Category Archives: philosophy

you’re not supposed to, but you do it anyway: a study

you want to save the world and make use of the complicated. let’s bemoan and let’s be pathetic. let’s depress the objectively deflated and inflate the pathologically insane. figure eight shows you the picture of a duck with training wheels, carefully imagining itself in a world of mass hunger and rabid determination. we’re starving our flocks to write this story and so you should keep being inept and press the ‘donate now’ button. it makes me feel good when i tell you this; it makes you feel even better when you jump aboard this ideological 747 with me. i, you, them, we, deity. all fabrications, with green smokestacks, emitting a purple wave of eccentricity with a positive charge and forty-four days left to procreate. subliminal delineations, danger. squeeze, tighten, fortify, splendor. adapt.

what is the generation thunder that roars beneath your feat, you incredulous tiger of misaligned ubiquity. ask. question. depress. you test your capacity to enlarge by postulating the maturity levels of iron at seven, 4 and thirty-3 years. impossible is possible, just think about it… just make it possible. it’s insanity (all over) when i hear you yelp from across the road, asking for help, disguised in a matter-of-fact gluten-free substance, poised to penetrate. you wish to change, to manage, to massage, to exacerbate, to complicate, to memorize, to show frigid temperatures how to fake the orgasm of amorous professions. or maybe you want none of these things and all of them at once, a paradox among the living, a choice dilemma that confounds the unannounced forces of faux-finished material textures.

go, for yourself, for others, for the benefit of the corrupted few who hold power, devour powder, speak louder, excrete madness and impose the word “rather.” how do you echolocate the entire sound alphabet, as it is spoken by a demented goat, born out of wedlock, its original creator a combination of an acidic substance and an opulent fissure of the most pernicious (but promiscuous) existence. light is a ray and if photos are edible, your subconscious and maniacal tendencies and contrived proclivities can all continue taxing the willing, at the expense of increasing your exposure to risk-free ultraviolet machinations. print, copy, x.

ambivalence is an investment, a radical departure from the convenient features of yesterday, a realization that tomorrow will undertake to completely water-down your nightmares while accentuating your dreams to the point of an introverted culmination of fat-free lipids and kleptomaniac-like reward schemes. but you continue, you continue along the predetermined path of your ethically challenged 99-meter sprint towards dystopia. or perhaps i have become more adept at storytelling than you used to be. possibilities are exponentially raised to import suspicion, but in your case, you infer speculation, add hyperbolic sensationalism and remind your opponent that within the farce that exists the orifice of comedic brilliance, there exists something that is not only available and you can call your own, an offspring, a progeny of mild-mannered motivators, but something that none of us can ever internalize, even if by means of employing harsh light and enlightened inconspicuousness.

my solutions are equally blunt. i can repackage hysteria and resend it. i can .pdf your mannerism and send it back to you, equally possible, especially when reply-all stares the effects of destiny directly in its jealous (and esthetically morbid) face. you have chosen out of a lack of choices. you have created your demise by failing to foresee possible (and expected) alternatives. and now i wish to implode and sideline my own detrimental (to your health) -isms for the sake of procuring a toothless lion, enclosed in a hamster cage, with the same help mode as a surrogate 19th century barn fly.

car keys. please.

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under abstract, critical, life, philosophy, symbols

the star without any end points, a circle in disguise

ready, set, go. attack, pant, begin to flaunt, oh my – is that kant? seriously. go fetch, go play, go emotionally decay. this blister is a complete disaster and someone just called me over to start the other side of their intricate project called casper. what a scene, full of fluffy fluffs fluffing about, can you believe such ignorance, i can’t tell you how happy i am to have experienced another way to lament. oh, continue, don’t abrogate, dictate, dictate…

[scene one]

[a small-ish rat occupies a space. a grandiose entrance, provided by some ill-advised sponsor, is entertained by a piece of cheese…]

[l… c… a…]

