Tell the People: Vince Cable Advocates Direct Action

"No government - coalition, Labour or other - would change its fundamental economic policy simply in response to a demonstration of that kind."¹

So sayeth Vince Cable yesterday, with regards to the March for the Alternative that took place on Friday. I cannot imagine a greater vindication of direct action and civil disobedience than that. In a single sentence Cable has affirmed the facticity of a truth understood by all who believed in the rightfulness of direct action.

Let's be clear. Direct action is not an intensifier in the dialogue of protest. It does not exist to punctuate our statement by saying, 'Yes, we are this angry.' Just and neccesary direct action must be both of those things. They are mutually inclusive. Neccesary action is always just, and just action must always be neccesary. When the state condoned form of protest discourse has been sublimated by the system such that its power is negated (as it is in our current system, where it is diffused along socially prefigured lines of characterisation and storytelling, repackaged as an old, powerless narrative), then direct action becomes neccesary. This should not be hard to accept: When there is no power in civil obedience, we must turn to civil disobedience to become empowered. (And the rider to that, which is that we must not accept disempowerment.) All of those who have been acting upon the rightfulness of direct action (and here I most definitely include UK Uncut, and exclude the stupidity of the Black Bloc) have held at heart the knowledge that civil obedient protest - marching and rallying - has been disempowered. Until now that view has had opposition from ineffectual neoliberals insisting that endless marching within state constraints is the only rightful form of protest.

As of yesterday, that argument has been exploded. No longer is this argument contested. Now we have a statement, a declaration from one of the central figures in the ConDem cabal, that the civil obedient form of protest will not be recognised by the state in any effectual way. It almost beggars belief that Cable would misstep so badly as to make a statement so blunt, but so he did, and the ConDem mask has slipped. The government will not listen to its people. We must disobey to maintain common power, and we must not surrender common power. There's only one course of action.

Now we need to get that message out there. It saddens me that so few people will even see Cable's message, and fewer still will grasp what it means. We need to push it out, educate people. If people truly understood what was happening in this country's political sphere (and beyond it, of course) they would be frightened for the future. Anyone who is not concerned about the path we are taking, nor angry at the exercises of power by these falsely elected ideologues, does not understand what is happening. Or, of course, they're one of those who stand to profit. We need to make sure people do understand, so actions like this do not slip past barely noticed nor challenged:

'Academic fury over order to study the big society'

One line in particular stands out:

The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) will spend a "significant" amount of its funding on the prime minister's vision for the country, after a government "clarification" of the Haldane principle – a convention that for 90 years has protected the right of academics to decide where research funds should be spent.

This use of the word 'clarification' is deeply, deeply sinister. It's an omen of things to come. What other policies and principles might the coalition see fit to 'clarify'? In the face of such things, when fully comprehended, who would not be up in arms? So it's vital we make sure these actions, this information, is diseminated and understood. Cable has given us a perfect rallying point, a statement simultaneously sweeping in its impact yet uncommonly clear in its meaning. Now we need to let people know.

---

¹http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12874631

Living Beyond Means

It's a great success of the Conservatives' rhetoric that they have convinced a lot of this country that 'Living beyond one's means' is the crime of the benefits claimants. This has been accomplished simply by the old staple technique of twisting definitions.

At the heart of the misconception, there is a conflation of this nebulous idea of 'means' and income. This is a misconception only on the part of the public who have bought into the idea. The Conservatives who have spun the story should not be seen as a piece with the accepting public. The public are mistaken - fooled - but the Tories are wilfully misdirectional.

The Conservatives have spun the story - sadly accepted in many quarters - that to live beyond your income is the great sin that has triggered the depression. They are able to gain credibility from pundits across the spectrum citing 'living beyond means' as the trigger for the depression. But note the distinction: Means, not income. To equate the two is the Conservative falsehood. Those without income are living beyond their means if they live at all, and those with absurdly overinflated incomes would struggle greatly to live a lifestyle that actually exceeded them.

The truth is that those 'living beyond their means' are comitting the excess at the point of income - their income is wildly beyond a reasonable level. And likewise, viewed in this light - the true light - we see that it is preposterous to accuse the benefits claimants of living beyond their means. If they have an income of zero, how can they possibly be living in excess of anything?

Of course a lie like this is insidious. Nobody explicitly draws the connection underpinning it - indeed, to do so is to expose the strings. Instead it is simply made a tacit assumption, an unspoken underlying definition. That way there will be many - those who are not already scrutinous but who assume veracity - who do not even notice an assumption is being made. And the best way to reinforce the false equivalency is simply to take it for granted, as if there is nothing even to dispute. But there is, and not just in this case. And those who assume veracity on the part of those in power are going to find themselves deeply confused down the line as to how things have gone so bad.

