Mass killings and eugenics are a good thing

[zigeunerweisen]

UK & world


'Beckham is nation's hero' Jan 23 2004


George Bush is as popular as Jesus, and Tony Blair can claim as many fans as illusionist David Blaine, Pop Idol singer Gareth Gates and model Kate Moss, a new study of celebrity worship revealed.

The academic research, which has already quizzed 2,500 people in the UK, has sought to discover who the country's most popular figures are - with England football captain David Beckham topping the list and scoring more votes than nearest rivals Brad Pitt and Justin Timberlake combined.

Despite child abuse allegations against him, singer Michael Jackson maintains a loyal fanbase and polled the fourth most votes in the University of Leicester project.

Dr Adrian North, of the School of Psychology, said his team has compiled a list of the country's top ten celebrities as part of plans to examine why people become fascinated and obsessed by public figures.

He said that researchers will now examine the reasons those stars are idolised and the mental state of their most ardent fans.

"Although people could have voted for great political thinkers or artists, their top ten comprised Hollywood stars, pop musicians and a footballer," said Dr North.

"What links all the names in our top 10 is not their great minds but their great looks."

Former South African President Nelson Mandela was the only politician to win a respectable ranking in the list, placed at number 14, three spots behind Diana, Princess of Wales.

Dr North added: "Tony Blair polled as many votes as master of illusion David Blaine. Not a single person voted for Michael Howard or Charles Kennedy and Jesus got exactly the same number of votes as George Bush junior."

Researchers, who hope for more help with their on-line project www.celebritystudy.com, also tested public opinion on the professions thought to produce the most celebrity figures. Acting predictably topped the list - but politics won fifth place, ranked behind sport, TV and music but regarded as more high-profile than modelling, comedy and belonging to the Royal Family.

[zigeunerweisen]

In here
icnorthwales.icnetwork.co.uk/

[andymackem]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

The proletariat are morons who deserve crushing oppresion - ideally at my hands.

There's no point educating these buggers. Just trap them in a netherworld of MacDonalds cuisine and "reality" TV and allow them to continue as worker drones.

But why has this happened?

I blame the demise of religion. I don't believe in it myself, but at least it offers either a state to which we can aspire or a value set against which we can rebel.

I don't know if anyone has ever been to anywhere like Bradwell, with a remote Saxon chapel founded on the Essex coast by St Chad, who travelled down from Lindisfarne to spread the gospel. When you visit you can still get a real sense of what it might have been like travelling into unknown territory simply because you had a burning message that you wanted to share with other people, and personally I find that very moving.

Even without sympathising with Chad's faith I can't help but respect his efforts.

By contrast nobody believes in anything but themselves anymore. Overly materialistic and under-imaginative, society's aim is becoming a headlong rush into pure blandness. Where once we felt pressure to change and evolve, now we feel pressure to conform and stagnate.

A good dose of heavy-handed faith would liven us up no end, IMHO.

[Quiff Boy]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

The proletariat are morons who deserve crushing oppresion - ideally at my hands.

There's no point educating these buggers. Just trap them in a netherworld of MacDonalds cuisine and "reality" TV and allow them to continue as worker drones.

But why has this happened?

I blame the demise of religion. I don't believe in it myself, but at least it offers either a state to which we can aspire or a value set against which we can rebel.

I don't know if anyone has ever been to anywhere like Bradwell, with a remote Saxon chapel founded on the Essex coast by St Chad, who travelled down from Lindisfarne to spread the gospel. When you visit you can still get a real sense of what it might have been like travelling into unknown territory simply because you had a burning message that you wanted to share with other people, and personally I find that very moving.

Even without sympathising with Chad's faith I can't help but respect his efforts.

By contrast nobody believes in anything but themselves anymore. Overly materialistic and under-imaginative, society's aim is becoming a headlong rush into pure blandness. Where once we felt pressure to change and evolve, now we feel pressure to conform and stagnate.

A good dose of heavy-handed faith would liven us up no end, IMHO.

not sure about your proposed solution (my faith and beliefs are governed by my own set of ideals, feelings and general wish to be fair and considerate) but i do agree with a lot of what you say: your summary of society's failings etc

depressing isnt it?

vive la revolution!

[MAtT]

When was this supposed golden age of human nature when the heroes of the general populace were great thinkers and intellectually deserving people; rather than the stars of football, TV, film, the miltary, the theatre, the court joust, or the coliseum?

People haven't changed - neither the 90% of the masses who don't share your interests or opinions, nor the 10% who do.... only the contexts and rapidity of change has altered.

[RicheyJames]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

The proletariat are morons who deserve crushing oppresion - ideally at my hands.

There's no point educating these buggers. Just trap them in a netherworld of MacDonalds cuisine and "reality" TV and allow them to continue as worker drones.

and what the f**k makes you so superior? i mean, just what gives you the right to even define who the proletariat are let alone propose a "solution"? from the tone of your post anyone would think that you were as morally and intellectually superior to the general populace as me. you're not. now get off your high horse and back in the gutter.

and while i'm here: i don't even understand why any of you hold the results of this survey in such disdain. despite the efforts of some morally bankrupt journalist (and i know that's a tautology before someone bothers to point it out) to twist this research into some damning indictment of the state of modern britain, the survey in question is merely an effort to discover people's favourite celebrity and the extent of their "devotion" (for want of a better word) to said celebrities. nothing about "heroes". so is it really that surprising that a man who brings enjoyment to millions of football fans and leads the national team should come top of such a survey? i think not.

[paint it black]

get nothing right in the grammer quiz to see the result of such a stupid philosophy. Even in jest it's very sick


.... unless of course you include Liverpool

[Black Planet]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

Then what do you propose in it's place?

[mugabe]

Then what do you propose in it's place?

http://www.angryflower.com/itsits.gif

[RicheyJames]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

Then what do you propose in it's place?

easy. a benevolent dictatorship.

oh, and mugabe; it's getting tired now.

[markfiend]

How do you propose to ensure the benevolence of the dictator? (Not that the dictatorship of the electorate is particularly benevolent; democracy is a bad system. However, it is about eight times as good as any other.)

[Black Planet]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

Then what do you propose in it's place?

easy. a benevolent dictatorship.

oh, and mugabe; it's getting tired now.

And what IS a benevolent dictatorship? Caesar Augustus started out that way.. He was murdered by his wife Livia who put her son Tiberius in charge. He ended up on the Isle of Capri living a debauch life. Followed by Caligula...who made his horse a Senator, and believed himself a God. He was murdered by his Guard becasue he was a horrible Emperor.

I just don't believe in dictatorships, even so called benevolent ones. They tend to morph as absolute power corrupts absolutely, even in the face of good intentions.

[RicheyJames]

another easy one - i'll do it. i'm already absolutely corrupt and i have no good intentions...

[markfiend]

Well it's not a benevolent dictatorship then is it?

[mugabe]

oh, and mugabe; it's getting tired now.

Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi, sed saepe cadendo.

[Black Planet]

another easy one - i'll do it. i'm already absolutely corrupt and i have no good intentions...

LMAO

[markfiend]

Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi, sed saepe cadendo.

Chinese water torture?

[RicheyJames]

Gutta cavat lapidem, non vi, sed saepe cadendo.

fair point. and i'm completely behind you in your unceasing campaign to stamp out these unnecessary abuses of the poor apostrophe. carry on!

[Black Planet]

Sorry boyz I am she who will not be stopped!

*BP* laughs evilly!!!!

[andymackem]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

The proletariat are morons who deserve crushing oppresion - ideally at my hands.

There's no point educating these buggers. Just trap them in a netherworld of MacDonalds cuisine and "reality" TV and allow them to continue as worker drones.

and what the **** makes you so superior? i mean, just what gives you the right to even define who the proletariat are let alone propose a "solution"? from the tone of your post anyone would think that you were as morally and intellectually superior to the general populace as me. you're not. now get off your high horse and back in the gutter.

and while i'm here: i don't even understand why any of you hold the results of this survey in such disdain. despite the efforts of some morally bankrupt journalist (and i know that's a tautology before someone bothers to point it out) to twist this research into some damning indictment of the state of modern britain, the survey in question is merely an effort to discover people's favourite celebrity and the extent of their "devotion" (for want of a better word) to said celebrities. nothing about "heroes". so is it really that surprising that a man who brings enjoyment to millions of football fans and leads the national team should come top of such a survey? i think not.

