Here it is kiddies, so quit yer whining...
Tuesday Feb 3:
SATAN!! (Special guest in attendance)
7pm -- The Devil Rides Out [1968]: Watch Christopher Lee (Sarumon from LoTR) take a break from the capes and the stalking to play a good guy (!) and kick some Satanic ass!! Watch him run, watch him punch... watch a guy with a goat's head on his noggin' do... something. A Hammer Films production.
9pm: Flavia the Heretic [1974]: More good ol' nun-ploitation, this time based on a true story and executed in true sleazy Eurotrash fashion. Those who caught "Alucarda" at last year's Cinemuerte should not miss this.
Tuesday Feb 10:
'60's Literary Girl's Trash
7pm: The Stepford Wives [1975]: Just in time for the big budget Nicole Kidman remake. If you don't know what it's about then you should probably read more.
9pm: The Valley of the Dolls [1967]: Not to be confused with the Russ Meyer/Roger Ebert collaboration "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls" (sorry Beej) this is trashy soap opera drama at it's best. And if you did get confused, then you should probably read more.
Tuesday Feb 17:
Just Because You're Paranoid...
7pm: The Manchurian Candidate [1962]: Again programmed to usurp the big budget remake coming this summer (much to Meeko's horror as this is one of her all time faves). Brilliant black and white photography highlights the creepy tale of Korean War vets brainwashed into become sleeper agent assassins. With startling parallels to the Bobby Kennedy assassination and the fact that it was pulled from circulation by Frank Sinatra (who stars as well as produced) in 1963 following the JFK assassination) the film's ability to chill still resonates all these years later. And if that doesn't freak you out, then Angela Lansbury (one scene, you'll know it when you see it) certainly will. Also, this movie justifies John Frankenheimer's status as one of the Great American Directors. "Reindeer Games" and "Ronin" never happened.... just keep repeating....
9pm: The Parallax View [1974]: Treading on similar paranoid territory this time helmed by Alan J. Pacula ("All the President's Men") and staring Warren Beatty and Hume Cronyn.
Tuesday Feb 24:
Over the Top Asian Trash (in honour of Owen's Birth)
7pm: Twins Effect [2003]: When American pop stars cross over into movies we get trite bullshit like "Crossroads" and "A Walk to Remember". When Asian pop stars make movies they star as kung-fu fighting, wire-flying, ass kicking vampire slayers. Featuring the Canto-Pop sensation The Twins and Jackie Chan in a humourous cameo.
9pm: Happiness of the Katakuris [2001]: If the words "Miike", "musical" and "dancing zombies" don't mean anything to you, you obviously have no soul.
Also on the burner for this month:
Feb 8 (Sunday) -- Party Monster Sometime in the evening (exact time to be agreed on later) we will be screening both the original documentary (60 mins) and the dramatization (both by the same writer/directors) featuring Seth Green and Macaulay Culkin (yes, the one and only) in his big screen return.
Feb 21 (Saturday, subject to change) -- Meeko's b-day karaoke!! "It's my party and I'll sing if i want to." At the Duff. Possible rising of "liquid courage" at my place beforehand. Details to follow.
That's all for now. As always suggestions and comments more than welcome.
~meeko
Saturday, January 31, 2004
Friday, January 30, 2004
Dank, grim, depressing...
Anybody up for seeing Mystic River Saturday afternoon at Tinseltown? I'm in town for the weekend and wanna catch a decent flick.
Truth be told, I was hoping to see something a little less bleak, since the only movies I watched this week were Monster's Ball and Bringing Out the Dead, but dammit, there's just nothing good out that isn't depressing as hell. And I can't bring myself to see Chasing Liberty a fourth time...
Truth be told, I was hoping to see something a little less bleak, since the only movies I watched this week were Monster's Ball and Bringing Out the Dead, but dammit, there's just nothing good out that isn't depressing as hell. And I can't bring myself to see Chasing Liberty a fourth time...
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
Water for Water
I was catching up on my news today and came across this article in which UBC students are noticing that their water foutains are going away.
The school claims that they can't afford to repair the fountains, some said the water was tainted, but I think that the Coke theory is the strongest that I've heard. Even when I read the headline "Student asks why UBC cut off drinking fountains" I had already assumed Coke would be a focus. Last semester an instructor here made mention about Coke complaining to the school about the water fountains here being "competition" and that was against their contract. Our school cried "bullshit" (apparently, and the fountains are still here).
And it all boils down to lack of government funding to our post-secondary institutions. These contracts should never have to be made, but I'm all for losing my water fountain priviledges as long as I can afford to attend school. Should it be a choice between water and education?