More to the point, they'll be responsible.

Nothing to Report

No news is not good news. No news is merely no news, and it gives me nothing to write about. Here is some minutae:

In writing:

A second serving of ephemeral pulp fantasy is available here.

Not content with driving to me distraction with script pitches, Big Finish are now soliciting short stories for a compilation Doctor Who short story audiobook. I have one idea already I am about to start work on.

In gaming:

Finished Star Wars: Jedi Knight. It's got a reputation as a classic and it's one it deserves. This is a game that is fantastically enjoyable nearly decades later. It shines on level design, pleasantly reminiscent of the Half-Life series, whilst its weapon set is brilliantly well balanced and the force power element lives up to the expectations of a game with the premise 'Play as a Jedi'. Secrets and a well implemented RPG system give it replay value. The live action cutscenes are pretty lame, but they're simply of their time and they have a certain charm.

Started Max Payne. Stuck on it at the moment, but far enough in to acknowledge that the hardboiled noir pastiche vibe is absolutely inspired. The gameplay, with it's then-uncliché bullet time gunfights is entertaining and pretty slick, though a bit repetitive for my tastes. I intend to finish it if I can get through this one hair-tearing part.

Currently halfway through Bioshock. This will get a full-on rambling write up when I'm finished, but suffice to say it is already cemented as an all-time classic in my mind, and THE best example of game storytelling I have ever seen.

In reading:

Don't laugh, but I'm reading a comedy thriller by Boris Johnson. It's actually highly amusing, and crying out for a screen adaptation. How much of it was written by Boris is of course debatable. Curiously, its biggest detractors appear to be Boris' fans.

In watching:

Newswipe is as good as ever, if not even better. This is the best of Brooker's shows, surpassing the flawed Gameswipe (Brooker may have cut his teeth on games coverage, but he is still out of touch), and bettering Screenwipe by being less ephemeral, and having some real gravity underlying its points.

In the Loop - Anyone who enjoys The Thick of It will of course enjoy this. But it is more than just The Thick of It writ large. The American story is as big as the British one, preventing it becoming Malcolm Tucker goes to Washington. Instead both sides are given equal billing, and whilst there are obvious parallels between them, the Americans have a different vibe and a different story to the British. And of course, it is as hilarious as it has ever been. It's not just Malcolm reeling of the quotable lines, either. Every character gets some really shining notes. My favourite quote might come from Addison (playing essentially a slightly nastier version of Olly): "You speak entirely in parables. You're like a crap jesus." Even Malcolm, the only crossover character (Toby is similar, but distinct, from Olly) is not just a retread of the Thick of It ground, as Capaldi saw fit to try and take him in a new direction for his story in the film, and we see a less secure, shark-in-the-pool Malcolm.

And that is the news as it stands at 18:41.

Everyone's a Bastard Who Dies at the End

Snow is almost gone.

News is less depressing of late. I'm still seeing portents, but it is not the shockingly unpleasant reading of late November/eary December. I am still disatisfied with the situation, but it is nice to catch a breather, feel that things are less stultifying and impending.

Thought about writing a short satirical piece earlier, but maybe a little too close to home, a little too vitriolic. I could do to lose some cynicism. Would writing this act as catharsis and release, or would it just focus my bitterness into a gritty little pearl? Don't know. Would be nice to write *something*, at least.

Big Finish impressed me again with Nev Fountain's Omega. It may actually be *better* the second time around. There is so much hidden in here, I am sure I haven't mined it all yet. Unfortunately not one I can easily recommend to non-Who fans as with Chimes of Midnight, as it is quite canon heavy.

Was absent mindedly singing a song earlier, then thought about the lyrics and was cut to the quick. That hurt.

A few books I've read recently -

The Lies of Locke Lamora - Caper story about youthful thieves living it up in fantasy Venice, when shit gets real. Really well crafted sense of place and inter-character relationships. Pretty funny in places, too. Everyone's a bastard who ends up dead (spoilers!), but they have redeeming qualities. More on this below.

A Canticle for Leibowitz - Split into three parts. Parts 1 and 2 are incredible, Part 3 seems a little more obvious and unsubtle. Nonetheless, deeply intelligent writing, witty and pithy. A better portrayal of the division between science and religion that probably any other I have seen. This is a book I will remember in twenty years time.

