A Legacy Contorted: The Facts About Dimebag Darrell And His Opinion Of Seven String Guitars

I rarely deal with the subject of music aside from the sporadic and very blue moon posts about certain issues that I find infuriating because they might be genuinely rife with irrationality, or be of a patently false nature. This is one of those topics that contains ample quantities of both vices – irrationality and falsehoods, spawned from the very ignorant depths of the Metal Community.

There's a subject that's been getting under my skin for the last ten years. It is closely linked with the controversy over seven string guitars as some niche breed of instruments that have somehow – through idiocy and cultural bigotry – cultivated a controversial reputation for being sheer tools of mediocrity in the hands of “talentless musicians” such as Nu Metal acts. I am not even going to get into the blanket condemnation of alternative and Nu Metal, since that's another subject, but I will focus on the baseless nature of this claim that seven strings are somehow tools for the sham musicians. 


Now what makes this irrationality worse is the cornerstone arguments in support of this opinion and pure perception – note: not fact – touted by purists of the metal genre, and worsened by the unquestioning group psychology of the community. What is this argument? It is a powerful claim that is apparently buried beneath an ocean of obscure and baseless references to the late and great “Dimebag” Darrell Lance Abbot: legendary hard rock and heavy metal guitarist; founder and iconic lead guitarist of heavy metal band, Pantera. I would like to address this misconception in full detail by treating this entry as a treatise of Dimebag's guitar philosophy, along with exposing the source of this misconception, which would then dispel this false dogma and perception of how this late legend denounced seven string guitars.

"Why does this get under your skin?" - Some Might Wonder

First, a bit of proper introduction and background to the thematic in question. Having a fundamental allegiance to most things fringe, heavy, black-natured, scrawled with blasphemous wounds of the macabre, and rife with unadulterated Satanic edge; I have an inexplicable, and irrefutable connection with the heavy metal culture, including many of its sub-genres and contemporary off-shoots. If it sounds dark, heavy, moody, and possibly thought-provoking. . . I'm there, and I'm ready to appraise it as well as feed off its energy like some starved demonic force from the cryptic splurge within a dying catacomb. I like my heavy metal, and I indulge in this appetite without any sense of restraint – I like heavy noise, and I employ instruments to create heavy noise; whether it appeals to an audience, an individual, or no one, is not my prerogative, but needless to say, I have like-minded allies in this pursuit.

Given my passion for all things dark and heavy, I tend to become a bit hung up on facts, claims, and conjecture, especially when one of my idealised veterans of the trade are falsely implicated in another moron's agenda. Now if only I had a pretty fuckin' penny for every time I've heard some no-name alias over the internet or some random stranger at a gig, go on to recount stories about meeting a famous musician and then proceeding to express opinions on behalf of said musician – some true, some pure fallacy. I am not going to imply that all claims of this nature are wrong, but I am going to make it very clear that these claims are purely claims until otherwise reinforced by factual information.

The claim that Dimebag hated seven strings with an unholy passion was one such exaggeration that has fuelled the argument by certain metal purists against seven string guitars. This, I think needs to be addressed properly since even the deepest natured research only unveils random hearsay from forums and sevenstring.org. It's usually that secondary-source anecdotal cliché, such as, 'My friend's cousin's ex-dead girlfriend's mother's second husband read some obscure scroll – that was destroyed during the Spanish Inquisition – about Dimebag that one time and the scroll said that he (Dimebag) hated seven string guitars!' I am sorry, but this is just not going to fly in the face of reason. Not to mention, the information is hardly even secondary since there's no trace of primary sources as one begins to unravel the concatenation of hearsay – it's really just a wide waffle of gossip with no real substance.

There is no doubt in my mind that Dimebag was a passionate musician with a skill-set and mastery of the axe that few among the modern-day greats could even dream of honing, so in my books, he earned a legitimate badge of honour to freely opine and critique. However, even then, I wouldn't allow myself to be swayed by his authority; there have been points where I disagree with Dimebag. Nevertheless, having had the immense honour to meet the guy once and only once, I know that his legendary skill is matched by the humble mentality of a complimenting rationalist; he's always been a flexible and open-minded individual.

The truth of the matter is this, Dimebag Darrell has always – without apology – held the view that guitarists should strive for better and achieve the most they can from the limitations of their instrument rather than being alien to the range of their musical weapon of choice. 


"Own your weapon, and don't let your weapon own you!" -- Inspired by Dimebag


This was the truth of it all. . . Dimebag never had a high opinion of guitarists with simplistic skill, but neither did he ever take exception to this and fully agreed with the age-old artistic anti-doctrine of, “To each, their own. . . If it works for you, then good!” Likewise, he didn't see the point of seven string guitars in the hands of individuals who'd only be using the lower three strings of the instrument – one could easily achieve this on a standard guitar, making the whole seven string feature an obsolete fad in the context of a guitarist who wouldn't utilise the full range of the instrument anyway. He even referenced Scott Ian of Anthrax using just a four string guitar as a legitimate stance and position [1].

“Ah, so when we observe some facts, stop looking at things in absolute shades of black and white, and halt this relentless debauchery of taking shit out of context, it becomes evident that Dime never had an issue with seven string guitars, or even four string guitars. . . He had an issue with people who'd buy seven-stringers to show off while only using 3 strings of the instrument; something anyone could accomplish by simply down-tuning a standard six-string guitar – Dime did it himself!” – Reality Check

Indeed, Dimebag himself was a connoisseur of drop and low tunings, which he executed just fine on a six-stringer. He was an amazing guitarist, and he was able to capture all of his sounds within the constraints of his instrument – this was the hallmark of his pride and glory as a musician. Somehow, after Dimebag's unfortunate demise, and the subsequent case of the 'Chinese Whispers' amongst some of his ignorant devotees, Dimebag's legacy was now being seized to support this anti-down tune and seven string guitar crusade; a crusade that was never even Dimebag's mandate or burden in the first place, and a gross perversion of his personal position on the subject. It's these kind of seizing tactics and overarching zealotry that pisses me off; where the legacy of deceased legendary artists is disgustingly usurped by the myopic and misguided agenda of some opinionated elitist fans who never understood the concept of art in the first place. With this kind of rumour-mongering, before you know it, we have an entire internet audience quoting Dimebag as 'the hater of seven stringers' with impunity – as though it is one of those irrefutable facts that one cannot dare to question.

I will acknowledge that I am not certain how many people treat such proclamations seriously; I certainly tried my damn best to ignore this bullshit up until a recent incident. I am also certain that the subject is of little interest to outsiders, and doesn't even matter to most, but this is my domain where I chronicle my thoughts, and as a long-time fan of Dimebag's work, I feel that his true legacy needs to be honoured here rather than abused for the perpetuation of falsehoods. So this can be seen as my effort towards dispelling this insidious erroneous urban myth about him hating a certain kind of guitar.

Dimebag Darrell never hated seven string guitars, he simply didn't see the purpose of these guitars in the hands of artists who can't even use a standard instrument to full capacity – he saw their utility and market appeal as a pure gimmick that might mislead other aspiring artists who could do just as well without going that route. If anything, he was trying to enlighten the masses on the real implications of guitar range and how much can be accomplished even with a standard guitar, and what more can be done with one that contains an added lower baritone key. Unfortunately, Dimebag Darrell's little interview with Guitarworldfrom 1999 – one that I had read – is most likely the source of this snowballed rumour. I believe it was this interview that was grossly misinterpreted and taken out of context by some poser, raging, boozing, image-incorporated head banger, who most likely – in a moment of head-swirling, brain numbing frenzy – chose to perceive that as an all-out condemnation of all things associated with the number 7, before proceeding to infect the rest of this cesspit-network called the internet with this myth that has now taken on a life of its own under the guise of an 'unquestionable fact'. If there's a supporting argument for stereotypical metal fans lacking intellectual fortitude, this myth would be a stand-out piece since they're doing great disservice to their own deceased hero.

To quote Dimebag's closing comments on that subject:

“I’m not saying I wouldn’t play a seven-string. It’s just that I’ve never needed one. Most dudes who play seven-strings don’t sound any different than someone playing a six-string that’s tuned down.” - Dimebag Darrell: Cra-Z-Boy;  Guitarworld, 1999

There we have it; truth magnified sans hyperbole and misleading conjecture. Dimebag never denounced or decried these guitars. It's dogmatic group-think like this that demonstrates just how the opinionated nature of the metal community will always be its sine que non Achilles Heel, since much of the bravado and passionate vulgar and gusto-stricken opinions are a false-front for an otherwise baseless or weak position on a subject matter where facts are anything but evident. It's just a shame for them that I don't tolerate jar heads hijacking Dimebag's name to rationalise their very illogical insecurities against the idea of diversity within the metal genre of music. So here's to the truth; the demise of a misconception, and genuine credence to the legacy of a great guitarist.

Finally, here's to Dimebag Darrell, as I honour his true memory in its unadulterated state today, along with hopes that I can use seven string guitars to their full capacity, someday. As it stands, I'm a terrible guitarist/noise-maker. Yeah, I'm one of those blaspheming heathens who abuses a seven-string guitar with pride, and when I met Dime, he didn't have much a problem with my philosophy, so long as gimmickry wasn't part of the parcel, which it wasn't. In fact, this post was provoked by my recent acquisition of the Dean Razorback 255 - 7 String, which prompted a not so well-informed outburst by one of my respected, but somewhat ignorant friends about how Dimebag 'hated 7 string'; clearly a far fuckin' cry from any form of truth.

Have a good one, moshers. Don't let too much of that blood rush to yer heads!

– Kade

Reference:

[1] Chris Gill. (1999). Dimebag Darrel: Cra-Z-Boy. Available: http://www.guitarworld.com/dimebag-darrell-cra-z-boy?page=0,3. Last accessed 15th January 2012.

This post is dedicated to the memory and grandiose stature of Dimebag Darrell; an iconic guitarist and a man who loved all musical instruments regardless of their string count. . . and regardless of what certain idiots on Blabbermouth.net's comments section would have us believe.

Greatness Passes, But Its Impact Remains: A Farewell to Christopher Hitchens

So another eventful year has passed, it was both mundane and predictable, but not without its own hints of the unexpected. Anyway, I would like to address one of the expected but personally saddening events: the passing of Christopher Hitchens at age 62 from pneumonia brought on by his cancer. It's funny since just days before his passing on the 15th of December, 2011, I was contemplating the idea of doing a short review of his book, “The Portable Atheist”, of which I had some things to say, but now that train of thought has been halted in its tracks. The great man with an even greater voice and piercing intellectual capacity is no longer among those present, but perhaps his legacy will speak otherwise, and so I will discuss that briefly.

I vividly recall bringing up his name in a discussion just a few months back when others commented about his physical decline in recent years due to cancer. Now despite how much the man had changed physically as a result of his physical affliction, I still continued to see him as an immortal – a titan in his own right. The man's sheer command of language, and his extremely uncompromising wit committed to his rationalistic, atheistic ideological views, will leave his voice infinitely echoing through the annals of the literary sphere. Sure, he looked ill, and I could tell that his time was short; he seemed to be running on pure fumes and passion in his last months, but I know that like most great individuals, his name and his words would continue to live on, shape and influence greater than most monoliths of our age and the ages of yore.

Despite having the urge to do so, I simply won't deify this man, since that'd be ironic. Nevertheless, if atheism and pursuit for objective knowledge and reason were – for one moment – collectivised as a single and quaintly counter-theological movement, then Christopher Hitchens could be considered the pioneering prophet of such a movement. I honestly do feel that individuals such as myself, and others who're like-minded, have lost a great source of inspiration, and a great voice for a hidden generation of critical thinkers and philosophers. The world today lost one of its most unapologetic, humane, and yet honest humanists, and it also lost one of its poignant writers – fortunately, since he was such an amazing, eloquent yet brashly articulate individual, his everlasting contributions and words have immortalised his presence.