The school claims that they can't afford to repair the fountains, some said the water was tainted, but I think that the Coke theory is the strongest that I've heard. Even when I read the headline "Student asks why UBC cut off drinking fountains" I had already assumed Coke would be a focus. Last semester an instructor here made mention about Coke complaining to the school about the water fountains here being "competition" and that was against their contract. Our school cried "bullshit" (apparently, and the fountains are still here).
And it all boils down to lack of government funding to our post-secondary institutions. These contracts should never have to be made, but I'm all for losing my water fountain priviledges as long as I can afford to attend school. Should it be a choice between water and education?
Monday, January 26, 2004
Real Sin at the D.o.S.
i shouldn't even really need to remind you about this week's program because you should all have it circled in red on your calendars since we are showing:
7pm: Switchblade Sisters [1975] -- From Jack Hill, writer director of "Coffy" and "Foxy Brown" comes this girl-gang grindhouse expoitation camp fest. Described on IMDB as "kind of like The Warriors meets Fast Times at Ridgemont High meets L7". Presented by QT's Rolling Thunder Pictures.
9pm: They Call Her One Eye a.k.a. "Thiller" [1974] -- The direct inspiration for Daryl Hannah's character in Kill Bil. Christina Lindberg is Frigga, the ex-hooker on a murderous rampage against her former tricks, and the people who kidnapped her into sexual slavery. Extremely graphic and relentless, this film will be presented in the original un-cut print that was banned in it's native Sweden (!). *WARNING* The only uncut print currently available is entirely in Swedish with NO SUBTITLES. The story is relatively easy to follow (it's a revenge movie), so this shouldn't be a problem; but people who complain "this isn't English!" will be sumarily punched in the arm and banished outside. Also, this film is XXX porn so those with more delicate sensibilities should stay home.*WARNING*
RSVPs are always apreciated, especially since THEY CALL HER ONE EYE was suggested by a number of the regulars. Pop fund in effect (if you don't want Pepsi, let me know), and call if you need directions.
~meeko
7pm: Switchblade Sisters [1975] -- From Jack Hill, writer director of "Coffy" and "Foxy Brown" comes this girl-gang grindhouse expoitation camp fest. Described on IMDB as "kind of like The Warriors meets Fast Times at Ridgemont High meets L7". Presented by QT's Rolling Thunder Pictures.
9pm: They Call Her One Eye a.k.a. "Thiller" [1974] -- The direct inspiration for Daryl Hannah's character in Kill Bil. Christina Lindberg is Frigga, the ex-hooker on a murderous rampage against her former tricks, and the people who kidnapped her into sexual slavery. Extremely graphic and relentless, this film will be presented in the original un-cut print that was banned in it's native Sweden (!). *WARNING* The only uncut print currently available is entirely in Swedish with NO SUBTITLES. The story is relatively easy to follow (it's a revenge movie), so this shouldn't be a problem; but people who complain "this isn't English!" will be sumarily punched in the arm and banished outside. Also, this film is XXX porn so those with more delicate sensibilities should stay home.*WARNING*
RSVPs are always apreciated, especially since THEY CALL HER ONE EYE was suggested by a number of the regulars. Pop fund in effect (if you don't want Pepsi, let me know), and call if you need directions.
~meeko
K
This weekend Kat took me out to "K" because Adam worked on it and, quite frankly, I like theatre despite my inability to get out to many shows.
In "K", we view a very stylized view of Kafka's last days/memories. A Danish production, brought over here by the same company using local actors, stage hands, etc.
First and foremost, this play reminded me heavily of a piece I wrote in Directing/Scriptwriting 12 years ago. I wrote this pretentious art-fuck piece about a girl having a dream about her father climbing a ladder, falling off of it into a black hole and eventually finding the devil and having some interaction there. I thought it was the most contrived piece of writing I've put to paper. Somehow, it was praised by my then theatre instructor. ...?...
The acting was by and large impressive. James Long is on stage performing the whole time in a monologue that is interupted by "visions" or reality. A 90 minute presentation is not an easy feat and on closing night he had his part down pat. I think one of my favourite aspects of theatre is that they can fuck up and that would be super cool. There were moments where I questioned the pacing of the dialogue (too great of a gap, punchline delivered a little off) but there were no sightly errors in the acting. The blocking wasn't all the way there. Several times actors were turned away while speaking their dialogue and often moments where expressions/physical responses were lost from actors looking away from the audience. One Ensemble member wandered off out of context at one point.
