the whites of its eyes
by David Holden
Wednesday, December 26th, 2012
a preliminary diagnosis
as our terminally constipated “politicians” all so frequently say if ever anything resembling a microphone is thrust towards their dully arrogant and hideously complacent mouthparts:
let me make this ABSOLUTELY CLEAR…
the West, now aptly termed global arrogance, shows every day more clearly that it has opted for the narrow goal of technical progress backing up a notion of global politics based entirely on economic domination and military strength.
the West also demonstrates that in its ruthless pursuit of such narrow aims — which are wholly circumscribed by (perceived) self-interest — it will attempt whatever is in its power to suppress anything and everything to do with our broader human purpose of spiritual development, and in particular, innocence, compassion, and joy.
the West is thus defined, in aspirational terms, by an exaggerated technological ambition placed at the service of an extremely unhealthy megalomania.
this creature, the West may also be defined negatively, by what it lacks. in this respect the careful observer notes a total failure of creative imagination applied to the development of our human potential. narrow aims and lack of creative imagination need only a spark of hatred to burst into flame – and the resulting conflagrations of fanaticism soon press into service every available reserve of cruelty and malevolence, albeit such demonic forces always claim to be acting in the service of the worthiest and noblest of goals.
this situation can be properly understood only if we first of all realize that it is pathological.
you. Madam, yes, you. you nod your head in sage agreement. why so calm? is it so simple? does it not disturb you a little to acknowledge that we live in a madhouse? a madhouse equipped with an arsenal of the most terrible weaponry?
we live in a madhouse on top of an ominously rumbling volcano, and it is long, long ago that the patients took over the administration of this asylum. such a truth cannot be easy to live with. but it must be accepted because only truth can begin to set us free. the long reign of polite pretending has been exactly what any person of sense knew from the beginning it must be – an elaborate scheme for evasion and waste of time. nothing is so truly undignified as uttering elegant phrases which bear no relation whatsoever to the reality in which we count our days.
the widespread oppression, impoverishment, death and destruction we see all around us is not the byproduct of a normal and healthy modus vivendi for the species homo sapiens. all these undesirables are due to one-and-the-same cause – a serious disease in the soul of humanity and one which continually perverts the normal spiritual metabolism of our species to synthesize, time after time, instead of the intended servants of humanity, sackfuls of seedy and pathetic selfseekers each enslaved to some humiliating perversion by means of which they are easily seduced, blackmailed and controlled. this same diseased metabolism also synthesizes those at the opposite pole of these soft types – the rarer class of dangerous madmen, not seducible, but whose immoderate cravings for power bestow upon them a negative shamanic gift, a baneful, almost hypnotic, ability to lead the masses astray.
this situation can be understood only if we first of all recognize, unequivocally, that it is pathological.
and in scrutinizing this pathology we cannot fail to recognize in its every phase the deadly sins of greed and pride, along with their inevitable accomplices – cruelty and carelessness of others welfare.
amongst the most notable external features to be observed in the progression of this disease is a continual process, akin to the operation of a kind of self-destructive madness, of large-scale environmental degradation – with the inevitable side-effect of wholesale extermination of many other species. we are polluting and poisoning everything with our wastes and filth, and at the same time we are destroying the Earth’s delicate ecological balance with the unintended(?) consequences of irresponsible experimentation.
therefore this sickness does not merely affect humanity. it has become a sickness afflicting the Earth itself, or rather its beautiful surface layer of water, landscape and atmosphere which has recently been called our biosphere, inhabited by a myriad lifeforms, animal and vegetal, each depending for its continued survival on the existence of carefully shaped niches, the totality of which forms an interlocking system of remarkable intricacy.