[“hello,” yelps the larger of the two. “perhaps you can guide me to your destination,” continued the belligerent, but this time with more gusto and perhaps even more empathy. i left the two alone to mingle and directed my attention to more pressing trifles, like the platter of duck confit that had arrived, just in time for the wetting of my palate. before i could ingest the floral display of apathetic violence, reconstructed for me by a magician of gastronomic “ooomph,” tragedy had struck. the legal person they called cheese, a blotched, half-empty placeholder, had already, rather desperately, forced its way into a container. it was hiding from the disaster. to spill more acid onto the intimately cancerous scene, monosyllabic doctors, competing for their own cubed foot of oxygenated diarrhea, all kept pushing alongside my leg without excusing themselves, perhaps on purpose. this entanglement further contributed to the pandemonium. the cheese was nowhere to be found by the true authorities and the obvious was lying naked on the floor, suffocated by the pungent smell of an unclassified piece of cheese…]

[this became, of course, a case no longer worth trying, never mind in front of a hot fudge, otherwise known as a fissure between an already widening gap; it is because of such influences that innocuous proper, playing with fire, will often burn at the same temperature as ulterior motives begin to congregate at.]

[r.i.p. rat, 547 grams, four inches tall, 11:43AM to 13:00PM]

there is an exclamation mark that gains perspective whenever you approach it with such sense of appreciation that your decoy is deconstructed the moment it senses and if containment is not preferred, it will also eat significantly more.

blah.

blah.

isms.

and again,

speech broke the silence, all too soon.

Leave a comment

Filed under abstract, critical, life, philosophy, politics, rant, symbols

The Terms of YOUR Agreement, Explained

Who cares if the disingenuous ant wanted to fight the mischievous caterpillar. Let’s be honest, really honest about this two-toned machination that only started becoming a problematic after the loaded-gun effect entered into the equation. So she was provoked! Big deal, alright! Matters of this complicated nature are a daily occurrence and by no means should be treated as statistical anomalies that fail to materialize. Her defence lawyer argued many-a-times, in previous proceedings, the ant’s propensity or for you schoolchildren of a more respectable social class, proclivity, for a pugilistic one-two after the ingestion of four pints into its depressed cavity.

Either way, you’re all insane, utterly mind-numbed. If you really believe the prosecution in this instance, you are only creating precedence for what is already quite obvious, namely that the man-made statute, erected for the benefit of the public at large, is now being appropriated by those with sufficient ulterior motives, to make me want to discontinue vomiting following a session of gorging on “propaganda popcorn.” Ah, such unnecessary evils.

My suggestion to the mother caterpillar is to stop playing one petulant child off another and rear-end herself into a different cause, preferably at a speed that can provide for her injury as well. No, nothing less than that proposition can ever be entertained and if less is suggested, I shall decree with the intention to repress and if my perfect state of imperfectness ripens by that point in time, oppress as well. Regardless, this cultural drama is creating a state of affairs in which I cannot, at least this time, do my best to avoid. Circumstantial evidence aside, my self-diagnosis is telling me that if I continue, psychological harm might just be recoverable, provided that my persuasive essay grades are high enough to convince a toothless but no less effective geriatric, perched atop an infant’s stool and with the moral savvy of a, pardon me, inflatable orangutan (sans the orange hair), that I, above all others, need legal treatment in every sense of the two words. Take this offer as you find it, I am not willing to sacrifice more of my continued perseverance, so that you may find yourself yelling at a television set without probable cause but most likely with an insanity conviction shortly after the foundation for the prosecution, a blind congregation of near-sighted bats, with four-year plans and a penchant for ridiculously low-rates, discovers that inside your chaotic but surely idiotic exclusion clause, you have hidden the terms “in no way” and “liability,” so as to inflict upon those less brilliant, a harm that lacks both an intention to ridicule and the act itself.

This all brings me back to my initial claim, in which I have every right to demand that I be reimbursed for my losses under the Fake Names Act 1429. My black-belt in corruption shall be honoured and principle will succumb to your will only insofar as you will bend to my desire for corrective justice in the playground. It is time the elephants met me in my office, or, if so desired, down at the Zoo, where we all can partake in the ginger petting of innocuous animals for the promotion of the public good. Otherwise, if the dinosaurs get here first, and I do mean what I say, I will only be open to negotiations if they furnish me with polyester dentures – must be made somewhere, anywhere will not suffice – and a carton of desperate vocal chords that were stolen from a location I will provide you with once I have made myself aware of what it is that I want to steal.

