Warning: Strong language dead ahead, may seem inappropriate to old people, but only if you’re really old at heart. Also if you’re a parent who thinks being overprotective has any positive effects (hint: it doesn’t) at all, this is your cue to cover your kid’s eyes.
Here’s to the 140th American bank to go under this year. 140 is a good number, so I suppose this is a good day to shout it out loud that we fucking told you so!
We told you this would happen, a long time ago, and when it did happen you lot didn’t learn squat from it. You just kept on trucking like it was business as usual, and it took Roosevelt to get you out of your shit. And get you out of shit he did, but did you thank him for it? No! How dare he mess with the market? How dare he fix the economy with his un-American ways? Shun the disbeliever, the market would have fixed it faster than he did anyway, probably… What’s that you say? Capitalism causes this, and it’s inevitable? No, that can’t be true, capitalism is perfect! It must have been all the government interference. Yeah, that’s right, it was the socialist bastards in the government that did it, because they got so filthy rich during the depression, yeah!
Holy fucking shit it happened again!? Are you serious? It can’t have been Bush’s fault, he was perfect! Didn’t care that the market was fucking everyone up the ass, started wars, drove the nation into a disastrous deficit after Clinton, that asshole, dared run a surplus. There’s just no way it was the Bush administration’s fault. No, Obama did it, Obama and Clinton. The aftereffects of the Clinton administration’s socialist cheating ways, and Obama’s first five days in office, that’s what caused this. Hell yeah, praise the Lord, hoist the flag, and pass the ammunition, for peace, justice, and the American way.
I recently had a conversation with a woman who expressed to me her fears concerning the transfer of prisoners from Guantanamo Bay to a prison in Illinois. To loosely quote her, “When they were in Gitmo they were surrounded by water…now they can escape into America.” It took some restraint on my part to not explode with a rebuttal, but I tried my best to listen to what she was saying. I’m glad I did because I soon realized that the invalidity of her facts really wasn’t that important, what mattered was the sentiment she was trying to get across.
It brought to my attention the growing number of Americans who have a real, if not slightly irrational, fear of terror attacks on American soil; a fear which is not entirely dissimilar to the fear felt during The Cold War. Of course, it is only natural to have some lingering trauma from the acts of September 11, 2001. One of the main reasons 9/11 was so frightening was the shock felt at having an attack on “American soil.” Up to that point, we had been pretty spoiled in not having to live in a war-torn country in which stepping outside your door presented a fairly good chance of being killed. The closest and most recent comparison I can make to 9/11 would be Pearl Harbor. So, what, about 60 years in between the two disasters? To some, that seems like an impossibly long period of peace, so I think we’re pretty lucky.
What I’m really trying to get at is this message for Americans: DON’T GIVE INTO YOUR FEAR! The only thing that can come from doing so is irrational paranoia, ignorance, racism, distrust, and maybe, just maybe, another Cold War. I don’t know about you, but the thought of another Cold War is much scarier than the thought of another terrorist attack. I know it’s hard to break through that wall of fear, but you simply have to open your mind.
I have great hopes for this country. I truly believe we can change our ways and evolve into a healthier, more respectable country which can be admired for its hope, flexibility, and promise- as it once was.
Do you ever wonder what the point of this life is? You grow up, work your butt off in school in order to do what? To get a job. Why do we get a job? So we can buy food and shelter and all the other things we want. Again, why? So that we can live alone in that shelter, make that food for ourselves and do whatever else we do. Or perhaps we do it all to prepare for a family. Why do we want a family? To pass on our genes? To feel more fulfilled? To feel less alone?
At times this life seems so monotonous and pointless. And what if this is it? What if there’s nothing after this? No heaven, no hell, no reincarnation… Maybe we are all just animals with abnormally large brains who die and simply decompose into the earth and that’s the end of it. I can sometimes understand why people turn to religion; for comfort. It’s almost unbearable to believe that what I have previously stated is the whole truth.
Still, the rationalist side of me can’t deny the rather sensible notion that our own weaknesses are what create and expand religions. Maybe us humans think we’re just too darn special to be here on this planet for no reason. But why not believe in something more? If we truly are just earthly mammals with no hope of “afterlife,” then no harm can come from believing we are part of a much bigger picture. And if there does happen to be some sort of spiritual master, then kudos!
What scares me about religion and spirituality is the fact that some of the most “faithful” people sometimes exhibit behaviors that go against my own personal set of morals- morals which have been developed through my own life experiences. For instance, many religious people believe that being gay, lesbian, bisexual, and/or transgendered is wrong and sinful and that people who demonstrate these behaviors are undeserving of equal respect. I happen to believe tolerance and love for all living things is very important. In fact, it seems like anything that spreads negativity just can’t be “right.” Also, so many horrible things are related to organized religion. Let’s look at Israel, more specifically Jerusalem. People are killing each other over a piece of land that is considered sacred only because of the particular religion they practice. How is that okay? It’s not. No part of earth should belong to any one human or any one group of people, especially if those people believe that God created the earth. Wouldn’t their God(s) want everyone to share the land? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not blaming religion for the destruction of humanity, but I am saying that religion, put into the hands of us foolish humans is an INCREDIBLY powerful weapon.
