Suits

My third post ever was about professional attire and I think it is high time I revisited it.
Thailand when you think about it, is a ridiculous place to buy a suit, moreover wear them, but it is one of the biggest things to do. I can tell this because of oversupply, you can't walk down a street in a touristy area of Bangkok without being accosted for walking, and offered a took-took ride to a bunch of homogenous gaudy buddhist temples and as a bonus a trip to the export market to buy jewellery if you are a girl and to get a suit tailored if you are a guy.
I have a few thai made suits over the years from my parents travels as part of their way to tell me they love me.
Yet as I had been suckered into taking a completely superfluous took-took ride (although good judgement comes from experience and experience comes from bad judgement) and was sitting with an Indian guy doing the worst sell job on me in my entire history (more on that in another post) I was looking at the catalogue and thought, suits are really stupid.
I love suits, as a traditional costume, but hate wearing them unless they are part of an event, like a party or something or an actual costume.
But when I sat in a Thai Tailors I realised that suits are banal, peices of shite. Just another manifestation of the consumerism that has born $50,000 watches and other beyond practical consideration inventions.
Although suits are more the other end of the spectrum, like when Mercedes had to bite the bullet and release a line of 'affordable' mercedes, and thus destroyed the value of the mercedes brand - its exclusivity.
In the desire for one to be associated with the uppercrust, a desire I just don't understand, I mean seriously, why the fuck does anyone want to pass themselves off as anything, do you really feel that bad? anyway as part of the so called pursuit, backpackers of all backgrounds can walk in and get themselves a nice suit they don't need in Thailand and go back to wherever they came from and go to football functions, Year 12 Valedictory dinners and Cousins weddings and absolutely look the part. The part of a douche that goes up the arse to be more specific.
One place that definitely isn't the Milan Spring Fashion festival is the Brownlow Red Carpet Special, but with the nutbag Demitrious insisting on 'black tie' literal interpretation of the invitation, the Brownlow's still have a world of class that Rugby presentation nights don't have. And that's because Rugby breads ugly, yet they still insist on putting thick necked brick shithouses in suits.
Its the Jordan phenomena of dressing sporting professionals for 'business' but has lost sight of the game. It is a phenomena that could have done so much good by working backwards, as in people wearing less suits to work.
Praise goes to AI for wearing his homeboy gear to games, and Steve Nash for wearing the appropriate Jeans and T-shirt.
It all reminds me of the most astute two messages on the subject of suits and professional attire I ever read, and they come from Dogberts: Top Secret Management Guide.
Here they are:
1. 'They may never respect you, but at least they can respect your clothes'
2. Shopping Tip - Next time you are buying a computer, ask the sales clerk what clothing the companies employees wear, and if you don't like the answer don't buy the product.
Yes good clothing can command respect, by respectable people. And there are books like 'dressing the man' that can fill one with wonder at the universe of attire for men. But the point is that the best thing about most suits, the feature that gos the farthest is who's wearing it.
Yes, image making, networking and all that other shit is a reality when it comes to job advancement, recruitment etc. But they are not good realities. Like Slavery was a reality if you were African American in the good old days, what do you do? Buy a book and get educated and go to seminars on how to 'play the slave game' or do you try and campaign for change in the world?
Suits are bullshit and I maintain even after two years of blogging, a distraction from professionalism. In my eyes, if the person wearing the suit can't pull it off, and I mean even a well tailored, well coordinated suit is difficult for a football player to pull off because I know they are paid to play football, then the suit enhances the joke, not respect.
I love the 3 piece suits of the old westerns, but the single breasted uniforms of the new generation are starting to get up my nose. I suspect some kind of armeggeddon may be approaching whereby the suit is no longer considered stylish at all, I did see homeless people in Japan dressed somewhat immaculatley by Australian Werribee standards. If homeless people are wearing trousers with nice leather belts and english toed leather shoes, what giddying heights must the rich ascend to next.
You guessed it, the new rich are dressing down, and have been doing so for ten years.
But if you think you can walk into a job interview of mine with a firm handshake and a suit and tie and I won't read your resume, ask you questions to determine whether you are actually capable of adding value and also capable of thinking and learning. You've got another thing coming.
Of course first I need a company...

Shak Shock and Kobe

I think its about time I revisited that all important topic of sports. Every so often overseas I see something shocking on a website, Heath Ledgers death I must say was an unwelcome reminder of my own mortality, and for the record if I should die, please don't say I died living my dream. Travel has never been my dream, I have always dreamed of being a plantation owner wearing white suits everywhere and talking in a Foghorn-Leghorn voice.
That said, yesterday when logging on to NBA.com to check out how Kobe and Pau Gasol were faring and whether the greatest player since Jordan would make his ascension I noticed in the interminably slow load time, one of the first images to load was an ad 'Buy Shaq's Jersey' and I thought, there must be some mistake that's pheonix sun's colours.
And then I realised another big trade had gone down. But this one made no sense. No sense at all I tell you. Pheonix have a world class center in Amare Stoudemire, and when I learnt what they had used to buy Shaq (Shawn Marion) I was baffled even more. Pheonix were the run and gun team of the NBA. Why trade a player as versatile as Scottie Pippen for the big deisel? 6 years ago you would just about have traded your entire roster for Shaq, and Heat's perspective is a little easier to understand as Dwayne Wade is the clear future and the ageing list pretty much removed any chance of them returning for another Championship without a shake up.
But Pheonix had one of the leagues best line ups and Shaq just seems a misfit.
Except when you look at the bigger picture.
You have the Lakers finally running and challenging Pheonix for leadership of the west, suddenly they get Pau Gasol in a major trade and they look that much more menacing than before. I don't expect anyone to remember or care, but I am right behind Kobe this season to get MVP which I think he has been overlooked for in the past not because I disagree that a star on a losing team is no as valuable as a star on a winning team (who may have to share the spotlight more) but that as the star on a losing team I would gauruntee that no other player would probably ever gauruntee you make the playoffs, and be able to singlehandedly push pheonix suns out to seven games.
So Pheonix reacted, at the start of the season it looked like the favorites to hold up the trophy at the end of the year was pheonix, but with the emergence of the Celtic big three that suddenly took a dampening as the Celtics clicked early. Then Kobe with Fisher and Bynum started to take off, and then the Gasol trade and blam, suddenly we sit amongst the year that may forever be known as 'The ring chaser year' Boston needed a win because they have had a post bird slump that was starting to look like a curse. Pheonix needed to win because they have been contenders for such a long time that its starting to get boring, especially considering the 80 game season. To have it all collapse year after year in the playoffs would leave me with a bitter taste in the mouth knowing the window is slowly closing.
And then the Lakers need to win because Kobe says so, if not he was going to tear apart the San Andreas fault line himself and just ship LA to the eastern conference.
At any rate, we live in interesting times. And boy am I sick of Lebron, as the least interesting person in the League.
Lebron is the US's Yao Ming, as in celebrated as some kind of God having not achieved anything yet. That is anything beyond being drafted at number 1 and I admit an Eastern Conference Champions Trophy. But no MVP, no finals MVP, no slam dunk win, no nothing just the highest wage and higher expectations.
He is a great player, but if there is one player not chasing a ring it is Lebron, when he gets to his 12th season and demands a trade, I will shed no tears for Lebron. The man that thinks he is good enough to bench the other 4 players and just charge on to the championship by himself.
Increasingly I am for Jordan's philosophy of 'earned' over 'entitlement' infact entitlement only really relates to the successful Hindu Caste system. But Lebron can give up some money and share the spotlight a bit, or he can keep playing to sell his ugly arse shoes (that will probably never outsell a pair of Jordans) and talk about becoming the richest man in the world. Not going to happen when you are buying Cannondale and not Wal-mart.
For me, Lebron represents something though that drives me crazy everywhere: speculation. Nike was not nothing, but lets say only significant before Jordan came along, and certainly not a player in basketball. Jordan was pick number 3 after being overlooked for big men, and then having an explosive run, put on some clown shoes that in a combination of early marketing and geniune genius made Air Jordans possibly the most significant shoe in history.
And season after season they led the way and are still one of the worlds biggest selling shoes. And in the meantime Jordan (with help from scottie Pippen and later dennis rodman) racked up 6 championships, 5 MVPs, and the second highest scoring record in history as well as the best single season in history.
And then speculation kicked in, you land on the next michael jordan, your brand too may be propelled to the top. And if there was ever a clearcut favorite to be the next Michael Jordan, it was Lebron James. Kobe snuck into the league, by being drafted straight out of highschool and being taken at 13th pick, he jumped the gun and bought himself space to develop. But Lebron nike locked down, showered in money and now desperately need him to pay dividends, and every year he gets older, and from nike's perspective remember he doesn't need to hoist one championship trophy but 7 Lebron is looking like he will crash and burn. There's no shame in that, Charles Barkley, Stockton, Malone, Pistol Pete some of the best players of all time never got to the championships, and its understandable, while it is inevitable there will be a champion every year there is just too much opportunity for things to go astray.
There is shame though in tattoing your marketing slogans all over your body, across Lebron's back is 'Chosen One' the moniker given to him if you believe them by Slam Magazine, and this notion of devine ascendancy is making 'chosen' as true for Lebron as histories greatest winners the jews.
Down one leg is written 'witness' to coincide with Nike's 2008 campaign 'the world will witness' but somehow I doubt it. Straight up at the Olympics Lebron will have to play alongside the best player in the League Kobe, and moreover he will be playing on the worlds best team, so unless Lebron kills all his teammates, or changes his nationality to bolivian and beats the US I sincerely doubt the world will witness anything particularly spectacular. The next slogan may be 'pray for me' and if he gets that tattoo I think Lebron can be crowned 'least cool' player in the NBA ever.
But enough of that tyrade against Lebron, I would be called a hater, but in the end, Lebron is crazy good at basketball, and like Jordan has a physique that was made to play, if only he could ditch all the marketing bullshit and play, he might even become cooler than Bogut.
That said, Lebron and Yao are probably not contenders. The three way collision of Celtics, Pheonix and Lakers is what is interesting now, and they aren't the only contenders, but their club management is the hungriest, you can't write off Mavericks, Detroit, Orlando or the Hornets.
At anyrate it is good to be in a country were I can watch Basketball on TV, if only I was in a country that I could play basketball on the street.