Repudiate at your own risk, but I do warn you that the offer is final and if you provoke me, unilaterally, arbitrarily and absolutely binding too.

Note: If you find the act of swallowing hard, please seek professional advice from a confectionary salesman. They’re trained to alleviate matters of such discomfort and will only recommend the most noxious of pleasantries, if of course, such are deemed necessary to cure your anxious but rather macabre depression.

Leave a comment

Filed under abstract, agreement, contract, law, life, philosophy, rant

hra – better than nothing? and has the EU really made a difference?

the herd, lining up

hra – better than nothing? and has the EU really made a difference?

– what does that tell you about how much the HOME OFFICE (a creation of some prime minister or another – i think in this case it was his royal tony-ness that transgressed) really cares about the HRA

– in my personal and humble opinion (yeah right ;)), the answer will tend to be “not really that much”

– they are constantly entertaining a state of complete apprehension, a state of being that paralyzes their foresight and continues to entertain the grossly inappropriate blinders-on effect that has been the status-quo for way too long in this nanny-state of a country

– i guess the thought of queens, kings and KINGDOMS conjures up warm and fuzzy feelings of slavery and repression with its gardens of evil and sand castles of hardship for the promotion of the social collective, the nation and the prosperity of the PUBLIC (and the PUBLIC’S GOOD)…another deep-throat anachronism that even my grandmother has stopped paying attention to…

– everyone is hiding behind the ‘public good,’ while we, the voters, the deciders, want accountability

– but really, when the closet monster makes a boo-boo, s/he blames it on the need to promote the public good, or some other utilitarian smith-slash-mill-like hit-and-run argument.

[note: the above happened ‘on the fly’ or ‘in the moment’ and its contents are unaltered so as to not entertain an adherence to certain unfounded and unjustified standards of expression or formalities that only restrict the audience slash reader to a given matrix of possible interpretations. art, a creation, a process.]

Leave a comment

Filed under abstract, academia, academic, brain, critical, life, philosophy, politics, rant, symbols, university

the game with three pac [not P+C]

[experimental 1]

The world according to the stars and the moons of world Exponential. Time is timeless, Michael said it. How do you feel about being entertained by forty-four monkeys with hats that look like humans. Speak to me when I am talking to you. You don’t ask questions, you don’t ask questions. Two rules of being i) aggressive and ii) rather random with two other chimps. Let’s continue this discussion with self-self-self plus one. Revoking your expenses is not playing by the rules. You’re fired, you complacent two-headed dinosaur. “What’s next,” says Michael the Chimp from forest Sporadic with flavourless overtones of Confrontational-Adrian…with a dash of FOUR AND A HALF FUCK YOUS.

Exact time, according to Copernicus, 1:31 OM Eastern, 4:11 YM…one second, some plug is speaking his mind…”look at my fucking thumb, look at it,” come on, “LOOK AT MY FUCKING THUMB.” Fucking ‘ell John, Jesus never even thought of that. I’m tired. Oww…who is being so loud…it hurts (and he also wants to add the following eulogy: “Kiss my ass…”) Frankie Wilde-with-a-y, hard a.

Updates: Scary noises, half-dressed-girls walking out, Sebastian walking in. Wait, Seb wants to say something…

…”party like it’s your last minute….” (or, hour, or…)

[caught between philosophers and artists extraordinaire…]

and now, Monkey…

…”I NEED TO ANALYZE(A) FANTASY (AND MY BED) HOCKEY” –> HE’S worse than a plug, he’s a half compromised deck of cards…

The only people in this world who need TVs are Jonsins, Natashas and Margaritas. penis penis (Monkey almost ruined it…). WOOF! – Monkey sneezed. WOOF! — Monkey sneezed again – and – I didn’t say cheers, ‘bless you’ or any of that colloquial parlance. For a dash of Sacha…”Dude, FsIeSbH just went to deb.”

…signed, your favourite AMOEBA.

