Airport Scrutiny Officers

An airport "security" officer was fucking around with my carry-on bag before boarding. The bag had already passed through the x-ray system and nothing "explosive" was found. But he decided to give my bag some personal attention, probably because I haven't shaved for a couple of weeks, which is apparently the first step towards becoming a terrorist.

He went through my stuff and found nothing but books, toothbrushes, boxer shorts and an external hard drive.

"What do you have on the hard drive sir?" He asked.
"Actually," I replied, "the answer to that question could be found within the question you really wanted to ask, but you didn't. The question you really wanted to ask was:

"What personal data do you have on the hard drive sir?"

This question answers its self, therefore it's a meaningless question; therefore a stupid one. It took a few moments of awkward silence for his basic human intellect to kick in, but eventually he just threw my stuff back in the bag and allowed me to pass. That's not airport security... that's airport scrutiny.

The expanded second edition of The Unwords will be released this summer

The second edition of The Unwords will be entitled "The Unwords: Exposing the dishonest language of a culture in decline" and will be published through Fearache Publishings and distributed worldwide through Ingram Distributions. Official release day will be announced soon along with a more detailed summary of what will be included in this expanded second edition of The Unwords. The first edition of The Unwords is now permanently out of stock, therefore discontinued.

Democratic leaders are neither "demo-" nor "-cratic"

Stop referring to politicians as "leaders." The concept of a leader contradicts the concept of a democracy... they have nothing to do with each other. The whole essence of the democratic system is the absence of leaders. The entire system was invented by the Greeks so they could finally get rid of their "leaders." In the words "monarchy" and "oligarchy", the second element arche (ἀρχή) means "rule", or "to lead." Hey, you wouldn't happen to know who was the leader of Athens around 500 b.c, would you? Of course not, because there was none! Because they were a democracy! That's right, they didn't have presidents, nor prime ministers. True democracy is direct, not representative. 

There are only three activities in which you can have leaders, in sports, religion and in battle. So unless your democratic "leader" is holding a rugby ball, a lightning bolt or an AK47 then stop wasting my time with this bullshit and try to pay attention to the language we've all agreed on.

The Unguests - Media in decline

We have become accustomed in learning to think, or learning to create a way of thinking, in accordance to the media and the content we see every day in news or soap operas or stuff we read in trashy magazines. We have programmed and modified our brains to think in a way that is acceptable by media and those few who are considered to be the “intellectual elite” which dictate acceptable social behavior. One could wonder what “acceptable” and "behavior" really mean today. It means limiting your beliefs and principles to what TV tells you. TV is creating today’s society. 

Certain people are not acceptable. Certain cultural streams are not acceptable. Certain fashion styles are not acceptable. 

I saw a man standing in a bus the other day. He was unshaved, unwashed, worried and alone. He had an old yellow suitcase where he probably packed his whole life inside. Some kids entered the same bus and as one of them sniffed through the air, the other laughed and said: “He’s behind you, man”. He… True, his clothes smelled bad because the poor guy had no house, no bathroom. This is all happening in the 21st. century, the high tech age with phones and clothes people call “smart”. I looked at his face and realized that he did not care about people, the sky, the birds or the river. That man was drowning in his own troubles. What would a group of teenagers know about troubles and one’s demons? Their brains are based on very simple processes and as such, they fitted the pattern. The man with the yellow suitcase is not a part of that pattern, because he smells bad. 

You’re homeless? OK, it’s not a big deal, you weren't lucky enough, but be good in this life and in your next life God will reward you with a castle. Meanwhile we need to put you on the margins of our beautiful society. The same rule applies to the unemployed, smokers and single mothers. Our society will reject you if you are different in any possible way. 

Those kids mentioned above are the new nationalists of Serbia. Born in the 1990’s during the war, dictatorship, turbo folk expansion and rise of new capitalists. They are the future builders of this land, controlled by sick media – TV or gossip magazines, which tell them how to think and what to do, creating retarded young people – nationalists. Just as I thought that we were leaving hate and prejudices behind, new stream of old conservatism came into life once again. This “new” conservatism is recruiting kids and sending them the message that our neighbors hate us and that only some specific nations love us. The guy who wrote the true history of my country is hidden somewhere in the United States. Americans hate us, of course. What they don’t think about is that a nation is not its government... a nation is not the voice of their local TV stations, but the people themselves, and they have a voice of their own.

People are brought into life in order to be creative and broad-minded and free. No one needs to remind me what I am and what I’m supposed to do, especially not the modern media. 

The Unguests - Tipped For The Win

by Tzellofouska of Lucubration Blog
Psychologist, heavy metal enthusiast, keen whiskey drinker and the founder of Lucubration. 

There is this old tradition which has been developed through time into some sort of social contract, which I am not very comfortable with. “Tipping” or “service charge” or “service fee” or “gratuity” or whatever you want to call it;

It seems to originate from the 17^th century England where people (usually of higher classes) used to tip or, better yet, bribe someone for the latter’s services. This trend was introduced into the United States during the civil war by American aristocrats, who wanted to show off their cultured nature, allegedly enhanced by travelling to Europe.

