Plans for the Queen's Diamond Jubilee have been announced. Massive cost to working people, parties, banquets, touring the world, fantastic!
You will be pleased to know that the plans for the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee have been finalised. I will personally sleep much easier now, knowing what will happen.
The plans involve all the Royals touring Commonwealth countries, visiting welcoming and developed cities, but steering well clear of any dissenting voices or slums and squalor. These countries are busy preparing banquets, and parties for the royal parasite, whilst half of their populations are living in shacks and surviving on a few pence a day.
Prince Harry is going to stage a charity polo match! This is fantastic news, what a courageous and selfless act of philanthropy.
The Queen and Prince Philip are planning to reduce their workload, and they are 86 and 91 next year. Reduce their workload? This has to be some kind of fucking joke? Since when has never cooking a meal, never washing your own clothes, having servants, visiting numerous countries every year, living in absolute luxury, having a guaranteed income of millions, ever been considered fucking work?
No wonder these bastards all live to a ripe old age. That is a fucking measure of how hard these chinless fucking bottom feeders have worked.
To make matters worse, we are being given yet another extra bank holiday. Funny how the public sector strikers are accused of damaging our economic recovery by allegedly costing £500 million for a day’ strike, despite most of that being recouped in not paying wages for the day. Yet, we will have had two extra bank holidays for the Royal Wedding, and the Diamond Jubilee, which between them will cost the economy £40 billion.
Perhaps I have got it wrong. As the government said last year, “times are hard, and events like the Royal Wedding cheer people up. They are good for morale and you cannot put a price on that” (or words to that effect).
Not me I afraid. I wake up every day hating these bastards, made worse when I see them in all of their finery, in their horse drawn carriages. All this happens whilst in the exact same city people are living in boxes, eating out of bins, and begging. She must be so proud!
Comments
Do you have to swear all the
Do you have to swear all the time?
Devrim
Wasn't this tired debate
Wasn't this tired debate about swearing hashed out years ago?
It's a blog rant, not a news article.
Swear away I say!
BIG POOS ;)
I swear. All the time. Even
I swear. All the time. Even in my mothers company
No I do not have to swear, I
No I do not have to swear, I choose to swear. Other people swear on their blog posts, so what is he differcence? Fair enough, I may swear more than most, but what is the difference between saying fuck once, or saying it ten times?
What is the issue about swearing? Do you not swear? Do you think swearing takes someothing away from the blog entry. Do some of the finest literary works in history not contain swearing? Do you watch TV ad films with swearing? Do your work colleagues not swear?
What is the problem???
I like the variety of voices
I like the variety of voices we're having on libcom now, this blog is a good part of that. He's hardly THE OUTLAW. If all our blogs/articles were sweary there might be a problem, but one amongst many is a nice change of pace.
working class self
working class self organisation
It gets really boring. It is generally viewed as quite boring to use the same word repeatedly in writiing in the English language.
working class self organisation
Yes, Yes, Yes, No, Yes.
working class self organisation
For me, when it started in the anarchist press back in the 1980s with Class War, it seemed like a conscious attempt to express themselves in 'real working class language' based on some strange notion of how the working class really were. To be honest I found it all both dishonest and patronising, and of course most of the people writing these things had a university education.
Devrim
I like this blog on the
I like this blog on the whole, and don't really mind the swearing. But I do find some of the language really off-putting; for example, insulting people based on their appearance is fucked up for a libertarian communist. Obviously they're not being insulted because of their appearance, but it still feeds the horrible dominant culture where people are bullied because of their appearance.
Also, as an aside, I don't hate the Royal Family; I actually feel kind of sorry for them and I imagine they have quite unhappy lives because of the environment they were born into. But equally, fair enough for hating them.
Boring? It's not boring. It's
Boring? It's not boring. It's in the context of a ranty blog. Like Fallback says, I take this blog as a ranty opinion soapbox, and I like it, gives me a chuckle everyday.
To be honest, if swearing puts you off it's snobby shite.
It's also RACIST against scots/irish/northerners ;)
[youtube]phJ9OdYniuM[/youtube]
As fallback says, in general
As fallback says, in general our style guide is against swearing on libcom. However, it is good to have a variety of voices and writing styles, and this is only one blog out of many, so I and many other people enjoy the variation. I am very grateful for Matt's contributions here, as it is really good to have up to the minute content about current events - which was something sorely lacking from libcom before in many circumstances. There have been a couple of comments about swearing on this blog now - so I would suggest in future not commenting on individual articles about this issue but instead starting a thread in feedback about the general subject.
Now, as for this article, there is one massive disagreement I have with it, which I also had with a similar blog post about the Royal wedding. And that is criticising the giving of next bank holiday on the basis that it costs the economy money.
Now, the economy and the working class have nothing in common, so from a working-class perspective there is nothing to be gained by criticising something for costing the economy.
From a worker's point of view, getting a bank holiday is excellent. TBH this is about the only time it has been useful having a royal family, as we got an extra day off this year, we'll get an extra day off next year, and hopefully she will cark it in 2013 giving us an extra day off again! And fuck the economy! (Of course it is fair enough to point out the hypocrisy of the government in criticising public sector strikes for this same reason however)
"For me, when it started in
"For me, when it started in the anarchist press back in the 1980s with Class War, it seemed like a conscious attempt to express themselves in 'real working class language' based on some strange notion of how the working class really were. To be honest I found it all both dishonest and patronising, and of course most of the people writing these things had a university education"
What is wrong with having a university education?????
I'm a bit of a sweary get and
I'm a bit of a sweary get and am not averse to nawty langauge. The swearing in this blog is part of it's general style, so I don't see a problem with it. Mind you, I'd quite like to show my mam this page but she'd batter the fuck out of me for all the swearing in it. I think in general it's worth considering whether our writing excludes some working class people who might be turned off by that kind of patter. But for this blog: fine. General publications and online texts: we should (and generally do) tone it down.
Whatever your writing style, remember who's the audience and think on, you cuntbubbles!
Steven, yes, I could have
Steven, yes, I could have worded issues around cost better than I did. The impression that I have given was not as I intended it.
"It gets really boring. It is
"It gets really boring. It is generally viewed as quite boring to use the same word repeatedly in writiing in the English language"
Perphaps DH Lawrence needs re-evaluating then?
Very fond of cunts and fucks if my memory servs me correctly.
working class self
working class self organisation
I take it you are joking. In Lady Chatterly's Lover:
DPP
Now as there are about 380 pages in it, that means that either of the words are used every eight or nine pages. Hardly repetition at your rate.
Devrim
working class self
working class self organisation
I didn't say that anything was wrong with it in itself. However, to have gone to university in the 1970s, or early 1980s was pretty much a guarantee that you were actually quite 'middle class', and almost certainly didn't speak like that at all.
The point that I was trying to make was that the adoption of this style in early 1980s anarchism was not a people writing how that spoke, but a conscious political decision, just in the same way as the Sun newspaper, and I was merely pointing out that I think it is a pretty patronising attitude to working class people.
Devrim
Devrim wrote: working class
Devrim
Well, since the mid 1990s HE in britain has grown exponentially. It no longer has that amount of prestige and (thankfully) has lost a lot of its clout as a stick with which the 'real' working class can beat fake anarchists with. If your an Oxbridge anarchy, fair enough it might have some justification.
As many people have pointed out here, we all swear in our everyday speech. I wasn't joking above when I said I swear in the company of my mother ;)
So it is the repition that is
So it is the repition that is the issue not the principle?
You know what I fucking hate?
You know what I fucking hate? Signing your cunting name at the bottom of a post, when we already know who it's from. Now THAT's completely unbastard necessary behaviour.
Arbeiten wrote: Well, since
Arbeiten
But what I was talking about was the period when UK anarchism adopted this style. If you go back a little further, for example to people like Aldred, they would never have written like this. Tha adoption of this style was a conscious decision ay a specific point in time.
Arbeiten
Right, because the middle classes were so discriminated against
Arbeiten
Some people do, and some people don't. It isn't really the point though.
Devrim
working class self
working class self organisation
No, the repetition just makes it a little boring. The fact is as Serge said above some people find it alienating. Personally, I don't. I just think it is based on a patronising view of the working class.
Devrim
JoeHill wrote: You know what
JoeHill
There is a real actual reason that I do it, but equally important is the fact that it annoys you. ;)
Devrim
Devrim, it started with the
Devrim, it started with the far left-republican press in the 1790s and continued with the French anarchist press in the 1880s/90s...
Choccy
The debate about swearing was FUCKING RESOLVED in the glorious years of 1790 by Jacques Hébert in favour of FUCKING SWEARING ALL THE TIME.
http://www.marxists.org/history/france/revolution/hebert/1790/pere-duchesne.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_P%C3%A8re_Duchesne
All the modern prudes are wrong.
"No, the repetition just
"No, the repetition just makes it a little boring. The fact is as Serge said above some people find it alienating. Personally, I don't. I just think it is based on a patronising view of the working class"
Some people find it alienating, fine, some people do not.
When I write as I do I am not making a conscious choice of what language I think the working class may like. I write as I feel I want to. This depends on what I am writing about, and what mood I am in that day. I do not feel that is patronising in any way.
Choccy wrote: To be honest,
Choccy
Hmmm. The times I've been asked to stop swearing ot has usualy been by either someone religious or someone northern. Some of this may be generational (eg my Dad thinks swearing is far worse than racism) but generally northerners of my acquaintance swear far less than Londoners.
And Devrim is a northerner, too, I think.
FWIW if all output here was full of swearing there'd be a problem, this blog is obviously personal and angry, and works because of that.