2 Comments

Filed under abstract, categories, expectations, explicit, free, game, party, philosophy, questions, rules

the day vlad lost ‘it’

first, read the following:

loveland ch 3, 1, 12, 13, 2, 21.

then, after reading 3, 12, 13, 21, rest.

if presented with an opportunity, write.

results may vary, but see below for possible outcomes.

small, stuffy bears. calibration speaks german. i is one of those self-explanatory letters that 99% out of three times will leave you without a dog to walk.

ramble-pie and thirty two have nothing in common but since we’re about trespassing linguistic absolutism, why don’t we also reproach the ‘lack of.’

attitude favours awareness but from what i can observe, it can neither read nor speak. without capacity, we’re stuck in a lala land of confused speculation.

ducks can often break their neck while chasing their own tails. feeding them during this crucial process of self-reflection may lead to severe nausea on the part of the benefactor. interested parties may apply within but only if they have proof of previous vaccination against forewarnings.

slavery of the mind or slavery of the body? i don’t know, but i certainly think one exists. when i was growing up, i did not demand to be ‘nanny-ed’ around. the contrary manifested. i now know that this past allowed for the ingestion of the drug GOOD, thereby preventing me from catching the disease BRAIN-o-DYSFUNCTIONALISM. (if your intent is to patent the aforesaid, i can’t help you).

sufficiency trumps lethargic circumlocution, read: c’est suffit.

vp, the draconian carnivore that ate dog(ma)s for dinner.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2261482, abstract, academia, experimental, personal, philosophy, poetry, rant, surrealism, theory

eu series: hegemonism – an eu love affair

Enlarging the European Union to include “new” member states is an ambitious and fascinating political project. Controversy however, does exist. Expanding the EU is an ideological exercise that strives to provide the impetus for the spread of neo-liberal market policies as well as other fundamental “democratic” concepts that may include a commitment to human rights, rule of law, transparency and elements of consociationalism. It is a function of reality and pragmatic constraints, that not everyone and not every political agenda can be accommodated.

Our Choice Is Peace?

The difficulty with failing to provide political outlets for those parties that may find themselves on the extremities or fringes of the political decision making process may find other means by which to manifest their grievances, often times using methods that have been captured by those terms such as “corruption,” “illicit” and “shadow” or “under- ground.”

As the EU looks to the East and the Balkan states to provide future economic markets, cheap labour, intellectual and natural resources, geopolitical advantages, as well as other strategic dimensions that make up the EU’s own “manifest destiny,” it is imperative if not counterintuitive and potentially catastrophic politically, if no measures are taken to accommodate the uniqueness of local and regional problems as well as solutions. The EU has systematically confused accommodation for supremacy and top-down “dictatorship” in key areas such as energy security, foreign policy and corruption. A failure to rethink accommodation in the EU may have history repeat itself with “second revolution” being a potential consequence.

The harmonization of local “laws” with the EU’s body of laws, otherwise known by the catch-all phrase, acquis communitaire, is bound to introduce a remapping or shifting of both political and economic actors. New winners become losers while old losers may find themselves on the other side of the spectrum. To reiterate the above is not to introduce something new, quite the contrary. Political and economic actors are constantly in flux. Traditionally, power sharing is explicitly desirable and opposition healthy; competition, or the antagonistic interplay between two parties competing for a limited-supply resource produces beneficial economic and “political” byproducts.

With the end of the Cold War and the disintegration of the Soviet regime, East Europe had been left without a governing hegemon. Criticisms aimed at undermining Soviet rule can also be applied to East Europe’s new hegemon, the European Union. East Europe and those living in East Europe have probably turned to the West in search for a panacea solution to their internal political and economic chaos. If freedom from Soviet-rule was, in retrospect, presupposing a departure from “colonialism” and “quasi-sovereignty,” looking forward, EU-rule will be a restoration of the very same things Eastern Europe was expecting to free itself from.