Considering the circumstances in which this unusual trend was developed, isn't it logical to abandon such customs in the 21^st century? Why do we still contribute to this paradigm of social inequality? ...Someone would argue. But I’ll pose another argument. The Oxford dictionary defines service as “ the action of helping or doing work for someone”. I will not get into the tiring definitions of what occupations are included in this term but aren't we all service providers, one way or the other?

I am a researcher. My action is doing work for someone. That someone is my boss. Despite the fact that I provide my services to my boss, aren't my published papers also a service towards knowledge dissemination or even a service to organisations that fund my research? Sadly, my funders do not think so, or do not even think about it this way, thus no tips for me! A musician is providing a service in that the music she produces with her instrument entertains people and provides them with a good night out on an otherwise boring evening. Do we throw coins at her? Why is it that waiting tables as opposed to writing a book is considered a privilege for the costumer? Aren't they both paid for the work they produce? I would say that tips would be more helpful for the writer rather than the waiter!

With every occupation comes a job specification document. Within that document there is a description of what the requirements are for the person to be employed. That person is receiving money for their service be it their skill of engineering a robot or their skill of mixing a drink. The two set skills are distinct yet both lay the foundations for a service to be produced for which money will be exchanged in return. As a customer, I am expected to pay the price the employer sets for my receipt of their employees services. So egotistically speaking why am I expected to pay more for someone to do what they are paid to do in the first place? Are we meant to be feeling bad for the waiter, the barman, or whoever desires our tips because they are stuck in a shitty job? I am sorry but last time I checked, no job is shit, right? And by labeling jobs like this aren't we contributing to social inequality ourselves? Don’t we stigmatize occupations for their inherent disadvantages?

I don’t even want to discuss the “discretionary service charge” restaurants put on the final bill, which is most of the times outrageous. This is technically illegal and one is legally right if they request this charge to be taken off the bill. Recent reports indicated that most of this money goes to the employers’ pockets, who use it to expand their businesses. See, we all fall victims to this old tradition and we may even feel bad if we don’ tip where we consider it “appropriate”.  I admit it, abandoning this kind of tradition may not change the world that much, thus it is up to each person whether they want to follow it or not. Well, the good news is that old traditions are not rules and some of them are nowadays obsolete; be it tipping, wearing a white wedding dress, throwing sick newborn babies into bottomless pits, or believing that morality derives from religion.

The Unguests

For the entire month of February, the official blog of The Unwords will be hosting articles written by fellow writers who I personally enjoy reading their work and who were willing to help me in keeping this blog active at a time when the process of writing The Torn is taking most, if not all of my time. The objective of this blog is and always has been, to expose the thoughts-taboo no one dares to express. To shout fearlessly what we have all decided collectively that must remain unsaid and to free all aspects of our social, spiritual and personal lives from hypocrisy and false representations.

The writers that will be featured are people I trust to deliver solid, quality writing and they have agreed to provide material which will be in line with the blog's overall thematic direction. Their views do not necessarily reflect my own personal views on the subjects they will elaborate upon, nor will I be moderating their writings in any way. I believe this is a good opportunity to inject a fresh voice in this blog by people I know first hand that they have exceptional skills in writing and I would like to thank everyone for their participation in this project.

A life of expectations: The criteria for a good book

The criteria for what constitutes a good book are pretty much the same for all of us... but what most people don't realize is that our "criteria" present themselves after you finish a book, not before. Before come our "expectations."

Each book is a brand new experience and you cannot have criteria for a new experience, it's impossible. A book is not like an apple, when every time you have one there is a criterion on what it should taste like. The day you bite an apple and it tastes like an orange will be the day there will be no more criteria on how an apple should taste like. Criteria are stable factors and common nature. What we so often find shadowing our judgement prior to a new experience is the concept of expectations, which are of infinite nature, change drastically from person to person and are usually completely meaningless because their creation was based on a different experience in the past and not on the one you are experiencing now. If my book fails to meet the expectations of someone who a week ago has read e.g 'Twilight,' it's because that person's expectations of that book have been laid on my shoulders to carry this week. But someone else with different expectations might read my book and be amazed by it. If you ask both what defines for them a "good book," they'll more or less mention the same attributes. "It's entertaining, it has originality, touches me emotionally" etc. The reason they don't share the same opinion about the same book, even though they had the same criteria, is because they went into it with very different expectations.

This phenomenon of fixed criteria but constantly changing expectations, if you pay close attention to your everyday life you will identify it as the root of many social problems, and perhaps the main reason why so many relationships today are led to an impasse.

Criteria tell you that for a relationship to work, there has to be love, mutual respect, communication.
Expectations tell you that a gesture of love is to be given something in gold or silver, forcing your lover to compromise constantly is a sign of respect and less than 20 text messages per day counts as a lack of communication.

Personally, I wouldn't want to live a life of expectations...would you?

The Torn Apart - Primitive

A long time ago, some men came across the ocean for the first time. And even though the common belief of their era was that the ocean was the edge of the world... they chose to cross it.