Aesthetically, it was awesome. The audience walked in to an open stage with only a huge wall of silver filing cabinet drawers. That's it. The wall is designed with a closet, a set of double doors, four windows, and a row of drawer handles sturdy enough to carry Long up the wall. The double doors release Kafka's hospital bed which provides the focus of the show. With the use of projectors, lighting and dry ice I had missed a few moments of stage transformation through distraction.
And now onto the plot of "K". While a storyline was there, I definately felt as though it was a poetic play with symbolisms that I couldn't get for the life of me (such as "Why are they walking backwards? All the time?"). I'll admit ignorance and stupidity when it came to understanding the intent of many of the overt symbolisms. I take great pride in my bullshiting skills with analyzing print materials, but on stage I've got no clue. I recognized Lilith's importance early on, why everyone was walking around "aimlessly", and some of the other small symbolic charcters. Perhaps I needed to read the stage directions. Anyone who had seen it care to explain a few things? Why was the assistant doctor repeating/echoing the words of everyone else? Why were they walking backwards? Why was the doctor acting like a broken record?
Arbitrary score of 864. Thanks for taking me Kat, and I still owe you for the ticket.
In "K", we view a very stylized view of Kafka's last days/memories. A Danish production, brought over here by the same company using local actors, stage hands, etc.
First and foremost, this play reminded me heavily of a piece I wrote in Directing/Scriptwriting 12 years ago. I wrote this pretentious art-fuck piece about a girl having a dream about her father climbing a ladder, falling off of it into a black hole and eventually finding the devil and having some interaction there. I thought it was the most contrived piece of writing I've put to paper. Somehow, it was praised by my then theatre instructor. ...?...
The acting was by and large impressive. James Long is on stage performing the whole time in a monologue that is interupted by "visions" or reality. A 90 minute presentation is not an easy feat and on closing night he had his part down pat. I think one of my favourite aspects of theatre is that they can fuck up and that would be super cool. There were moments where I questioned the pacing of the dialogue (too great of a gap, punchline delivered a little off) but there were no sightly errors in the acting. The blocking wasn't all the way there. Several times actors were turned away while speaking their dialogue and often moments where expressions/physical responses were lost from actors looking away from the audience. One Ensemble member wandered off out of context at one point.
Aesthetically, it was awesome. The audience walked in to an open stage with only a huge wall of silver filing cabinet drawers. That's it. The wall is designed with a closet, a set of double doors, four windows, and a row of drawer handles sturdy enough to carry Long up the wall. The double doors release Kafka's hospital bed which provides the focus of the show. With the use of projectors, lighting and dry ice I had missed a few moments of stage transformation through distraction.
And now onto the plot of "K". While a storyline was there, I definately felt as though it was a poetic play with symbolisms that I couldn't get for the life of me (such as "Why are they walking backwards? All the time?"). I'll admit ignorance and stupidity when it came to understanding the intent of many of the overt symbolisms. I take great pride in my bullshiting skills with analyzing print materials, but on stage I've got no clue. I recognized Lilith's importance early on, why everyone was walking around "aimlessly", and some of the other small symbolic charcters. Perhaps I needed to read the stage directions. Anyone who had seen it care to explain a few things? Why was the assistant doctor repeating/echoing the words of everyone else? Why were they walking backwards? Why was the doctor acting like a broken record?
Arbitrary score of 864. Thanks for taking me Kat, and I still owe you for the ticket.
Sunday, January 25, 2004
Leisure Town
I keep telling Graeme about Leisure Town, the BEST WEBCOMIC EVAR. Usually, I'm complaining about how it no longer exists. BUT! I found a mirror site at http://www.steamerbean.com/leisuretown/
My personal favorites are A Comedy Crisis and Winter Pageant; but Q.A. Confidential stands alone as the mature work of a modern master, a shining beacon of truth and light in our otherwise meaningless lives.
And I thought I was going to get some work done today...
My personal favorites are A Comedy Crisis and Winter Pageant; but Q.A. Confidential stands alone as the mature work of a modern master, a shining beacon of truth and light in our otherwise meaningless lives.
And I thought I was going to get some work done today...
Saturday, January 24, 2004
Thursday, January 22, 2004
Stupid Graeme
I'm so fucking bad a procrastinator. I just wasted two hours that I should have used to mark papers to watch "Ronin." While moderately entertaining, I'm gonna have to make up that time sometime, and that's running thin as of late. I did get some of that done, but not as much as I wanted to.
At least I got the reading that I needed done.
And the car chase is a little overrated. Nowhere near as good as the "French Connection."
At least I got the reading that I needed done.
