Last night, I watched the seminal action-thriller film Speed, starring Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock, and some other famous people. Obviously this isn’t the most cerebral thing that I could have watched – Hamlet was on today. But it did make me think – given the millions and millions of hours academics waste studying Shakespeare and reading too much into it, I think they’ve missed something. If only they’d stopped examining Hamlet from a post-modernist perspective, and had instead looked at Speed, they would have spotted the most obvious commentary on modern capitalism I’ve ever seen.
Think about it – the bus being unable to stop is a comment on capitalism’s need to constantly move forward and grow, and the jeopardy of the bus exploding is a metaphor for if the capitalist system slows down, the world economy will explode – taking many innocent civilians with it. No one being able to get off the bus is just like how it’s impossible for anyone – or any one country – to opt out of global markets and the capitalist system – because of the hold capitalism has upon everyone, whether they like it or not. Anyone who does try to escape – like one of the passengers – will just get destroyed for trying, not through the fault of the other participants in capitalism (the other passengers), but by the structure of the system itself.
Reeves’ saying “The bomb is big enough to blow a hole in THE WORLD” is not the clunkiest line in cinema history – far from it – it’s actually remarkably prescient, and is actually a commentary about the importance of capitalism in world society. If we were to lose capitalism overnight, society would break down.
The gap in the road that the bus has to jump is a metaphor for the occasional crisis that capitalism faces – and the extraordinary steps that are required to get past it (like bank bailouts).
The villain, an ex-cop out to make money is an allegory for the profit driven nature of the capitalist system – and the corrupting influence of money. The good guys in the film are the governments of the world – trying to correct the inadequacies of the free market and counter-balance the unfettered profit-driven motives of private industry.
And of course, Keanu Reeves’ wooden acting is an allegory for the destruction of trees and other natural resources in pursuit of consumption and the bus never stopping.
Look out for my thesis, Pop Quiz Hotshot: Speed, Society and Capitalism, in the new year…
Ridiculously, my work thought it a good idea that they lend me a video camera to make tutorial videos and the like for them. So today I had a play with the camera to test some things out, like how to edit the video and that sort of thing, and in the process recorded myself doing something more amazing than Derren Brown. Have a watch for yourself:
Poor journalists. It must be a pain in the arse when a story breaks at around midnight, so you have to cut them some slack for, perhaps, not living entirely up to proper Woodward & Bernstein-esque journalistic practice at such an hour. Especially on a showbiz story…
A subtle shift has been going on in the war with Afghanistan, apparently. The politicians in America and Britain are talking less about the need to turn the country into a vibrant multi-party democracy, like they’ve been trying to do with Iraq, and have been talking about “stability” instead. Obviously this is because they’ve realised that turning Afghanistan democratic is going to be really difficult, so have instead redefined the challenge. After all – a draw is a bit like a win, but with less people getting a bit upset.
Kabul needs a tough, tightfisted central ruler who can manage the warlords and promote such basics as trade, clean water, and – we’ve moved on since 1485 – education for girls
He’s arguing that Afghanistan needs a Henry VII. And whilst this is a good idea, is a bit impractical, what with Henry having been dead for about 500 years. Though this did make me think of another leader who could do this job, who has a proven track record, and will provide an authoritarian, yet stable government:
Saddam Hussein.
Unfortunately he too has been dead for a few years now, but just think what wonders he could have done for the original war on terror, if they’d had the foresight to keep him alive and given him a new country to play with. He’d have made the perfect President of Afghanistan.
When Saddam was in charge of Iraq he ruled with an iron fist, but managed to hold together a country made up of a patchwork of tribes, ethnicities and interests that’d been cookie-cuttered out of the map by a pencil drawing artificial borders. Sound familiar?
What’s more is that Saddam would have been the perfect consensus candidate. The west need someone they can work with, and they’ve a long history of working with Saddam throughout the 1980s, and Saddam would’ve never dreamed of working with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, having been mutual enemies whilst he was leader of Iraq. It’s not even as though he’d be a puppet of the west in the eyes of the Afghan people, as he’s got a well-known history of standing up to and opposing the Americans, and it’s fairly unlikely that he’d introduce western concepts like “democracy”.
