David Cameron has called for an end to the slaughter in Gaza, a useful contribution to the debate marred only by the lack of any ideas about how to achieve this end. He has not as yet called for an end to fracking, but a new development yesterday stunned most people: the Daily Telegraph gave prominence to an article by Tim Morgan, who called it ‘the dotcom bubble of our time’, trotting out the exact same arguments this and millions of other sensible sites across the globe have been on about for years: the threat of water supply compromise, the rapidly diminishing returns, and so forth. Sadly, Mr Morgan’s starting assumption (that Cameron has gone fracking mad because he believes in it) is flawed: for Dave, it’s another Bright idea (like the HST to Manchester rationale) that came out of one of his brainstorming sessions) designed to generate pointless gdp and make the UK economy look as if it’s moving forward.
Meanwhile, pretty much the minute Mr Cameron had stopped calling for ends to things, Hamas and Israel agreed to meet in Cairo for the 42nd replay of the 0-0 draw that has held the world captivated (and both sides captive) for the last twenty years. I quite enjoyed this American take on the nature of the debate yesterday….
….but not much about this conflict is funny: least of all a new Computer Game (imaginatively entitled ‘Bomb Gaza’) which is being stocked by Google Play without much aforethought. The point of the game is to drop bombs while trying to avoid civilians, so that’s alright then; I was wondering if there might be a points system – you know, 10 points for disembowelling a one-legged mentally disabled kid on a crossing, but only 1 point for murdering a young bloke with no sympathy tags to his name at all.
But a Google spokesperson saved the day by declaring that the company “removes apps from Google Play that violate our policies.” As their mantra is supposed to be Do No Evil, they must have a very narrow definition of what Evil is. Perhaps they have a team of humanist philosophers on the case, none of whom believe in the concept of Evil per se. Yes, that would explain it.
The newly brokered ceasefire in Gaza is called ‘humanitarian’, an interesting use of adjective so close to the uncontained joy surrounding this, the centenary of the First World War. The memory of those who died in that four-year cull, the MSM keep telling us, still burns bright. Does it? And if it does, why? Is it because they died at the hands of inhuman weapons like phosgene gas and gatling guns after declaring Christmas 1914 a truce for humanitarian reasons?
All death is death. Some deaths seem sadder than others, but that’s because, like Time, the sadness of death alters relative to where you’re standing. A humanitarian truce is an oxymoron: it’s not that the truce is humanitarian, but rather that the bloodshed is human. Homo sapiens likes to call it ‘inhuman’ in order to excuse the species, but I don’t see any horses killing anyone. It is part of the human condition to kill. That’s the problem.