And the car chase is a little overrated. Nowhere near as good as the "French Connection."
Tuesday, January 20, 2004
Travis in Vancouver
My favouritist Tim has an extra ticket to Travis on Thursday. <3 And he thought of me. So I thought I would brag.
Monday, January 19, 2004
This Week at the D.o.S...
Hey kids!
This week it's back to the classics:
7pm: THE THIRD MAN [1949] (not to be confused in any way with last month's "THE FOURTH MAN") -- Based on a script by Graham Greene this superb noir set in war torn Vienna stars Orson Wells and Joseph Cotton. That in itself should be enough to recomend it, but let's not forget the amazing twists and turns of the plot and the gorgeous black and white cinematography. Essential viewing for anyone claiming to be a fan of film and films.
9pm: THE LADY VANISHES [1938]: Hitchcock's second to last British film starts off as a comedy of manners and slowly evolves into the one of the twisty-turny yarns we've come to expect from ol' Hitch as a little old lady goes missing from a train...
Please pass this on to anyone you think would be interested if you know they don't already receive this mailer. If you are on the list and you want off, just let me know. Bring money for the pop fund and if you have suggestions for beverages let me know, otherwise you get Pepsi. RSVP if you can (it helps us keep track of numbers) and call if you need directions.
~meeko
This week it's back to the classics:
7pm: THE THIRD MAN [1949] (not to be confused in any way with last month's "THE FOURTH MAN") -- Based on a script by Graham Greene this superb noir set in war torn Vienna stars Orson Wells and Joseph Cotton. That in itself should be enough to recomend it, but let's not forget the amazing twists and turns of the plot and the gorgeous black and white cinematography. Essential viewing for anyone claiming to be a fan of film and films.
9pm: THE LADY VANISHES [1938]: Hitchcock's second to last British film starts off as a comedy of manners and slowly evolves into the one of the twisty-turny yarns we've come to expect from ol' Hitch as a little old lady goes missing from a train...
Please pass this on to anyone you think would be interested if you know they don't already receive this mailer. If you are on the list and you want off, just let me know. Bring money for the pop fund and if you have suggestions for beverages let me know, otherwise you get Pepsi. RSVP if you can (it helps us keep track of numbers) and call if you need directions.
~meeko
Thursday, January 15, 2004
Since I'm not just R's yes-housemother...
Here's my take on Friday night's Grrrrl's Riot.
Activities
- Drastic hair changes be it color or style or cut. As much or as little crazy as you want it.
-Lots, I mean llllllllots o' Chocolate (cake,puddin',cupcakes,bars) and if yer allergic, "Just say no!" pamphlets will be available.
-Will be attempting Truth or Dare but wimpy girly rules may be applied to either truths and/or dares so that no one (read me) ends up cryin' her little sorority eyes out before ten pm.
-Winding down to sleepwear, stuffed animals and low volumed movies to provide heaps of gab time to catch up on the past years events or current excitments or any notions that enter our gorgeous (note drastic hair changes above) little heads.
so some last minute notes to the loverly ladies i'll see tomorrow:
if you have an all time favorite movie that only a group of females could really, deeply appreciate on the same level you do and it is on VHS please please know you are safe to share it with us and bring it to show
if you have slippers, sleep stuff and something pink - good things to bring
if you want things special for your hair like a certain dye color bring that too. i just have the bleach.
fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun ya good....
Activities
- Drastic hair changes be it color or style or cut. As much or as little crazy as you want it.
-Lots, I mean llllllllots o' Chocolate (cake,puddin',cupcakes,bars) and if yer allergic, "Just say no!" pamphlets will be available.
-Will be attempting Truth or Dare but wimpy girly rules may be applied to either truths and/or dares so that no one (read me) ends up cryin' her little sorority eyes out before ten pm.
-Winding down to sleepwear, stuffed animals and low volumed movies to provide heaps of gab time to catch up on the past years events or current excitments or any notions that enter our gorgeous (note drastic hair changes above) little heads.
so some last minute notes to the loverly ladies i'll see tomorrow:
if you have an all time favorite movie that only a group of females could really, deeply appreciate on the same level you do and it is on VHS please please know you are safe to share it with us and bring it to show
if you have slippers, sleep stuff and something pink - good things to bring
if you want things special for your hair like a certain dye color bring that too. i just have the bleach.
fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun fun ya good....
Girl's Night Update
Now that I have just remembered that Girl's night is tomorrow, I should give "the girls" some more information. We are telling people to show up around 8pm. Bring sleeping stuff and something to drink if you want.
My friend Jackie, from Toronto, who has just started her Ph.D. at UBC will be there.