Flashman at the Charge - I haven't finished this, actually. I got distracted and veered off into the above two books, and trying to pick this back up has been like swimming upstream. I'm halfway in, just after the account of the Charge of the Light Brigade. This is probably the best Flashman has been since, well, 'Flashman'. Less fantastical, more historical, with Flash getting caught up in everything whilst trying to avoid anything. I'll probably pick it up idly in a month or two and finish it in a spurt.

Currently I'm on A Game of Thrones, because I think everyone I've spoken to has told me to read it, so I decided to give in. Another fantasy story where everyone is a bastard and they all end up dead. The front cover boasts about how venomous the characters are. This is in vogue at the moment, but it's getting tiresome. Post Lord of the Rings movies, it is a good way to define an identity for your book that isn't an association with that saga, I guess. And maybe after Potter and Rings, people are becoming a little jaded toward heroic fantasy. It needs balance though. Lies of Locke Lamora got this right, portraying the disingenuous and variously unpleasant people of Camorr, but balancing it against the genuine camaraderie and friendship of the gang.

Just discovered I have to go for a medical exam on Sunday. Not for my own health or anything, but so the government can decide whether or not I'm really ill. Did I say I had caught a breather from the stupidity of the system? Hah. There's a joke.

The Year We Make Contact

I don't make New Year's Resolutions as I have no resolve, however the New Year's Resolution of my monitor was 1440x900px. In lieu of such things, here are things I'm doing, thinking of doing, and thinking I should be thinking of doing:

Finding a new flat - It's pretty clear I should be getting out. I have decided to go live in York. Now I have to find a place. This is difficult because I neither want to live alone, nor with people I can't stand, and people usually need a flatmate ASAP, and don't want to spend time making friends. Also, I am bad at people. I haven't had much motivation to do this yet.

Writing - Something, anything. My creative side is so withered and dead it is saddening. Every time I have brilliant thought I realise it's really only a brilliant concept, and I have no clue of the realisation. I have this one idea for a weird sci-fi/fairytale/folklore mish-mash thing riffing on verbal tradition and old folk stories mixed with futuristic stuff and language, but it's hard to flesh out a plot. Also plays, I am more hopeful for these. I think I may start work on my adaptation of Borges' Theme of the Traitor and the Hero soon. Been planning it long enough.

Posting - I think things, I discuss them, I intend to write them here, I don't. It's not like I have nothing to say, either.

Socialising - Won't happen til I move to York, so on with that, I guess.

---

Enough of that. I have been thinking about the election recently. Is there any chance of a Labour majority? I would rather that than a Conservative win, and if I thought there were any chance, I would vote Labour in the hope of it. Otherwise I will be voting Lib Dem. I think a hung parliament with the Lib Dems playing Kingmaker is probably the best I can hope for.

Also, have you been watching Irish politics recently? It's like a Tarantino movie.

---

On a related note, I originally started this blog because that ornery Irish bastard Gundrea read some of the stuff I'd blathered about gaming and said I should be throwing it up somewhere. That lasted all of two posts where I blithered on about Metroid Prime, and then I turned into a bleeding heart liberal. In honour of the humble origins of this blog, however, I will now proceed to write mindlessly about videogames once again. I actually only started really being a gamer this year, it was at most a casual distraction prior to this. The fact that this year saw me getting a high end PC and living in a household with all major consoles is not coincidental. Here then, is a year in gaming. (Games marked with a * were released this year. Games marked with a ** were released this year, but originally released earlier.) I was gonna go month by month, but I forgot when I played stuff.

Fallout 3 - This is pretty much the first PC game I actually played when it was relatively recent. So inexperienced and naive a gamer was I one year ago. With wide-eyed innocence I stumbled into the post apocalyptic wastelands, and proceeded to become a saintly swashbuckling wanderer of the wilderness, with my huge Supermutant friend at my side who WOULDN'T TAKE THE LETHAL RADIATION DOSE FOR ME THAT FUCKING GREEN WANKER. I haven't played any of the DLC but I found the world really immersive, and it hed me for the whole game. I didn't roam too far and wide, as I found the gameplay was lacklustre. Much tighter resources could have really made the game, but it was still pretty addictive as was, and the world felt very real. Also, the 50s sitcom section was inspired, and a few more touches like that would have made it a classic.

Warhammer Online - They were fixing the gaping flaws when I quit, but too little, too late. But hey, Lego Universe is going to be awesome right? No need to give up on MMOs just yet.

Mirror's Edge - I invented this game. I mean, really, seriously, I envisioned and described a game exactly like this. It was like seeing one of my dreams realised. Heavenly.