Janice I'm getting Married

There comes a time in every man's life where it seems a good idea to romantically stalk a celebrity, and possibly attempt to assasinate Ronald Reagan to try and impress them.
I have to say that Brenton introduced me to my perfect fixation and fortunately I am very far away and have no real motivation to do track her down but seriously I fell in love the moment I heard these vocals:

The bar has been set higher. Maybe people will stop giving me shit for my former flames Aretha Franklin and Dolly Parton.

Caveat Emptor

Last night as I was reading my emails, I could overhear a tourist (guess if you can guess where from) having an arguement about the phone service dropping out and how he wasn't going to pay on principle the 47 seconds worth that he couldn't hear the person he was calling.
The nice lady behind the counter tried to explain that nevertheless the charge had been incurred and they had topass it onto him.
Maybe he was right, I don't know, but I do know he is a douchebag. Arguing on principle over an amount you just earned in that couple of seconds it takes to argue does two things - makes you miserable, makes the person you are arguing with miserable.
Harvard asked me on messenger the other day 'how the white supremacy tour of Asia was going' in part I know he was having a go at me, but another part is sad that the b grade celebrity status granted all white people in asia, makes supremacy an easy idea to embrace. But on the other hand let me make amends for not giving whitey's enough of the pointy end of the stick.
Australians must look ridiculous to foreigners. They act all important even though Australia is one of the least significant countries in the world.
But on a day tour this week I was relieved to see myself joined by three other stray Australians only because I was dreading the worse alternative of sweaty elderly scottish couples and such. At first I enjoyed the biting humour and stuff, but then I got over my first exposure to home in 4 months real quick. Our tour guide turned up too early for our elephant ride, rather than bore us by sitting and waiting she tried to kill time by taking us to another walk. Something she explained pretty clearly I thought.
but then the demands started, and better yet on all our behalves. "I say we demand she take us to the elephants."
"I say we don't get out of the van until she shows us the elephants"
And so on ad nauseum.
And I got pissed off, they went off the rails as to how they had wasted the whole morning and they should demand a refund or discount. None over the top, but nevertheless wholly unnecessary when the tour guide followed the plan and killed time with a short trip and then put them on elephants.
They were the nicest people except for the heroic retail encounters they described.
And this I see everywhere I go. They are getting a bill and checking it twice.
In countries were the difference between a good deal and ripped off is worth approximately 20c. Fuck it and enjoy your wealth in context motherfuckers. I wouldn't bend over to pick up 20c.
And so fourth. The standard justification for letting something you normally don't care about actually upset you is 'its the principle'. Yes south east asia is annoying when prices aren't displayed, but get over it, my major beef with haggling is that it takes time I'd rather spend doing anything but haggling. Just stick a price on the goods and let me buy it.
Listening to manager-tools podcast I unfortunately forget which one, I heard something that was music to my ears. The guy described one of the best and most effective store sales reps he had ever come across. He wanted an iphone i think and walked into the apple store, and here is where the truly amazing customer service took place I will recount it to the best of my ability: (G equals guy [mark horstman] and S equals store clerk)

S: Hey.
G: Hey.
S: You want a phone?
G: Yeah.
S: The big one?
G: Yes
S: Okay.

What is so great may have escaped you, but it is infact, the lack of syrupy customer pampering that facilitates an easy sale. This is certainly how I like to shop, I hate being approached by someone as soon as I walk into a store. If there is one thing that will make me reconsider walking into a store it is if I look in and anticipate being bothered. For me and I assume a lot of people like me, we barely walk into a store if we haven't already made up our mind what to buy. When browsing, this is a process that involves, looking and reading. I find it invaluable to know my pants size, because this means I never have to try anything on.
For me, shopping is all give and take, and I can't stand shops giving heaps of shit that I don't need. It is all born of the seemingly infallible but hugely flawed trend of 'delighting customers' and it has born the age of caveat vendor, of course, beating customer expectations causes short term delight and even higher expectations, and the vicious level of competition has bread something truly awful out of white people.
It reminds me of retail marketing where I first discovered the horror of this phenomena, when someone talked about how Just Jeans better clean up their act for refusing to honour a clearance sale on stock in a different store and different size.
And I looked around and most people were nodding in agreement. But a clearance sale is to clear the stock that isn't selling and help cashflow, there's no reason I can concieve of on earth that the store should have to honour such an elaborately bullshit request as to pull stock out of a different store that doesn't have the sale and sell it at a discount price.
people have it way too fucking good.
An old colleague of mine demonstrated the principle of why I am for a return to caveat emptor. We both worked in customer service, and you cop a lot of shit. People who want roadside assistence for their $400 lawnmower is a good example of consumer expectations going crazy.
And my colleague would bitch and moan about how crazy and stupid customers could be (when they were 'bad' ones) and then pick up the phone and call her drycleaners and make the most explosively aggressive, abusive and devoid of all reason calls you ever heard.
'NO! YOU LISTEN TO ME, you will pick up the dress, adjust the straps and give me a full refund.'
It's one of those moments where someone screws up an easy connect the dots puzzle. People's expectations of service it seems in the white western world is so far from reality or reason, literraly most people acting like fucking royalty, that in turn customer service has dropped, because the same people in customer service, still think they are royalty when they are taking it, not dishing it.
so yeah, instead of demanding refunds for your own stupid purchases, try making up your mind before you walk in the store, maybe some internet research, then you don't have to have these upsetting confrontations.
Except maybe not just consumer expectations have been altered, but also what could be called 'common sense'. Yes consumers should be protected, but not insured, so much so that if you do get a bad bit of some product you don't profit for it.
Businesses don't want to ceade any competitive advantage, so when one company refunds your lunch because the soup was cold and gives you free drinks, all companies must adopt the same policy else they never win your business back.
But at some point this becomes the new norm, and anything less than delightful service recovery is unsatisfactory. Hence nobody will repair any minor defect in a product anymore, they are so affronted they want a whole new one.
And there is a competitive advantage in treating customers fairly, not with priveledge. It makes it more pleasent to work in customer service, abuse is not the worst part, having to suck up to abusive people is the worst part.
Its like how if you ever have an employee that tries to manuevre for more money you are better off just getting rid of, so too with a customer that tries to manuevre for excessive recompens or greater discounts. Just scrap them and start again.
Not because you should accept low quality in your own performance, but the risk of losing one customer may not always outway the risk of losing a good staff member. Furthermore it is about managing expectations, if you have excessive expectations you always have to strive more and sacrifice profits (and profits are what really should be driving growth and innovation and subsequently superior service) furthermore the greatest benifit of all is that developed countries will produce less arseholes.
I came to South East Asia, and China to experience the reality of poverty, but a lot of other Australians, AMericans and Europeans are in South East Asia under the impression that they are seemingly in some kind of western hotel. That commercial law may be somehow different and that people need the money far more than westerners need our 'principles' In a way its true that tourism is helping, the more dollars that can be milked out of fat white people and put to sustainable development and independance the better. But that said being in an actual fullblown tourist destination, I kind of respect Japan more, because they don't need our fucken money, and don't need to take shit from westerners. I hope SE asia and China can get there, except with the environment in tact and no chronic depression, shut ins and masochism.

Don't Go to Cambodia

Just donate money to happy school! I know after one day it is always a disaster to say things like this, but I love Cambodia. Cambodia now is what Thailand would be if it didn't have beaches - an interesting place.
Don't get me wrong, thailand has many points going for it, but Cambodia is just nice. Its really nice, I'm glad Pol Pot is dead because this place is really endearing.
My motorbike driver is really nice, sightseeing is nice, there is no intimidating government propaganda or officials, and I am seeing the tourist mecca that is Ang Kor Wat. and I have to say, it is really great. Possibly the greatest thing I have seen, for a tourist destination, it is surprisingly quiet. It is surounded by forests and albeit there are still annoying hawkers unlike China they stick to the unimportant areas, like the end points, across the bridge and the carparks unlike perching themselves at the peak point of the great wall of china and everywhere else along the wall.
So there, I finally feel like I am on holiday. Cambodia

Blogs I read

There is a section of links to the left titled 'blogs of people I know' this is my being part of a community, but I thought the other day to share some blogs I actually read.
At the moment my number one favorite is 'bikesnobnyc' I love the entertaining synicism and the best part is it updates near daily, it is focused which I think is why it attracts so many, and there is an art that is underapreciated in being really good at shitting on trends and stupidity. I find this blog high quality and also focused on the world of bike riding. So I check in and read it whenever I can, I also have pretty much read just about all of its backlog.

then there's Harvard's blog, a blog of someone I personally know. It also updates fairly regularly, although drops out sometimes. Since Harvard started working it has taken on more of a design/advertising focus. but that said a window into anyones world is actually something you should look through while touching yourself.
I may come to regret those words in the future but I simply say, any person willing to share insight into themselves to you, is a precious thing so yeah I check out Harvards blog and I have to admit, while I may not find him as funny as I find myself he does reek of style. And I have a soft-spot for malaysians, because I kind of think they are retarded.

