I hope they are lying. I hope the government does not really intend to put 18 billion more into Anglo-Irish Bank. I hope they are just pretending that they are going to give Anglo all this money in order to boost “international confidence” - but that really they intend to wind it down. That’s our only hope now. That the government is lying.
According to Lenihan "Winding-up the bank is not and was never a viable option" because an immediate wind-up would lead to a fire sale of assets resulting in additional losses of €30bn. Yes, but those losses would NOT fall on the Irish taxpayer, if the winding up takes place AFTER the government bank guarantee lapses at the end of this year. And unless the government is insane, they will allow this guarantee to lapse. The foreign banks to whom Anglo-Irish Bank owes money would then need to make the best of it once the bank is closed down.
So really the government must be lying. Because if they are NOT lying, you know what this means? You want to know why the government would be doing this? It’s hard to believe the reason. I have difficulty believing it myself. It is incredible. But here is the reason: if Anglo-Irish Bank is closed, the foreign creditors will seize all the worthless property and land and sell it at knock down prices. That would mean that houses and apartments and land would become affordable to ordinary Irish people, which would be great for the people who live here, and a great boost to our economy’s competitiveness. But it would be a disaster for Fianna Fail and their property developer chums, as well as for the other banks.
Think about that all you young people out there, as your pay is being cut, or you are losing your job, or as you struggle to pay your mortgage, and are told that there is “no money” for any of these things. The state is taking 18 billion of YOUR money and pouring it down a hole. That is eighteen thousand million euro. You could build about 50 major hospitals for that, assuming each hospital cost 300 million euro. We have become so accustomed to hearing these large figures being thrown around that we no longer know what they mean – how many schools will be underfunded, how many hospitals will be understaffed, how many people’s incomes will be reduced, in order to pay for it.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Pedal Pumping – the hot new sexual fetish
Apparently “pedal pumping” is a strange sex fad in conservative America, in which men watch women trying to start stubborn cars.
According to the Daily Beast:
“The foot is slender, sleek, unmistakably female, and about a size 8, partially enclosed in a six-inch, sequinned white-satin stiletto sandal. In the video, it repeatedly and fruitlessly depresses the car's gas pedal as the woman revs the ignition and coaxes, "Come on. Start." Cherry-red polish glints on her nails, and a gold ring encircles her middle toe.
Aroused yet?
If so, congratulations: You're into pedal pumping”
Personally, I find it implausible that only conservative, working class Americans would find this a turn on.
According to the Daily Beast:
“The foot is slender, sleek, unmistakably female, and about a size 8, partially enclosed in a six-inch, sequinned white-satin stiletto sandal. In the video, it repeatedly and fruitlessly depresses the car's gas pedal as the woman revs the ignition and coaxes, "Come on. Start." Cherry-red polish glints on her nails, and a gold ring encircles her middle toe.
Aroused yet?
If so, congratulations: You're into pedal pumping”
Personally, I find it implausible that only conservative, working class Americans would find this a turn on.
Monday, March 22, 2010
The United States joins the Civilised World
I see the United States has passed health care. Or that’s the impression I’m getting any way. It’s impossible to work out what the hell is going on over there. At the very least, it appears that something a bit like universal health care has sort of been passed. Whatever. It sounds to me like good news over all.
But Jeez, you underestimate the persistence this guy Obama at your peril don’t you? People have spent the last year denouncing him for being “weak” and “vacillating”. The right have relentlessly targeted his health care reform, calling it “socialist” and “communist”. For a while it looked like this campaign had worked, because a couple of months ago Obama lost his super-majority in the Senate. Who would have bet on health care reform passing then? Not me. But now Obama has achieved what so many Presidents have tried and failed to do. This is the most significant piece of social legislation in the US for the last 60 years. The bill is imperfect, but it’s a start. Once the principle of universal health coverage is established, it always proves wildly popular, and impossible to reverse.
There's nothing Modern about Post-modernism
A READER WRITES: “I must object to your response to my question. I can’t believe that you don’t prefer the excitement and originality of postmodernism to dry, boring, passionless analytical philosophy. What a yawn it is! At least the postmoderns aren’t boring – they are saying something new and fresh.”
