Advertisements

Category Archives: Politics

What’s the difference between…?


I say, I say, I say: what’s the difference between a social worker and a Rottweiler
I don’t know, what IS the difference between a social worker and a Rottweiler?
You get your kids back off a Rottweiler.

I say I say I say: what’s the difference between the Soviet Union and the European Union?
I don’t know, what IS the difference between the Soviet Union and the Euopean Union?
You get your countries back off the Soviet one.

 

Advertisements

Chats between Guv and Peeps #1. Leaving the EU.


Guv: Hey, Peeps, shall we remain in the European Union or shall we leave?

Peeps: Well, you know what, Guv, in view of what Merkel is doing and how Obama threatened us with the end of the queue for trade deals, I suppose, marginally, we’d better go, hadn’t we? I am sure we’ll find a way to be independent.

Guv: OK, that’s what we’ll do, then.

Peeps: OK, Good luck. Sie schaffen das, hur hur hur.

Two and a half years later:

Guv: Well, Peeps, it’s now nearly three years later, Obama is long gone, Merkel’s on her way out, there’s lots of countries in the EU that would be our allies these days for a less federalist Europe. The guy in charge of the USA is all infavour of our leaving now, but for his own benefit. It’s clear that the whole business of leaving has a lot more issues than we knew about before, and you’ve got 5% more young people who wanted to stay in the electorate now, so are you QUITE SURE you still want to leave?

Peeps: How dare you ask us again? We gave you a clear signal? Wanna go undermining our demotrachic rights?! Disgusting!!!!

Are some animals more viable for exploitation than others?


Christopher Lewis asked me on Facebook:

I am interesting on understanding your scale for judging an animal’s suffering. How do we know killing one animal is fine, another is wrong. Torturing one animal ok, hunting another to extinction not.

Here’s my answer:

Christopher Lewis It’s an excellent question.

I would formulate my thoughts this way:

  1. Vulnerability to extinction. First, we have to protect species against extinction. I believe it is a massive sin to cause any extinction of species, a total blasphemy against the Creator as we cannot create a single species. And also the loss of the genetic material robs future human generations of the opportunity to experience this life form. So I make the same point here for animals, plants, fungi and without regard to size or complexity. We cannot replace them, and don’t destroy what you cannot create is an excellent maxim for life.
  2. Controllability of habitat and numbers Second, given the first point, we need to take more care with regard to animals or plants where the slide to extinction is less controllable by us. So at the moment marine life has a bigger call on protection because we have certainly placed plastics into the oceans at measurable amounts and this is completely and guaranteedly anthropogenic and there is no debate about it, unlike the debates that can be made in the case of greenhouse gases and global warming. I am in two minds about GW but I am not in two minds at all about the plastic issue, to the degree where I jumped up and down and got everyone in a small chain of stores I do things with to abandon plastic bags entirely. I have been talking about the plastic issue for fifteen years in fact, and finally people are starting to take the issue seriously and hopefully not too late, but we still don’t know how good the clean up can be and how fast. So I put animals in the line of threat from plastics into a degree of priority.
  3. Strength of links to others of the species It does appear that certain animals, even from their behaviour, have empathy to each other and interact with each other and some have interactions with their offspring which are related to love and tenderness in the human. For animals where the loss of one causes distress to others, I give more consideration than for the ones which do not have such a case. There are many species of bird, for example, that could be domesticated but humans have not chosen for the farmyard those which have lifelong pairbonds and which pine away when their loved one is taken. Take a chicken from the rooster and he happily carries on with his existing harem and the other chickens also don’t tend to look around for the missing hen. Do this to penguins, storks, swans and many other birds and mammals and you have a node of suffering. So I give priority not to eat the animals which show tenderness to one another and which demonstrate meaning to one another. In “The Time Machine”, for example, H.G.Wells Morlocks have taken the trouble to breed out of the Eloi race of humans they are farming any kind of empathy for each other. As indeed the powers that be do to us today, replacing Christ’s call to love our neighbour with the empty husk of political “correctness”.
  4. Intelligence regardless of sociability Fourthly, the above point doesn’t mean that vertebrates are always preferred over invertebrates. It appears that shrimp which people eat in great numbers are social and that the octopus, which is pretty anti-social really, is a startling intelligence and deserves a bit more respect than your typical invertebrate. All of this is subordinate to the first and second point, anyway.
  5. Deaths per kilogramme if useable protein This leads on to the fifth and this is an important point. If we are turning a living, sentient animal into amino acids for our own digestion, it seems to me to be more moral to take one animal that will feed many families over many meals than to take an animal which it takes many of to feed one person one meal. This is one of the reasons why I try to avoid shrimps. It takes maybe 10 shrimps to make a meal for one person, whereas a cow might make a hundred meals so the relationship of shrimps to cattle to give you a tonne of protein is at least a thousand (maybe closer to ten thousand) shrimps to one cow. This is an extreme example. Now if we placed the intelligence and value of the life of the shrimp at only one thousandth of that of the cow, maybe that would be justifiable. But if you look at shrimps in an aquarium for any length of time you’ll see probably just as much different activity and expression going on as you’ll see on a cow’s face as it stands around chewing cud, and maybe even more. So for me it’s disturbing to think that we could be making a virtual holocaust of these crustaceans just to produce the kilos of a single slaughtered cow. Likewise when it comes to fish is it not a bit disturbing to take a thousand capelin to give us the equivalent flesh of one tuna? Worth a thought.
  6. Naturally predated And then we have the sixth issue. Prey animals. Animals are by nature divided into hunter and hunted. The hunted tend to be thise which are naturally in the niche of proviing meat to other species and to a degree they evolved into it. It is part of being a sheep that you get eaten by a tiger, it is part of being a tiger that you don’t get eaten by anything. Human agriculture fit into this natural division in that we usually don’t eat tigers (some do) and usually do eat sheep (some don’t).
  7. Substitutability. If an animal or plant can be substituted with another in order to give the necessary thing we are looking for (example tortoiseshell now largely replaced by plastics) then it is best to take the version of the product with the least offences against these other points. If there is no substitute then all the more we need to take care that the species is protected from extinction. Usually this involves careful cultivation over a number of different sites.
  8. Farmability Given the last point, an animal or plant which can actually be farmed is a better candidate for use than a wild species that cannot be kept and cultivated under human control. Those which can be kept ought to be kept in a proper way, with regard to diet, housing and enrichment. The use of battery farms and similar is becoming thankfully a thing of the past, and this trend should continue. We are making a one way trade with these animals, they feed us and give us food and fibres, plants render to us all their nutrients and chemicals and of course it is not a deal any of them signed up to. The least we can do is give them a reasonable time of quality life with as low suffering as possible prior to sacrificing that life, again with the minimum possible suffering. Not all species lend themselves to farming, on the other hand those species which do also seem to lend themselves to adaptation into numerous breeds with varying characteristics.
  9. Multiple products. It is maybe good in view of the above to use synthetic fur rather than real fur, however if synthetic fur becomes unviable for any reason, it is better to farm fur animals which are also edible, such as rabbits, rather than mink which are only there to provide fur and which by the way require the sacrifice of numerous other animals to nourish them, although they can of course be fed on foods made from spent hens and dairy cows not usually sold for human cuisine. If we are going to sacrifice an animal, we should at least waste as little of it as possible. It is good to keep sheep as they provide milk and wool in addition to the produce of their carcase. Cattle produce leather in addition to their milk and blood products taken during their lives but this, like their meat and unlike wool, is a one off event at their death.
  10. Utilisation of inedible food. Humans cannot eat grass which is the easy crop. Cattle, sheep and camels do eat these as they are cellulose metabolised, thanks to their microbiota hosted in special chambers of their alimentary canal. Pigs can eat acorns and scraps which humans cannot eat. Via these animals, oak forests and grasslands have a use to us which might make the difference between keeping them going with their additional biodiversity, which you wouldn’t find in say a wheatfield. Hence farming them has advantages which vegetarians tend to overlook. Now let’s apply all the above to the issue of whales. They for sure let themselves down on the size issue – one whale will feed more than one of almost anything else, and given that we cannot eat plankton they let themselves down in the acorn argument too, but on the other arguments we shouldn’t be taking them.