I check in Morley's sight, but less so since the twilight days of his Canada trip, when he more or less stopped updating and I saw the same picture of snow on a garage roof for 6 or 7 visits.
Also I never got around to subscribing to his podcasts so missed the majority of his actual material. But that said, unlike Harvard, morley is one of those guys that I find funnier than myself. I know there is a place, a time and a place for both of us in this world, but you have to see his Angry man routine and also his Gary Becker - beaver sketch.

Then 7' of pure arsehole is of course a reference to the tall, australian 'Mr.John'
I have a rule for Mr.John and that is every second time I notice his link on my website (not often) he will have a new post on his blog. His posts are high quality, and I should point out that all of us, excluding bike snob, where at one point contributors to the fine publication that is the globe. John writes interesting shit, but roughly 1.8 times a year. So I keep the home light burning. Also he got sidetracked by ultimate frisbess which unlike bikes, I don't really understand and remember loosing a trivia night question related to the sport.

Aside from that there is Gilbert Arena's blog.
I read this dependant on the attention it gets on the NBA main site, which drops when Gil is injured like now. NBA has good blogs and basketball can teach you much much more than just basketball. Gil besides is fucking insane. Just read his wikipedia section 'Gilbertology' documenting his shinanigans. This makes his blog highly entertaining, if not the best insight into the goings on on NBA.

That's what I try to read, and did so even before I had all the time of travelling life up my sleeve. So when I write know also that I read. Blogs are good.

Oh yeah I should plug Bryce's industry specific blog - you have changed. with the disclaimer that I wouldn't say I read this blog by virtue of it updating far more often than I read it. Unfortunatley it serves a purpose and is just too damn professional for me. I like Bryce more when he is unprofessional, but it does have from time to time stimulating articles that are abstract enough for me to sink my teeth into.

Democracy hates Democracy

I am getting to a point where I need to stop preaching from on high in my prechingest preachy voice, and simply just recommend books of people who are much more conscice and instructive than I.
But I also like to share here and write to share my thoughts largely with myself. It helps me think and comprehend.
I finally, finally less than a month ago now, started reading Chomsky.
I will later in my travels be stopping at MIT and hope to catch a glimpse of the worlds most quoted activist (largely for his linguistics work) but as one can guess, my mind has been being blown with a regularity the past couple of years, that makes my formal education seem worthless.
I like shit that when reasoned out makes sense.
Georgism, came to me as the most stupid sounding thing in the world. But it was like a black hole for my mind, that nobody else in my circle of friends seemed to or still seems to comprehend the significance of, even in development. But it completely rearranged my view of the world, with its asking of the right question 'what causes poverty?'
Then there was Semler, who in his book 'Maverick' [english] or 'Turning the Tables' [portugeuse original] illustrated all things I had only begun to suspect about work and put them together in a beautiful illustration of the principle of liberty.
Then Dawkins came about with his consciousness raising mission, that Athiests are incredibly hard done by when you go to seek the moral answers on a panel by sitting a Rabbi, Cleric or Priest in the chair and don't put in a Moral Philosopher, whose profession and whole life is morality. And there's more than that.
Then there is Abe Lincoln, who taught me about capturing public sentiment, that freedom is the heritage of the world and his skillful repositioning on the American foundation.
Lincoln isn't really someone whose methods become a neat reason circuit, something that works despite your best efforts to break it, but Chomsky is certainly on the above list by pointing out the fundamental failure of democracy.
Democracy hates Democracy.
The book was 'Hedgemony or Survival' and it is detailed, and that is why I say go out and pick it up, if you care what happens to you in life. But I will simply cover the arguement without too much background.
But here's the background. Iraq, the Hussein tyranny was propped up by the US government as the second major US power hold in the middle east along with Isreal, until in the late 80's early 90's Saddam disobeyed his masters and invaded Kuwait. Then the tables turned. 15 years later, Bush Jr. had a 'vision' and brought freedom to the world, yet as Chomsky points out the Bush Administration had done everything it could to disrupt and undermine Iraq's first democratic voting process since the occupation.
Then there's South America, where from the reagan years, CIA backed operations deposed popularly elected governments and propped up dictators with the sole exception of Cuba and recently Hugo Chavez. Cuba is bad because as Michael Moore stated, 'a dictator we don't like got rid of a dictator we did like'
The sellout dictators.
Cuba and Iraq are more instructive though because of the economic sanctions. The US sanctions against Cuba could have crippled it and caused a catastrophic humanitarian crisis if it wasn't for Cuba's world class health care.
In Iraq, US and UK sanctions kept the country poor and its people dependant on Saddam. I don't have the book to quote anymore but there was an analyst that said 'no invasion of Iraq was necessary to overthrow Saddam, all that was necessary was for the US and UK to lift the trade sanctions that prevented a middle class from emerging to challange Saddam.' certainly something that appears to be happening in China.

So what's so mind blowing, well for one thing it reminds me that I thought America was an evil tyrant when Clinton was in charge promoting so much injustice and hypocrisy in the world, a lot of it inspired by the American citizens that make up Rage Against the Machine.
Secondly it had never occured to me before that democracy hates democracy. It always just made sense to me that US or UK or Aus in their foreign policies would always push for clones of the democratic system anywhere it could force its hand. A maker making them in their image I suppose you would call it.
But that is not the case and that's where Chomsky get's on the mind-blowing-reason award.
You see my previous post was on 'No God, No Country' and I've also been talking recently about Universalism and Individualism.
Scope is an important concept for all of these, and it all has to do with how and who you identify with.
Democracy is derived from the greek word demos the people and means loosely 'of the people' it is representative. Expansions on democracy in purpose is 'of the people, by the people, for the people' and so forth.
Democracy is representative, it represents the interests of the body of people that participate in elections.
That is, retention of power is based on an ability to represent and fulfill the interests of those in your electorate. (aha)
So now let's take it to the thought exercise.
You have two countries. My economics lecturers would love this.
One produces phones, the other produces oil.
Illustration one: The one that produces phones is a democracy, the one that produces oil is not.
The democratic leadership to retain power must represent the people in its electorate, the other government retains power by oppressing its people and its interests. Therefore the first government needs oil to drive its economy, at the lowest cost so it can maximise profits thereby improving the standard of living for its people.
The country with oil might have millions of people, but their welfare means nothing, the government of oil only has to look after the interests of the government therefore it only needs to ask a price that will fulfill the needs of government not the people. (aha)
Illustration two: Both countries are democracies now, therefore the welfare of both populations are important to the retention of power of both governments, for the country with phones, this means trying to buy oil at the lowest price and sell phones at the highest price. For the country with oil, the opposite is true, they want more phones for less oil. The two opposing views are both crucial to retention of power, so it looks like they will have to negotiate. (aha)

You see, maybe lastly a metaphore. You are a sprinter, tomorrow you must run to compete for a prize in an invitational sponsored athletic event. The prize is $10,000 a true sportsman of course seeks competition, strong competition is the only meaningful reward, but if you have the $10k in mind you would be hoping and praying to go up against a fat, smoking, beer drinking slob that doesn't run to the toilet.
I would have liked to put the Youtube clip of john Belushi's 'Little Chocolate Donuts - Breakfast of Champions' to give you a mental picture but it seems to have been removed.

So that's it, a democracy has an incentive to do whatever it takes to please those with a vote, and anyone who doesn't vote, doesn't matter. And to go up against another democracy means the negotiations are that much harder, it is cheaper to sell your own luxury goods to a small party that oppresses its people into submission, than a competent government, that manages its economy well and gets the most bang for its buck for its people.
And it is a unconscious mechanism of a fundamental design flaw of democracy - scope. Simply that retention of power is limited to a small group of individuals. With globalization and climate change making the decisions of governments more and more global ramifications (that is Australia's energy policy for example could contribute significantly to killing every last person on the planet) then democracy has to step up a notch.
Or rather increase its scope to everyone effected. I mean imagine if the government of Austrlia only had to win my vote? what would that mean for you? either very little or a hell of a lot.
So just take that thought and imagine it about 9 billion people bigger.

No God, No Country

When I was young, my family stayed in a Caravan park, the owner patrolled the park on a little bicycle, we got up his nose by using the pool on 'seniors day' or some other stupidity and then he wouldn't leave us alone. He would pull up my father in the car and say 'do you know the park speed limit?' and my dad would say 'no' and he would say '5 km p/h do you know what you were doing?' and my dad would say 'no' and he would say '6 km p/h' admittedly that was 20% above the speed limit. But could be put down to the sensitivity of accelerator pedals. Yes my dad could have used cruise control, he was careeless, reckless, irresponsible.
But more acurately the caravan park owner was a dick. An Australian dick. I am also Australian. And in Australia, you can say this, Australians are Australian.
Mark Twain to get to the point though, said this:

The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also. - Mark Twain

I've been quoting Mark Twain a lot lately, but he is a gold mine for insight and witicisms. My atheism I hope is well known, and I don't get much pushback on it and haven't for a number of years, except when I showed up at meetings of COMMON. Which if you kept the above quote in mind, multi-faith meetings would have to be the biggest evidence of human stupidity in the world.
But then there is also this insight also from Mark Twain.

The rule is perfect; in all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane.