Commonplace energy rhetoric is often bundled with a normative pursuit of democracy. Rather alarmingly, EU’s energy commissioner, Andris Piebalgs, made explicit that “[t]he best way to create EU energy security is to export market economy values to suppliers such as Russia and the Middle East.” By throwing its political and economic weight around, the EU is trying to reconcile the uncertainty that is “foreign” or “alien” approaches to governance with their own version of market economics. If the EU’s is not prepared or willing to negotiate with players outside their geographical and ideological borders, what sort of example is that setting for the newly accessed East European countries, as well as those to be accessed, Romania and Bulgaria, in January 2007. To proceed with caution would be an understatement.

Furthermore, as an example, Germany and Poland have “failed to see eye-to-eye on the second major issue of energy, with the Polish leader sticking to his opposition against Germany’s plans to build a direct gas pipeline to Russia under the Baltic Sea, bypassing Poland.” This is, again, certainly nothing new. Anyone, with even the most limited background in history understands, not just as a result of World War II, but previous historical events as well, that Poland sovereignty is a sensitive issue for many Poles. To bypass such sovereignty, in this case the justification being that Germany must secure energy supplies and Russia is an appealing as well as suitable supplier, is to yet again, reinforce what has just been previously been said that the EU simply cannot dismiss the unique local socio-political make-up. To have German Chancellor Merkel offer to a “branch from the pipeline to Poland,” allowing for the possibility of a “valve-shut-off,” a-la Ukraine during early 2007, stands to prove the German approach as being unilateral and for the most part, politically ignominious.

Poland has voiced, through President Kaczynski, their sovereign desire to achieve energy security through “supply diversification,” a policy and initiative that includes a commitment by the “Western” countries through the “linking [of] energy grids” and the “enshrining of principles at the [EU] treaty level.” It is without doubt that given the latest rounds of accession, the EU has observed an increase in oil and gas imports and consumption. These rates stand to further rise, as the newly annexed countries have “weak internal hydrocarbon production.”

With the Baltic States looking to “reduce the number of Russian investors for historical and geopolitical reasons,” and the EU seeking to secure policy that is founded on treaty law (something that has yet to happen) with Russia, it will be interesting to observe the extent to which supra-national interests will trump national ones. Vladimir Putin has already expressed his concerns over allegations that Russia has continued to transgress human-rights law (for some a jus cogens principle), stating that Russia did not invent the word “mafia.” Whether or not that stands to be of any significance, it not only reminds the EU of its own past corruption scandals and political malfeasance, but rather antithetically speaks of the hypocrite nature of the disparity between EU practice and EU foreign policy. To provide examples, France’s experience with Jacques Chirac’s sloth during his tenancy as mayor of Paris, as well as the 1991 “Lafayette Deal” between France and Taiwan, both speak for the reality that is corruption and the exploitation of office for personal gain, with different repercussions and consequences for different countries.

In addition, British Euro-skeptics often find it extremely difficult to reconcile the benefits of the current status-quo that is EU’s civil-law legal system, with the UK’s traditional common-law system. EU Criminal Law overrides national provisions, regardless of opposition from local governments. All breaches of EU law are subject to sanctions that can be imposed by the EU Commission, an un-elected body in Brussels, which also has the right to propose and define what those criminal sanctions will be by definition (with a majority vote of Council of Members needed).

The above is an example of how as a supra-national institution, the EU is not always making unanimous decisions or implementing policy that is accommodating of all. It would be dangerous to make such an assumption by implying it. While current governments of the day can be said to be pro-EU, opposition and dissent do exist, even within veteran states, at both political and civil society levels.

Questioning EU’s future prospects is an exercise bound to introduce arguments from both Euro-skeptics as well as EU proponents. However, given current “policy” approaches that adopt measures more akin to imposed dictatorship, dissatisfaction either from old member states or newly accessed member states is bound to, in the future, undermine the traditional EU objective of uniting to reinforce national commitments that provide and oversee all “essential services” – as dictated by accompanying political mandates.

The EU constantly echoes those principles on paper. In reality, the truth points into other directions, directions that are not “consociational” or “accommodating” in nature, but rather disappointingly, the opposite.

Leave a comment

Filed under acquis, affair, critical, critical theory, democracy, double standards, EU, european union, hegemony, hypocrisy, law, legal, liberalism, liberty, love, pathologies, philosophy, Policy, politics, rights, school, symbols, Uncategorized, university