Controversy Tuesday: Same Dip, Different Shit
July 22nd, 2008 | by adminAmericans often find themselves on the business end of criticism over having very little knowledge or understanding of foreign nations, including the European continent to which many of them have fairly recent blood ties. They’re often accused of not having an accurate picture of the differences in culture between the myriad European states, or even being able to identify many of them. I’ve spent some time in Europe, in various places, and I have one feeling about this stereotype at this point. Good lord, do pots enjoy calling kettles black.
Complaining that Americans can’t tell the difference between Sweden and Norway is like complaining that Norwegians don’t know the difference between Texas and Oklahoma. I’ve met myriad Europeans who weren’t aware that the USA is split into several well defined regions, each with its own politcal and social preferences, not to mention local culture. I’ve heard a lot about double morality, a phrase that requires a scoff to correctly pronounce, but not so much about the differences in the North Eastern, North Central, Mid Western, and Northwestern accents. I’ve heard people complain about Madonna and Eminem invading European charts, but I haven’t found more than two people in Europe who’d even heard of artists like Jurassic 5 or the Reverend Horton Heat.
What bothers me is the acrimony with which these fucked up notions are brought out. There’s a pervasive sense of classism, even imperialism in these kinds of comments. They carry a sort of secret nationalism that’s a poison to the listener. Even the people most disatisfied with their home country manage it: “Well, I maybe be disaffected in a shitty nation of jerks, but at least I’m not American.”
The moral here? “Fuck you” is the same in every language. And if it’s not in your native language yet, don’t worry. It’s getting there.
Love,
Captain Cussy Pants.
Controversy Tuesday: The Trashiest Environment!
July 15th, 2008 | by adminIt’s populare these days to take a proactive stance regarding the pollution and/or alteration of the natural environment, as well as to adopt so-called sustainability practices into one’s everyday life. Many people take this to the furthest extreme they feel is possible, having a strong emotive context inspiring their actions. Common steps taken are regular recycling, purchasing organic foods and ethanol based vehicles, and using “natural” products.
The problems here are many. As far as recycling goes, it seems to serve the same purpose confession does to a not-so-devout Catholic. Recycling is comparably simpler to do than many other “green” activites, and has an immediate and observable result – all your cans are out there in a tub by the street. The breakdown occurs in what actually happens to that sorted material. Does any of it actually make it back into new products? Does it even make it past the waste collection centre? Do you even bother to check that you’re buying new products produced from recycled materials? Few people bother to answer any of these questions.
Organic foods and ethanol or other pure petroleum-alternative fueled vehicles take another direction. In the case of organics, an often overlooked point is the origin of the foods. Not all states have regulations defining the term “organic.” The regulations that do exist may vary from region to region. This has many effects; the term itself breaks down in meaning, and organic foods are more likely to be produced in states with well known standards (Oregon, California) and shipped by conventional means, which requires fossil fuels. This brings me to petroleum alternatives. Hybrid cars are merely a stopgap in truth, whereas electric cars most likely still depend on fossil fuels being burnt at the generator, as is often the case. A popular and fairly recent third choice is E-85 ethanol burning vehicles. While ethanol burns “cleanly” in comparison with petroleum distillate, it doesn’t come from out of nowhere. The corn that is required to make it must be grown like any other commodity, requiring machine tending and harvesting in today’s modern agriculture, then shipping and processing, all of which require energy in the form of electricity and/or the burning of fuels. Another dent in the “green” efficiency of ethanol is its production requires an increase of corn crops, which requires expansion of farmlands, displacing some farms into new, more poorly equipped areas, or just outright farming on new, undomesticated land.
The last concept I find ridiculous: that of consuming “natural” products. This is an idea that some clever marketeer dreamed up and was made king of Advertoria for. There seems to be a persistant belief that natural things are somehow better. The problem is, nothing that claims to be natural on the package can back up that claim to any point of satisfaction. One example is a fruit salad. All the individual fruits in the salad can be naturally, but pineapples don’t naturally come in small wedges, bereft of seed and skin and tree, nestled closely to orange sections. At best, the salad can claim to be a collection of natural things, but they’ve all already lost that distinction by being modified by human hands. The fact of it is that something is natural when it occurs in nature. Even the natural tomatoes you purchase cannot claim to have originated in the area they were grown. Furthermore, tomatoes and all other commodity crops have been selectively bred and hybridised over years by humans to improve flavour, size, productivity, uniformity, and a dozen other traits. The only way you can hope to really eat naturally is if you run freely in the woods and take bites out of birches and deer.
Why the fuck do you feel so good about being “green?”
Love,
Captain Cussy Pants
Blogs are shit. They really are. Travel around the ridiculously termed “blogosphere” for a while and you’ll see what I mean. Seriously, go on, do it for a while. I won’t be doing anything interesting for at least a sentence or two.
Ha, I should’ve had vegetables for dinner. That’s what I get for being awesome, deliciously low nutrition snacky times. Back yet? Alright.
Notice what I’m talking about? No? Alright. Basically nearly every blog is completely fucking the same. Chances are, you hit one consisting of every single website the author finds mildy hilarious. Pretty great, huh? How was it the second time, when it had a different URL? How about the fifth? The twentieth? What the fuck? Alright, so you also read somebody’s political viewpoints or election coverage. How was that for you? Mind numbing? Maybe you found a movie or music review blog. Great, so you got a single person’s impossibly narrow selection of bits of culture. Maybe it was useful for you, if you read a review for something you were thinking about buying. But come on, you were going to buy it either way, weren’t you?
Blogs have a lot of potential. They could reinvent the way we communicate, the way we record our history. They offer a day-in-the-life view of the modern human, but they so rarely do. We could be using them to regale our fellow Earthworlders with amazing stories, or for sparking incredible debate and shared community understanding! It would be a Zen-powered eutopia of typing madness and it would fucking save the world. All we have to do is take those intriguing thoughts we all have several times per day and publish them in WordPress. We cann all achieve an evolution in society together.
Except I’m tired so I’ll probably do it tomorrow or something.
Today’s effort at controversy is:
Hitler had a great moustache!
You have no choice but to realise this. Hitler’s moustache was great. It was probably one of the top three tashes in all of time. It was so great that I propose naming it “Das Adolf.” Now and forever.
With controversy like this, can fame and fortune be far behind? VERY LIKELY.
Love,
Captain Cussy Pants.