The Girl's Nights Activities are apparently "Top Secret" which probably means Karen doesn't know.
See you there.
And guys don't bother trying to peak in the windows, listening to a bunch of girls griping about you isn't as exciting as it's made to seem in the movies.
My friend Jackie, from Toronto, who has just started her Ph.D. at UBC will be there.
The Girl's Nights Activities are apparently "Top Secret" which probably means Karen doesn't know.
See you there.
And guys don't bother trying to peak in the windows, listening to a bunch of girls griping about you isn't as exciting as it's made to seem in the movies.
JANUWEEN PARTY
Date: Saturday, January 31st
Time: 7:00pm onwards
Location: The Boiler Room(TM)
Theme: Stupid bets and alcoholic consequences-ween
RSVP for directions at this email: boilroom@lycos.com
(sort of the new events email for upcoming stuff)
Bad beer and Incan Chocolate compliments of The Boiler Room(TM) and our Sobakan counterpart, straight outta Peru.
Previous excuses to get a bunch of rowdies together (prior to the 'ween excuse) include:
* Ang's housewarming
* "Corinne was right all along about women"
* Duke vs. the Sun
* "No more alcohol ever" -- or at least no 154 proof rum...
Duke
Time: 7:00pm onwards
Location: The Boiler Room(TM)
Theme: Stupid bets and alcoholic consequences-ween
RSVP for directions at this email: boilroom@lycos.com
(sort of the new events email for upcoming stuff)
Bad beer and Incan Chocolate compliments of The Boiler Room(TM) and our Sobakan counterpart, straight outta Peru.
Previous excuses to get a bunch of rowdies together (prior to the 'ween excuse) include:
* Ang's housewarming
* "Corinne was right all along about women"
* Duke vs. the Sun
* "No more alcohol ever" -- or at least no 154 proof rum...
Duke
Tuesday, January 13, 2004
Grae's Birthday
Board games it is.
Denny's North Road by Lougheed Mall
9pm
Friday January 30th
Bring change for coffee.
I'll get us a booth.
Denny's North Road by Lougheed Mall
9pm
Friday January 30th
Bring change for coffee.
I'll get us a booth.
Monday, January 12, 2004
Your Friendly Weekly D.o.S. Reminder
hey kids,
Just wanted to advise you of tomorrow's screenings: "Oh those wacky Christians!"
7pm: Hell House -- In case you missed it at the viff, we will be screening the amazing, eye opening documentary on the original "Hell House" -- a Halloween scarehouse operated by a Christian Church in the southern US. Graphic and gory, each of the "scary" scenarios are meant to teach you about "God's Love", but the basic hypocrosy will more likely leave you scratching your head or shaking it in shame. Perhapse the scariest thing of all is that these events are now immitated by churches all over the world, including several in the lowermainland. Expertly filmed in a largely non-judgemental maner this movie is nothing short of a must see.
9pm: God Told Me To -- The title refers to the explanation given by the various culprits of a series of seemingly motiveless killings all over New York City. Then things get really weird. And Andy Kaufman is in it. From cult legend Larry Cohen (Q the Winged Serpent).
Let us know if you can make it or not. Guests are of course more than welcome, but a heads up would be nice. Pop fund in effect and I'm pretty sure it's not going to snow, so you'd better have a good excuse...
~meeko
Just wanted to advise you of tomorrow's screenings: "Oh those wacky Christians!"
7pm: Hell House -- In case you missed it at the viff, we will be screening the amazing, eye opening documentary on the original "Hell House" -- a Halloween scarehouse operated by a Christian Church in the southern US. Graphic and gory, each of the "scary" scenarios are meant to teach you about "God's Love", but the basic hypocrosy will more likely leave you scratching your head or shaking it in shame. Perhapse the scariest thing of all is that these events are now immitated by churches all over the world, including several in the lowermainland. Expertly filmed in a largely non-judgemental maner this movie is nothing short of a must see.
9pm: God Told Me To -- The title refers to the explanation given by the various culprits of a series of seemingly motiveless killings all over New York City. Then things get really weird. And Andy Kaufman is in it. From cult legend Larry Cohen (Q the Winged Serpent).
Let us know if you can make it or not. Guests are of course more than welcome, but a heads up would be nice. Pop fund in effect and I'm pretty sure it's not going to snow, so you'd better have a good excuse...
~meeko
Bubba Ho-tep Update
Currently it is booked for at least a one week engagement starting on 2/13. Tickets will be available 4 days in advance, online at www.cinemark.com or at the theatre, Tinseltown.