A form of Catch-22 that allows anyone of faith in anything to maintain there own faith in the presence of contrary evidence.
But whilst religion cops a fair beating, there is a form of religion that is arguably more dangerous, just like Marijuana has damaged more of my friends lives than heroine despite it honeslty being benign in comparison.
Let me go back a bit, the year before last there was a stink kicked up in the leadup to Australia day, because the organisors had banned the Australian flag at 'The Big Day Out' stating that previously with the racial violence in Sydney the flag had been used by gangs to pressure people to swear allegence to it on the threat of a beating.
I can understand why the organisors had thought it prudent, and to me it seemed a sensible precaution. What surprised me was the outrage it caused. I was honestly surprised anyone would care. But it seemed that sydney over the weekend had a large population of people who don't own shirts or pants and had absolutely nothing else to wear but the Australian flag.
The NSW premier was on Sunrise and Today talking about investigating legal action they could possibly take. Then more ecoverage on the day triumphantly showed all those fine examples of humanity that aree patriotic australians turning up defiantly wearing their Australian flags and harping on about how 'Australia is the greatest country in the world'.
This display would surely make an American scoff with contempt at the ignorant foreigners who know so little. Don't they know 'The U.S. is the greatest country in the world.' its a plain fact. And it is an insidious lie spread as propaganda of the infidels, a clear attack at the true greatest country on earth: Saudi Arabia.
After all Saudi Arabia is host to the two most important cities in Islam, the unquestionable homeland of the true prophet of Allah - Mohommed.
Of course Islam is historically unverafiable, and one can clearly see that the 'land of the gods is Japan' the country more unique than any other, one cannot become 'Japanese' on has to be Japanese all ones life.
Similar to the orthodox Jewish belief that a Jewish person must come from a Jewish womb, and Isreal is clearly the greatest country because it houses god's chosen people.
But since wheen did religion have anything to do with anything, what about living standards? then one can say simply that Scandanavian states are 'the greatest countries in the world.'
And we come back to Mark Twain's comment, I am highly suspicious that my country is not the greatest in the world. Sure it is the most convenient for me. I can live there and enjoy all its benifits that comes from the default membership I have.
But what is a Nation? It is at the end of the day, just a word. 'Australia' 'America' 'Babylon' and they are 'creations' clear cut creations unlike reeligion where theree are myths about god's actively establishing reeligions. Religion is a manmade creation too, but the creation often isn't as widely accepted as the blatent out and out reporting of history of founding nations.
Which is fine, to take pride in any institution or company or anything manmade. Except that Nationalism geets promoted to religious status in that it isn't nearly as accountable to facts or subjectivity than others.
And most often employed by governments in the same way a priest or cleric or abbot can invoke authority over something as objective and deeply personal as religious beliefs, all based on membership.
Mark Twain had this to say on such practices:

To put it in rude, plain, unpalatable words — true patriotism, real patriotism: loyalty not to a Family and a Fiction, but a loyalty to the Nation itself!
..."Remember this, take this to heart, live by it, die for it if necessary: that our patriotism is medievel, outworn, obsolete; that the modern patriotism, the true patriotism, the only rational patriotism, is loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it." [Czar Nicholas II]

Which doesn't go far enough. Because a nation is ultimately a word designed to devide. A wall, a barrier. Membership in a club, that takes virtues comman to all humanity and then tries to copyright them. Just like the company that tried to own water that falls from the sky.
I will never forget how impressed I was at the Melbourne Youth Forum of something or rather that I got invited too through the aforementioned multifaith efforts and I asked the panel how they felt about all the 'this is what Australia stands for' crap that goes on the TV before Australia day eveery year.
And the girl said 'There is nothing Australain about being a decent human being, theree is nothing Australian about treating people with respect' and she didn't mean that Australains were disrespectful indeecent human beings. But more along the lines of what Chris Rock was getting at:

You know the worst thing about niggas? Niggas always want credit for some shit they supposed to do. A nigga'll brag about some shit a normal man just does. A nigga'll say some shit like 'I take care of my kids.' You supposed to you dumb mutha fucker! What kind of ignorant shit is that! 'I ain't never been to jail!'What do you want, a cookie?! You're not supposed to go to jail you low expectation-having motherfucker!

That's the form most patriotism takes. An illusion, and then there's the religious fervor. In America the police will take you away for burning an American flag. That's too much freedom. In a place where freedom of speech is gaurunteeed under the constitution. Albeit it doeesn't permit hate speech, unless hating people is part of your religion.
But Bill Hick's take is most instructive again:

"Hey buddy, my daddy died for that flag."

"Really? I bought mine. Yeah, they sell them at K-Mart and shit."

"He died in the Korean War."

"Wow, what a coincidence. Mine was made in Korea."

No one – and I repeat, no one – has ever died for a flag. See, a flag … is just a piece of cloth. They may have died for freedom, which is also the freedom to burn the fucking flag, see. That's freedom.

And that's the plain simple balls of the matter. A flag is just a piece of cloth. A country is just a word, put on a map. I don't oppose organisation, I oppose people investing fancy, imaginary things in words and piece of cloth.
Like in the story of William Tell, putting a hat on a pole and expecting the townspeople to bow to it.
Same same when I visit temples now over seas. I used to 'do as a roman does' and follow the superstitious rituals. Shinto is a money making machine, and I kind of respect its unashamed capitalist bent, but praying for miracles to entities I can't believe can hear my thoughts are just as ridiculous as ascribing character traits to geeographic boundaries drawn on a map.
Thatcher famously said 'there is no such thing as society' I believe in society, and community. But not reeligiously, I believe a particular group of people most likely will adopt common norms. But these can't be qualitative except in functional forms. And even then if you take an obvious example of culture such as language, there is no basis to really say one is better than another.
I have a friend who complains about the lack of 'love' subcategories in English. And I have to admit, that Japanese is real easy to speak thanks to having no constanant clusters. But to say one is superior, one is better. That is faith.
I have an exercise overseas which is useful I find, and that is, when a foreigner is talking to me, to briefly picture them as someone I know.
It alters that perspective that makes different standards based on a manufactured belief that people from another country are different to you.
When a took took driver is haggling to take me around to temples and to do so for less than a dollar, and I picture it as a friend from College, haggling takes on a new form, if it was a friend of mine selling himself out just for 20c (and being fucking annoying in the process) I would feel like he had fallen on hard times. Instead of gawking and marvelling at this 'quaint curious culture'
Thailand is a good place to learn all about nationalism, at least for me. Having no idea about thailand before coming here, I invariably fell in with the rest of the tourist crowd. Seeing tourists at the airport is the first time I have seeen unfamiliar Australians in 4 months. Do I feel a patriotic kinship? no. Because a lot of Australian tourists that come to Thailand are bogans I wouldn't necessarily associate with at home.
There is a world of difference between me and other people even ones that went to the same high school as me. And that's not to say I am unique, but that everyone is. The world over.
Some countries human life does seem more 'comodified' namely China's overpopulation and Japan's homogeniety, but evene then, I know in both cases from having personal friends that there is always a full spectrum from the reepreheensible to the wonderful in any area of 100km square anywhere there is land on earth.
And that's precisely why I say now, that I am not just an athiest but a creature of reason, and that I will embark on a No God, No Country, philosophy. Practically by virtue of passports, common law and so fourth, I will always be Australian, but that is just membership to a society.
What it means is acknowledgement of what I have held true for a long time. I would never for the sake of something so flimsy as a country, go shoot a perfectly decent foreigner in war, to protect and defend some Caravan park owner who happens to have been pushed out a cunt in the same country I was.
Likewise I wouldn't sell out my neighbour for the ambitions of some other national just because my wife is from there and I find her delightful.
Nationality shouldn't come into it, it should all be about character, which is all about behaviour, which is all about the individual.

What's Great about China

The worlds 'biggest' everything may also have the 'worlds shortest list of things tohm find's great about it' and so it must come with disclaimers.

Disclaimer 1: A lack of greatness is not the responsibility of the nation itself but rather the management of it. The Stalinist/Maoist brand of Socialism is transparently known to be spectacular at impoversishing a nation. China is a developing country so it shouldn't be surprising that when plagued by poverty there is not much to reecommend about it. Furthermore from a humane point of view, I find it much more ethical to hold China to a global standard of the services provided to its people than to diminish them to a standard whereby services and achievements that are a matter of course in other countries should become sugar coated 'achievements' in China.

Disclaimer 2: Cheap prices and shopping can't truly be great, it is a little akin to saying 'stealing is great' cheap goods in China are those that are labour intensive eto manufacturee rather than capital intensive, and that means that the low prices are secured at the expense of people who make transactions that amount to .01 AU cent a couple of times a day. Now living expenses are low, so wages have to be judged in real purchasing power for local standards, but inflation is leaving people starved cold and hungry in China right now, which kind of takes the shine off getting a pair of pants for $3.

Disclaimer 3: I went there in the coldest winter in years. Birght light makes anywhere look better, and seem more liveable. That said Parky said Beijing was prettier for the snow, which possibly reduces the stink of garbage and human reefuse left in sunlight. Also grey skies make pollution look better too, as evidenced by my journey to CCTV tower where I could appreciate smog more than when I was walking about in it on ground level.

So here's the list:

1. Cuisine

You could eat at the same restaurant for a month and never have two dishes the same. You could eat in China at Chinese restaurants for 10,000 years and still never have sampled all of Chinese cuisine. And it is large and plentiful. A word of advice though, Chinese restaurants are probably best if you can bring 4 or 5 friends, to experience 'real china' restaurants whilst also being able to justify a private room to get away from the smoking and spitting. If you are a relative eprude like me, that finds bushman's oysters on the floor unsavory.

2. Warmth

There is a certain advantage to socialism and relative to Japan, Chinese buildings in Beijing at least are well heated, centrally heated by the government. This is a big improvement on Japanese apartment blocks. Albeit if Japan chose to fix their homes with insulation and proper heating they could do so tomorrow and build new profitable industries while they are at it. But that said, in Beijing I could strip down to tshirt and underpants safely in my hotel room despite it being -6 degres outside, and this is provided to a large number of residents of beijing it seems.