World of Goo* - Absolutely brilliant, innovative, challenging, hilariously funny puzzler. Also has a fantastic soundtrack. I only wish it were several times longer.

LittleBigPlanet - This really is impressive for its innovation and carving a new path for games. It feels like something new and exciting. And is also very fun. It's a shame the level editor sacrificed function for gimmicks, though.

Gears of War 2 - IT'S A GIANT WORM! THEY'RE SINKING CITIES WITH A GIANT WORM! That is all.

Echochrome* - Hardly anyone has heard of this amazing gem. It is based on the works of MC Escher, and allows you to mess with perspective to get places. It's really clever, an accurate realisation of Escher's pictures in a gameworld. Also nice violin soundtrack.

Half-Life 2 - Yes, that is how behind the times I am/was. I always scorned the excessive hype. That was a mistake. It really is that good. Episode One was lacklustre, but the level in the dark was very clever. Episode Two was heavenly. Where is Episode 3?

Portal - Nothing I can say hasn't already been said.

Metroid Prime Trilogy** - Alright, alright, I'll shut up about it.

Prototype* - A good game that several flaws prevented from being a brilliant game. A (badly written) review is on my facebook page.

Castle Crashers - Exactly the sort of thing XBLA needs more of. Played this local multiplayer and it was a blast.

Shadow Complex* - Oh wow, this was good. I mean, pick of the year good. Epic and Chair's love letter to Castlevania and Super Metroid (Sorry!) managed to be a crystallisation of the pure goodness in the genre. The gadgets were inspired, especially the foam gun, and the world a veritable labyrinth. Could only have been improved by a better story and acting, but the laughability of the existing one at least added amusement.

'Splosion Man* - A so-so singleplayer game that had a fantastic completely retooled multiplayer mode. The simple one-button control concept was also brilliantly realised. Fear those rising water levels, though.

Team Fortress 2 - What do you know, I actually enjoy competitive multiplayer FPS. But I can only play Scout.

Trine* - 'It's not bad. In fact it's quite gorgeous and innovative and I do intend to finish it because I'm having fun.' Apparently this constitutes a bad write-up, so I will add that it was one of the most pure experiences I've had in a long time, and the RPG elements fit right in and let you actually play to a role. Sheer unadulterated fun.

Dragon Age* - So, it's official, Bioware have perfected the fantasy RPG. If you like RPGs, you'll like this. Otherwise you won't. It's not anything other than a fantasy RPG, it's just the genre, cut and planed and smoothed and polished to perfection. And full of dicks who hate me. My only friend is a golem. FUCK YOU ALISTAIR! I DON'T NEED YOU! I DON'T NEED FRIENDS!

The Operative: No One Lives Forever - Old, this, but good. Takes the Austin Powers type pardoy 60s spy theme and runs with it, turning it into a very respectable stealth game. An underground hit that I'm surprised isn't better known.

The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks* - Technically I'm playing this this year, but who cares? It's disappointing. It still has the basics, but the magic that made Phantom Hourglass an absolute joy is all gone. Worse, it's been replaced by the most excrutiatingly annoying mechanics ever. I am fed up of this game. The first Zelda game I've ever really got bored of before the end. Sad.

House of the Dead: Overkill* - No gameplay to speak of, but the atmosphere is so thick it's sheer fun anyway. The music is hilarious and it baffles me that the unlockable versions have no lyrics.

Plants vs. Zombies* - It's fun. That's ALL. It's not a brilliant, addictive new super craze. And zombies are really, really tired now. Seriously, what is PopCap doing to mind control everyone? Scary people.

Highlights: Trine, Shadow Complex, World of Goo
Disappointment: Zelda

Next up: Something about books. And more Metroid.

Ch-ch-ch-changes

Hm. I was made somewhat bluntly aware today of a considerable paradigm shift in my personality. I am considerably more invested in the state of things, and also more vociferous about it. Or, put another way, I have become an impotently ranting politico.

One wonders if this shift is all for the good, however. I scanned the BBC headlines earlier, and noticed it was surprisingly full of stories of nutjobs killing people, and also the tedium about Tiger Woods and Avatar. I caught myself feeling relieved and thinking 'Thank God that the morons in power haven't done something newsmakingly revolting today'. Concerning, on multiple levels. (And I still found some things to rant about.)

Things I need to blog about:

Hat Time

Dragon Age

Banning of slang

Why I want Avatar to flop

Speechless

Sometimes, there are no words. Quite literally so; I saw something earlier that rendered me speechless. I don't even know where to begin with addressing it, it is too perverse for me to even get my head around. My only responses to it were rage and nausea and confusion. Anything I could say about it would be ranting, just venting. A meaningless outburst would serve no purpose, so I have nothing to say about it.