BB SAYS: There’s nothing modern about postmodernism. People have been saying the exact same things that postmodernists say since at least the time of the Ancient Greeks. For example the Ancient Greek sophist Gorgias wrote a book called On the Non-Existent in which he made the following three claims:
1. There is no such thing as reality.
2. Even if there was such a thing as reality we couldn’t know anything about it.
3. Even if we could know something about reality, we could not communicate it using language.
Well, that’s basically what all the postmodernists say. Whether it’s Derrida (pictured above trying to look enigmatic), Lacan, Foucault, or Braudrillard. All these writers are making the same three banal points. If you look beneath all their jargon, and all their self-important posturing, they are just saying the same things that Gorgias said over 2000 years ago. But they dress it up in fancy language in order to make it appear more original, more complex and more mysterious than it is. What they are saying is neither original nor interesting.
Postmodernism is what happens to many people who spend too much time in university arts departments. They start thinking that there is no reality for words to refer to. And why wouldn’t they think that?
So again, I reject BOTH the continental, postmodern approach to philosophy AND the pro-science, ultra-rational analytic approach. True philosophy consists in the Golden Mean between these two approaches. A great philosopher is both a scientist AND an artist, both a Presocratic AND a Sophist. For example, the Platonic dialogues, in which Socrates is the hero, provide a way of speaking about human life and the world that is both scientific and poetic, both rational and passionate, and hence superior to either science or poetry.
Friday, March 19, 2010
The Banker as Psychopath
Quite a few readers have contacted me to say that I should not be feeling any “pangs of sympathy” for Sean Fitzpatrick, given that he has cost the country billions that could have been much better spent on schools ‘n hospitals. He has ruined and damaged countless people's lives. And now he has been released, for the moment.
I agree that he should be locked up forever, but I reserve the right to feel some sympathy for people. The difference between normal people and the psychopaths who run banks is that the latter are incapable of feeling ordinary human emotions such as sympathy, pity, empathy, guilt or shame. Psychologists say that sociopaths or psychopaths are simply missing the normal human moral emotions, and that is why they act as they do. They can feign feeling these emotions but they don’t really feel them. Some estimates suggest that 2% to 4% of men are sociopaths, to one degree or another. Hardly any women are sociopaths. Senior figures in politics, business and finance often display psychopathic behaviour. The stereo-type of the psychopath is that he must be a serial killer, but that's not the case at all.
In any event, although we should be aware of psychopaths, we should not become like them, since what distinguishes us from them is precisely the ability to feel compassion for the suffering of others.
The characteristics of pyschopaths are, in terms of clinical diagnosis:
1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative
5. Lack of remorse or guilt
6. Emotionally shallow
7. Callous/lack of empathy
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
9. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
10. Parasitic lifestyle
11. Poor behavioral control
12. Promiscuous sexual behavior
13. Lack of realistic, long-term goals
14. Impulsiveness
15. Irresponsibility
16. Juvenile delinquency
17. Early behavioral problems
18. Revocation of conditional release
As is clear, most of the above characteristics apply to the people who run our financial systems. The reason these kind of people end up in control of banks is precisely because they are psychopaths, since no morally normal person would do what is required in order to gain control of a bank. We should acknowledge this obvious fact and regulate banks accordingly. But we should strive to feel sympathy and compassion for everyone, even though it is often very difficult to do so.
I agree that he should be locked up forever, but I reserve the right to feel some sympathy for people. The difference between normal people and the psychopaths who run banks is that the latter are incapable of feeling ordinary human emotions such as sympathy, pity, empathy, guilt or shame. Psychologists say that sociopaths or psychopaths are simply missing the normal human moral emotions, and that is why they act as they do. They can feign feeling these emotions but they don’t really feel them. Some estimates suggest that 2% to 4% of men are sociopaths, to one degree or another. Hardly any women are sociopaths. Senior figures in politics, business and finance often display psychopathic behaviour. The stereo-type of the psychopath is that he must be a serial killer, but that's not the case at all.
In any event, although we should be aware of psychopaths, we should not become like them, since what distinguishes us from them is precisely the ability to feel compassion for the suffering of others.
The characteristics of pyschopaths are, in terms of clinical diagnosis:
1. Glibness/superficial charm
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth
3. Pathological lying
4. Cunning/manipulative
5. Lack of remorse or guilt
6. Emotionally shallow
7. Callous/lack of empathy
8. Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
9. Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
10. Parasitic lifestyle
11. Poor behavioral control
12. Promiscuous sexual behavior
13. Lack of realistic, long-term goals
14. Impulsiveness
15. Irresponsibility
16. Juvenile delinquency
17. Early behavioral problems
18. Revocation of conditional release
As is clear, most of the above characteristics apply to the people who run our financial systems. The reason these kind of people end up in control of banks is precisely because they are psychopaths, since no morally normal person would do what is required in order to gain control of a bank. We should acknowledge this obvious fact and regulate banks accordingly. But we should strive to feel sympathy and compassion for everyone, even though it is often very difficult to do so.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Help Kevin Myers Leave Ireland
In a recent article in the Independent, Kevin Myers expressed a wish to leave Ireland and go and live "somewhere civilised". A Facebook Group has been created for people who would like to support him in this, and even contribute to paying his air fare out of the country.
If you would like to join the group and help Kevin Myers fulfill his dream of leaving Ireland, please click below.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=373581257868
Finally
Seanie has been arrested.
There was a documentary recently where a typically obnoxious reporter hunted down Sean Fitzpatrick on the street and started hounding him with questions. Fitzpatrick did his best to scurry away from her. “Are you sorry for what you did?” she shouted at him. “Of course we are sorry” replied Fitzpatrick. He sounded like he meant it. To date, he has been co-operating fully with the authorities during all investigations, unlike some of the other senior banking figures.
As I watched him slink away from the reporter, down the steps into the basement of some building, a pathetic figure, I felt a pang of … of … well … I felt a pang of pity for him.
The Philosopher’s Ten Commandments
1. Do not fear Death. Do not hate Death. To hate death is to hate life, since one entails the other.
2. Pursue all things in moderation, save wisdom. Follow the Golden Mean.
3. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
4. Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead.
5. Seize the day. Enjoy what you can, endure what you must.
6. Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand.
7. Know Thyself. The proper study of mankind is man.
8. Know what things are in your power, and what things are not in your power.
9. Question Everything. Know what you know, and know what you do not know
10. Make your quest for knowledge both a means to an end, and an end in itself.
Notes: Broadly speaking, the first five commandments deal with the moral virtues, while the second five deal with the intellectual virtues. According to Aristotle, if someone possesses both moral and intellectual virtue, they possess complete expertise in the art of living, in both a practical sense and a theoretical sense. Commandment Number 1 relates to courage and is based on the Epicurean teaching about death. Overcoming the fear of death is the key to living courageously. Commandment Number 2 is based on Plato’s teaching about the virtue of moderation. Number 3 is the Golden Rule, the essence of morality and justice, found in all societies. Number 4 is from Oscar Wilde. It deals with love, compassion and charity – which is the one great virtue missing from the traditional Greek list of the four cardinal virtues. Number 5 is a combination of an Ancient Roman axiom, and a quote from Goethe, dealing with prudence or wisdom – completing the list of the cardinal virtues. This quote from Goethe combines what is best in Stoicism (“endure what you must”) with what is best in Epicureanism (“enjoy what you can”). Commandment number 6 is from Spinoza – and deals with the power of knowledge to reduce suffering. Number 7 is from Socrates. Number 8 is from the great Stoic philosopher Epictetus. Number 9 is from the Socratic: “I know only that I know nothing”. The 10th commandment is an exhortation to be curious at all times, since, according to the philosopher Hobbes: “Desire to know why, and how - curiosity, which is a lust of the mind - exceedeth the short vehemence of any carnal pleasure.” Commandments 9 and 10 complement each other – the wise man is neither an extreme skeptic, nor an extreme dogmatist – he pusues the Golden Mean in all things.
2. Pursue all things in moderation, save wisdom. Follow the Golden Mean.
3. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
4. Keep love in your heart. A life without it is like a sunless garden when the flowers are dead.
5. Seize the day. Enjoy what you can, endure what you must.
6. Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand.