refusing the lies
recently Harold Smith in a VT comment produced an excellent preliminary list (we could each add to it from our own experiences) and which we might think of as:
a draft non credimus for the early 21st century
I don’t believe that Abraham Lincoln gave a damn about Black people and their status, nor do I believe that he DID NOT deliberately provoke the Confederate attack on Ft. Sumter; I don’t believe that the Spanish blew up the USS Maine in Havana Harbor; I don’t believe that the Lusitania WAS NOT carrying munitions intended to kill Germans; I don’t believe that warmonger and consummate moral slug Woodrow Wilson involved the U.S. in WW1 to “Make the World Safe for Democracy”; I don’t believe that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was a “surprise”, nor do I believe that it was “unprovoked”; I don’t believe that Hitler exterminated 6 million Jews in gas chambers; I don’t believe that Harry Truman dropped atomic bombs on defenseless Japanese civilians as a “military necessity” “to save American lives”; I don’t believe that General George Patton died from injuries received in a “car accident”; I don’t believe that the government of Jacobo Arbenz (in Guatemala in the 50s) was any kind of “Communist threat” to the U.S.; I don’t believe that Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy; I don’t believe that the Vietnamese attacked the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964; I don’t believe that the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty in 1967 was an “accident”; I don’t believe that James Earl Ray assassinated Martin Luther King; I don’t believe that Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert F. Kennedy; I don’t believe that Saddam Hussein WAS NOT deliberately provoked into invading Kuwait, nor do I believe that George H.W. Bush, by and through his agent, April Glaspie, DID NOT deceive him into thinking the U.S. didn’t care wherether he invaded Kuwait in response to the said provocations; I don’t believe that Clinton wanted a peaceful solution with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, over the Kosovo issue; I don’t believe that TWA Flight 800 exploded in mid air because of “a spark in a fuel tank”; I don’t believe Saddam Hussein tried to buy “Yellow Cake” uranium oxide from Niger; I don’t believe that Saddam Hussein had “reconstituted” any WMD programs when Dick Cheney said he did; I don’t believe anything that Colin Powell said about Iraq in his speech to the U.N.; I don’t believe that “Arabs” attacked the U.S. on 09/11/2001, in part because the “U.S.” “government” has never produced any evidence in support of its story; I don’t believe that Osama bin Laden would pull off such a daring and successful attack and then deny it, therefore I don’t think Osama bin Laden had anything to do with it; I don’t believe that the three towers “collapsed” due to “fire”; I don’t believe that Bruce Ivins was the anthrax killer; I don’t believe that any of the numerous post 9/11 U.S. wars of aggression against any Arab/Islamic countries have any justifiable legal, moral or practical basis; I don’t believe that Pat Tillman was killed by a “friendly fire” “accident” any more than I believe that General George Patton died from injuries due to a “car accident”; I don’t believe “Obama” (if that’s even his real name) has a legitimate U.S. birth certificate, because if he did he would produce it, thus I don’t believe he is even a legal U.S. citizen, let alone a “Natural Born Citizen” of the U.S.; I don’t believe that “Obama” et al. want to repudiate the Second Amendment and disarm the U.S. citizenry because they care about “the children”, because if that were true, they wouldn’t be senselessly murdering children in far away places like Afghanistan and Pakistan and Yemen on an almost daily basis, nor would they be arming and supporting a bloodthirsty, illegitimate rogue state, Israel, which brutally and routinely kills defenseless Arab children, apparently for sporting purposes. In summary, I don’t believe anything the “U.S.” “government”, its owners, agents, enablers, apologists, and Court Historians say about anything of any significance.
Posted by David Holden
on December 26, 2012. Filed under Philosophy.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
46 Responses to the whites of its eyes
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
Jay Knott
December 26, 2012 at 7:56 pm
I like the rock climbing picture. The rest, not so much.
‘Sickness’. ‘Biosphere’. ‘Niches’. I used to believe all that too. Then I discovered it’s not about belief. I tried testing some of these ‘beliefs’. For example, ecology is a belief, not a science.
The list of random “I don’t believe” statements from ‘Veterans Today’ is a sad reflection of the state of opposition to war etc. in America today. How the establishment must laugh at the opposition’s methodological weakness.
David Holden
December 27, 2012 at 4:08 am
glad you like the top picture.
your admirably terse observation is a little too telescoped for me to decipher your intention, unless it be simply to convey a polite hand-wave of slightly impatient dismissal. your comment is undoubtedly fertile as it offers up several points which could serve to initiate a potentially useful discussion.
perhaps i may be permitted to mention three small matters pertaining to your paragraph 2 – in each case i feel more exposition would be helpful to those seeking an adequately precise understanding of your point of view.
firstly, the affirmation “it’s not about belief”, admirably succeeds in suggesting the triumphant completion of some fairly protracted period of cognitive self-appraisal, but suffers nonetheless from the lack of a clearly identifiable referendum for the impersonal nominative “it” – this problem may well not be evident to the utterer who doubtless holds before his mental gaze a knowledge of (or belief about) his own past and present intellectual intentions/aspirations, but such knowledge must, absent some telepathic and catalyzing event, necessarily be unavailable to the unprepared reader.
secondly, the phrase all that in the remark “i used to believe all that too.” suggests that the three items you selected (sickness, biosphere & niche) are meant not as a complete list, but as exemplars of some larger family of notions (which by implication you consider i entertain) – but if so the thread which binds this larger family of notions together can only be the common fate of your having parted company with them, an attribute which understandably remains somewhat opaque to me due to my insufficient familiarity with your intellectual history.
finally, without further elaboration, as a pair of contrasting concepts belief/science furnishes us with only a rather flabby instrument of comparison since any science is at the very least a whole complex system of beliefs satisfying certain further criteria of consistency and compatibility with observation. likewise the remark “ecology is a belief, not a science” succeeds in expressing a pejorative judgement, but as it stands must be taken as rhetorical rather than evidential. are you suggesting that the study of population dynamics, or of food chains has no empirical basis or employs fallacious reasoning? i suspect you felt tempted to use the more declarative phrase mere belief. if so it is a misfortune that your praiseworthy eschewal of an explicitly reductionist terminology may in this context serve only to enhance your vulnerability to the unmerited charge of being disingenuous.
footnote: as an incidental side-effect of the personal ambition of my then supervisor, i briefly met Charles Elton (1900-91) (pictured above in more youthful days) in the early 1970′s. the encounter was largely wasted on me at the time – as an ignorant, arrogant and somewhat callow youth i was quite unaware of the significance of his pioneering studies. however, to contextualize Jay’s remark that “ecology is a belief, not a science”, i felt it might be of benefit to other readers to illustrate the nature of this belief by quoting a brief appraisal and a table of contents from a recent reissue of his classic text Animal Ecology:
296 pages | 8 halftones, 13 line drawings | 6 x 9 | © 1926, 2001
Charles Elton was one of the founders of ecology, and his Animal Ecology was one of the seminal works that defined the field. In this book Elton introduced and drew together many principles still central to ecology today, including succession, niche, food webs, and the links between communities and ecosystems, each of which he illustrated with well-chosen examples. Many of Elton’s ideas have proven remarkably prescient—for instance, his emphasis on the role climatic changes play in population fluctuations anticipated recent research in this area stimulated by concerns about global warming.
For Chicago’s reprint of this classic work, ecologists Mathew A. Leibold and J. Timothy Wootton have provided new introductions to each chapter, placing Elton’s ideas in historical and scientific context. They trace modern developments in each of the key themes Elton introduced, and provide references to the most current literature. The result will be an important work for ecologists interested in the roots of their discipline, for educated readers looking for a good overview of the field, and for historians of science.
Contents
List of Plates and Diagrams in Text
Preface
Introduction by Professor Julian S. Huxley, M.A.
New Introduction by Mathew A. Leibold and J. Timothy Wootton
1. Introduction
2. The Distribution of Animal Communities
3. Ecological Succession
4. Environmental Factors
5. The Animal Community
6. Parasites
7. Time and Animal Communities
8. The Numbers of Animals
9. Variations in the Numbers of Animals
10. Dispersal
11. Ecological Methods
12. Ecology and Evolution
Conclusion
List of References
Index
Jay Knott
December 27, 2012 at 5:21 am
“I used to believe all that too” means I used to believe, but now reject, the prejudices revealed in your article:
“the West… exaggerated technological ambition… extremely unhealthy megalomania… self-destructive madness… large-scale environmental degradation… widespread oppression, impoverishment, death and destruction… destroying the Earth’s delicate ecological balance” etc. etc..
Compared to what? There was genocide in pre-Columbian America, but you don’t hear about it from the lefty academic establishment. There’s no such thing as ‘ecological balance’.
David Holden
December 27, 2012 at 5:27 am
thx for that clarification
again one might take issue with “there’s no such thing as…” – why so definite?
i assume you may be referring indirectly to one of the most difficult and controversial problems in theoretical ecology – the relation between the concepts of ecological succession and ecological invasion. Elton’s own thoughts on invasion were only published as a book in 1958, several decades subsequent to his earliest essays in the field. perhaps because i am much subject to the vagaries of an overactive fancy, i see in this controversy and the subsequent use made of it by those seeking to discredit the underlying ideas of ecology some parallel to attempts to discredit Thomas Kuhn’s (in my view) very useful distinction between normal science and scientific revolutions.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
December 27, 2012 at 11:29 am
I am impressed by the wise thrift exercised by this cat, playing gently with the resident mouse to make it last. After all, mice don’t grow on trees, not around here.
David Holden
December 27, 2012 at 2:00 pm
hi Ariadna, good to see you back. the rat pictured appears to me to be acting a part, and may have indulged in this kind of play before, possibly with other cats, or even members of less related species. the young cat seems in an affectionate rather than predatory mood. however, given the relative ease with which adjacent neural circuits in the vertebrate limbic system can trigger each other one must pay tribute to the rodent’s courage and the feline’s restraint. the shop assistant’s enthusiasm for the play to continue beyond its natural course cannot be approved on aesthetic grounds alone – it is as if a porn movie director tried to insist the stars continue their congress beyond the natural hormono-temporal boundary delimiting the springtime of their mutual erotic interest. this, in Nietszche’s terms, is human, all too human. however my cautious nature informs me that aspergers may, as is often the case, be responsible for my missing some obvious commercial motivation which could provide a simple explanation.
the comments on youTube, some giving expression to a restrained outrage, are also of considerable interest, providing an excellent illustration of several (insufficiently well-known) truisms concerning the way people can easily misinterpret (incompletely) camcorded activities. despite my very stringent position on the ethics of animal and human experimentation, i cannot prevent the imagination that if at the end were shown a photo of the mangled and mutilated corpse of a different rat (but one otherwise of very similar appearance) most people, myself included, would initially make the unjustified inference that the cat had killed it.
what still surprises* me is the persistence with which we cling on to our interpretations, even when we know full well how easily we can be induced into making a mistake. some unscrupulous people cannot desist from an urge to cynically exploit such weakness in order to line their own pockets. subsequent charitable contributions to worthy causes like the Iron Dome maintenance budget or the decorations bill for the Knesset’s annual Christmas party do not, in my coldly observant eyes, amount to any substantial mitigation of such petty crimes against humanity once the offences, as all too easily happens through the well-known behavioural positive feedback mechanism powered by secondary reinforcement, have become habitual. i remain open-minded on the nature/nurture aspect of the question.
* the only thing that surprises me is the fact that i retain the capacity to be surprised (La Rochefoucauld).
i have reworked this into the following routine which i try out occasionally, though success will remain limited until i can perfect an appropriate body-language idiom to flesh out the verbal script –
(me) “I’ve only got one fault, but it’s a big obstacle in life.”
(my interlocutor) “Oh! what is it?”
(me) “I judge myself too severely.”
Ariadna Theokopoulos
December 27, 2012 at 3:38 pm
“subsequent charitable contributions to worthy causes like the Iron Dome maintenance budget or the decorations bill for the Knesset’s annual Christmas party do not, in my coldly observant eyes, amount to any substantial mitigation of such petty crimes against humanity once the offences, as all too easily happen….”
fool me once...
December 27, 2012 at 5:42 pm
@AT
That\’s not no mouse!!!
Big respect if you live where the mice are that big!
I think though, the \”resident\” white \”mouse\” who, with a peculiar fondness for feta, can be heard humming to itself in the niches of deLib\’s corridors, mistakenly sees itself as the piper…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS-7EPDR-PY
Ariadna Theokopoulos
December 27, 2012 at 8:29 pm
OK, so not a mouse, but a white rat .Fine. I accept your correction in its entirety.
Feta? Are you suggesting it’s a Greek rat? I hope not.
Great song.
fool me once...
December 28, 2012 at 1:30 am
No, I\’m metaphorgoricalising that you are the Feta who the resident white rat finds peculiarly irresistible. The vids colours and lyrics to the tune he hums, gives clues to his true desire and ambition to, Pied Piper style, lead the way to truth on deLib.
. Hey talking of surfing, where is JB? Last I heard was when he said his computer was going slow slow slow on 道不道 . Do you reckon he may still be holed up in a bunker somewhere, you know, 2112 and all that?
Thus;
Can\’t you see, I\’m the Pied Piper
Trust in me, I\’m the Pied Piper
And I\’ll show you where it is AT
etc etc.
.
I was surfing on your cat/mouse metaphor to DH, but now that I have explained it, maybe I was on the beach all along
btw I am avoiding using apostrophes and quote marks cos for some reason this happens \”typo\’s\”
David Holden
December 28, 2012 at 1:32 pm
i’ve noticed an absence of Somoe too. is it possible they are attending a conference?
Blake
December 27, 2012 at 3:14 pm
David you are have an amazing intellect. I am in awe.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
December 27, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Quick, rephrase it, Blake. Make it something like this:
“ David, I am somewhat impressed by your intellect which might, just might, be a little above average although I don’t know from averages. Still and all, nice going.”
You don’t want to be responsible for David’s departure and absence for days and days while he recovers from your rough praise. Surely it has not escaped your attention he is praise shy. Exultant praise like yours may give him excruciating pain.
Blake
December 28, 2012 at 2:04 pm
Ah bless. Humble Holden.
fool me once...
December 27, 2012 at 8:04 pm
psst Blake, yeah I agree, but as AT notes \”he is praise shy\”, so it\’s better to say nowt and just absorb the rays. Otherwise you may receive a gentle nudge along the lines of…
.
November 6, 2012 at 3:40 am
\”…though i must warn you i am not easily swayed by flattery, even flattery as subtle as the suggestion that i am unusually ill-informed.\”
Although said in friendly jest, it was enough for me to close the compliment door, though I still occasionally draw a smiley face on the frosty door-glass to show appreciation for his magnificent, unparalleled truth seeking brain power
Ariadna Theokopoulos
December 27, 2012 at 8:28 pm
I knew you’d have documentation to support me…
Blake
December 28, 2012 at 2:05 pm
Lol. Noted. I shall absorb those rays.
Jay Knott
December 27, 2012 at 4:34 pm
David: “those seeking to discredit the underlying ideas of ecology some parallel to attempts to discredit Thomas Kuhn’s (in my view) very useful distinction between normal science and scientific revolutions.”
There may be a parallel, but they are quite different. Ecology rejects the idea of nature as a war between selfish genes, and replaces it with the cute idea of a balance of nature. Like your article, it is part of anti-Western, or in its extreme form, anti-human thought, separating us from the rest of nature and telling us we are being bad to cuddly polar bears.
Roy Bard
December 27, 2012 at 5:02 pm
” the idea of nature as a war between selfish genes”
Is that what you believe in Jay?
And how much do you think that idea in itself might have been promoted by powerful privileged men to jutify their own privilege and power?
Be careful now – you’re almost in danger of exposing your own belief system…….
Jay Knott
December 27, 2012 at 5:07 pm
Roy: “you’re almost in danger of exposing your own belief system…….”
You too, mate.
Roy Bard
December 27, 2012 at 5:17 pm
I’m not nearly as ‘enigmatic’ as you Jay
Jay Knott
December 27, 2012 at 5:19 pm
Rody – even if these powerful privileged straight white men ‘promoted’ ‘The Selfish Gene’ in the mistaken belief that it served their interests, it would have no bearing on its explanatory power.
Roy’s argument is straight (if I may use that word) out of ‘Not in Our Genes’. This, and similar offerings by Stephen Jay Gould et. al., conquered the universities in the eighties. It’s easy to show how they distorted the arguments of scientists to serve a left-wing agenda. Whether they also had a Jewish agenda is more controversial, and I’m not quite convinced of that.
Jay Knott
December 27, 2012 at 5:21 pm
That should have started ‘Roy’ not ‘Rody’.
David: “i assume you may be referring indirectly to one of the most difficult and controversial problems in theoretical ecology – the relation between the concepts of ecological succession and ecological invasion”.
No, I’m rejecting ecology completely. There’s no difference between succession and invasion. Some genes simply replace others.
David Holden
December 27, 2012 at 5:29 pm
with him having been the only person to comment on the pictorial aspect of my deeply flawed post – indeed he proclaimed – gratifyingly to the author – that the headline rock-climbing image satisfied him – i am intrigued by Jay’s declining to comment on the second, smaller image. if memory serves, it was something like this:
i mention this only because of the ruthless warrior connexion brought to our attention by Roy’s observation on Jay’s remark. it seems that Jay has undergone a conversion-type experience which naturally makes him intolerant of those who manifest his own former weaknesses –
intellectually speaking, not religiously, i hope it was not necessary to add.
Jay Knott
December 28, 2012 at 4:44 am
I’m not intolerant of anybody.
Roy Bard
December 28, 2012 at 8:01 am
It’s the way you sneer at people for not following your mysterious trajectory to believing the ‘official story’ about 9/11, and that apprently we’re all just a bunch of selfish genes that gives the impression you are though Jay
David Holden
December 28, 2012 at 10:37 am
perhaps a bad choice of word on my part. i didn’t mean the kind of intolerance which wishes to see its opponents harassed or locked up, but the doesn’t-suffer-fools-gladly type of intolerance – this is highly likely to manifest after a conversion because there is a (probably for the most part kept out of the conscious mind) negative feeling towards the pre-converted self which easily transfers to others in the manner Roy points out. to the extent that this process of transference is not conscious the convert may feel unfairly treated, or form the defensive-aggressive opinion that others are mere fools either unwilling to understand or incapable of grasping the Truth.
