tripu

Richard Dawkins prompts me to a moral dilemma that is also a paradox: I want to worship Richard Dawkins as a god, but I can’t because I am an atheist myself.

I must confess that two days ago I had no idea who George Carlin was.

I got to know him only yesterday, thanks to one of @ampajaro’s tweets announcing his death first thing in the morning. That was followed by a chain of entries coming from a few of the blogs I (helplessly try to) keep up with.

I have read such striking superlatives about this comedian that I youtubed him. After watching a few of his routines I now feel that I have to share and honour his talent. So here you have two pieces of different shows by George Carlin. Caution — strong opinions (and language) ahead.

The first video is basically about religion being a pile of bullshit (kudos, we need more of that nowadays):

The second video is a somewhat furious yet brilliant sermon against those who are against abortion. (I personally don’t agree with all of what Carlin says in this video. I am not against abortion. But unlike most of other left-wing people I know, I am not that sure that I am undoubtfully in favour of abortion, either. Also, I don’t buy the theory that equates abortion to women’s rights, and to “the choice of one woman”. In any case, I’m an atheist and my position has nothing to do with religion, tradition or customs, so I very much support — and enjoy — Carlin’s mockery of religion’s mean and simplistic approach to abortion):

What I admire the most about George Carlin is the technique — the round, perfectly-delivered script. He can speak for ten minutes without stumbling over a single syllable, without humming or hesitating. Weaving long enumerations of words or examples, putting the stress in the right place and stopping precisely where required.

And I love his strong and brave position on issues as sticky as religion, politics, taboos, gender, death, PC language and abortion. Even if at times he looks more like a fanatical preacher than a comedian and some of his arguments seem debatable to me. But hey, conservatism needs to be balanced. Don’t miss his “Seven dirty words” routine (“shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits”), which apparently caused a radio station to be sued and sparkled a major debate about censorship in the American airwaves. Here, the video audio in YouTube.

Via Chewie’s well-formed strings I discover “Even Stevphen”, the section that Steve Carell and Stephen Colbert have in “The Daily Show” (Comedy Central). It’s a delightful exercise of intelligent humour in an elegant format.

I was just about to post their wonderful debate on medical marihuana, but I decided that this rational discussion about Islam vs. Christianity is even better.

BTW, Colbert is that one famous journalist that spoke for 24 minutes during the last White House Correspondents Dinner, corageously making so much fun of Bush and his administration. Chewie and I recommend not to miss that video, neither. (If you did read last month’s “Wired”, you already know who he is).

A dios pongo por testigo que nunca conseguiré entender por qué la gente más estúpida disfruta tanto exhibiendo su imbecilidad en TV.

Desde que vivo en un piso con tele y me salpica la programación británica en [de]prime time, estoy descubriendo un infragénero de serie Z que, hasta donde yo sé, aún no ha llegado a España (ojo, que en pocos meses lo tendréis en la Europa continental): el «reality show temático pseudoformativo». Todos estos escaparates de la miseria humana tienen en común la figura de un «experto» que en cada programa llega a un hogar distinto para ayudar a la familia a solucionar un problema relacionado con su especialidad. En todos los casos, resulta que la solución más eficiente y justa es asesinar un poco o bastante a todos y cada uno de los miembros de la familia. Sin embargo, el experto indefectiblemente se entrega con pasión a hurgar en los detalles del problema hasta sacar pelotillas, en una celebración gloriosa de la bajeza, la indecencia y la estulticia del hombre (y de la mujer, que no se me enfaden las feministas).

Éste es el bestiario provisional que he elaborado, en orden creciente de toxicidad:

Read the rest of this entry »

Politics in Spain is dead boring. At least this is so when comparing with other countries.

I first realized this fact the year I lived in Italy. Italian politicians and parties are more diverse, brave and spontaneous than their Spanish counterparts. The ideological range is much wider, from the communists and radicals (Pannella, Bonino) to the nostalgic xenophobic neofascists (Bossi, Berlusconi). Not to mention the permanent inner fights in the leftish and Catholic parties (L’ulivo, La margherita, Prodi) and the fascinating tentacles of the Catholic Church. Many topics that in Spain are sort of taboo or understood ─civil war, gay rights, laicism vs. Catholicism, manipulation in the media─ are passionately discussed in Italy.

Now I find this George Galloway, a British MP that reminds me of Marco Pannella. Via my new flatmate I discovered this TV clip in which Galloway is interviewed in Sky News on the Lebanon vs. Israel crisis.

From Galloway’s very first answer it’s crystal clear that the interview is going to be anything but boring. This is a completely different point of view on international politics than the one the mainstream media show in their news. And Galloway puts forward his ideas in such a simple and passionate way that you can’t but feel empathic with him. (And pity the newsreader who interviews him).

I also found a rough transcript of the debate.

Stimulating at the least, definitely you don’t see these things in Spanish TV.