7. Know Thyself. The proper study of mankind is man.
8. Know what things are in your power, and what things are not in your power.
9. Question Everything. Know what you know, and know what you do not know
10. Make your quest for knowledge both a means to an end, and an end in itself.
Notes: Broadly speaking, the first five commandments deal with the moral virtues, while the second five deal with the intellectual virtues. According to Aristotle, if someone possesses both moral and intellectual virtue, they possess complete expertise in the art of living, in both a practical sense and a theoretical sense. Commandment Number 1 relates to courage and is based on the Epicurean teaching about death. Overcoming the fear of death is the key to living courageously. Commandment Number 2 is based on Plato’s teaching about the virtue of moderation. Number 3 is the Golden Rule, the essence of morality and justice, found in all societies. Number 4 is from Oscar Wilde. It deals with love, compassion and charity – which is the one great virtue missing from the traditional Greek list of the four cardinal virtues. Number 5 is a combination of an Ancient Roman axiom, and a quote from Goethe, dealing with prudence or wisdom – completing the list of the cardinal virtues. This quote from Goethe combines what is best in Stoicism (“endure what you must”) with what is best in Epicureanism (“enjoy what you can”). Commandment number 6 is from Spinoza – and deals with the power of knowledge to reduce suffering. Number 7 is from Socrates. Number 8 is from the great Stoic philosopher Epictetus. Number 9 is from the Socratic: “I know only that I know nothing”. The 10th commandment is an exhortation to be curious at all times, since, according to the philosopher Hobbes: “Desire to know why, and how - curiosity, which is a lust of the mind - exceedeth the short vehemence of any carnal pleasure.” Commandments 9 and 10 complement each other – the wise man is neither an extreme skeptic, nor an extreme dogmatist – he pusues the Golden Mean in all things.
Continental philosophy versus Analytical philosophy
A READER WRITES: “As you doubtless know, there are two main schools of philosophy in the contemporary Western world. The first is Analytic Philosophy, which predominates in the English speaking world, and which often focuses on logic and science. The second is Continental Philosophy, which dominates on mainland Europe, and which is associated with postmodernism and existentialism, and which may be said to be more artistic in outlook. Which school do you favour?”
BB SAYS: I favour neither. A plague on both their houses. My philosophical hero is Socrates, and my guess is he would not have had much time for either Analytical philosophy or Continental philosophy.
From a Socratic point of view, today’s Analytic philosophers are analogous to the Presocratics of Ancient Greece, and today’s Continental philosophers are analogous to the Sophists of Ancient Greece. Socrates is famous for attacking both the Presocratics and the Sophists. If Socrates was around today, I think he would be hostile to both Analytic Philosophers and Continental Philosophers.
Socrates attacked the Presocratics for not putting human beings at the centre of their investigations. For Socrates, the proper study of mankind is man. The Presocratics, by focusing on questions of science, logic, maths and metaphysics, forgot that wisdom consists not in that kind of knowledge, but rather in knowledge of how to live well. In this respect, they were like many contemporary Analytic Philosophers, with their emphasis on logic and science. For example, logic might be a means to the end of attaining wisdom, but by focusing too much on it, a certain type of philosopher is in danger of forgetting the ultimate end towards which he properly must strive. That is true of the Presocratics, and it is also true of today’s Analytical philosophers.
The objections that Socrates directed towards the Presocratics could plausibly be directed at many of today’s Analytical Philosophers and Scientists.
Socrates attacked the Sophists for a different reason. The sophists, like today’s Continentals and postmodernists, were experts in using fancy words in order to impress audiences. They could use clever arguments to confuse people - or to entertain people in order to get attention for themselves, and to attain fame, notoriety and money. But really they were not interested in truth. The Presocratics, for all their faults, were at least genuinely interested in truth. The sophists, on the other hand, had a tendency to indulge in super-sophisticated discourse, the purpose of which was more often to try and impress or confuse, rather than to attain truth.
The objections that Socrates directed towards the Sophists could plausibly be directed at many of today’s Continental philosophers and postmodernists.
Socrates, and those who follow him, represent the true spirit of philosophy. Socrates combined what is best in Continental Philosophy (the openness, and the focus on the human condition, the artistry) with what is best in Analytic Philosophy (the clarity of language and the love of truth, reason and rationality).
So both Continental philosophy and Analytical philosophy are corruptions of true philosophy. At their best (Heidegger in Continental Philosophy and Wittgenstein in Analytic Philosophy) they can teach us useful things and they can approach genuine philosophy. But overall, they have lost sight of the Socratic inheritance. Heidegger is great because he transcends the limitations of the Continental school, and Wittgenstein is great because he transcends the limitations of the Analytic school.
BB SAYS: I favour neither. A plague on both their houses. My philosophical hero is Socrates, and my guess is he would not have had much time for either Analytical philosophy or Continental philosophy.
From a Socratic point of view, today’s Analytic philosophers are analogous to the Presocratics of Ancient Greece, and today’s Continental philosophers are analogous to the Sophists of Ancient Greece. Socrates is famous for attacking both the Presocratics and the Sophists. If Socrates was around today, I think he would be hostile to both Analytic Philosophers and Continental Philosophers.