And that's it, I could also talk about the relieving freedom of a completee absense of social contracts when compared to Japan, but China is a case of too much of a good thing. Jaywalking is great, but China both pedestrians and cars jaywalk. Being comfortable enough to fart in company is also great, but shitting on the streets is disrespectful to other people who have to walk there. Being unreserved and expressing your feelings is also great. But yelling over the top of people to as Andy says 'create a warm friendly atmosphere' continually is not conducive to conversation.
So there you have it, but I think they are positives. Other people could find more probably but I was only there two weeks and to call China a 'great' place I feel is ignoring the elephant in the room.
Again, Chinese civilisation and culture has a long proud history extending back to before the Romans and should not be disrespected or ignored, but it was disrespected, ignored and shat on by Chairman Mao with his self serving 'cultural revolution'. It ain't the emarginalised masses fault, it is the contender for 'worst government ever' that is the CCP.

More that's Great about Japan

I neglected one or two things:

9. Netcafes
So far Japan takes the cake, and it seems logical that eventually netcafes will supersede capsule hotels alltogether. Cheap, with 6 options for chairs, showers, staff checking reegularly, unlimited drinks, food, warm, shower and bathroom facilities. Netcafes truly rule in Japan. you can safely sleep in them if you pick the right style. Only downfall is having to relearn how to type.

And let me just say, perhaps controversially that part of me kind of thinks, what would Asia look like if Japan's occupation had gone further. For sure a historical impossibility because Japan as we know it is based on the democracy installed after their defeat. But at the same time, I have to say, as much as they are in a hollow consumerist funk right now, they still strike me as the most capable leaders in a distinctly 'asian' culture. Furthermore their voracious insatiable consumerism is the fruit of the psychological fallout of the military defeat. The 'never again' philosophy that makes Isreali occupation so endearing.
And yes, there is also the whole forgotten holocaust of the Manchuoko occupation that still riles the Chinese to this day, man they hate the Japanese as much as the Japanese hate them. But money keeps the wheel of friendship turning. That said I think westerners unjustly pat themselves on the back when it comes to the leadership of both the US imperialism and UK imperial era's, whene you look at the treatment of the native populations of the America's, Africa's and Australian invasion as well as the steeller success of 'western' leadership in the middle east, we'd be hardpressed to state Japanese war crimes (very brutal, very wrong) as a reason not to bequeth them leadership.
So far they are not just the country with the most dogmatic nationalism in Asia, but also the one with the most self respect, the one that truly goes on to have its own world leaders in the rare and exceptional Japanese companies of Honda, Toyota and Nintendo. I also see them making breakthroughs in Stem-cell research that makes me cringe for Australia, that as Adam Spencer pointed out years ago that whoever gets on top of genetics will have the dominant market of the next century.
Australia is a pilot fish, not a leader so Japan is great also because despite the misery resulting from the blind sacrifice instilled in its culture (and to a lesser extent the psychological challange facing every country) it is a leader, if it can overcome the psychological crisis of depression and hopelessness and get to work on its environments it would leave a lot of countries for dead.

10. Leadership.

What's great about Japan (and how to enjoy it)

I actually long for the noble Japanese now that I am in Thailand. They stay out of your face, that's a good thing. Its true the Thais could teach the Japanese how to be polite without being excessively formal, but I still miss a lot about Japan.

Namely when I was on a plane there, having no job, no home and said goodbye to my friends and family for an undefined number of months, reality sunk in. All I had was a back pack and I was flying into a city I had never been to before late at night without even a hotel booking. fortunately...

1. Customer Service
So what if its all social protocole, Japan has fine customer service. The best I have ever come across, on my first night there a super nice, friendly info desk girl in Osaka Airport called a hotel for me, got directions and drew a map with minimal fuss and the politest manner you ever saw putting me at ease. All I asked was 'where do I catch a train to get here?'
And so fourth, in Japan customer service reps presume nothing and go the extra mile all the time. They can also respect personal space aswell, unlike other countries I can name that solicit you constantly.

2. The Baths.
You gotta go naked and public, its the only way, Japanese men/women won't check you out as much as you don't want to check them out. Get over yourself, nobody cares. That done, welcome to the country where clean is beautiful, and going the public bath option can save you money on a hotel room as well. I am a big fan, I want a japanese style bathroom in my home. First, you wash, soap yourself from head to toe, then shower yourself down, rinse off. Then you hop in the big hot baths after rinsing your special areas again. And you relax, and really do, and you get out, enjoy a sauna or just towell off. Nothing is better. Nothing.
If you really want to appreciate how beautiful Japanese public baths are, go to a 'Japanese' public bath in China. Where the squat tiolet door is see-through, seady men are getting massages, everyone is smoking in the shwoer and the baths and you think (rightly) that you are getting dirtier not cleaner.

3. The Food.
Japan certainly doens't have the best food in the world. It is however a power house cuisine. Infact I'm confident no country has the 'best food in the world'. But if you are in Japan, know this, Sushi is not even the tip of the iceberg of Japanese cuisine. Increase to 4 meals a day and try Japanese curry rice, shabu shabu, yakiniku, takoyaki, katsudon, okonomiyaki, tempura, gyoza, ramen, soba, miso-udon, kare-udon, unagidon, yakisoba, oden, gyudon, sashimi, teppenyaki, misoshiro, mcdonalds, mosburger and any number of Japanese 'local specialities'.

4. The people.
Despite the masochistic work tendancies, the people are the best part, if you can make friends with a japanese national you are set, they are the most generous, funny, out there people you can meet.

5. the fashion.
Best observed outside Japan. The 'crazy' fashions can be deceptively monotonous in Japan because they usually involve membership to a group. But really the clothing designs are truly different. Its a pity the European fashion brands sell so well.

6. The commons.
The trains are the best you will ever come across, as are public toilets. Maybe not the ones in parks, I don't think even Jesus could figure out how to keep those clean. But ones in department stores, book shops, train stations etc are for the most part immaculate, well stocked and unvandelised.

7. Bicycles.
That such a rich developed country has women in highheels riding bicycles to work is a testimony to its greatness. You would never see that in Australia, or anywhere else. Once you hit highheels in most countries, you are either being chauffered by your asian boyfriend, or trying to take on 'the man's world' of professionalism in Australia and thus driving a holden or some shit.

8. Security.
I'm sure as a tourist I could wear a fur coat with all my savings in 10k yen notes pinned to it trailing down the street and Japanese punks no less would rush up to show a note to me and tell me it dropped off my coat. Japan has its share of psycho stories, but to me, not getting drunk and accepting a lift home from a creepy looking businessman seems like common sense in any country. Japanese psychos may be a little more creative than other countries and more prone to fetishes from the abundance of pornography, but these remote dangers are as nothing compared to knowing nobody is going to reach into your backpack and steal all your valuables while you sleep on the train.

What's great about Australia

And now the promised positive posts:

Australia, is not the greatest country in the world, I can't prove it one way or another, but nevertheless it does have some fine things going for it. some are unique, some aren't.

1. Apathy
Seriously, this is the best. It often gets raised but Apathy is one of the things that makes Australia such a comfortable society to live in. There is no stress to adhere to any particular model for the most part eg. the CCP doctine in China, Social norms in Japan or Loving the King in Thailand.
People don't care, they don't particularly trumpet Australia's horn. The media and the government try to drum up patriotism year after year to no avail. Australians garble the anthem and don't give a fuck about patriotism. It can backfire, such as Iraq and Work Choices but if the whole world was as apathetic as we are, the world would have a lot more peace going around.

2. Army
By this I mean, in Australia, if you join the defense force, you have even chance of being called a loser long before anyone calls you a 'hero'. Countries that make me uncomfortable are the ones where a person can actually attain prestige and respect by wearing a military uniform. This is bad. Australia is good.

3. Nature
I used to kind of be embarassed that Australia only had rocks, mountains and forests as its cultural heritage with none of the impressively ancient temples of Asia and Cathedrals of Europe. But I was wrong, getting sick of temples is easy to do, and there isn't much to do in them, nature really is the best architect and hiking through them can be far more interesting and relaxing than even the most elaborate national shrine.

4. Beaches
Australian Beaches are left pretty much well alone, there are plenty so If you don't want a crowded one, you don't have to have a crowded one.

5. Human Rights
You can bitch about your own government in Australia. You can associate with people. You can sue the government. You can take someone to court for discrimination. You can get a divorce. You can be a single parent. All manner of wondrous things.

6. Sport
AFL is one of the only two sports I will acknowledge as 'real sports' and then we are pretty good at almost every other sport anyway. Furthermore in 'almost real sports' like soccer I like the fact that although generally Australians are apathetic, we would never accept members of the soccerroos curling up in the foetal position after having there shinguard bumped.
The amount of public space available for playing sport is truly great in Australia, and makes it a living culture. Whether it is beach cricket, pack, frisbee or halfcourt 3 on 3 basketball or riding bike paths, you can do it all, free and easy every day of the year.

So that's it nothing mindblowing, and some of my positives are really veiled negatives of other countries. Also realise that culture is learned behaviour, it isn't intrinsic, there are no distinctly 'Australian' qualities of character.
I also realise that plenty of what I think is 'good' could be listed as things that are bad. If there was one thing, to keep it is nature, preserve the nature, that is after all what Australia is, not the people living on it. Second pick would be the apathy towards nationalism.