Christopher Hitchens was a phenomenal individual, and will remain in such light for times eternal. I highly doubt that this man, who epitomised the intellectual forefront of reason and championed its every crucial fight, can ever truly become a passage of the past. He may have died, but there is no grave, nor state of finite mortality that can entomb this man's invaluable essence, arrogance and humility as a human and an atheist, and his literary contributions as a philosophical icon of all human ages.

Having considered all of the above, and also having fully appreciated what has happened, I bid this my farewell to Christopher Hitchens. I think now I will get back to finishing The Portable Atheist again, and then proceed to do a straight forward critique of just how unportable a joy it has been to read, even including some brief thoughts on the satisfying pissed off looks I garnered from random onlookers and fellow commuters who already have a hard time digesting my evil demeanour, let alone that demeanour with a thought provoking contrarian book. Heh. We've all got a pretentious side to play up on occasion; sporting that book made my 2011 moment, which I'll discuss later. At this point, I'd gladly carry all of Hitchens' books on my person, for public display, in their full verbose – such is the value of literary greatness; the man may have passed, but his impact will forever remain.

-- Kade

London Riots: Criminality and its Causes – Mutually Exclusive Subjects?

Given the recent events in London, I was watching Sky News on the following Friday morning after having endured the chaos of the London riots over the earlier leg of the week. Many of my supposedly educated and enlightened contacts over the social network were posting brief little blurbs about using extreme force on these rioters, and perhaps even having them shipped off to Somalia or some other war zone as cannon fodder. Someone even proposed that we bring in National Service for the explicit goal of shipping off these kids to Afghanistan so they can 'watch their friends get blown up'. Yes, we get the message; people are angry, and before we try to understand this situation, many of us will be venting without compromise – even I'm guilty of this charge.

While the rest of us were blowing our stacks, Sky News decided to take things further by having one of their correspondents do a brief interview with a few of the looters, and of course, the interview revealed the obvious. So what is this obvious that we're talking about? Well, for those that are of decent character and intellectual fortitude – you know what I'm talking about – it is an expression of no remorse, a sense of rebellion against a status quo that views them as society's discarded elements worthy of not only being rejected, but not even being noticed or considered for viable opportunities that would allow them a chance at integration or betterment.

Now let's get one thing straight, we're already calling them 'opportunists', which they are; so what makes an opportunist? A sense of wanting and exploiting for opportunity when it isn't typically present. Sorry, but this whole one-sided, 'it's plain criminality - end of story,' argument comes back full-circle to the same 'cut off from society opportunists' rhetoric prompting a need to figure out why this sense of despotism has come about and taken centre-stage. Make no mistake that this isn't justification of the acts -- which seems to be another common straw that detractors are relentlessly grasping at to shut down any further pondering -- but these riots and the declarations by these 'youths' is a clear-cut indication of something being very wrong with the state of affairs and a need for further investigation of the sociological and economic elements that are the unconscious-driving force behind these chaotic scenarios.

Many wise sociologists and observers have stated time and again that freedom is more of an illusion than a factual precedent. Granted that we are free in theory and will, but this sense of freedom is entirely limited to a certain set of parameters that are far outside our paradigm of control. What are those parameters? At the risk of oversimplifying – just as most of society is diligently doing at the moment to suppress further investigation of this topic – when someone is raised and groomed to rob or beg, then they're simply free to chose between the two options. What alternatives does one have when there are sophisticated elements that both limit and ostracise these individuals against their own volition and choice – they're then forced to operate within the resulting parameters. This is the undeniable alienation of socio-economic classicism in this modern age – certain groups just don't mix with others and as a result, are unable to avail opportunities in the same vain. You can't just step outside and say, “I am better today,” and viola, everything is fixed. Naturally these crimes were serious and worthy of unanimous condemnation but surely the criminal subjects need to be studied and their motives fully understood. The interview by Sky News was one measly step in the right direction and damn did it incur public wrath.

So how does the public react to this little interview? Do they absorb the totality of the events, realising that while condemnation is present and acceptable, further investigation and understanding must be worked into the equation as well? That there's probably a reason why we're getting an upsurge of 'disaffected youths'? Oh, hell no! They react by immediately expressing outrage, throwing allegations of attempted justification at the news source. Collectivising not only the subjects involved in the thuggary, but also the media radicals who're taking the extra step to not only expose and condemn these acts, but also make the legitimate extended effort to understand the eros of the problems. As I watched the interview show for the first time, I almost guaranteed my wife that Sky News will soon be flooded with complaints from pundits getting on their soap boxes in order to slam certain journalists and social workers for having the audacity to actually listen to these kids and dare further to posit an explanation that goes beyond petty simplifications. . . such as, "they're criminals, plain and simple."

“Oh no, this is perfect! This is how we should be! Imagine a world where we – the elitists in our comfort bubbles – righteously judge the misguided and ill-fated. A perfect world with all the perfect answers against all that vile filth and talk about self-entitlement spread by those mentally diseased Marxists. What gutter-crawling poison those Marxists are, right? I mean it's not like this world is descending into a spiral of materialistic inequality, brought on by manipulation for profit, betterment, and ultimately, a slippery slope thinking towards blatant overrule that has society fragmented and alienated over issues ranging from class, ethnicity, religion to just plain old – and the crown jewel – social-economics. What's that? They are lower class and poor because they deserve to be? Oh, but of course! It was fated from the start! Their destinies were already sowed into the tapestry of the astrological plane! Probably the work of that defunct 'God' person that people keep promoting in their delusions of idealism.” - A Dispassionate Closer


Yes, let us all promote more ill-intentioned, and very much intentional apathy towards this cause when we lack the intellect or selfless mindset to analyse and study the decline of our society and scoff at the weak as though they're vermin deserving of their misfortunes. Perfect little equilibrium – NOT – that we've got going in this equation. The day that reason is seized by elitist douche-bags to become part of a cold-logic strategy for simply 'weeding out the weak' or anything else that we consider 'less', is the day reason and rationale, and more importantly, humanity, have gone out of the window. It's moments like these that I'd rather side with theistic thinkers who often take a negative stand against this calculated form of existence. Why? Because some of these supposedly civilised folk would rather that we just dump all these kids in Somalia to get blown away and pretend like this whole event never happened – like it might not possibly happen yet again as a result of a very diminished, self-consuming, greedy, post-Capitalist morass.