When Saddam became Iraqi Prime Minister, under President Bakr, before he became President and sort of ballsed up a few diplomatic matters, he did some relative good for thte Iraqi people too, nationalising the oil industry, creating a buoyant middle class. Maybe he could do the same for Afghanistan’s economy and boost trade just like Michael White says it needs – after all, he has some industry contacts: specifically the French arms industry and the Russian nuclear industry.
As Iraqi President, Saddam ruled Iraq as a secular government, perhaps because he was in the Sunni minority – not that this would be a problem in Afghanistan as it’s 85% Sunni. He also ran Iraq as a highly centralised state – another item on Michael White’s list, and another key component of holding the country together.
The best bit of this would have been that there’d be no chance of Saddam going a bit mental and starting wars like he did before – Afghanistan’s armed forces are – as is my understanding – a couple of guys with AK47s and some paper planes. So he’d pose no threat to international security, as was alleged during his first go at running a country.
The King of Pop is dead, with no immediately obvious heir to the throne. I imagine in the next few days we’ll see the different pretenders to the crown emerge, each sounding things out and making their case – this, however, terrifies me. If a candidate can capture the public’s imagination they could take power quickly and we could – god forbid – end up with a situation where Bono is in a position of power, rather than just pushing his nose up to the backside of it. The other possible outcome is that of civil war if no one contender takes the lead – and this would be dreadful for society, as can we really cope with another King Richard vs Prince John, or Oasis vs Blur during a recession?
It is for these reasons that I have decided to submit myself as an independent candidate for the new King of Pop. And I hope that you, zeitgeist, will support me.
Sure, I may not have the superficial qualities associated with the office: musical talent, a back catalogue of hits or even a likeable personality, but I believe I am the candidate to steer popular culture through these serious times, because of my political and managerial skills.
Here are my manifesto pledges that, if elected, I will enact to radically reform the entire pop music landscape:
1) Blanket ban on interviews with music professionals.
There’s nothing worse than hearing a musician be interviewed, be it their uninformed opinions or ability to talk shit. No, your new record isn’t a journey, it isn’t “saying something” and I think things are slightly more complicated than your song implies. No, we can’t just solve all of the world’s problems with “love”.
This ruling will also apply to appearances on Nevermind the Buzzcocks, unless the musician demonstrably has anything resembling charisma (unlikely).
2) Politics banned unless the musician knows what they are talking about, and ideally, have a degree in a relevant subject
Don’t get me wrong, I love political music – but far too often is politics used by mainstream acts to boost flailing careers, or to behave sanctimoniously towards the public despite their private jet ownership. I realise this is a tired observation, but the pop world needs a King who will prevent the Bonos, Geldofs and Madonnas from preaching until they’ve written theses on the economics of debt reduction.
3) Only political music will be allowed
This may sound contradictory to the above – but it is not. This will narrow the range of artists and cut all of the crap and waste out of popular culture. Overnight, superficial acts who only sing about feelings and emotions, and who are inherently selfish and inward-looking, will be wiped out. Pop will be forced to look outwards at things that really matter, and fight for and raise awareness of issues in a genuine way. There will be a dispensation made available for songs that are about social and scientific issues, but these will have to be justified in a political context.
4) No sell-outs
The four-big-labels oligarchy will be dismanted and replaced with DIY independent labels – and acts will be banned from performing in venues bigger than, say, Islington Academy. All albums will have to be bought from the merch stand. In additional, file sharing will be fine – but people will pay back the artists by going to gigs and supporting the scene.
5) James Blunt will be banned from music.
I don’t think I need to explain this one.
So that’s my manifesto – so, zeitgeisty readers, I implore you to elect me, James O’Malley, as the new King of Pop.