And that's good, I think. The idea that there might be a day when nothing can render me speechless is disturbing in the utmost. I don't want to be able to analyse and comment on everything, to account for and address everything. That's too much like comprehending the perverse thinking on display. When I can't proffer a response, I can at least cling to that as a sign that I am not yet like them. Their world doesn't make sense to me. God help me the day it does. Of course, venting incoherent rage isn't going to change anything. It'll take someone other than me to actually improve things. But I don't know that I want to be able to think like that person. I don't think I want a philosophy that accounts for everything.

By Any Other Name

I saw a nonsense article on the BBC news site the other day, in which the Economics editor tried to make the claim that we were no longer living in a capitalist society. Her argument was that with the government bailing out the banks, we no longer met the definition of capitalism, which required laissez-faire government. Well, bollocks to that. What a stupid semantic argument to completely miss anything relevant or of worth.

There is no such thing as true capitalism, or true communism, or true anything else in a working world. A practical economic system will never equate precisely to the theoretical model, because no model has yet been conceived that can account for all the chaos of a human element and all the unpredictable eventualities of life. It's unsurprising, though, that those people who do try and reduce the boundless and most definitely irreducible problem of life to a few pages of economic modelling are now crowing meaningless arguments that we no longer meet the definition, no longer adhere to the model, and therefore are no longer of that system.

What's relevant is the underlying principles of the system, and the tenets of the economy have not changed one bit. The economy is now, exactly as it was previously, underpinned by the reduction of everything to commodity. All things have to be precisely defined in what they are, in order that they may be assigned specific value. Everything is reduced to precisely defined value-packages, and each individual element of a thing is itself reduced to component value-packages. This is exemplified nicely in the buying out of shareholders. Each individual interest in a product or service does not share in the whole of the thing, but instead has their own slice, of carefully defined parameters, which can be assigned specific value and purchased from them. It's also no coincidence that this closely mirrors the urge to reduce a person to a series of metrics, the two are intertwined; we fast approach the day when we will have to assert ownership of our own eyes, or fingerprints, lest we are expropriated of it.

The other aspect of the economy, correspondent with the commoditisation of everything, is the assignation of ownership to all things. Everything must belong, there must always be a person who holds the power to any thing – because ownership is equal to power. This is why everything need its owner, so we know who it is who can dictate how that thing is used, how we may interact with it, even what the thing is.

There was another story in the news the same say as the capitalism article. It mentioned that police-seized computers were continuing to be held to serve the interests of FACT, a private interest. As a friend indicated, this reveals the falsity in the 'freedoms' we are given by the power-holders. Expropriating his words for a moment:

What the computer fiasco shows is that, for example, the ‘right to your own private property’ is an everyday assumption masking what is actually only *permission* to keep and use what remains at all times open to the possibility of sequestration by police (acting on behalf, here, of other private corporations). Nothing you ‘own’ privately cannot be forcefully taken away from you under the reign of speculative investigative powers. [...] This is the paradigm on which the above kind of interventionism is premised: the possibility that copyright-infringing material might be found on a computer system is enough to seize hold of it indefinitely, the possibility that Iraq might house underground weapons bunkers the first Bush administration overlooked is enough to invade it and change it irrevocably, the possibility that a foreign-looking man running in the London Underground could be a suicide bomber is enough to gun him down fatally, the possibility that someone is a terrorist is enough to detain them without due legal process, render them or submit them torture, etc. In each case a state, police or corporate claim to a right (copyrights, rights to regulate arms, rights to act on suspicion, rights to suspend international law) privileges itself in order to suspend other rights, which are thus revealed to be mere permissions (permission to use media, permission to defend oneself, permission to use public transport, be foreign-looking, be protected under international laws, etc., etc.) that can at any time be withdrawn.

It is in fact the power-holders (primarily I mean the government, but there are some others in this group) who hold all the power over anything we allow to be commoditised, and that power is deferred to us only contingent on investing the power-holders with the power to withdraw it. They are, after all, the power-holders.

If you really want to argue that there is no capitalism, look to the fact that the individual is not the owner of his belongings, but is rather holding only a permitted stewardship. If we are not living under capitalism, it is because the power-holders are the owners of all commodities. The economic system we seem to labour under exists only because the power-holders grant the permissions which support it. The system is the same, but the rights it is premised on have been exchanged for provisions.

(I need a better term than power-holder. This is what is meant by sovereign power, right?)