Is this the justification that the so-called thinkers among us have resorted to in light of what has just happened? Fuck this pathetic descent into elitist fascism! Intellectual or not; such people should just walk into a field of fire and not come back until they're a gust of ash in the fuckin' wind, because they're just as much – and more so in the long run – our doom as these hopeless, misguided nobodies attempting the futility of looting! In fact, this lost generation of 'self-entitled ingrates' are a direct product of the same negligent, egocentric greed and profit driven society that has left us at the mercy of manipulative social architects like Rupert Murdoch and his ilk.

“By the way, about that little bit where I'd rather side with the disenfranchised theists. . . don't get carried away. I am simply on the side of those that can comprehend a reality where one can condemn an act, and then try to understand its causality, even if that means turning to inward philosophy. Whether these people happen to be believers in some fairy, or are blind-Dawkins devotees is not my concern. In this case, the generally graceful and decent of mind do wish to refrain from the act of judging and instead, assert understanding over the situation. Now this is by no means even an indirect endorsement of the psychotic proto-religious babble spouted by The Daily Mail's A. N. Wilson, who made a back-handed attempt to blame this whole mess on the immoral state of a 'religious-less' society when no more than three-years-ago, he was blaming the decline in Christian identity on those very Moslems and immigrants who he was now serenading for their community spirit and solidarity like some two-faced hypocrite without any apologies. Such a morally bankrupt man cannot be a believer in any Higher Moral Authority – I doubt he fears any God if he has the gall to peddle such nonsense and twist his own statements like some career politician with a clear-cut agenda.” - Just Saying (I'll address this matter in more detail at a later point.)

Anyway, have a good one, fellow Samaritans and alumni of this sham that we call civilisation. Continue your fruitful efforts towards ignoring the problem and just blaming the symptom. Always be sure to curse out the weak some more while condemning those of us that attempt to study and calculate the causality of this sense of entrenched dreariness. Of course, condemnation of criminality and study of its causality are indeed an incestuous union of Marxist proportions, since they should not be allowed to co-exist and instead be left mutually exclusive. Keep up this leap of logic and pay umbrage to the legacy of self-righteous pond-scum like Enoch Powell, or better yet, Adolf Hitler – I'm sure they'd be proud.

Meanwhile. . . Satan laughs! And yes, I kinda' mentioned Enoch Powell in the same sentence as Adolf Hitler – always takes a certain train of thought to get the whole cataclysm going, and before you know it, your guy's no better than the other fascist cunts who we're conditioned to abhor from birth. Oh, and in case the point's been missed: Satan's laughing.

Later,

Kade

Late as Always – One Boring Wedding, And One Snappy Funeral!

In keeping with the trend that I have established for myself over the many years, I am going to address two pieces of news that are almost four months too late. As my old Course Leader, Anne Karpf once paraphrased one of her peers, “News shouldn't be called news, it should be called Olds.” Heh, I absolutely agreed with that axiom and strive hard day in and day out to be the most lazy bastard that I can be and address news pieces that aren't just old. . . they're fuckin' archaic.

We have had an eventful close to the month of April, what with one of the most hotly televised and viewed weddings on the planet – Prince William marrying Kate Middleton; an utterly boring event that somehow captured the dying minds of billions across the planet. This baffling occurrence of unified brain-fart was swiftly followed by news that the eternal Boogie Man of the post-9/11 world, Osama bin Laden, was successfully apprehended, and killed by the C.I.A. He was also DNA sampled; possibly autopsied. His body was fully inspected to back viability of identification, the spoils of which are not to be shared with the rest of us in the Free World TM for the sake of avoiding antagonistic reaction, which happened anyway to no one's surprise. What's more, after all of the above, Osama's body was swiftly dragged all the way across the Pakistani landscape – from North to South – and dumped into the sea as a momentous burial, shrouded by apologies and excuses, some of which make no damned sense. What's really astounding is the fact that all of the above pertaining to the killing of the Boogie Man, and its aftermath, happened within the course of a single day.

“Wow, that's really convenient!” – My Reaction

“You fuckin' tin-foil hatter! You're mad! The witch is dead and we're all trying to celebrate this apex in our chapter of FreedomTM while individuals like yourself are trying to cast aspersions on this victory!” – Common Response

“Well. Sorry. I was speaking literally. I mean it is a very convenient truth for us all to swallow; sometimes I think it's a magic pill created in a lab – it's so palatable and perfect. Let us not even dwell on the fact that this matter was dealt with so efficiently and quickly that it makes some of us wonder how this useless cunt of a human being became such a big deal in the first place, but I'll leave my thinking cap-err, tin-foil hat in the closet this time. The asshole's dead! HELL YEAH! Drinks on the house! We've won, Johnny!” – My Surrender

Moments like this make me realise that Beyond Freedom and Dignity was indeed an excellent, and almost prophetic book written by Behaviourist—or I should say the true Founding Father of Behaviourism, Burrhus Fredric Skinner. Sorry, John Broadus Watson fans; I acknowledge that he most certainly founded the concept, but Skinner's the man that gave this concept its eternal life. Skinner was an often misunderstood individual for his strict devotion to only the empiricist branch of Psychology and Social Engineering. However, dehumanising as the man may seem, his disciplined constrictions, anti-theoretical stance, and critical view of popular abstractions such as Freedom and Dignity came with merit, because they help expose the relevance and profound presence of control in the human condition and in Skinner's own words, cultural engineering.