Charlie Wilson’s War – Huliganov Rant for March


Original playout date: 2 March 2008
Duration: 25:34

This is actually the Eighth Hulirant. I haven’t been counting them over to this blog but you can see the earlier ones by looking at the side bar with the detailed navigation – and find “Hulirants”. They are all being collected there.
Read the rest of this entry

Huliganov’s Rant for February – On UK Political Correctness


Original playout date: 6 February 2008
Duration: 2:13

Once again, Huli is not up to date with the rant. First off Huli points out that this is two years into his channel, and this is at the time of uploading here to Huliganov TV already 12 and a half years which is like one eighth of a century.
Read the rest of this entry

Huliganov’s 2nd North Experience #10 – Taxi Ride to Manhattan Island (purple language warning)


Original playout date: 29 December 2007
Duration: 12:14

This is a new york yellow cab driver, and I won’t identify him, probably couldn’t anyway. But he was very chatty, and it was interesting to listen to and keep for posterity some of the things he said.
Read the rest of this entry

News at Ten – Blair becomes Pope


Original playout date: 22 December 2007
Duration: 0:18

Following his 2007 connversion to Roman Catholicism, Bliar had a serie of meetings to become the first Pope to have been converted into the faith only days previously, and to be beatified while still alive and serving as EU President as St Antonius Bliarius, patron saint of war criminals.
Read the rest of this entry

Alan Heath Interview 3/3


Original playout date: 24 November 2007
Duration: 8:50

Continuation of the earlier interview. Here we talk about how Alan managed to “befriend” someone whose views he found repellant and why he did so.
Read the rest of this entry

Alan Heath Interview 2/3


Original playout date: 24 November 2007
Duration: 10:00

Continuation of the earlier interview. We resume a day or so later over lunch at the Moldovan restauran in Warsaw. This restaurant still exists but is now right next to the parliament, whereas at this time it was over in Ostrobramska street. That location has been redeveloped in the meantime for Polsat.
Read the rest of this entry

Huliganov’s Free Spee..


Original playout date: 18 November 2007
Duration: 4:22

The attempt on Benazir Bhutto’s life prompts a rant from Huliganov which you could get away with in 2007 but could never get away with in 2017, in this era of political correctness and special pleading for the religion of peace. Thankfully in 2007 we have complete freedom to express opionions, but there are still some opponents better left untouched. Therefore, on legal adice, Huli’s enthusiastic endorsement of pulling lawyers’ hair has been removed.
Read the rest of this entry

Huliganov Rant #4 – “Lest we Forgotten”


Original playout date: 13 November 2007
Duration: 32:03

Huliganov talking in another monthly rant, of the sort we did for a short while, this time for November, and November is of course the month for remembering, be it All Souls Day, Bonfire Night or Thanksgiving.
Read the rest of this entry

Huliganov rants on house prices and the childfree “decision”


Original playout date: 31 July 2007
Duration: 15:16

I came in for a fair degree of criticism for this. Don’t care about that. It is quite a high dislike to like ratio, which for my demographic is quite high.
Read the rest of this entry

%d bloggers like this: