Ignorance + Arrogance. A dangerous combination

Ignorance is a dangerous thing. I think we can all agree on that.
You don't know that the stovetop is hot, you touch it, you get burnt.

And arrogance, well, it's just plain annoying. Unless I'm being arrogant. Then it's ok.

But put them together and you have the potential for something more lethal than a Justin Bieber concert.

And what's worse than a person who has no idea about something, but convinced he's right?

Well, probably that same person who has no idea about something, trying to convince somebody else he's right.

We've all been there: bosses, colleagues, siblings, Kanye West. The debates are never pleasant and usually by the end somebody's bleeding from somewhere.

Far too much arrogance and pride gets in the way of what would otherwise be sound, civilised debate in today's culture.

So what's the best strategy to conquering this synergistic nightmare? I say divide and conquer.

Let's leave arrogance and pride aside and keep discussions rational. Intelligent. Constructive.

Let's leave aside preconceived notions of prejudice, bigotry, hatred, and your mum's weight, and accept the fact that we're fortunate enough to live in a free society where we can all share our ideas on what we think society should look like.

And if we don't agree, that's ok! We can still be friends!

As long as you accept that I'm better than you, we'll get along just fine.

Trolling for Trolls

I confess that trolls have never been a big problem on my blog, mainly because I rarely write anything.

Of course, there are the odd jabs I make in various political directions which have earned me some unwanted and unpleasant attention in the past, but it's all part and parcel of putting your opinions in the public forum.

Still, it helps to understand the different types of trolls, and their general mentality. I've recognised a few in this list, which journalist and blogger James Delingpole has put together.

'til no-fault-divorce do us part

You may have seen an Austar commercial reappear on TV recently:

The commercial depicts a wedding ceremony with the celebrant asking the groom “Do
you Richard, take Alicia to be your lawfully wedded wife, knowing you have 60 days to
reconsider?” The celebrant then asks the bride “Do you Alicia, take Richard to be your lawfully wedded husband, knowing you can leave at any time?”

The voiceover:

 “If you have trouble committing, try Austar for 60 days.”

 I have this to say, in response to the commercial, and today's attitude to marriage:

"Geeee-aaaargh-a-za-frig-shi-rrraaargh!!!"

Thanks for listening. Comments welcome.

Carbon Tax: The Musical!

It's the most controversial issue on the lips of Australians at the moment. And it's an inevitability. There'll be a musical reproduction.

Here's my prediction for how it will pan out.

The show opens with our lead, PM Julia Gillard's rendition of U2's Sunday, Bloody (Carbon) Sunday, followed by the all-Australian public chorus singing Fleetwood Mac's (Tell me) Sweet Little Lies.


The show will also feature Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery performing Crying in the rain by the Everly Brothers, as he reflects on his dud predictions over the years, and Greens Senator Bob Brown belting out the Rolling Stones' Blinded by Rainbows, because, frankly, he is.

The choreography will be tricky: lots of mechanical hand movements and moving forward.

And lastly, Gillard closes the show with Bacharach's Promises, Promises, all to thunderous applause as the chorus hauls her out of Parliament after the 2013 election and deports her back to Wales on a solar-powered freighter. Carrying live-export cattle.

Bravissimo!

What relaxation sounds like

I was introduced to this delight on YouTube by my favourite composer the other day (he had a link on his FaceBook page - it wasn't a personal introduction, alas...)

The video features six male voices: the harmonic 'cloud' they create, particularly in the latter half of the piece, is simply breathtaking.