To sum this mess up, I suppose everyone goes through a stage in life when they ponder the very things I speak (or type) of. What should we believe in? Is there a God or higher power? Were we put here? If so, was there a reason? Is there any hope for our kind? I, along with many other people, am completely torn. But I’m okay with that. I think it’s okay to admit that we don’t know and probably never will know the answers to any of these questions.
Yeah…..I can’t think of a good closer so, the end.
Hi.
Alright, it’s been a while since my last blog entry. I don’t have a lot of time for it lately, but I’m gonna try to squeeze a few out where i can.
What I wish to talk about today, is something called a vote of no confidence. This is a motion to recall an elected official from his position, done if a majority of some group agrees that this person no 
longer serves the best interest of the country. In Norway, members of parliament can form together to move for a vote of no confidence, either in the government or specific people in government (also if a single government has more than 2 votes of no confidence against members of it, the government has to resign).
What does this do? Well, it’s a system for keeping politicians in check. So that they can’t just go rampant and do whatever the hell they want with their elected positions, they have to keep the peoples best interest in mind. After all, the parliament is representatory of the supreme people as chosen through a votation. So if a member of government or the government itself no longer serves the people, the peoples direct representatives can recall it. At least in Norway. And it’s a nice thought.
In Venezuela, they have something similar to this. In addition to the parliament moving for a vote of no confidence, the people can do this as well if enough people sign a petition for it. Thus, if a great enough part of the population moves for a vote of no confidence in the president he has to resign. I take my hat off for Venezuela, because this is pure brilliance, and it is highly democratic and admirable.
If the president no longer serves the people, they can throw him and elect another one better suited. You know what this ensures? It ensures that issues stay on topic after election campaigns. In Norway, as I’m sure in the rest of the world, politicians are great at making promises before elections. Not so good at keeping them, and that’s a shame. This recalling system, the fact that the supreme people have the power not only to appoint its leadership but to throw it, is nothing short of brilliant. I believe a certain vendetta-fueled rebel said something about how the state should fear its people. And imagine how the world would have been if our leaders were afraid of us, and therefore couldn’t, for instance, go to war on Iraq because it felt fucking good idea at the time?
Yes I am aware of the fact that 18 states in the US has the ability to recall their governors, but that’s a bit irrelevant to the point I’m trying to make. I think. Anyways, I’m ending this entry now. No proper ending on it, so salutations and farewell to ye all.
Vegard
This entry is actually a few weeks old, from my other blog. I just didn’t bother posting in on brbcoffee until now. Nevermind that, here it is.
Lets talk about democracy. The word comes from two latin words. First up is Demos, which means people, and Kratos, which 
means power. So, democracy means power to the people! Which I’m all for. The problem is that the further along I get, the more obvious the flaw of todays “democracy” becomes. And this greatly saddens me. The kind of democracy thats most common today, pretty much the only one you find today, is that a representative democracy. This means that instead of public polls on issues, the public votes forth representatives to make decisions for them. This has flaws.
Obviously, most systems have some flaws. As it is today, the greatest flaw that i can detect is important cases not being represented at all by the representative politicians. In Norway there are two cases like this that im going to mention briefly here. The first one is about oil drilling in an area called Lofoten and Vesterålen. Basically, over 51% of the norwegian people feels that oil drilling shouldn’t be done here, because it is the birthing ground to one of the last big cod populations in the world. Also the area in question is 14 kilometres from land. Drilling here would cause major harm to lots of different businesses. Yet, in the norwegian parliament ca 10% is against it. Nice.
Also, the war in Afghanistan. I might blog about it at a later point, but for now ill suffice to say I’m 
strongly against it. So is over a third of the norwegian populous, yet there is not one single person in parliament against it. What the fuck!?! I am willing to apt for a complete democracy, where people make individual votes about cases! In Norway, to get a peoples vote it first needs to be suggested in parliament, then get approval from a major part of the representatives. Which never happens.
Representation through single cases is not the thing that worries me most tho. In Norway, a political party has to have over 4% to reach the treshhold for getting district-mandates. (there is no real english word for it. Basically, because people and power is centralized, communes away from the centre of power get additional mandates out above the population number, to make sure there is still people there that care about the districts.) Anyways, the problem with this is that this treshhold is so ridiculous. Norway just had its election, and one party ended up at 3.9%. They lost 2%, yet they lost 8 out of their 10 mandates because of it. They did not loose 80% of their votes!
Another problem with this system is the fact that it is almost impossible to get your first mandate. But from there it gets easier, then you hit the threshhold, and it gets even easier. And the bigger your party gets, the easier it gets to get an additional mandate. So a party that has 63 mandates needs far less actual votes to get an additional votes than you need for the first one.
Personally I think we should scrap the entire threshhold system and rather give mandates based on actual percentage of votes in relation to percentage of people. This has to be worked out, obviously, but it makes more sence than having some predetermined threshhold at which it suddenly gets easy-as-fuck to get in. Alternatively do as Germany did pre-hitler. Germany before hitler was the most democratic land the world has ever seen, in the sence that the threshold was 1%.
A high threshhold means 1 thing more than others: Tactical voting. People vote for the bigger parties, because parties below the threshhold has no real influence. Which is bullshit. Not the power part, but this phenomena. The bigger keep growing, and the small parties get squeezed out. As it is now, Norway is going towards a two-party system, something that is a mockery of the democratic idea. And if it ever comes to that I swear I can’t be held accountable for my actions.
Until next time friends,
Vegard