Socrates attacked the Presocratics for not putting human beings at the centre of their investigations. For Socrates, the proper study of mankind is man. The Presocratics, by focusing on questions of science, logic, maths and metaphysics, forgot that wisdom consists not in that kind of knowledge, but rather in knowledge of how to live well. In this respect, they were like many contemporary Analytic Philosophers, with their emphasis on logic and science. For example, logic might be a means to the end of attaining wisdom, but by focusing too much on it, a certain type of philosopher is in danger of forgetting the ultimate end towards which he properly must strive. That is true of the Presocratics, and it is also true of today’s Analytical philosophers.
The objections that Socrates directed towards the Presocratics could plausibly be directed at many of today’s Analytical Philosophers and Scientists.
Socrates attacked the Sophists for a different reason. The sophists, like today’s Continentals and postmodernists, were experts in using fancy words in order to impress audiences. They could use clever arguments to confuse people - or to entertain people in order to get attention for themselves, and to attain fame, notoriety and money. But really they were not interested in truth. The Presocratics, for all their faults, were at least genuinely interested in truth. The sophists, on the other hand, had a tendency to indulge in super-sophisticated discourse, the purpose of which was more often to try and impress or confuse, rather than to attain truth.
The objections that Socrates directed towards the Sophists could plausibly be directed at many of today’s Continental philosophers and postmodernists.
Socrates, and those who follow him, represent the true spirit of philosophy. Socrates combined what is best in Continental Philosophy (the openness, and the focus on the human condition, the artistry) with what is best in Analytic Philosophy (the clarity of language and the love of truth, reason and rationality).
So both Continental philosophy and Analytical philosophy are corruptions of true philosophy. At their best (Heidegger in Continental Philosophy and Wittgenstein in Analytic Philosophy) they can teach us useful things and they can approach genuine philosophy. But overall, they have lost sight of the Socratic inheritance. Heidegger is great because he transcends the limitations of the Continental school, and Wittgenstein is great because he transcends the limitations of the Analytic school.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Chaos of Thought and Passion, all confused
Will not be blogging for the next week or so my little chums – taking some time out to research some seriously interesting posts, which I will share with you upon my return. While I am away, I invite you ponder these words of wisdom from Alexander Pope (of all people)
“Know then thyself, presume not God to scan;
The proper study of Mankind is Man.
Plac'd on this isthmus of a middle state,
A being darkly wise, and rudely great:
With too much knowledge for the Sceptic side,
With too much weakness for the Stoic's pride,
He hangs between; in doubt to act, or rest,
In doubt to deem himself a God, or Beast;
In doubt his Mind or Body to prefer,
Born but to die, and reas'ning but to err;
Alike in ignorance, his reason such,
Whether he thinks too little, or too much:
Chaos of Thought and Passion, all confus'd;
Still by himself abus'd, or disabus'd;
Created half to rise, and half to fall;
Great lord of all things, yet a prey to all;
Sole judge of Truth, in endless error hurl'd:
The glory, jest, and riddle of the world!”
The proper study of Mankind is Man.
Plac'd on this isthmus of a middle state,
A being darkly wise, and rudely great:
With too much knowledge for the Sceptic side,
With too much weakness for the Stoic's pride,
He hangs between; in doubt to act, or rest,
In doubt to deem himself a God, or Beast;
In doubt his Mind or Body to prefer,
Born but to die, and reas'ning but to err;
Alike in ignorance, his reason such,
Whether he thinks too little, or too much:
Chaos of Thought and Passion, all confus'd;
Still by himself abus'd, or disabus'd;
Created half to rise, and half to fall;
Great lord of all things, yet a prey to all;
Sole judge of Truth, in endless error hurl'd:
The glory, jest, and riddle of the world!”
Mullingar Judge Neilan: A new hero for our nation
Local legend Judge John Neilan, known for his intemperate outbursts in Midland courts, has now become an official NATIONAL legend – a spokesperson for a whole generation of fucked-over young Irish people.
Angrily dismissing a case in which a couple owed a bank money for a confusing car loan, Neilan announced that he would rather “lie in a gutter with a pig” than meet a banker. Leaving aside the undertones of beastiality, few would disagree with the general sentiment here.
He lashed out at bankers for "flying off to lovely places", "sunning themselves" and having board meetings so elaborate that "the king of Saudi Arabia wouldn't be as well feted". He continued: "If they had an ounce of decency, then they would leave their offices in shame, with their heads hung low.”
The judge issued a call for a national revolution: “There was a time in the past when banks and their buildings would be dismantled stone by stone by the people in outrage at what is being done" before concluding that bankers are “totally, utterly, absolutely removed” from any reality.
If this man ran for election, who wouldn’t vote for him?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)