Morally bankrupt journalist? And I'm arrogant and superior one?

As a journalist myself, with a fairly clear moral and ethical code which I do apply on a daily basis in my professional and personal life, I think I'm entitled to tell you to stick your ill-informed preconception of a profession firmly up your arse.

In the nicest possible way, of course.

As for my right to define a proletariat and look for a solution, I'd argue being a thinking human (as opposed to what appears to be a computer-generated rant machine) qualifies me to have an opinion on the state of my fellow man. Don't tell me you're unhappy because you disagree with me? I'm sure you can do better than that

[andymackem]

This is why I don't approve of democracy. When you give the people a choice they get it wrong.

Then what do you propose in it's place?

That's the hard part. Assuming I can't rule the world myself (tempting, I know, but I can't do it all - too lazy) I'd have to say I'm still working on it.

As soon as I get an idea I'll let you know.

[zigeunerweisen]

and while i'm here: i don't even understand why any of you hold the results of this survey in such disdain. despite the efforts of some morally bankrupt journalist (and i know that's a tautology before someone bothers to point it out) to twist this research into some damning indictment of the state of modern britain, the survey in question is merely an effort to discover people's favourite celebrity and the extent of their "devotion" (for want of a better word) to said celebrities. nothing about "heroes". so is it really that surprising that a man who brings enjoyment to millions of football fans and leads the national team should come top of such a survey? i think not.

The problem is exactly the kind of people that were chosen. Where are the great politicians, thinkers, artists, cientists? People that change the course of history? Why were these people not chosen, why aren't they looked up to as are entertainment celebrities?

The survey was not "merely an effort to discover people's favourite celebrity and the extent of their "devotion" (for want of a better word) to said celebrities". The survey discover what we all knew already, today's world is dominated by pop ideology, materialism and mass culture. The icones of the XXIst century are the beautiful people, the adulation of celebrities.

Although it was a british survey, i'm quite sure the results would be similar if it was conducted in any other country.

And Richey, i know you're too smart not to know this and that you would love joining me in bombing some of this people just for the fun of seeing them blowing up.

[zigeunerweisen]

and what the **** makes you so superior?

I think Beckham is so gay that actual men having sex is straighter, and i think Justin Timberlake is a joke. That makes me superior

[mugabe]

bombing some of this people just for the fun of seeing them blowing up.

Sometimes I wish I were a cannibal- less for the pleasure
of eating someone than for the pleasure of vomiting him - E. M. Cioran

[RicheyJames]

Morally bankrupt journalist? And I'm arrogant and superior one?

actually i think you'll find that dismissed your claims to be superior. which i guess in some people's eyes makes me pretty damn arrogant.

As a journalist myself, with a fairly clear moral and ethical code which I do apply on a daily basis in my professional and personal life, I think I'm entitled to tell you to stick your ill-informed preconception of a profession firmly up your arse.

In the nicest possible way, of course.

well, believe it or not, i wasn't aware of your occupation when i wrote that. that's not to say that i don't still believe that the majority of journalists are morally bankrupt (and i think my point that the journalist and/or sub-editor responsible for the story under discussion twisted a valid piece of research to fit their own "story" is still valid, but i'll discuss that later), but i'm quite prepared to accept that there are a few exceptions to this rule and you, mr mackem, may well be one of those exceptions.

As for my right to define a proletariat and look for a solution, I'd argue being a thinking human (as opposed to what appears to be a computer-generated rant machine) qualifies me to have an opinion on the state of my fellow man. Don't tell me you're unhappy because you disagree with me? I'm sure you can do better than that

"computer-generated rant machine" - i like that. i might just edit my profile. my point still stands though. what puts you, me or anyone else in a position to dismiss "the proletariat" in the terms which you used in your original post. this sort of attitude seems particularly prevalent in the goth/alternative "scene" and, quite frankly, is the sort of pretentious nonsense that makes me despair.