Henry George: The Best Thing That Ever Happened To Your Sex Life

I am sorry to say, that while in Japan, one inherantly Japanese cultural experience escaped me. Love Hotels. Despite Miki often pointing out love hotels and saying 'It's a love hotel, yeah let's fuck!' one of the things about Miki is that she is actually pretty hard to read.
But Love Hotels kind of offend me. Not in any prudish way, but just that I believe that if you are suave and confident enough to find someone willing to sleep with you no third party should profit.
I mean I realise that profit is a good incentive to put condoms on the market and so fourth, but Love hotels charging couples roughly $80AU a night to fuck. How sorry I felt for the Japanese. Some third party providing a space for you. The Japanese are too polite to fuck in public parks, and too traditional to fuck at home in their parents house.
Thus some big hotel developer can poket $80AU a night just because a tristing couple needs somewhere to trist at.
And I was thinking how great it was that in a country like Australia...well then I realised that I paid rent for my room in Australia, and whilst being cheaper than a love hotel, didn't have a spa bath and fruity soaps, nor got cleaned every day (or to be honest every month) and my landlord pocketed money just so I had a roof and some walls and some see-through sliding doors postered up to achieve a space private enough to fuck in.
I hope never to be in the situation where I have sex under the same roof as my parents do. But even then, its kind of like your parents own your sex. You'd have to buy your own home before you could say that nobody was profiting from your ability to pull.
And then again, there's the bank loans, and I noticed a lot of house adds were marketing their pre-fab houses for delfin estates with attractive models walking through a display home, with a subtext of them looking lustily at all the new areas of a home they could have sex in.
I must admit, the prospect of such unbridled freedom, to have keys to a place where you and your partner can draw the blinds, take of your clothes, and have carnel relations wherever you happen to cross paths as you go about fixing dinner, looking for a CD case, or tying up newspaper stacks, this freedom is highly appealing to me.
But it seems inescapable that someone profits, from the human compulsion to totally do it.
And I remembered my introductory reading of Georgism, which said how Land was unique in that everybody needed at list enough to lie down on.
And I thought, that's it.
People profit from the joy of sex, aswell as reducing the opportunities for Japanese teenagers to have it, by depriving others of land. Property speculation.
In Japan it is merely extreme. Infact Japan is on the whole, consumerism carried to it's logical conclusion. Although China is a fierce contender for 100% brand oriented life.
Everywhere else that has private land ownership is the same. As far as I am concerned there are two excuses to have to engage a hotel for sex. A good one or a bad one.
good = you want to be romantic, and a fancy hotel sweet or bed & breakfast makes for a positive change.
bad = your wife is at home.
Apart from that, while sex should not be a gaurunteed human right, the right to have sex for free should be. And not that I mean if you need prostitutes, you shouldn't have to pay for them. But that there shouldn't be some middle man providing less service than a pimp profiteering.
But if land tax was applied, and land lost its unproductive speculative value, then the land we so desperately need to have sex on becomes available. As a further plus Chian demonstrated to me, that things like Georgism, as in simple solutions to seemingly insurmountable problems, can be easily repressed and quashed by vested interests. This lends the fact that most people have never heard of 'Progress and Poverty' as creedence that it may actually work and not be some quack theory.
I'm sure the 'Australian dream' of owning your own home, shows up on statistics as averaging out to ownership at about .5 per person, that appears to be mostly couples owning a house shared.
But that would surprise me, because I'm sure that it's more like, a few people own 2-3 homes, a very very small number own 0-100 properties in 1 year, and the rest own nothing, and rent homes despite high vacancies and record home loan defaults.
The net effect is that when a land tax is introduced. Investing in property becomes less attractive. Which seems mind blowingly stupid at first.
But you have to look at why property investment is so attractive first. Here it is in a nutshell:
1. You can make money out of land, without engaging in any productive activity. Demand always exceeds supply, therefore capital appreciation.
2. If you happen to make a loss on the interest on your loan, you can deduct it from your tax in your economically productive activities. Hence even a bad investment in the traditional sense, is a good investment in the real estate sense.
3. You can buy a house or dwelling you don't need yourself, and get someone to pay off the loan who does need, albeit maybe for a temporary time, or simply cannot get loan approval.
So what happens? you remove private ownership, suddenly everyone has to pay rent, but as a tax, based on the value of the land. But the speculative value drops, the land is only as valuable as the money you can make out of it afterall. If you have to pay rent, you need it to make money. That's why unemployed people live with their parents more often than not, because they don't make money, they can't pay rent.

Simalarly, if you own a site that if you built a factory could generate $100,000 a year, you should pay rent that reflects the best use of the land. So build a fucking factory or sell it to someone who will.
Likewise same with rental properties. If there are properties whose best use is as a living abode, the land rent should reflect this, or roughly the proximaty to productive wages. then if you tried to rent land, and then on rent it for 10% you will fail, because unlike where you can provide value to a renter in a private ownership economy, you aren't contrbuting any special capital, so you should just fuck right off.
This means a house that is valued at $200k because it is in an area close to good services thus always in demand. Drops down to the value offered by those services and no more, no 'I don't mind paying a premium because I'll make it up in capital appreciation' value.
Because you can no longer afford to own a $200k property and pay 20k in tax because of it, if that house is empty. Thus the house remains for people who can use it productively.
And that extends to sex too.
Look the mechanism of Resource Rentals is simple, but takes time to appreciate it. If you are interested in how you too, can have a just and fair place to have sex, check out www.earthsharing.org.au and ask them to 'play the earthsharing game with you'
And let's end the Tyranny of Love Hotels forever.

Jerry can't sing when there is no song in his heart

I love Jerry, Jerry is one of the hardest people to describe because he is so non-descriptive. Despite his nondescriptive appearance though, he is one of the easiest emotional reads you will ever come across. When he is upset he visibly shakes and so fourth, emotions just burst out of him. When driving me around Beijing he would often burst into song, really gay, chinese pop songs. He even did it in front of his somewhat 'informal girlfriend' John remarked once that he had 'forgotten about tohm's singing' which is apparently terrible and tone deaf. But in Beijing I similarly had no desire to listen to music at all. I ended up listening to 5 minutes worth, for some reason I just didn't feel like listening to music there. Jerry could, and did, and sang at me, but then his troubles began.
Surely there is nothing more painful than unrequited love. Mayhaps having one’s fingernails split with a chisel, or having a white hot copper funnel forced down your throat, or having hot coals sewn into your skin, or hobbling, or being flayed, or having your legs grated then dipped in citric acid. I don’t know, frankly I’m not willing to try.
But traveling through Asia now, I have expanded my list of standard questions for foreigners in a relatively monocultural society that is none the less suffering from globalization. ‘Where are you from?’ is the common one, but I also come across ‘Will you find a country currently residing in girlfriend? Then you can get married and stay here.’ Varying from ‘do you like Japanese/Chinese girls?’ and so fourth. The frequency with which people try to set me up with a local seems to be inversely proportional to how much I desire to live in a country. Japan, I could live there but only part time = 3 solicitations in 3 months. China, where while being a rich cultural experience and fascinating for me to behold, but provides no ready reason why I would ever choose to live here or indeed return = 3 solicitations a minute.
Awkward though it is to try to come up with sincere and polite responses to these questions it is for one part always empowering to say no to sex in all its various forms. It is also very empowering to say yes to sex in all its various forms though so on the balance I run a deficit here.
And then there’s Jerry.
I have been on the wrong side of the unrequited love situation before，I feel though that my self indulgent emoting may have been justified after all I was coming off long term fairly involved relationships。 By contrast Jerry has been dating his sweetheart Rebecca for a staggering 2 months。
He is visably preoccupied with the inner turmoil he suffers from her not committing her everlasting love to him. He is particularly perplexed by her callous indifference to him after he has ‘proven’ his love to her. This more or less involves the time he bought her 11 roses, which is symbolic of a life and a life or ‘I am yours forever’ he explained to me the complex numerical system of roses in China. 1 means you are unique. 2 means we should be together, 3 means something else and so on.
In Japan, a lot of restaurants have machines out the front that you put your money into and then receive a ticket and some change after pressing a button. Then the chef cooks whatever you pushed on the button and serves it to you. In ‘Shutting out the Sun’ the author points out that it is inconceivable for any romance to occur in Japan without money changing hands, whether it be in Japan’s healthy sex industry or in the form of compensated dates.
China seems to have headed down the same path. I think to myself that buying someone 11 roses actually means nothing at all. Anyone can fucken buy roses. It seems to me that romance actually has to be personal, something that doesn’t lend itself to high context cultures. Instead, things need to have a certain unshakable currency such as roses and driving someone around, reducing a girlfriend to a commodity, though I’m sure that Jerry’s love is sincere, ironically he seems to be one of the most inept for relationships, surpassing even myself.
On the first day Jerry was telling me how he would move into a place with his girlfriend and if they could live together for 2 years then he would really know her and be able to marry her. Two days later he was complaining about how extroverted she was and that his friends said she was no good for marriage.
When Rebecca offered to marry me I was inclined to agree, I worked myself into the trap by carelessly asking conversation making questions like ‘what did you study?’ ‘which part of china are you from?’ ‘have you done much travel?’ and in hindsight the particularly foolish ‘what is your dream for the future?’ something I had gotten used to asking young people in Japan.
At the same dinner Jerry brooded over why she wouldn’t tell him how much she had spent on shoes. He later told me how angry it made him that she ‘kept secrets from him’ the melodrama that preoccupies Jerry’s mind had me imagining Jerry as never quite making it past 3 months unless he latched onto a particularly shy, naïve and dependant girl.
Jerry made the mistake of asking my advice when upon discovering that he did not have the exclusive priveledge of driving his girlfriend to places but that she also accepted lifts from work colleagues he decided to throw in the towel in his spectacularly emotional and fickle relationship of 2 months.
I tried to explain that although when you tell someone you love someone it is very nice for them to send it right back at ya, it was infact a state you decided for yourself and not one were you could impose or hurry along the status in someone else. I explained how proposing to a girl was in essence asking them to make a decision in which you might reasonably expect an answer one way or another. But telling someone you love them is a statement of a fact and you had to be relaxed and cool about it otherwise you get creepy. As Jerry was starting to creep me out.
Jerry sets the bar high, is demanding and controlling and it results in me writing blog posts as if I am his girlfriend. I just found it highly funny to see someone butcher a relationship like this as it exposes the universality of human emotion.
For Jerry whether he admits it or not, his behaviour indicates that a relationship is something one can buy, same same in Japan. There just seems to be an absence of the kind of romanticism spawned by France and Italy and chivalry that is the personal touch. Even when I say chivalry I know the knights of old used to try and win jousting tourneys to win a ladies favour, eg love is proportional to the number of spears you can break against another mans shield. Homoerotic perhaps? Anyway when I read of Il Magnifico aka that ugly renaissance man (not in the polymath sense) Lorenzo Di Medici composing sonnets and serenading girls from his window, or the efforts and individual schemes in Shakespearean romance it seems that courting and romance was whilst tacticly similar not something any two couples had the exact same experience over.
Jerry and Rebecca when discussing how great it would be if I found a Chinese girlfriend and stayed to work here and teach English asked me ‘what type of girls I like?’ meaning ‘what race of girls do you like?’ but I chose the literal interpretation and said ‘I like pretty girls, and educated ones.’ Jerry questioned my evasiveness and refused to believe I would date a black girl, despite what I think is the obvious qualifier of ‘pretty’ even after listing examples like Ciara and Beyonce and shit. But in the meantime I thought how true my answer was, attractiveness is one part, but man is the ability to think independently attractive. I never realized it until I realized how embarrassed I would be to show some of the girls I’m meeting lately at a dinner party with my friends.
One side of me pangs for Misaki, the girl had spunk, could engage herself in conversation with my friends and made friends out of just about anyone, she infact probably made me far more welcome at social functions than when I was single, probably because I usually make people uncomfortable by creeping up behind them and frotting.
I also pang for Claire, who to her credit could listen to contrary opinions to hers and debate them on their merits even when I was being a beligerant arsehole.
In Japan the hollowness of prospective relationships is quite obtuse, even misaki when I was looking for a birthday gift sent me a text message saying ‘plada(prada) LV, or Gucci these are all good gifts for me’ which she maintains was just a joke but so representative of the Japanese mainstream I have sincere doubts as to her joviality. This is just slightly scaled back in China, where the pragmatic considerations are long term employment prospects, cars and ability to buy meals (the basics of traditional male escort even in Western traditions) but that’s about where it stops.
I read in Social Intelligence with interest that whilst it is well known that men tend towards visual appeal of a partner whereas women tend to look more for signs of status and success, this is not the primary criterion for either in assessing prospects simply the most different between the genders. For both parties the primary criteria is kindness, it also said that love was a triumvirate of separate brain areas of passion, nurturing and something else that escapes me that allows for love and that whilst relationships can function with a combo of two out of three or even just one, love as we know it takes all three.
For me I have to actually respect my partner in some way to even want to talk to them, but whilst I do believe fundamentally I am kind, it is often the least impression I make at first. Infact my past behaviour is such that my partner has often been the near exclusive recipient of my kinder side. But I like it, kindness that is. Anthropologically the quality relates to our prospect as a child rearer but the book did say it was equal.
Whilst I am glad I dated a class A bitch once in highschool I have to say that kindness holds true for me, but also self respect, independence and all the things that usually come with education.
I think the state of romance is at its worst in a long time, I had a shortlived relationship in highschool, more a game of cat and mouse, and I was a poor stupid mouse, with a lovely girl that took two shots until I lost my frigidity. The first one failed because of an unwelcome middle man. A parasitic leach to the interest a new relationship caused.
The middle man in Asia, is numerous corporations which will lead to my long unanticipated return to Georgism next post, but in Japan for example, christmass is valentines day, valentines day is about chocolate and then there is 'white day' which unfortunately doesn't stand for 'sleep with a white guy day' or rather fortunately judging by some of the deadbeat english teachers I saw there but is all about buying white chocolate exactly a month after valentines day.
Then there's the 'tradition' of the diamond engagement ring. A tradition recently invented by the South Africa Diamond company and all the numerous consumer transactions dating right back to perfume, or probably berry gathering that have managed to wedge themselves between penises and vagina and complicate everything for so long. Conversation remains the major factor for sexual success, unless you literally are dealing with prostitution. So better yet, conversation is what is most important in determining romantic success.
Improve your conversation by following the following process:

1. Make a statement.
2. Ask a question.

When you get good at it, 1 & 2 will be related to eachother. And when you get really good at it 1 & 2 will both relate to what the person you are talking to was talking about. Blogging is btw not a good forum to practice this.
There if you read this post I have saved you thousands of dollars in 'romance' currency. 1 & 2 should get you laid, unless you like me have a habit of saying stupid things like my opener to Misaki.

Misaki: 'do you like Japan?'
tohm: 'no, I like Korea' [tohm walks away]

It is a miracle I managed to get with her, but this is how I usually establish myself as 'unkind'
Next post: 'How Henry George is the best thing that ever happened to sex'

Fuck Mao and his Fucking Mao Face

Ah, it feels good. So good I will say it again, Mao is the biggest fucking arsehole peice of shit cuntfuck in the world.
And now I am blogging again.
China is fucked. I will go into detail later, but the overwhelming impression I got from Beijing and Wuhan is that China doesn't have a government but is in fact just a big ghetto with a gang. Just like Crips vs Bloods, except Bloods one (because hey are red) and sport some trendy articles of legitimacy such as uniforms, suits and other shit.
I know of three people who have been to China whom I thought like minded, Trav and Morley, both gave me the impression that China is some sort of paradise with 50c beers and meat on a stick for 5c and all that shit. And its true, KFC costs a mere $3.50 upsized and with desserts and they appear to use real chicken in the food.
But there is a realiy to cheap shopping, and that is the shopping is cheap because people are so fucking poor. I felt like Bill Gates, the comment that did it for me was Andy when he had the store hand check all the DVD's I was buying, for about $4 I was getting I Am Legend and about 10 other films and when the first 6 were all top quality I said, tell him he doesn't have to check the rest, trying to save my time and get me out of the cigarette smoke filled store. Andy insisted though and when I remarked it was $2 he said 'tohm you don't get it that's big money here'.
And from then on I felt like some fucking tycoon come to throw money at the peasants and laugh at their squalor and shit like that.
I can't pretend to understand China, like I can do a decent job of pretending to understand Japan, but there are some things China highlights that are simple common sense.
I bought a copy of newsweek that along with a copy of bicycle magazine I ended up reading cover to cover, foolishly not topping up on books when I departed Japan. I made the mistake of thinking I still had a third of my Noam Chomsky book to go, then discovered en roue to beijing I had about 2 pages left and 50 pages of notes and references of articles I am never going to check.
In Newsweek the first bit of insight was gleaned, a Japanese securities investor pointed out that, what I am increasingly learning to be true, that stupidity knows no race, colour or creed.
The gist was that all the hot air being blown about China, and I don't know if the cmmentaries have changed since I was there and their sharemarket crashed, is exactly the same as the Japan bubble of the 1990, the souheast asian tiger bubbles of 1995 and the internet bubble of 2000 and so fourth. Except worse, worse, worse, worse. The rate f growth and the excess that is foolish speculative investment China is making similar to Mitsubishi's purchase of the Rockafeller centre in New York are going to leave a massive black whole of debt on banks and companies that weren't decade old proven institutions like Japan.
But everyone should go to China, I think it one of the best tourist destinations in the world. And one of the most instructive. Particularly coming from Japan, where I read at length to understand that nobody matters in Japan because 'everybody' is what is important. I expected China to be much the same, being a high context asian culture, but China is the reverse of Japan.
Parky put it best when we were talking about the communist party and how old school big brother it was 'it's also the freest society in the world, 'm pretty sure you could do a shit here and nobody would do anything'
China is a farm, a people farm. The government is the union so there are no unions, and as wrong as it sounds for the most part in the governments view the Chinese people are little moe than beasts of burden.
That's litarally all China offers, the economic development is interesting only in that it seems crazy for the communist party to do something as dangerous to itself as create a middle class. One or the other has to go, but I am betting both, because of the greed of al peoples of the world domestic greed and international.
It is hard to be sympathetic for the Chinese, but as I am collecting crazy folk wisdom from around the world it seems the Chinese offering is 'grab feathers when geese fly by' and no shit the photo I read this off had in brackets - 'meaning tak advantage of other people whenever the opportunity presents itself'.
So to truly be the opposite of Japan nobody is important because only you are important. Even the first time I went to Japan I didn't really feel culture shock, but going from Japan to China I sure did. As parky says, children do literally shit on the street, adults piss on the street and spit. The traffic is insightful as well, pedestrians don't have right of way, you are expected to get the fuck out of a cars way. Right of way and merging is all about accelleration, not manners.
I felt like an uptight japanese in China, a sensation that was reinforced when I went to an establishment generously called 'Tokyo bathhouse'
I read an article about a famous lawsuit where an Onsen (public bath) refused foreigners in Japan. I thought 'aha' proof that the Japanese were racist motherfuckers (lke me) but as I read I felt sympathetic. The owners had done it because hairy russian guests were just jumping straight in the bathing pools without washing first. And the onsen was losing its domestic market. It should simply have adopted a black list I guess, afterall japan also bans tattoos from public baths to gt rid of unsavoury yakuza, but if I wiped my arse on the tablecloth in a fine restaurant in Melbourne and made other customers throw up and leave, I would expect to get myself banned too.
That said, I'm pretty sure in China I could wipe my arse on a tablecloth in a fine restaurant and nobody would do anything.
And its because China exists to serve Chairman Mao, the people were impoverished, starved, brutalised and killed to make a docile paddock of livestock to provide oppulant luxary to a small minority that retaned power. And Mao raised himself as a reliion.
I mean Mao killed 38 million people during peacetime, that dwarfs the holocaust, and is arguably worse because he killed the people he claimed to protect and who had faith in him, rather than people he had scapegoated.
If I went to China and discovered that Tasmania was in fact it's own independant democracy, that Labor and Liberal where in fact the same power and answered to the great lord Zoltar and that my whole national identity was a lie, I'd feel like I was Chinese.
Andy and Jerry both exhibit the 1984 symptom of doublethink, Andy sees no contradiction between believing Taiwan is part of China and also that if he wanted to visit china he has to apply for a visa and it takes a whole year.
They think they are doing good in Tibet and that I would be pleased there is a railway there now. I agree that the Tibetans should be entitled to religious freedom and like all other people not forced to accept the 'tibetan lifestyle' simply because they were born in tibet but solving this problem by imposing the 'chinese lifestyle' is not solving anything and infact making it all worse. I think China should get the fuck out of ibet like the coalition of the willing should get the fuck out of iraq, pay people the basic respect of letting them decide for themselves.
Interestingly if you do go to china you have to watch CCTV9, its the best. At first I found it refreshing, and all the bullshit I'd been fed in Australia about China's wonderful economic growth (more on that in a future post) disinclined me to suspect it. Bt CCTV9 is the communist parties english channel, and its all good news. It wasn't the cynical fearmongering of Australian media criticising everything (like me) but the Beijing Olympics were great, every diplomat was talking about how 'they had never been closer' with China, and then Gorden Brown affirmed his support for the 'One China' policy. I assume this means that Taiwan and Tibet belong to China.
The curious thing is Gordon Brown being English, and furthermore the Prime Minister of England, you would think prime material to speak English on China's English speaking channel. Yet while they had recorded his speaches and various addresses they simply had a reporter talk over some muted footage to report that he reaffirmed the 'one china policy' it seems that everyone who visits china does.
Propaganda is the thing to experience in China, it really should be shown in Australian schools to sow a healthy distrust of mass media.
Hence China and I don't agree, as it has censored all user generated content. The CCP is a cowardly little circle hidden away in their secret district whom nobody likes but nobody is educated nor brave enough to simply oust them.
Andy says Hu Jintao is the biggest gangster of them all, I worry that he believes the party doctrine and with the inevitable impending train wreck might do something stupid with a nuclear weapon, as the CCP is pretty addicted to its control of things by the looks of it.
Either way, it is good to have blogs.

