foot in his mouth and heart in his hand

in which patrick calls for an artificial apocalypse

So, after being fired from Australian Idol for, you know, being a horrible person who has no place on this planet or off it and whose very existence means not only that we are not living in the best of all possible worlds but also that Satan is real and God is dead, Kyle Sandilands has a job as a judge on The X-Factor.

Frankly I disapprove of the existence of an Australian version of The X-Factor to start off with. We already have Australian Idol every two hours. We do not need another one. The current supply is sufficient for reasonable demand.

But the man who trivialises the rape of an underage girl, mocks survivors of brutal regimes (and he's not picky on which brutal regimes they were under!), taunts families by threatening to prevent their reunions, and... oh, what the hell, I don't want to get into picking through this amoeba's fetid leavings, especially when the blog Crimitism has already taken that martyr's task upon itself when the entirely expected happened just over a year ago (post 1, post 2, post 3, read them all even though the subject matter is an appalling waste of proteins and lipids because the blog writer is pretty damn fantastic). My point is, this man is the scum that grows on the underside of scum when said scum has been kicked out of all the better classes of scumbuckets by scum who do not want to be associated with that kind of scum.

His placement in this program, doubtless to get viewer cred for being 'edgy', now proves that we are rewarding people for being arseholes. Is that too scatological, not specific enough? Hateful, jeering bullies with the mindsets of particularly twisted seven year olds, desperate to prop up their own standings and their own egos at the expense of everyone else around them. We are rewarding and funding the pettiest, most banal kind of evil.

In short, there is no more reason to let civilisation exist. I'm calling, here and now, for global rioting, not in terms of a revolution to replace the current power structure with a new one, but a purely destruction-focused scouring of the Earth, leaving no pillar of society standing. Only when all traces of the current structure are gone can a new world be built, unfettered by our failure. I appreciate that this likely means that I, myself, will have to die. It is a small price to pay for humanity's all-too-necessary rebirth.

Seriously, fuck Kyle Sandilands.

(Now to clean this up and find a way to send it to Channel Seven. They're being very coy about any e-mail address. Maybe I'll have to dig up the show's major advertisers and send it to them.)
foot in his mouth and heart in his hand

On books, dear God I should be in bed now.

Superfreakonomics is a fascinating book for the issues it raises.

However, it disagrees with me politically, and is therefore wrong.

I mean, it's understandable. The authors are economists, that legendary discipline born of putting one part pure mathematics, one part statistics, one part psychology, and four parts pure evil in a vat and cooking it until something came out. So it's only to be expected that the same book that talks about "negative externalities" should commend Iran for allowing the sale of human organs. (I can draw a line from that to murder on the streets in three steps, by the way.) It's only to be expected that they'll swallow the 'happy hooker' business hook (pardon me), line, and sinker. It's only to be expected that they'll cast Al Gore as Jeremiah in a hairshirt and Boris Johnson as the far-sighted Alexander who sees through the emperor's new clothes. (I'm allowed to mix metaphors, because I do not have tremendously fake-looking blond hair that shows everyone the twat I secretly am deep inside. I'm sorry, Boris Johnson and I don't get along.)

In all honesty, they mostly do present themselves as showing that approaches can work and taking an amoral view on them. In almost all cases they're not suggesting that what they say is a good thing, just that it's a thing. However, after a bit of a rant about how governments like things to be costly and cumbersome (it's the pure evil, it tends to slant you rightwards) at the end of a section about how simple and effective the seat belt is, they have the following paragraph.

"Nor was it the government that put seat belts in cars. Robert McNamara thought they would give Ford a competetive advantage. He was dead wrong. Ford had a hard time marketing the seat belt, since it seemed to remind customers that driving was inherently unsafe. This led Henry Ford II to complain to a reporter: "McNamara is selling safety but Chevrolet is selling cars.""

Or, in short - "The government doesn't do cheap and simple solutions. Note how this one cheap and simple solution was put into practice by an ex-government employee against the wishes of his employer and lost the company money. This shows that when one's looking to solutions one should always look to the profit-centric free market."

If an editor has seen this paragraph, that editor deserves a smack. Then again, maybe the authors deserve one too.

I'm also planning a post about how the free newspaper you get on Sydney trains is trash, and to parlay from that into the general ghastly unconcern of "Lighter Side"/"News of the Weird" sections. Thus, I should probably start titling these the "Get Off My Lawn Series: Concerns Of The Most Elderly Twenty-Six Year Old In The World".

That said, I've been happy recently. For a wide variety of reasons. Not least of which is that University is Fun and since I have to be awake in five hours to go there tomorrow I think I'll sleep now.