All the people I've spoken to are shooting for the 13th, for the obvious reason of a prior engagement on the 14th.
- Duke
All the people I've spoken to are shooting for the 13th, for the obvious reason of a prior engagement on the 14th.
- Duke
Since I don’t want to just be MrEff’s yes-man:
Dear Puke,
The anti-war movement is not a collective. Honest to god, it’s not. They do not choose to participate under a collective banner. A poltical group posts up flyers, web pages, hand outs to get the masses (anyone) to attend a rally based on the issue that they are concerned with (be it anti-war sentiments or Free Peltier). No one claims a right to this group that collects en masse at a rally. These political organizers don’t distance themselves from the wackies because they are open to others ideas, thoughts and opinions. When you create an open rally, you invite anyone with like or opposing interests. Why should an organizer take any credit or blame for the action of anyone in attendance?
Protests, rallies, whatever you want to call them are not “working” as you feel they should in that they don’t stop the war. I think that these protests, rallies, etc. have more than one purpose. Sure, if a whole bunch of people physically say somewhere and it stopped war all over the world that would be swell, but that doesn’t happen. What does happen is that 100 people find a place to stand and voice their opinion. They invite everyone. People listen, people learn. The audience and support for an idea expands over time. Look at the WTO. Do you believe that most people would even care if it weren’t for protesters? Now you have Jane Smith, anchorwoman, running a story about why people destroyed Seattle’s downtown. When there is dissent and upheaval it makes for good 6:05 news.
The grassroots political groups need to pick their battles, and they do. I’m sure they are very sorry about not being able to hold a rally every hour of every day for every human-suffering world event that is horrible and caused by wealthy bastards. If they don’t fight all of them it does not mean that the causes they do choose are somehow less worthy of our attention.
As far as the removal of Saddam, there are other options. Ideally, yes, you create a huge domestic opposition. Realistically, you hire a sharp shooter or four, pin the blame on the guy in the warehouse who ran into a movie theatre and there never was a grassy knoll. Honestly. You don’t send off all the physically able citizens aged 18 to 34 into a pit of death to kill anyone aged 0-125 over there. Innocent people get killed in wars. Innocent children get raised in wars. Innocent children growing up in violence become violent adults. You’re setting up for future wars when you teach societies that this is the only way to solve conflicts.
Just because someone opposes Saddam and opposes war but does not have a brilliant underplayed solution doesn’t mean that they are somehow wrong. I just came up with one very sketchy alternative to the removal of Saddam without war (the whole grassy knoll). Am I all of a sudden right about opposing both war and Saddam?
The status quo on Iraq a year ago = not good. The status quo 5 years ago = not good. The status quo now = not good. What’s different is that with the removal of Saddam there are prospects for the future. People are still dying on a regular basis of unnatural causes, just now there are Americans in the mix and the numbers per day are probably up.
“Most members of the movement argue that they take to the streets in favor of the voiceless people of the countries involved; they seem instead to be arguing against any American military action.”
I don’t think those two are separate issues entirely. If American military action is taken what effect does that have on the voiceless population?
I think there is a difference between violent interventions such as war (that an anti-war movement is likely to dislike) and political interventions. Some interventions are worse than other. Going down the line we have War being the worst for all parties, All Sanctions being horrible for the citizens of the punished country, Trade Sanctions will hurt the businesses (in turn the citizens, in turn the economy, in turn the state) but at a high cost for all parties if the export is important, Opposition Campaigns (in this case unhappening—in many cases where regimes need to be removed), Political intervention with Human Rights trials from the UN and so on and so forth (but we know the limitations of the UN) and finally Humanitarian aid such as citizen empowerment programs. It’s like giving an 11 year old the talk about the birds and the bees. Sure it’s intervention, but it’s good intervention.
There is nothing moral about a country getting violent when other options can be made available for a lot less of the costs of both finances and lives. You rape comparison is false as we can call an authority to prevent it. The world stage has no one at this time (and if we did it would be Revelations, baby).
If you get to the UN make the tools of political upheaval an army of sharp shooters.
Just because some one doesn’t believe war to be the answer and does not have an answer of their own does not mean that they are doing a disservice or are magically wrong. It’s not unlike telling an anti-abortionist that protesting doesn’t work and that they should somehow rise to government with that platform to change that law. Not everyone has the desire to enter politics in a very real way.