The Bit of the Iceburg that is not the Tip of it

First a comment I recieved:

Matthew said...
But I digress, Individualism seems to be the answer... (what was the question?)

Left on my last post from Japan. Firstly matthew is right, even though this comment isn't a preposition of any kind, what I mean is that without checking I probably didn't put down what 'the question' is. The question is vague though. I find questions far more instructive and impressive than answers. Telling someone the answer is never as skillful as asking the question that allows them to figure it out for themselves.
Why the fuck do tourists from sunny places (the southern hemisphere right now) come to Bangkok now, in the Chinese Lunar Festival?
See that's a question that is prompted by the fascinating aspect of Thai culture that is tourism, much more fascinating than buddhism here.
Anyway, before leaving Japan, and much before conceiving of the glory of De La Land, my waxing philosophical was bearing fruit flavored 'individualism' and to my surprise and horror, I was starting to actually discover that anarchism isn't just for dumb ass-aged skateboarders who entertain themselves by getting beat up by "fascist" riot police who attend events largely to save taxpayer money from shouldering the cost of repairs for damage done to private property. That sentance was too long so I just gave up on it.
Anyway, anarchism seems to suggest that 'people don't really need governance at all' and I believe now that, whilst there's obvious pitfalls to having no law enforcement and so fourth, I do believe a society could be weened off most forms of governance except where standardisation naturually bears fruit.

I feel like a penguin, or maybe something cooler like a Polar Bear, yeah, they are big efficient individuals, anyway. I feel like this polar bear, let's call him Derek Kaiser, because that's a pretty cool name, anyway Derek Kaiser the Polar Bear has been milling about on top of this Iceburg doing nothing much, just checking out the ice and now, suddenly derek kaiser has covered the whole above the water scene and decides to jump off. Refreshing. Now Derek turns around and head under the water glimpses the spectacularity of the bit of the iceburg that isn't the tip.
That's my metaphore for where I feel like I'm at right now, and I think it is one of my best ones ever, largely because of the mystery and romance of Derek Kaiser the polar bear. Maybe one day, scholars will refer to this as my 'Derek Kaiser' moment.
But to be fair, it probably should be referred to as the less cool but pretty cool name 'Noam Chomsky' moment.
Noam has a subsection in a chapter of his book 'hedgemony or survival' where he explains some useful truisms - and one of them added the half, or rest of the pie/iceburg/threeway that I couldn't articulate nor neatly construct, and that is Universalism.
Universalism is the basic truth of morality, that we return the same courtesy to others that we expect from them. Religions claim to have invented this, and many embellished so as to make it more convoluted, less just and should just do the individualism thing and let people's innate morality guide them. The ten commandments (the words so important they are the only part of the bible god saw fit to write himself) are a good example of bolliksing up a simple concept.
But thats it, and the question? the question is: how do you give people free will without them exploiting eachother?
To give one example it is self set pay. Self set pay sees like it is an insane proposition, because you are running McDonalds and you tell some 16 year old kid he can set his own wages, and he modestly pays himself 10 billion a year. So obviously a company has to set the wages for them, right? wrong.
The situation fails above because the employee doesn't associate the good of the organisation with his own personal interests. Now this may sound like the 'trickle down' approach of capitalism which Noam Chomsky describes here:

"...so long as power remains privately concentrated, everybody, everybody, has to be committed to one overriding goal: and that’s to make sure that the rich folk are happy -- because unless they are, nobody else is going to get anything. So if you’re a homeless person sleeping in the streets of Manhattan, let’s say, your first concern must be that the guys in the mansions are happy -- because if they’re happy, then they’ll invest, and the economy will work, and things will function, and then maybe something will trickle down to you somewhere along the line. But if they’re not happy, everything’s going to grind to a halt, and you’re not even going to get anything trickling down.

But what I mean though is that it is very different for someone to reach into a dark mystery box and remove a section of cake that nobody else sees and yet they consume. And someone surrounded by their peers going up to slice themselves a piece of cake that is in plain view and everybody sees exactly how much they are taking.
And that's the essence of self set pay, it works if everyone knows how much money is in the bucket and how much everybody intends to take out by individuals.
Mark Twain has a quote I think, but I can't find in my searches now, truth is he has a lot of quotes but it is something to the effect that 'it takes relegion to do wrong and feel right' but that is the fundamental property of the two major obstacles to progress we have, that are realy two sides of the same coin. That is, Nationalism and Religion.
Religion I have covered till I'm blue in the face, nationalism I usually cover on Australia day, a sickening day for me only worse for the Today Tonight features on 'Australianism' the week before it. But Nationalism is probably the more instructive concept. Because everyone can agree that Nations are made up by human beings, some like Mexico have mythos in their foundings, the dream of the snake being caught by an eagle standing on a cactus in the middle of a lake. This would be more convincing if Mexico hadn't been founded by the Spanish on an already existing nation, so devine dream or no, Nations I hope we can all agree are man made.
Yet there is such effort in reinforcing 'national pride' and 'patriotism' and making up abstract values that are supposed to be miraculouly intrinsic of the people who just happen to be born there.
It and religion and class and any number of irrational beliefs serve one purpose, to segregate. To make 'us' into 'us and them' and they are usually encouraged from all sides. Hence segregation is the opposite of Universalism. An example of Universalism is Victoria and NSW, I would say that NSW hosts superior armed forces to Victoria, yet Victorians as far as I have observed do not fear immenent attack from NSW, invasion and conquest threatening 'the Victorian way of life' and 'the Victorian dream' and this is simply because we don't consider ourselves that different from the people in NSW. I would argue that being born in Sydney does seem to miraculously make someone a complete fucking twat but not from birth, just as I do believe that being born in Melbourne does make someone pretty fucking arrogant, like me.
But the point is that we don't fucking worry about the wrongs someone might do against us, or do wrong to people when we actually identify with them.
That's Universalism, people are all different, but I'd be surprised if many victorians apart from me seriously wished harm on Sydney, nor wasn't impressed and envious of Sydney's fireworks displays. I only wish harm on people in Sydney by the way, when I am in Sydney the rest of the time I'm happy to just let them be. I don't know what it is, maybe from watching the Sydney entrants in reality tv programs such as 'my restaurant rules' and that one about renovating apartments.
But that's the principle premise to actually conduct yourself immorally whilst having no internal conflict, you have to believe that the rules that apply to you, do not apply to someone else. Universalism is the simple process of merely saying, rules are universal or they are not rules at all. That is it is no more wrong or less wrong to attack the head of state as it is to attack anyone else in the world.
Accept this and this alone, and everyone can simply and adequately govern themselves with only a very small minority of anti social disorders that may need some external management.
And aha! suddenly I break my own rule, someone with a chemical imbalance in their brain is not my morale equal. Well no, just like someone religious I believe is not my moral equal, because there is something that impares them from functioning on reason.
Now people say reason is so cold, so machiavellian, and that is why Derek Kaiser the Polar Bear has to swim around some more. Thailand for example is warm, lovely, everyone is friendly here and particularly pious. And yet Thailand is also the country where people hobble their children to create a source of income, whilst the capital sports 320 or so I am told, Buddhist temples, and the are pretty lavish for the most part too. And that to me seems cold.
It's why my next anticipated reading is 'the selfish gene' because I nead to understand and find basis for my belief that similar to self set wages it can be demonstrated that morality is no accident of human evolution, that altruism is mutually benificial. I believe this for now, without understanding it, there are examples like semco, and the limited scope experimentations in democracy. Countries that seem to look after their societies by allowing them participation and a certain amount of power to determine the nations agenda seem much better off than countries where the governments manage the people for their own good.
Keep reading.