I went down to Westminster today to see what was going on, and to check if Gordon Brown was still the Prime Minister or not. I bumped into Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox whilst down there – so seizing the moment I thought I better ask him something. I am now officially a citizen journalist:
If you’re anything like me, chances are you’ve been full of righteous anger over the last week because of the whole MP’s expenses thing. Every day, the Telegraph has been giving us more and more reason to hate politicians, because it turns out that the clichéd complaint, previously only peddled by those not informed enough to follow politics as closely as obsessives, is literally true: They are all on the take and are only looking after themselves after all.
The ridiculous claims reached their pinnacle on Tuesday, when it was revealed that one Tory ponce was claiming for cleaning his moat. Obviously the sceptic might think that the word “moat” is probably describing a tiny pond or something, and is blowing it out of proportion, but no, look at the pictures – he literally does have a moat.
It’s perhaps not surprising that the public’s faith in politics and politicians is at an all time low, and there’s a lot of speculation that the next election will see the biggest kicking out of incumbents in ages (and not just because of the Prime Minister being shit at his job).
So obviously this is a concern for politicians, and they need to do something to turn it around, to try and reassure the public that they’re not all corrupt bastards – and I’ve an idea for what they can do. Previously I’ve advanced the theory that we’re reliving 1979 – the Tories are doing well, we’re in a recession, The Specials are touring again – but I’ve changed my mind, and I think that politicians need to go further back in time to find a solution: Back to the 19th century. If they want to save Parliamentary democracy, they need to repeal the Great Reform Act.
The Great Reform Act was the change in law that enfranchised millions of more people, for the first time gave most men the vote, and gave everyone proper representation for the first time. Politics is no longer seen as a noble profession – so what better way is there to change this perception than to return to a time when politics was constituted entirely of nobles?
Things wouldn’t be terribly different – the Tories would still be there and doing well, and given the polls it’s entirely plausible that the long-dead Whig party stand a better chance of being elected than the Labour party at the next election.
Repealing the Great Reform Act would put the expenses scandal to bed once and for all. MPs owning second homes (to have one in London and one in their constituency) is one of the major points of controversy – if we went back to having rotten boroughs, and changed it so that all of the constituencies were inside the M25, no MP (except for maybe Keith Vaz) would need to have a second home. Sure, this may lead to some of the same issues as used to happen before the Great Reform Act, such as major population centres like Manchester and Birmingham not being represented, but without representation… who are they going to complain to?
What’s more – if we go back to a situation where only land-owners have the vote, then it won’t be possible to complain about millionaire Tories having moats – as moats will not be the exception, but will pretty much become the norm.
Does anyone want to join me in a peasants revolt, in calling for a less transparent and democratic Parliament?
I spent most of the Easter weekend glued to the news channels and the political blogs because it was all terribly exciting – the characters and blogs that I’ve been following for ages suddenly came alive, like it if were a TV adaption of a work of literature.
Seeing Iain Dale, Derek Draper, Paul Staines et al come to life on the screen was how I imagine it must have felt to see the Lord of the Rings films for the first time after years of being a Tolkien bore.
When they suddenly became newsworthy, it was like I already had an emotional stake in the production – whilst they were not childhood heroes of mine (a failed Tory candidate, a whiny disgraced psychotherapist and a muck-raking gossip-monger aren’t quite as inspirational as, say, Batman) – I already felt like I knew them. After all, Dale has commented on this blog, Draper apparently follows me on Twitter and Staines linked to me long ago.
So as you can imagine it was thrilling to see them get their break on TV – especially as they might have been wearing coat-tails that I could perhaps have grabbed on to.
Though this said, I don’t think the plot was up to much. The smears that Damien McBride came up with were rubbish. I mean, I understand wanting to stick it to the Tories – thinking anything but this is tantamount to mental illness in my book, but McBride’s work just smacks of over-thinking it.
One of the smears, according to the Sunday Times, was to suggest that George Osbourne once wore women’s underwear and blacked up. Women’s underwear I could believe – same if it were just blacking up – but both of these things together… really?