Anyway, I digress, because I think before attacking conspiracy theories and the de-constructive views of those that make the Critical Thinker's choice -- to analyse Osama's demise and bring up poignant questions about the obscurities surrounding said demise -- people need to read Beyond Freedom and Dignity and then re-examine our collective acceptance of news and so-called facts. Such an approach could possibly restrict the collectivist myopia just about enough to give us room to consider our own willing and programmed gullibility, geared towards accepting even some of the most poorly tailored dog and pony acts that couldn't even fool the untrained-whimsy of a child. Perhaps we need to start thinking a little bit like errant children to get out of this rut.

“But Osama is dead, asshole!” – The Next Wave

“Holy fucking shit! Great! We've won! What now?! Can we see his body? Oh wait, we buried him at sea because he's Moslem, oh, they don't like that—wait, we buried him at sea because we did not want to enshrine such an infamous individual and thus turn an area into a hot-bed of controversy and false worship. So how about some photos?! Whoops! Nope! Can't do that either because that'd provoke extremism that's already happening, and revenge bombings, that are also already happening! FreedomTM! FUCK YEAH!” - Loaded Proclamation

“If Tron: Legacy could give us a CGI'd Jeff Bridges in young form, then I am certain that The Powers That Be can amuse us with something a little more convincing, alluring and credulous, than a couple of blurry pixelised photos with red splodges that I could recreate with no more than five Euros worth of Jam and Organic Tomato Puree! There, I fuckin' killed the guy, and that's my proof because I have photos of supposed blood splatter! Now hail me as the new curator of facts, saviour of the Democratic world, and the sole man who privatised FreedomTM. . . and also pay for the damn goods I'm selling – in this case bullshit-loaded acts –, you commie dirt-bag!” - Closer

Quite frankly, I am tired of this bullshit. The only thing I was looking forward to during the Bank Holiday Weekend in the name of their Royal Highnesses, was the actual holiday aspect. Why anyone would waste so much time zoning out to a boring, bland, repetitive, constipated ceremony, commemorating an absolute waste of time, money and productivity – not to mention, a facade – is an absolute mind boggle. Of course I know that this is a case of demand and most people pay for this kind of shit; otherwise, gossip magazines and dirt sheets wouldn't be selling the way they do by these pseudo journalists who manufacture cheap stories for a living. Yes, I realise that the mass populace has reached such an all-time low from its struggles in the ever-congested Rat Race that it must paralyse itself with such mediocrity that literally mocks this accomplishment of self-induced ignorance as we all slowly inch away into our own graves. Nevertheless, I think we have a moral duty – and I know it might sound contradictory after the B.F. Skinner monologue up there – to continue begging this question: why the fuck have we reached this level of self-immolating depravity?

Secondly, and more importantly, I am ashamed of the mainstream media. These people should be bartering actual information of value and purpose and not serve as proverbial whores in the brothel of marketed information that is only stupefying us further as a collective. This is where the real shame begins and ends – why in this day and age of Freedom and Dignity and Valuable Information, do we dedicate a whole day's worth of news broadcast to this inconsequential dramatisation of extreme pretentiousness? Even if our capitalistic urges can be used to explain the market motivation for this mind-numbing bullshit, people should still herald these moments as our downfall when some shitty marriage of self-importance is taking centre-stage over a whole slew of actual news and worthwhile information that could better serve and inform the people – educate the audience.

“When it appears like I am asking this question, I am not actually asking a question, I'm making a rhetorical contention. And to say otherwise, or simply trivialise the matter with a 'but people are into this shit' argument only emphasises extreme defeatism in the face of something that needs purging!” – My Contention

“But real news is sad and boring!” - Common Argument

“As opposed to shit like a mundane wedding of mechanistic royals reinforcing the time honoured classism cliché? It's the industry's shameless submission to such stuff that makes an absolute mockery of the whole journalistic medium.” - My Rebuttal

“Oh, you mean stuff that is fun, stuff that is other than plain boring and depressing news! Look, a Prince finally got a Commoner for a Princess. . . so romantic and inspirational!” – Resounding Retort

“That's fuckin' idiotic, and ten-folds a disgrace for being dignified as an argument, bought out by a thinking viable member of the genus Homo sapians, who is actually making crippled-justifications for this crap when they ought to have better integrity matched by a hunger for knowledge and facts! Shame on you! You should be ridiculed openly for squandering your intellect, if not to motivate and provoke an actual realisation of just how shameless your ignorance has become!” – Manifesto

Without overstating the obvious yet again, let's be clear that I would be among the first to admit that people are apparently groomed to appreciate such shenanigans as opposed to thought provoking information that might be unsettling to confront at times. I am not contending or expressing shock to this observation as though it were newly realised, but I am expressing general disbelief that a race of thinkers has devolved so much in the process of running through their hamster wheels. It's pathetic, and pointing out this obvious issue isn't posing a question, it's simply holding a mirror up against something critically wrong – it's almost a moral directive for those of us that still give a shit. I fully accept that whether I like it or not, mindless, ignorant, and senseless bullshit will continue to pollute the airwaves. Likewise, whether the mainstream likes it or not, there will be people ready to hold up a mirror to such follies and continue to ridicule this sordid cultural decline in hopes of triggering some kind of collective awakening.

