Warning: This Is A Cup

Morley seldom crosses into the realm of pure artist but when he does he probably could make a living from it, in one of those countries like France.
The said art piece was a polystyerine coffee cup from our Dining hall with warning labels placed all over it: 'Warning this is a cup' and 'Achtung: Die ist Cup' or something.
Who knows what happened to that cup but it made a potent comment about human nature and self interest.
It was during O-week and somehow through the democratic process we had elected a President and Activities Officer that where more interested in being President and Activities Officer than doing a good job of President and Activities Officer duties.
As such when threats were levelled at said roles, they caved unashamedly, almost as if it was the rational thing to do.
It was almost as if they held their positions for priveledge and not on account of being popularly elected to represent the students of IH.
Like their foremost responsibility was to the poor and shortsighted, unprofessional and irrational business objectives of the administrative body and not to the students who financed both the student club and the college.
And as such when faced with threats to make O-week less enjoyable or face 'mysterious consequences' that never were articulated or real, they caved, they accepted the first offer and started scaling back the enjoyment of o-week because they were pussies.
All them paragraphs were summed up beautifully by one cup.
The sort of cup I will one day purchase at auction for $10,000 when Morley is rich enough to live his dream of shooting his televisions with a magnum and replacing them rather than turning them off.
Scared of what? nothing.
It was a cup and we were duly warned...that it was a cup. What else to do, it wasn't like it was a 'sharp cup' or 'cup will become hot when heated' or 'do not squeeze too hard' the warning was simply that it was a cup.
We would possibly as a society benifit more from such warning signs.
Obvious examples would be 'caution: terrorism' terrorism what? what about it? what do you want me to do? be afraid of it.
Or maybe Howard's next campaign can be: 'Warning: Economics'
In the immortal words of some guy Les Claypool quoted - 'Think it's not illegal yet'
there are a whole load of reasons as to why probability doesn't match fear, eg more people are afraid of getting eaten by a shark, than getting killed in a car crash.
People will take more precautions against being mugged at night than preventing a housefire.
A kid dying on any day is tragic, but on Christmass day it's extra tragic.
A kid is safer statistically in a house with a gun than a house with a pool.
A gun is more likely to shoot a family member than an assailant.
Yet fear often runs counter to reality.

If everything was a business and human life had a $ value. Tragically the world would probably be a lot safer.
Example: Flying a plane into the twin towers kills a lot of people unexpectadly.
Work Place Health and Safety issues kill a lot more people even more unexpectedly.

But the first one is more outragous which is why it became a trillion dollar (failed) solution to a billion dollar problem.
Similarly, the sales of gas masks skyrocketed following the twin tower attack, now I believe that not a single person who bought a gas mask believed any organisation short of the US government capable of launching a gas attack on every street corner of every city of every state in the US. People opted though to try and solve the problem of their remote probability of being attacked in this specific way without any real evidence that this kind of attack was probable in the first place.
Hence - 'Warning: Terrorism' is all you really need to say. Then you simply go and invade countries and buy gasmasks, and advertise toll free numbers to report suspicious 'anythings' or 'pieces of information' all in the name of taking the necessary precautions against 'terrorism'
which is likely to be a far too political analogy. I simply want to highlight the disparity between how willingly people subscribe to fear for some things, and not for others:
eg. 'Warning: Terrorism'
vs. 'Warning: Diabetes'
Two unspecific warning labels, but I'm not sure anywhere near the number of people are afraid of diabetes than are afraid of Arabs. (Arabs = Terrorism)
And it could be that similar to cars, the threat of diabetes may only be averted by sacrificing parts of our lifestyle we have grown accustomed to.
Eg. Fast food and sugar in the case of Diabetes (and driving walking distances etc)
and driving over the speed limit, whilst drunk & driving in general for car crashes.
But some of the shit involved in 'preventing' terrorism require sacrifice to lifestyle as well - eg. civil liberties, national dignity, having to actually think hard about a career in the armed forces etc.

The real thing the cup said to me, is, if you are going to be afraid, have a good reason. Don't just be afraid because it's generally thought to be a good idea.
Flashman is a primo example of someone who get's afraid for good reason, he runs away when his life is in danger.
People who run away, sign things over, or pay money when nothing is in danger we call, dumbasses.

The other thing for me is the old definition of insanity - more of a strategic overview overall - 'doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result' this sentiment was also espoused by the sad social climber of a high school principal I had when he used to say the no less valid 'you'll always get what you've always got, if you always do what you've always done'
Which makes assumptions - the best case scenario is 'you'll always get what you've always got' it needs to be qualified with 'or less'
Bill Russell had a take on it too in terms of basketball which was 'if you are doing something right, don't stop it for your oponent, let them stop you' infact if you want a good read, read Bill Russell's nba finals/playoffs blog.
If there is no evidence to suggest a current strategy will stop being successful, this is the best reason to continue. Contingencies sure, and obviously the evidence in a bball match that a strategy isn't working because you stop getting stops on defense and scoring on offense.
Anyway, that is all I really have to say, today.