My Aunt and Uncle are away on holiday, so I’m going to help walk their dogs over the next few mornings.
It’s means I’ve got to catch an early bus, but apart from that I’m looking forward to exploring somewhere new. I’ve spent time out there before, though almost always with someone else, and always with something to get back for. But tomorrow, and Tuesday and Wednesday, I can take the dogs out in whatever direction I please, for however long I want and at whatever pace I choose. It’ll just be Milly and Nina, and me and my thoughts.
And my camera.
The only thing that could spoil my fun would be the rain. It would ruin it. Being a casual walker, I can choose to stay in when it’s cold and wet. You don’t have that freedom when you have dogs – you have to go out and there’s not much you can do to change that. It’s no fun walking in the rain. It’s cold and miserable and you can’t enjoy yourself and your surroundings ((It’s particularly annoying when you wear glasses, the rain collects like on a windscreen and needs wiping off to let you see properly.)).
Today it rained for the first time in months ((I’m probably wrong about this, but I think that, snow aside (which we had a lot of), it’s not rained since the beginning of winter.)). Oh dear.
UPDATE: I’m looking after them all day Friday as well.
From Balloon Juice:
I don’t care if you have to “ram it down their throats,” as the Republicans are fond of saying.
Although none of the stuff going on at the moment is going to affect me, I still think that the Republicans are fucking scum. That anything can be accomplished against such dishonest people is amazing.
Alright I’m going to try and write in the daytime for once.
Last time I wrote about WiBu I had some criticism about his blog and what I felt was his restrictive desire for perfection. Whether or not that was true, WiBu has since relaunched a much-improved IAmWiBu.com, as a series of ‘WiBuLogs’. That’s not to say that his deleted content ((I still have a copy of it. Once something’s on the internet it stays there… forever. ;))) was bad, but, judging by the number of posts, his setup is now much more successful at getting his thoughts down (which is the whole point after all).
These ‘WiBuLogs’ are like Twitter feeds, only not limited to 140 characters ((A limitation which I do quite like.)). Each one spans a month. His posts are concise ((Something I’ve yet to learn how to do.)) and, best of all, there doesn’t seem to be a single mention of the process behind it – it’s not another blog about blogging ((I try and avoid blogging about blogging but I realise I do, including the first line of this post.)). It’s his thoughts, and his thoughts only ((I can appreciate the lack of commenting.)), and it’s to some of those thoughts I want to respond today.
I find it striking how often WiBu and I are think about the same things. It probably because we visit the same websites and so read about the same topics, and also I think we’re just pretty similar.
Here are some of WiBu’s posts:
21/02/2010 21:20 GMT:
Seems like I’m a fan of ideas and theories rather than realisations.
Although I do like ‘realisations’, I agree, and that’s why I’m going to do a degree in pure maths rather than something like applied maths or even just general maths. Some people think that pure maths is a bullshitty subject, and instead I should do something like computer science or even just applied maths; something with a practical use. You could use the same logic to argue that one should study technology and engineering rather than science. Just because you’re looking at maths in a way that’s not focused on practical results doesn’t mean that there aren’t uses or that there won’t be in the future.
21/02/2010 22:03 GMT:
I will never shave with a razor again.
Never have liked the clean/close cut shave feeling.
I’m totally the opposite. Although I don’t particularly enjoy shaving – I often cut myself on spots, it takes too long and it sometimes leaves a rash – I can’t stand having more than a few days’ growth on my face. I find myself constantly playing with it, it itches and it makes my face feel hot ((As hair should.)). If I leave it much longer it looks shit; I’m still 18 and it’s still developing. Maybe I’ll grow my facial hair in a year or two, and just brave out the ‘sharp’ stage.
FYI, I also like my hair short, number 6. It’s nearly 5 weeks since I last had a hair cut and I think I’m due another.
25/02/2010 17:20 GMT:
I’d happily live forever. I’m slightly annoyed that my time as a concious being is limited to 100 or so years.
I don’t know. I don’t like either alternative. 100 years is too short in any case.
I often wonder if it would be possible for a life form to live ‘forever’ ((The universe is most likely not going to last forever, but it will still have an unimaginably long life.)). Living forever has no significant reproductive advantage ((As far as I can tell.)), so it would not be naturally selected for, but what about with artificial selection? Is there some physical limit or not?
06/03/2010 14:53 GMT:
It annoys me how the world (well, the world I seem to live in) has been designed around the mobility granted by the car.
Tell me about it. I’ve been a cyclist for as long as I could cycle; we never had a car when I was growing up in England. The world shouldn’t be focused the most dangerous, polluting, noisy and lazy method of transport.
08/03/2010 18:27 GMT:
I don’t understand why we celebrate birthdays. Why wait for a certain date to celebrate your life?
I was thinking the same thing just a few days before. I don’t really celebrate my birthday. Of course I accept any presents I’ve been given and eat the cake, but that’s it. Last year, on my 18th, I was on a train for most of the day and spent the evening being ill. There’s nothing special about that particular date to me.
09/03/2010 23:28 GMT:
Looking into the sky at night, particularly if you’re lucky enough to live in an area free of light pollution, is a humbling experience.
It really is. I’ve written about this before and I’ll write about it again.