The low down on all the points discussed:

• Osama was nothing more than a gimmick – conspiracy theories are irrelevant in light of this fact. He was more of a Political Position of Power than even a figure and individuals like him can be created and recreated for centuries to come just as they have in the centuries gone; it's a job vacancy that'll be filled by anyone willing to play head-asshole of the world. We already have a budding list of cock-suckers on all sides of the war fence willing to perpetuate conflict for the sake of their own take on 'Moral Superiority'. Sorry, one dubiously shoddy claim of 'dead Osama' doesn't change anything in our lives. The Good Guys – if there were any in the first place – have not won. We're still neck deep in a cesspool of shit that is only looking to get worse. Not to mention, a dead Osama will not deal with your centralised banking system running rampant with a massive Financial Crisis that our governments are paying off for, while the poor class gets shafted, blamed, and stigmatised as lazy 'Communist Scape Goats' in light of this New Age Economic Apocalypse.
• The news is dreary, boring, and not fun to the dopamine-starved minds of the apathetic masses craving their next uptake of serotonin! However, there's a reason for that because the world's a fucked up place, and accurate news should present an accurate account of the fucked-up picture. When we want to try to keep up to date with the facts, we try to make out a blurry picture of reality from the already watered-down and skewed bullshit that is presented to us by a very pretentious and self-conscious News Media engrossed in the shameless act of bartering information for the sheer goal to create more revenue and ratings. If you want amusement and fun, switch to fucking CBBC, Disney Channel or Nick-fucking-Jr. – that's your domain for fun. Insisting that the already compromised news sources be further blunted and trivialised with absolute waste of time and space such as the Royal Wedding is shameful and a poor reflection of resource management. Even Royalists should be able to appreciate the idea that the Royal Wedding – with all the money and resources already being pumped in – shouldn't be anything more than a meagre five-minute news piece; leave the rest of the trivialities to the glossy magazines and tabloids and give us our REAL news A.K.A. World Affairs, and the melancholy of “OH, GOD! WE'RE GOING TO BURN, DUDE!” You don't see some of us dissenters complaining that Cartoon Network is too 'fun' now, do you? So fuck the hell off and give us back our news.
  
  

Until the next time, which will probably be next year given my activity and self-consumed sense of nihilism, take it easy, fuckers.

Later,

Kade

P.S. Dear Anne, if you ever have the misfortune of running into this website. Please do not take offence to the quote. I was honoured to be your student and I felt that in light of everything that has happened, your line was very fitting, almost like a key sonnet in a tragic poem – I couldn't help but assimilate its wisdom with due credit. So again, please do not take offence – I already have too many enemies and haters, and certainly don't wish to make another one out of one of my mentors.

An Inconvenient Leak

The following is coming months late, but whatever. I know this is coming after a new year; we're in 2011 -- another year of staunch declarations for both the hopeless and those with iron-will. Yeah, I'll just pretend like it's another day and move on with the discussion.

Not so fresh off the press--or as I like to call it, out of the horse’s ass—there’s international media drama over the two-hundred-and-fifty-thousand US Embassy cable leaks, exposed by our information-barters at WikiLeaks. Before this little fiasco, hardly any of us even knew about WikiLeaks, let alone its fonder, Jullian Assange -- a man who is the centre of much controversy for not just being a shameless 'cyber terrorist', but also a 'rapist'; what better way to rally up the apathetic masses.

Of course, now that we have the circus-freaks on a feeding-frenzy over these supposedly 'world changing' leaks, we know everything about this Assange character, down to the political nailing of his character with allegations of rape. How nice and convenient; we're detaining this nobody because he's a rapist, who also happens to be the founder of a non-profit organisation that loves to get a hold of unfathomable, and unattainable information that could pose a threat to the security of the entire civilised world. For now, I won't even get into the rather convenient circumstances surrounding these leaks and the implications all the hype and drama behind these leaks might have on our grim future.

There's obviously a long list of issues and subjects one could discuss pertaining to WikiLeaks' latest move, but for now, I am only interested in how this is starting to fuel the fire amongst radical-reformists who feel that this is the perfect opportunity to define and declare 'cyber-terrorism' as concept and increase its promotion as a viable threat to the prosperity and sanctity of this post-modern illusion that we call the freeworld. Now don't get my knee-jerk reaction wrong here, but I do find that it is awfully convenient that this bullshit angle over how these leaks are some 'catasrophe' is now leading us down a path of declaring war on concepts such as 'Freedom of Information' and the internet domain as an alternative medium for information and ideas that -- while sometimes jaded and false -- might also be free of contamination from the status quo of the mainstream.

I won’t play referee in the main debate over whether or not WikiLeaks should be heralded as a breakthrough force in the 'Alternative Media' and 'Freedom of Information' movement, or whether they should be condemned publicly for shamelessly revealing sensitive information that might carry some serious political and global ramifications.

Take careful note that I use both the positive and derogatory terms as not only a representation of what the opponents and proponents of WikiLeaks feel, but also of my own stand. It's all nothing more than the putrid, amoral consequence of the information market's rising demand for more controversy and drama that is geared to generate revenue and support certain special, elite interests. There are no heroes in this world, because to be a fuckin’ hero, you gotta’ be someone’s arch fuckin’ nemesis, and that’s just the bottom line of being trapped in a world with conflicting interests for the supposed ‘common good’. I can repeat this mantra to death, but that’ll imply care on my part and truth be told, I really couldn’t spare a fraction of conscience or even give a pauper’s share of shit with regards to what anyone thinks about WikiLeaks -- good or bad. The point here is that these events have now become the prelude to further drama and reform in political ciricles when it comes to the internet; this is where my interest comes in because this will implicate a lot of individuals from all over the world.

Another somewhat related-aspect that I am also interested in is the reaction to some of the information that is now being published by News Outlets regarding the highly-confidential—and oh, dear Christ, controversial—content of these messages, as well as the way WikiLeaks is being perceived. My primary focus for now of course, isn’t the opines in the news it self — I might as well shoot myself in the head — but rather, the way in which the internet community is reacting to the information that is being supplied.