Regards,
Martin
phew it's a good job i was
phew it's a good job i was being serious ;)
Devrim wrote: Arbeiten
Devrim
OK I had hoped that I had dealt with this point implicitly, but i will now outline it explicitly it is not that period of time, and we are not those people
Arbeiten
Right, because the middle classes were so discriminated against
[/quote]
you, Devrim, are the only person on this thread that has presumed the term 'middle class' is a self explanatory category that should stand in for genuine critique.
Arbeiten
Some people do, and some people don't. It isn't really the point though.
Devrim[/quote]
Brilliant some people do, some people don't. So what is your over arching point? perhaps the person who wrote this (in all probability) does. So what is your point. I don't know what sort of self flagellating you did in the 80s, but most of us now just swear as a matter of course? Apart from your own personal (conservative) taste for all good and proper language, I don't think you have a leg to stand on.
Too much sarcasm, too much
Too much sarcasm, too much unnecessary (and unimaginative) swearing, and the one or two good points here are muddled (Bank Holidays, Commonwealth tour) or undermined by the angry emorage rhetoric ("wake up every day hating these bastards, made worse when I see them in all of their finery, in their horse drawn carriages").
There are loads of important things to be said about this topic, but this reads like a rant from angry internet guy than a properly thought out blog piece for discussion.
See me after class.
The (obviously genuine) angry
The (obviously genuine) angry rhetoric is exactly why it's great.
Well, if you enjoyed it then
Well, if you enjoyed it then fair enough. I might try adding some swears and some sarcasm to a BBC news item if that passes muster round these parts. I won't be linking this to anyone.
Smiley cunting faces. They
Smiley cunting faces. They can fuck right off an' all.
Crow, what is unimaginative
Crow, what is unimaginative swearing? In fact, a better question would be , what is imaginative swearing? should I add a French accent to 'cunt'? There are not many swear words. Perhaps I could make some words up? just like the word you used, 'emorage'. In future I could trawl the 'Urban Dictionary' as you have, and use some terms from there!
I do see people's point about swearing. Some people are fine with some people are not. It is a simple choice, take it or leave it.
Why does adding sarcasm or swearing to a BBC story make it less valid? I have never agreed with this, as I said earlier in the thread, some of the great works of literature are riddles with swearing. If the blog entry is crap, fair enough, but it is crap whether there are swear words in it or not.
I have been very suprised about how some people on Libcom are more concerned with the exact wording of things, than they are over the issues being discussed (not just on my blog).
Crow, you will not be linking this to anyone. Fine, many have done. the blog is not to your taste, no problem. other people like it.
For the record, I do not swear in front of my mother, apart from a few very low level swear words (if you could even call them that). Nor do I have sex, or take a crap in front of her.
The biggest suprise on this thread is that someone has decided that because I use words such as cunt or fuck. that I must be middle class with a university education who is patronising the working class because I have a deluded view that working class people swear a lot. Working class people do swear, just as people from other classes swear. I am working class, and yes, guilty as charged, I have a university education.
Some of my blog entries on here (this being an example) http://libcom.org/blog/why-nurses-should-take-industrial-action-23112011 contains no swearing. it has a more serious tone, and it was something I thought a bit more about before and during writing it.
The entry we are writing about, was typed in five minutes on the train on the way home from work. I dont claim that my blog is full of great pieces of literature. I would not try, mainly because it would not interest me to do so.
I am sorry if some people do not like it, but some people do!!
It's ok once in a while but
It's ok once in a while but there have been many articles, all by yourself which are very similar. I think imaginative swearing might help a bit though as long as you don't do the articles too often, or without some good material in them. Honestly this one isn't very good at all.
Devrim has sworn before ("fuck off you patronising middle class cunt" I believe he said on revleft), but I get his point that this consistent and deliberate swearing is kind of grating really.
This really is a bucnh of
This really is a bucnh of snobby fucking shite.
Well trodden ground here - http://libcom.org/forums/libcommunity/youse-lot-swear-too-much
A forum post or a blog rant is NOT a news item - comparing it to the BBC is plain fucking cretinous.
It's rare I quote Revol as spend more time taking the piss out of him but:
Should 'we limit our expression instead?
I'm sorry but swearing is what we all do in real life, it's how we converse in non formal settings and that is what a message board is.'
I'd extend that to a ranty opinionated blog too.
One or two of you need to
One or two of you need to give your heads a serious wobble. It's a light-hearted blog article which has a bit of swearing in it. This is not a big shock horror because it's generally the blog writer's style. You go to this blog and you expect to get a bit of swearing. If you don't like swearing, read summat else. If you want more heavy theory, then there's lots in the Libcom library and if you want BBC stylee, I gather... er... the BBC are quite good at this sort of thing.
The point about 80s Class War is spot on. Yes, it read like some posh 'erbert trying to sound like a pleb. Now I'm sure all Class War people weren't posh but the paper often sounded really fake. Still, it was fun, like a left-wing Viz, shame about the actual politics though.
But we're not talking about 80s CW are we, we're talking about one man and his blog - hmm... good name for a woolyback TV show, that is.