What inspires a man to commit to such an insane act? What quality, what virtue must a man possess, to look straight at the horizon of an endless ocean, the end of the world as they knew it and say "I will push forward!"

Is it faith? Maybe, but I doubt it. The established belief was that once you reached the shore the world ends. This belief progressively made its way into various mythologies across the globe at a later time, even after we became quite adequate in sailing. The ancient Greeks for example placed gold coins on their dead so they could pay the boat man and allow them to cross the ocean into the underworld. So the idea that across the ocean lies danger and death was still evident even in more advanced civilizations and was embedded in their religious beliefs. Faith would only produce more fear and hesitation in defying those beliefs.

Is it curiosity? Probably. I cannot see how a man can march towards certain death and infinite nothingness without some questions in his head that need to be answered. But is curiosity enough to commit to this? Today, would you jump into a black hole in space just out of curiosity? I don't think so...

How about imagination? Most definitely. I believe imagination is a quality that played an integral part in our evolution as a species. The ability to imagine and calculate an outcome in our head, with eyes wide shut, without necessarily experiencing the action. Imagination is what gave birth to mathematics. Mathematics, at their basic core, is an imaginative way of connecting things together without necessarily having them physically in front of you. I believe that these men, while staring at the endless ocean, had the imagination to invent the most raw form of mathematics, but also the most genius. The thought process would be this:

If the ocean is the end of the world, 

then this means that the world is made of land. 

If this is the end of the world, 

and the end of the world is the end of land...

...then why is there still land under the water?

Think about that the next time you come across the term "primitive." Because these men were physiologically and biologically identical to us. The difference is that they did a lot more... with a lot less than what intellectuals have available today.

Tearing the atheist apart

I saw this photo by accident on Facebook and I just had to share it with you. For those who might be checking out this blog for the first time: I am a Gnostic. Meaning that I don't believe in anything for which there is not already a solid scientific knowledge-base for available to study. Therefore I do not believe in any of the current gods. And believe me, I've had my share of hearing some really bullshit pro-religious arguments so far. But if there's one thing I despise more than bullshit religious arguments from believers, it's bullshit anti-religious arguments from non-believers.

This guy posted this pic to show that the christian priests shake hands the same way the Jewish shake hands, implying a conspiracy connection between the christian and the masonic establishment. Well, yeah it's true dude, they shake the same way as the Jews. It's also the same way the Muslims place their hands when they pray as well by the way. You know why?... 

...it's because they all worship the same god!

It's the God of the old testament for all three of these religions! And yes, they share common customs and traditions, OBVIOUSLY! Really man, seriously?! Do you know how easy it is to hammer religion? Pedophilia, homophobia, extremism, authoritarianism, a gazillion superstitions, the earth is 6 thousand years old, a man living inside a whale, an apple eaten by some brainless twat inside a garden being the cause of why you catch a cold every now and then, the stars created after the earth, a giant boat with 2 million animals inside floating around in the ocean, the fucking crusades for Christ's sake! And out of all that, the best you can come up with is... the way they shake hands?!! I can tolerate illogical behavior from believers, through repetition they have become exceptional at it and it's something you kind of anticipate. But sorry, I expect more knowledge and logic from the group that claims knowledge and logic as their ultimate weapon.

The European dream is the American nightmare

You have probably heard many people, usually artists and politicians, declare that they are pursuing the american dream, or that they are living the american dream, or some other variation of this very common motto. You can even hear this motto from people who are not even Americans.

When a Mexican immigrates to the United States in search of a better life, he is not after the American dream, he is after the Mexican dream...because he is Mexican. There is only a small minority group of people left in this world that are searching for the American dream. The Americans, obviously... and there aren't as many as you might think. Because a few centuries ago, when the Europeans decided to immigrate to the western hemisphere respectively searching for their own European dream, they... well, they kind of killed them all and stole their lands. 

It is almost impossible to accurately determine the exact number of native Americans that were sacrificed so Europeans can keep on "dreaming," but it is certainly in the 7-digit area and above. There is a term for that, it's called "mass genocide," but politicians prefer the term "colonization" cause it's more elegant. Everybody strives for a better life for themselves and their family, that's understandable, so I'm not judging the immigration to the American continent at all, every human being has the right, or should have the right, to move and settle wherever he desires. I'm judging the inexcusable attempt of pursuing your dreams in the expense of another human being. Native-Americans got wiped out cause the lands they were settled in had a huge vein of gold and oil which Europeans absolutely needed for their "dreams" to come true. And when you label this motivational concept as "American" when it has in fact led to the near extinction of the actual Americans, and subsequently to the demolition of all their own dreams and hopes for a better life... it's kind of an insult to them, don't you think? It's like referring to Hitler's attempt to carnage the entire Jewish community as "The Jewish Dream."

Dream on... by all means, have fun. Claim your right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But never forget... that when one group separates its own ambitions of well-being from the overall well-being of humanity... you only need to look at the 9/11 events to realize...

...that one's dream can be someone else's worst nightmare.