11/03/2010 19:03 GMT:
I never used to make what was supposed to be made with Lego or K’nex.
Me neither. I was particularly fond of bridges, tunnels and houses.
There’s a whole lot more and I hope WiBu continues posting his thoughts. I look forward to them. Definitely worth reading.
I have no analysis to add, but I love trains and I’d love to be able to use such a railway:
So the news that China is planning a series of transcontinental high-speed rail lines designed to connect London to Beijing in just two days that broke yesterday in the South China Morning Post should be taken at face value. The proposal, which is mapped out above according to preliminary information about proposed alignments, would likely be the largest infrastructure project — ever. Taking the growing Chinese rail network as the starting point, new 200 mph lines would extend south towards Singapore, north and west into Siberia, and west through India, Kazakhstan, and Turkey, with the eventual goal of linking into the growing European fast train system.
The politics of China are interesting, and I often wonder how the world will change with the inevitable rise of China. For sure, air travel won’t continue as it is for much longer ((As oil becomes more scarce and hence becomes more expensive, air travel will become much more expensive too. After oil, the only viable route will be to use biofuels, though depending on demand for such fuel, the price could be immense. Planes will still fly, but probably limited to the military and the rich. At least, that is, until another fuel of comparably high energy-density is found, or demand for biofuels drops off to make air travel more affordable.)). High-speed rail is an excellent method of transport and should be the direction in which all countries move.
ASIDE: this was written by 2010 Wilf. My thoughts may have changed since.
I don’t get nationalism. I think it’s stupid.
I’m English, though I think of myself more as British. I admit that I cheer on England in football and rugby matches, and I root for Team GB in the Olympics.
But I can’t see nations ((By nation I mean: nation, country, state.)) as anything other than arbitrary containers. What’s the difference between me and an Irishman? Why should stepping over an invisible line just North of Berwick upon Tweed mean that I’m in a different country with different laws? ((Whole islands being nations – Iceland, for example – doesn’t seem so arbitrary, but the classification of land into ‘nations’ does still seem artificial.))
A few thoughts:
- I only support British/English teams because I happened to be born there.
- I only happen to be cultured as I am for the same reason.
- I wouldn’t fight for my country.
- Fight for an ideology, yes, but not an arbitrary country.
- I don’t think Brits are superior to the rest of the world.
- I don’t think I should treat them any better than the rest of the world.
Why do nations exist? Are they anything other than the result of a history full of battles between the rich, with borders being placed at the extent of a force’s reach?
The differences between nations are their laws and (to a lesser extent) cultures ((There is a lot of mixing of cultures between nations so this is less relevant.)). I believe that ‘high-level’ laws ((As I shall call laws about things such as murder, assault, rape, and fraud which almost all would accept should be illegal.)) should apply to the whole world.
Now I come to the idea of a one world government ((The structure of such an entity is not my concern at present.)). Oooh! Whenever I watch something by teh conspiracy theorists, crowing about a “New World Order”, I think: what would be so bad? What would be so bad about there being a global government which could legislate for the whole world, globally creating and enforcing high level-laws? Some things should be illegal.
Why can’t we be citizens of the Earth, rather than citizens of France or subjects of The Queen? ((Star Trek has it right.))
The next question is how much power should this global government have, and to whom should the rest be given? The simplest solution would be to give all power to a single global government, and to have no derivative, local governments. Perhaps that is the way we will eventually head, but ((Regardless of its merits or failings, of which I have not even started to think.)) we would not reach that place without passing intermediate steps, and it’s those steps which interest me more.
In the majority of countries at present, there are many levels of government. In America, there is the federal government, state governments, and then local governments in individual counties. It’s similar over here. It might just be my prejudice from growing up in such a world, but I think it’s right that local populations should have some ((I don’t know how much.)) say over how they are governed, separate from other localities. For example, different counties could have different class sizes, or different speed limits, or different environmental policies ((I’m just making stuff up here, but the specifics aren’t important.)).
How do we divide these localities? I don’t know. Perhaps we’re back to drawing arbitrary lines in the sand. Maybe the concept of a nation shouldn’t die, and could still act as another level of government. Despite everything I’ve said, what bothers me is not that nations exist, but that some people are so patriotic. Yes, your country might be a better place ideologically ((And it might be more fertile, productive, resourceful and attractive.)), but it doesn’t mean that your people are ‘better’ ((Whatever that would mean.)), and it’s only by chance that you happen to have been born there anyway.
Such thoughts are childish.
A conclusion/aside of sorts. When I see people pushing for increased nationalism – as is the case in Scotland with the SNP ((My constituency has been SNP for a while now.)) – it bothers me. In my opinion, we should be moving in the other direction: few countries and borders, not more.
At present, the Scottish Government has full control of Scotland, except for these powers. Whether or not particular areas should be legislated at a more local or more global level, there is no need for Scotland to become yet another sovereign state.
What happens if, after Scotland gains independence, Perthshire decides to be its own nation? And then after that, Blairgowrie decides to be its own nation, and so on? Why would it be any less ridiculous than Scotland exiting the Union? Why does the SNP want to leave the UK but not the EU? I don’t know.
Here’s a Wikipedia entry that I’ve yet to read. Cosmopolitanism may describe my views, but I’ve not read that either. I acknowledge that I should do a lot more research and reflection.