I think the most bizarre thing that McBride did though was to suggest smearing ‘mad’ Nadine Dorries, a relatively obscure backbencher who’s MP for mid-Bedfordshire. The suggested smear was to suggest that she’d had an extra-marital affair – which is pretty tame, not to mention difficult for a woman who has been divorced for some time. But this is stupid anyway because you don’t need to make stuff up to have a go at Dorries because she’s crackers.
Want proof? Check out this dispatches documentary following her around the time of the abortion/human embryo/whatever bill a while back – she’s seen hanging out with, and in the pockets of, young earth creationist fundamentalists and all sorts. I think there’s even a sequence in the documentary where she avoids the question of “how old is the earth?”.
She’s also a member of the Cornerstone group of Tories – a group for whom the general Tories just aren’t right wing enough for. Y’know, the unpleasant socially conservative “faith and family” types who sound idelogically closer to Mitt Romney than David Cameron. All Labour would have to do would be to point out that ‘Dave’ is backed up by this group of crackpots and the Tories would look like a right nasty bunch again.
So in a bid to grudgingly help the Labour party, as I really don’t want the Tories to get in at the next general election, here are some of my suggestions for more realistic smears that could be employed:
William Hague wears a bald cap to hide his ginger hair
George Osbourne’s wife has some mental health problems… because she’d have to in order to cope with looking at Osbourne’s face with such regularity.
Derek Draper is actually a closet member of the Conservative Party who was sent to sabotage Labour’s election chances (I’m still hoping that this is true)
I like to think of myself as the anti-Amish. Not only do I love technology and hate Amish people, but I think that rather than steal your soul, only photography or being filmed can truly validate your existence. It’s why I moved to the CCTV capital of the world, and why today, I appeared fairly prominently in the background of a news report.
No, I wasn’t in Austria sticking up for Joseph Fritzl (though I’d still argue that the default reaction to “secret underground dungeon” is “that’s cool” rather than “that’s horrible”), but I went to a protest organised by TV’s Mark Thomas. That’s right, TV’s Mark Thomas. Not the other one.
The cause was noble: it was calling for the government to invade Jersey.
Jersey is known to be harbouring billions of pounds, having spent years avoiding tax inspections, and is thought to have links to a number of rogue corporations and shadowy groups known as hedge-funds. What makes the need for this action even more imminent is that the UK government has in fact sold off various buildings to private companies (who then lease it back) based in Jersey – in practice, this means that HMRC, the tax inspectors who collect tax and track down people who are avoiding and evading tax rent a building from a company who avoid paying tax. You don’t have to be a genius to realise that this is not on and thus support the military action.
Brilliantly, the story made More4 news tonight. Here’s their report, in which if you look closely you can see me in a suit:
Obviously though, what with this being the future and all, it was I, the citizen journalist who beat Channel 4 to the studio. In fact, I did a live broadcast to the internet. Here’s my report, as it was broadcast live:
This time there’s apparently 120 Labour MPs ready to rebel over the part privatisation of the Post Office. I think it’s about time – in fact, I think that it doesn’t go far enough: we need to shut down the Royal Mail entirely.
For too long, the meddling nanny-state has had a near-monopoly on delivering letters. Why doesn’t the state trust us to travel and take written communications and parcels to people ourselves? Why must the Post Office provide a service to take my letters to whoever I want them delivered too when I am capable myself of driving the letters to their destinations myself?
What makes me even more is the government’s sick profiteering. Stamps are merely a stealth tax imposed on us by literal paper-pushing bureaucrats.
And don’t get me started on the speed camera-like ruse of legally imposing occasions like Christmas, where it is almost obligatory to send greetings cards and line the pockets of the Hallmark-industrial-complex.
![Album art for 005 Warped Tour Compilation [Disc 1] by Dropkick Murphys](http://jamesomalley.co.uk/blog/wp-content/lastfm_album_art/2005_Warped_Tour_Compilation_[Disc_1]^Dropkick_Murphys.jpg "Dropkick Murphys - 005 Warped Tour Compilation [Disc 1]")
_Noise_Conspiracy.jpg "The (International) Noise Conspiracy - 002-09-17: 9:30 Club, Washington D.C., USA")