To take an example; two primary issues came to light a few-days-ago. One issue being the American paranoia and disapproval with regards to the present British Coalition government, and mostly strong disapproval of David Cameron. The other--more amusing--issue being these secret pleas for help by certain Arab states that are demanding prompt action against Iran's rise to power. So, apparently, the A-rabs are frightened of a potentially Nuclear Iran. I guess all those theories about a deep-rooted division between the Shia and Sunni sects as well the schism of the Iranian-identity in an Arab region is certainly proving to be substantial. This latter leak I find both hilarious and fitting since it is usually the very pundits of the Arab states that whine and decry foreign intervention and attitudes against rogue states in their region. However, behind closed doors, or beneath the shifty veil over confidential phone lines, the story’s an entirely different breed of drama. For one moment, I would like to put aside the subtle overtones of hostility and in turn, hypocrisy between the two leading allied powers – Britain and The United States. For one moment, I would even like to put aside the very peculiar manner in which these 'sensitive leaks' have somehow appeared out of no where, and brought with them no leverage or real 'world changing' results that we've been told to fear, but enough fire-power for certain pundits to rally people against Freedom of Infornation.

Instead, I'd like to take things lightly and focus on the more amusing bits of 'sensitive information that was leaked', between the two of the aforementioned. I would like to focus on this greater, backstabbing cowardly attitude being exhibited by supposed paragons of the Moslem world, such as King Abdullah. Nothing best describes this fascist vermin’s two-faced ego than his metaphor for the Iran solution, “Cut off the head of the snake.” Two-timing doesn’t get more pathetic than this man’s egocentric, barbaric, theocratic regime that is dictating an entire state through an archaic religious legislation that keeps its citizens in stern-check with consquences such as punishments of inhumane proportions by way of brutal incarcerations, public-lashings, amputations, and even death. Meanwhile, the king of the land prances about demanding to be treated like the bloody leading face of good will and faith in this staged deception that we call modern geopolitics. Better yet, the same fighters of progress, democracy and freedom are happily in bed with this hedonistic criminal. You want to end tyranny in this world? Then start with Saudi Arabia; this ought to be the first country on your list.

"Cut off the head of the snake? You fuckin' kiddin' me?! Has this vile serpant looked in the mirror lately? All I've seen him do since I've existed on this forsaken planet is shed his slimey skin and drip venom from his mouth. . . King Abdullah is the fucking snake, people! I ain't no fan of Ahmedinajed, but he's just a straight-up prick, and he makes no conscessions about his esoteric pride and values as the leader of a sole nation struggling against the rest of the world." -- My Thoughts (Even though I don't see any ground being broken with this leak.)

It should also come as no surprise that in these very leaks, many other suspisions come to light. Including a long-standing investigation into Saudi-donation towards terrorism. So not only is King Abdullah a fuckin' two-timing cunt, running the world's most backward state, but he's also the backbone of the very evil that he so deceitfully projects onto Iran. Again, I implore people to not get my intentions wrong here; I think Iran is a disgrace as a country, and also a disgrace on a personal level for most of its forward-thinking citizens. From its treatment of women, to its equally archaic Sharia laws against Freedom of Conscience, speech, and personal liberity -- I find Iran absolutely repugnant, because not so long ago, this country used to be a non-Islamic state with a culturally progressive leaning. The way I see it, a potentially progressive state was laid to waste and that is always a far greater disappointment and tragedy than having to come to terms with the Draconian visage of a nation that has always been plagued by inward barbarianism -- Saudi Arabia.

Unfortunately, like anything that's vulnerable, Iran fell prey to the zealotry of the theocrats. However, let's not fool ourselves, because while Iran has become a rogue state, Saudi Arabia is a far greater evil. This country is a historically established cornerstone pillar in this empire of evil with generations of institutional oppression and strict conditioning of its people under the most terrorising sense of law by the sword -- 'obey or die!' The only reason certain Arabs are getting so wound up over Iran is because quite possibly for the first time in Islamic history, their Wahabist-dictatorship in the Middle East faces a potential threat from another minority Sectarian School of Thought that wears hundreds of years of oppression like a blunt chip on its shoulder; and now this sect holds in its grasp a dangerous weapon. Such a fuckin' typical reaction, befitting of the fascist, mysoginistic, backward, barbaric, elitist ethos that forms the spine and constitution of Saudi Arabia and its vile dynasty of ruling pigs.

I am done for now as we can all rest easy with the notion that these 'leaks' have done little to threaten anything. All they've done is expose more candid-drama from behind the scenes, while reinforcing the agenda against the internet medium as an alternative hub for news, discussions and ideas; certainly convenient for those with ulterior motives.

Later,

Kade

Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/150519

Link: http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=197130

As a parting gesture for my gross digression, while still staying somewhat on topic, I would like to share the following strip with any poor soul that makes the mistake of subjecting themselves to my quixotic ramblings.

A Long Overdue Homage

In this life of shenanigans and vulgar theatrics, all of which I appreciate and revel within, there’s a key note of timing that is always missing. This disrupts and detracts from the charm of such antics and with such glorified gimmicks execution is a cornerstone to perfection. Without it, you simply have a pointless exhibition devoid of any self-reflection or depth.

This is the kind of keynote that is always overlooked by many people, ranging from the boisterous artists to the pompous political pundits; a curse of having a seismic ego with no barriers or sense of purpose. For example, there’s certainly a very specific time and place for one to be an unyielding, uncompromising, stubborn, belligerent, insidious, hideous, invidious, fuckin’ asshole! You nail this sweet-spot, and you're an epic hero with smashmouth charisma, but if you miss - you're nothing. Absolutely nothing! And the sad reality is that most of us don’t know our place well enough to get that timing right.

So here’s a fuckin’ toast to the ignorant, oblivious Rockstar! Let us bow to this idol -- the on-stage God Complex and ‘never say die’ attitude. The endless supply of promiscuous groupies and the multitude of STDs. Let us also honour the notorious drug addictions--because nothing says 'bad ass' like livin' life ont he edge--and the countless fuckin’ puncture wounds that overshadow the plethora of tattoos! All hail the art of plain fuckin’ indulgence and ignorant trains of thought on a nauseatingly excessive scale. The kind of downward spiral that would have even the least humble amongst wishing for a swift and dignant death as a release from this lexicon of shame. Rock on, you arrogant bastard; won’t be long before you end up drowned in a pool of your own vomit, bile and blood.