The anti-war movement is not a collective. Honest to god, it’s not. They do not choose to participate under a collective banner. A poltical group posts up flyers, web pages, hand outs to get the masses (anyone) to attend a rally based on the issue that they are concerned with (be it anti-war sentiments or Free Peltier). No one claims a right to this group that collects en masse at a rally. These political organizers don’t distance themselves from the wackies because they are open to others ideas, thoughts and opinions. When you create an open rally, you invite anyone with like or opposing interests. Why should an organizer take any credit or blame for the action of anyone in attendance?
Protests, rallies, whatever you want to call them are not “working” as you feel they should in that they don’t stop the war. I think that these protests, rallies, etc. have more than one purpose. Sure, if a whole bunch of people physically say somewhere and it stopped war all over the world that would be swell, but that doesn’t happen. What does happen is that 100 people find a place to stand and voice their opinion. They invite everyone. People listen, people learn. The audience and support for an idea expands over time. Look at the WTO. Do you believe that most people would even care if it weren’t for protesters? Now you have Jane Smith, anchorwoman, running a story about why people destroyed Seattle’s downtown. When there is dissent and upheaval it makes for good 6:05 news.
The grassroots political groups need to pick their battles, and they do. I’m sure they are very sorry about not being able to hold a rally every hour of every day for every human-suffering world event that is horrible and caused by wealthy bastards. If they don’t fight all of them it does not mean that the causes they do choose are somehow less worthy of our attention.
As far as the removal of Saddam, there are other options. Ideally, yes, you create a huge domestic opposition. Realistically, you hire a sharp shooter or four, pin the blame on the guy in the warehouse who ran into a movie theatre and there never was a grassy knoll. Honestly. You don’t send off all the physically able citizens aged 18 to 34 into a pit of death to kill anyone aged 0-125 over there. Innocent people get killed in wars. Innocent children get raised in wars. Innocent children growing up in violence become violent adults. You’re setting up for future wars when you teach societies that this is the only way to solve conflicts.
Just because someone opposes Saddam and opposes war but does not have a brilliant underplayed solution doesn’t mean that they are somehow wrong. I just came up with one very sketchy alternative to the removal of Saddam without war (the whole grassy knoll). Am I all of a sudden right about opposing both war and Saddam?
The status quo on Iraq a year ago = not good. The status quo 5 years ago = not good. The status quo now = not good. What’s different is that with the removal of Saddam there are prospects for the future. People are still dying on a regular basis of unnatural causes, just now there are Americans in the mix and the numbers per day are probably up.
“Most members of the movement argue that they take to the streets in favor of the voiceless people of the countries involved; they seem instead to be arguing against any American military action.”
I don’t think those two are separate issues entirely. If American military action is taken what effect does that have on the voiceless population?
I think there is a difference between violent interventions such as war (that an anti-war movement is likely to dislike) and political interventions. Some interventions are worse than other. Going down the line we have War being the worst for all parties, All Sanctions being horrible for the citizens of the punished country, Trade Sanctions will hurt the businesses (in turn the citizens, in turn the economy, in turn the state) but at a high cost for all parties if the export is important, Opposition Campaigns (in this case unhappening—in many cases where regimes need to be removed), Political intervention with Human Rights trials from the UN and so on and so forth (but we know the limitations of the UN) and finally Humanitarian aid such as citizen empowerment programs. It’s like giving an 11 year old the talk about the birds and the bees. Sure it’s intervention, but it’s good intervention.
There is nothing moral about a country getting violent when other options can be made available for a lot less of the costs of both finances and lives. You rape comparison is false as we can call an authority to prevent it. The world stage has no one at this time (and if we did it would be Revelations, baby).
If you get to the UN make the tools of political upheaval an army of sharp shooters.
Just because some one doesn’t believe war to be the answer and does not have an answer of their own does not mean that they are doing a disservice or are magically wrong. It’s not unlike telling an anti-abortionist that protesting doesn’t work and that they should somehow rise to government with that platform to change that law. Not everyone has the desire to enter politics in a very real way.
Sunday, January 11, 2004
request
folks, if I'm ever doing something REALLY stupid and am trying to justify it somehow that's total bullshit, PLEASE call me on it. it really bugs me when friendship takes precendence over honesty. if you're a real friend, you'll be honest, for my own good. if I'm doing something that's not cool, call me to the mat on it. I'd gladly do the same for you.
we now return you to your regularly scheduled broadcast...
we now return you to your regularly scheduled broadcast...
An Open Letter to Blue.
Your open letter to the anti-war movement reeks of ignorance and does you a disservice. For readers as at home, I do not plan on quoting it, so if you can't follow along, tough cookies. You will find a link here. (You may need to scroll down).
