man.

So the government is forcing more benefits changes on people. A new budget that will cut billions from those who are most needy in society. This naturally filled me with a lot of vitriol, so be prepared for a tl:dr.
Well I'm so glad that this government is going to put countless disabled and ill people through needless stress, heartache and suffering just to save a few quid. And all because, as a culture, we have decided that being disabled is a swindle to cheat the state after money.
Nobody asks to be disabled. Nobody wants to have to claim disability living allowance. It's not "for fun" or a swindle. Stop the rhetoric that it is. Just accept that people need to claim it.
You can't incentivise people into not being disabled like you can with people who are out of work through choice.
Somehow we voted for a government that actively discriminates against the disabled because it knows that they won't fight back or that if they do they won't be listened to.
I'm disabled. Like many people it is a cause of great shame and not a badge that I wear with honour - more a cross that I have to carry in a culture that kicks me to the floor more often than it helps me up. And changing the benefits that make life bearable; by putting people through unfair hoops and forcing them through bureaucratic targets, making then into statistics instead of people, this government is kicking disabled people to the floor once again.
And to add insult to injury, the Home Secretary has decided that questioning government policies is tantamount to treason. Disagreement makes one a "terrorist sympathiser".
I suppose this is hardly surprising when one considers the bed fellows but do we want to fall foul of a Saudi-Chinese system of state control and interference?
I am opposed to military action in the middle East AND to sweeping welfare reforms.
I am pro funding education, healthcare and the police.