Here’s another fuckin’ toast to the Rhetorical Rodents that lurk in the sewage of the political sphere – our beloved pundits. A grand toast I make to acknowledge these cunts for grossly spinning and distorting the context of truth to serve their every foul whim; even if it incurs the wrath and judgement of the entire global conscience over the appalling nature of their tactics. Again, it won’t be long before your filthy skeletons break free of the closet -- from the sex-scandals to the blatant expositions of hypocrisy that can be poetically juxtaposed against your own shallow judgement of others. The concept of Poetic Justice cannot not be more majestic with your downfall as you're picked apart by the vulture-mentality of your own kinship.

At the end of it, I would not be surprised if most pundits would wish that they had gone the way of the Rockstars, but given how their kind are known to prostitute their own dignity on a daily basis, it also wouldn’t surprise most of us if they continue to walk through life un-phased and unscathed – simply loathed and scorned for being the perfect representation of subhuman gunk.

Does this have a point? Are there hints of self-reflection in this sarcastic diatribe? Did something happen recently that provoked this outburst? Fuck no! This is just a general observation and acceptance of the status quo by the supposed ‘rebels’ that actually help maintain this mind-numbing stasis that we call the mundane system. Who wouldn't want to honour these goodfornothings and their futile melodrama? They're the perfect personification of reality.

Take it easy, fuckers.

Later,

Kade

The Heathens Are Coming!

So in my recent voyages into this perpetual-psychosis that is human nature, I have come across some rather amusing gemstones of profound ignorance and ill-fated ideas that are being promoted with assiduous effort for the sole purpose of justifying the fragile perception of a certain few deluded shmucks.

"There's an atheist conspiracy in the works and it is indeed this cult of the atheists that is the mastermind behind what appears to be a genuine New World Order movement." -- The Latest Turd of Nonsense

Oh. Really? Shit. Man. That’s such an eye-opener. I'll take pause so I can laugh, but not because of the sheer irrationality of what is being proposed here, but rather, because I am overwhelmed by hysteria. After all, there is nothing funny about the idea of a non-existant group-movement out to topple our theological beliefs. Frightening!

I mean, I can just abandon all credible facts and knowledge of everything Hitchens and Dawkins have pushed for here in the UK regarding the idea of freeing ideologies from one another's control, and removing public-funding of esoteric theological schools, and instead, doubt their motives and life-long efforts as nothing more than a mere ruse. All in light of the cock-eyed assumptions found in this New School of Thought and their latest annexation of complete rubbish that forms the ground work for this ‘atheist conspiracy’.

"HOLY FUCKIN' SHIT! THE HEATHENS ARE COMING! FUCK KNOWS WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND WHY THEY ALL INDIVIDUALLY CHOSE TO REJECT GOD, BUT THEY’VE BINDED TOGETHER IN THE NAME OF. . . I DON’T FUCKING KNOW, BUT THEY’VE BINDED TOGETHER AND IT MAKES ALL THE SENSE IN THE WORLD! THEY'RE OUT TO KILL GOD! THEY'RE KILLING GOD!" -- Venting/Belching/Whatever

You know what we call this kind of confrontation of ideas? That’s right: a no-win situation. It is nothing more than sprinkled bullshit on top of more bullshit, making up for our yearly-quota/recommended allowance of bullshit! Why do I call bullshit on this? Well, because we don’t even have a very accurate statistical count of ‘atheists’--three-percent at best--let alone those that have clandestine agendas to spearhead a proper ideological movement. All we’ve really got is a statistically acknowledged number of people ‘who don’t practice any religion’, and a small figure at that, which can just as well mean any spiritual agnostic looking to find God.

These douche-bag 'theorists' are trying to support a conspiracy theory that is contingent on a unified group-ideology, and their centrepiece for this theory is a non-cohesive group of unrelated, individualistic people who we only know to share one ‘negative claim’ that can’t even be officially documented on any census to date. This is a recipe for failure and a perpetuation of this bovine-philosophical purgatory in which most frail-minded, agenda-driven theologians find themselves. Like it wasn't already enough that their personal beliefs in the supernatural had to be preached as logic and fact to dictate real-world policies; now the very faith-element that some of these posing believers hold pride in, must be protected from the hostile influence of a fickle-thinking that barely makes up for any portion of the global populace. What a fucking joke! And talk about being insecure. Any dignified individual with a creed or genuine faith would laugh at such a theory, as would any non-believers, because both sides share a stable and sane outlook -- a reality where a meager, unrelated few could never have any reason or potential to oppress a relatively ginormous margin of people with institutionally-protected beliefs.

Seriously, there’s a time and place for one to don the tin-foil hat, and this ain’t one of those moments or subjects. When people are making up shit, at least they shouldn't lose their absolute grip over reality; something as subjective, individualistic, and potentially nihilistic or humanistic as atheism cannot support such an agenda because it lacks any kind of cohesive structure or grounds for collectivism. Assuming that there’s an 'Atheist Conspiracy TM' is tantamount to assuming and professing one’s own idiocy of epic proportions on a grand podium for the entire world to ridicule and mock.

Granted, many of us have had our moments where we've jumped the gun, or have been eager to buy into a convenient 'alternative explanation' to a reality that we cannot accept at face-value. However, it is always better to carefully select and pick supporting ideas and theories; to know what one's talking about as opposed to randomly spewing every fallacious-musing heard on the web like some broken stereo. Hell, if people are so bent on intentionally promoting absolute nonsense, at least they can be a bit more tactful with the deceptive use of ideas and selective facts. Even when it comes to propaganda driven by lies, there's a very blunt and obtuce margin that separates unique fabrications engineered through ingenuity from the plain old mediocre, random, nonsensical horseshit that one could find rotting inside any dead horse's ass.

Atheist conspiracy? Fuckin' hell! Please, tell me where these all-powerful non-believers/guys are so I can sign up for the cause. Heh. More on this at a later point in time.

Take it easy, fuckers.

Later,

Kade