To sum up the gist of your letter:
The anti-war movement is deserving of outrage because:
a) They have not been successful
b) When they have been moderately successful, they have supported regimes that have caused horrible atrocities
c) They haven't protested all of the other wars or lobbied for outside intervention in them.
You argument rests on one obviously contentious assumption: That the anti-war protestors are all the same, and that none of them did in fact protest the wars that you mentioned. A fact I find quite hard to believe. Despite the fact that you seem to think that the anti-war movement is comprised entirely of people that are completely ignorant of world affairs. This seems like an obviously false assumption. The hard left (much of whom comprise the so-called anti-war movement) tend to be fairly knowledgeable about what's going on in the world, quite often more so than your average Joe. Making gross generalizations about a movement so big as the anti-war movement doesn't seem fair.
This being said I have a bone to pick with each of your "arguments."
a) This argument is ridiculous. It makes no sense to criticize a protest movement for not having been able to effect the changes that they are trying to bring about. That's like criticizing someone trying to escape imprisonment for not having been able too. The goal that they have set themselves is quite a difficult one to obtain, what with deeply entrenched conservative and military powers.
b) Here, you are effectively saying something akin to Bush and "If you are not against us, you're supporting terrorism." Simply because someone does not support interventionist policies does not mean that they support the regimes that intervention has been considered for. The anti-war movement doesn't think that war is the right way to bring about the needed change. By and large the anti-war movement are probably more eager to bring about some change in these countries for the better, tan people who support military intervention as they quite often have a better idea of what's going on in countries like that (think Amnesty International and its work to this regard). They just don't think that violence is the right way to go about it. How horrible of them!
c) You give an in depth list of wars that you say that haven't been properly protested by the anti-war movement. First of all, I'm not sure that you have you facts right. I have no evidence that the anti-war movement has not been active in any protest of these wars. Secondly, you argue that they should have protested for intervention in these wars when this goes against exactly what they believe in: they actively fight against interventionist thinking. Thirdly, even if it were the case that they didn't protest these (a few of which occurred well before a lot them were even born) it seems really strange of you to suggest that protesting is useless, but also that they should have been protesting. Not to mention the fact that it really does make more sense to protest your own government's actions as you have a greater chance of effecting change. Finally, you should direct more of your outrage against yourself for having been just as much an accomplice in tacit support for all of these wars too.
To sum up the gist of your letter:
The anti-war movement is deserving of outrage because:
a) They have not been successful
b) When they have been moderately successful, they have supported regimes that have caused horrible atrocities
c) They haven't protested all of the other wars or lobbied for outside intervention in them.
You argument rests on one obviously contentious assumption: That the anti-war protestors are all the same, and that none of them did in fact protest the wars that you mentioned. A fact I find quite hard to believe. Despite the fact that you seem to think that the anti-war movement is comprised entirely of people that are completely ignorant of world affairs. This seems like an obviously false assumption. The hard left (much of whom comprise the so-called anti-war movement) tend to be fairly knowledgeable about what's going on in the world, quite often more so than your average Joe. Making gross generalizations about a movement so big as the anti-war movement doesn't seem fair.
This being said I have a bone to pick with each of your "arguments."
a) This argument is ridiculous. It makes no sense to criticize a protest movement for not having been able to effect the changes that they are trying to bring about. That's like criticizing someone trying to escape imprisonment for not having been able too. The goal that they have set themselves is quite a difficult one to obtain, what with deeply entrenched conservative and military powers.
b) Here, you are effectively saying something akin to Bush and "If you are not against us, you're supporting terrorism." Simply because someone does not support interventionist policies does not mean that they support the regimes that intervention has been considered for. The anti-war movement doesn't think that war is the right way to bring about the needed change. By and large the anti-war movement are probably more eager to bring about some change in these countries for the better, tan people who support military intervention as they quite often have a better idea of what's going on in countries like that (think Amnesty International and its work to this regard). They just don't think that violence is the right way to go about it. How horrible of them!
c) You give an in depth list of wars that you say that haven't been properly protested by the anti-war movement. First of all, I'm not sure that you have you facts right. I have no evidence that the anti-war movement has not been active in any protest of these wars. Secondly, you argue that they should have protested for intervention in these wars when this goes against exactly what they believe in: they actively fight against interventionist thinking. Thirdly, even if it were the case that they didn't protest these (a few of which occurred well before a lot them were even born) it seems really strange of you to suggest that protesting is useless, but also that they should have been protesting. Not to mention the fact that it really does make more sense to protest your own government's actions as you have a greater chance of effecting change. Finally, you should direct more of your outrage against yourself for having been just as much an accomplice in tacit support for all of these wars too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)