Jay Knott
December 28, 2012 at 3:12 pm
I’m accused of “sneering at people”, of “believing”, and of having “the defensive-aggressive opinion that others are mere fools either unwilling to understand or incapable of grasping the Truth.”
By truthers, no less.
I’d say something about pots and kettles, but I wouldn’t want to be accused of racism.
Roy Bard
December 28, 2012 at 4:49 pm
JK: “By truthers, no less”
Is that what I am?
And can you see how the addition of “no less” to your comment makes it looks like you’re sneering at these so-called truthers, as if they’re really beneath you?
fool me once...
December 28, 2012 at 5:56 pm
@Roy
Roy, do you think there might be a glitch in the wiring somewhere at the deLib end as there seems to be a typo fault when some, me included, but not all commenters do the \” or the \’? It appears from a cursory glance that it only happens to those that aren\’t writers?! pgg804, cosmo, fmo etc.
Roy Bard
December 28, 2012 at 10:30 pm
hi fmo – yes there does seem to be a glitch – it needs JB to sort it out – but he seems to be on a well deserved break. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that it is down to something that DH has done
Its happening to my posts as well – I think it is probably happening to everyone.
Jay Knott
December 30, 2012 at 4:45 am
Roy – you’re right.
I just read Peter ‘particle’ Higgs admonishing Richard Dawkins for arrogance. If Dawkins shouldn’t sneer, I definitely shouldn’t.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
December 28, 2012 at 11:31 am
How can you tell the diff bet. conversion and coming out–not that it matters much
David Holden
December 28, 2012 at 5:57 pm
“Helen and Robert are high-fliers in Silicon Valley. they are both gay, but somehow contrived to fall in love. after a lot of problems they came to see me. i told them the obvious solution: you have each got to have a sex change operation. they went through with it, swapped names, moved to a new town, and are now a happily married couple with two adopted children. that is conversion.
later, due to a family feud involving Helen’s (Robert’s) inheritance, the local media got hold of the story. that was coming out!”
Dr Chaim Y. Borgstein Gender, the Final Frontier? 2009, p.17.
fool me once...
December 28, 2012 at 12:50 pm
@DH
Will you expand a bit more on why you think someone would have a negative feeling to the pre-converted self, please?
I think I have experienced that, but the negative feelings toward others slowly disappear as the transition completes. The wrenching away from past thinking habits and beliefs can be a time of turmoil. I guess conflict and blame become bedfellows and negativity the mattress. Like Goldilocks, one has to carefully choose ones bed, but thats still no guarantee for a positive outcome.
Somoe
December 28, 2012 at 11:10 pm
Hi everyone, it appears there’s a glitch in the code.
When did this first start happening? There’s been a couple of upgrades recently so we need to narrow it down. Anyone?
Somoe
December 28, 2012 at 11:17 pm
I think despite its fancy appearance the new wordpress has some glitches that we didn’t expect. We will have to try switching plug-ins off to find the offending software.
Somoe
December 28, 2012 at 11:18 pm
By heck i think he’s fixed it!
Jonathon Blakeley
December 28, 2012 at 11:21 pm
I am still her on my old computer creeking away.
My Geeky mate has promised to build me the perfect PC in time.
Happy New YEar To You All.
deliBeration is 1 year old tomorrow 29/12/12
Roy Bard
December 28, 2012 at 11:28 pm
Happy Christmas and New Year to the both of you
Its cake tomorrow then…..
Jonathon Blakeley
December 28, 2012 at 11:23 pm
Aye always with the fixing of the bugs..
but they are not bugs just un documented features
Jonathon Blakeley
December 28, 2012 at 11:25 pm
delib seems faster to me now. though Its hard to tell in Cornwall on shitty internet.
Roy Bard
December 28, 2012 at 11:28 pm
I think its faster too
David Holden
December 29, 2012 at 4:22 am
i stayed in a small town in Shropshire with internet problems. there was a caf with a good connection – the owner said he’d organised a lot of local people and they’d clubbed together to get a high-bandwidth dish…
just a thought
Roy Bard
December 28, 2012 at 11:25 pm
‘By heck i think he’s fixed it!’
Aah great
Somoe
December 28, 2012 at 11:40 pm
Sorry to have been noticeably absent on the comments tho’ rest assured we nip in periodically and help tend the garden that is deLiberation that would be so much less without your collective efforts.
I have to say i particularly enjoyed reading this piece, David. A brilliantly timely piece that raises many deep issues affecting our globe as a whole. Thank you.