Every time election time comes around, whatever it may be for (municipal, federal, school student society, etc.), people always ask me if I’m going to vote, and subsequently, who I plan to vote for.  These people obviously feel passionately for politics, and probably have a strong bias for one particular party/candidate.  I mean, they’re asking, after all, so they must have at least a minimal interest in it.  So then, when I tell them I don’t plan on voting, it typically casts an empty glance across their face, as they stare at me in disbelief.  Yes, that’s right, I said it.  I don’t vote, and don’t ever plan to.

My decision to not vote, and my stance on why other people shouldn’t vote, seems to go against everything that stands for goodness and order in this society.  Hell, MuchMusic even runs ads around federal elections telling young adults to get out and vote if they have the chance.  So with all of this media and personal hype around casting my life-changing vote, why do I still choose not to?

First let me get one thing straight.  My choice of not voting does not equate to the fact that I don’t care.  Now, to be completely frank, yes, that’s part of it, but not all of it.  Of course I care about my own well-being and all of that shit, but there’s a lot more to it.  The main reason I don’t vote is because I don’t know enough about politics.  I don’t research enough into the campaigns, or what so-and-so’s stance on immigration is, or whatnot, because I have little to no interest in it.  It doesn’t mean I don’t care about the outcome, but I feel I don’t have enough information (or rather, I don’t care enough to go out and gather enough information) to sway myself in a particular direction. 

As a result, all I ever see are campaign ads on TV telling me this guy will do this for me, and a few seconds later, the next opposing dude telling me that first dude is a douchebag.  And of course, whatever I hear from the news.  Is this enough for me to make a firm decision as to who should run this wonderful nation of ours?  I certainly don’t think so.  Why?  Because campaign ads are full of propaganda and partiality (what you’d expect from people who will tell you anything to get your vote), and news will always have some sort of political bias underpinning what gets reported.  So with this enormous heap of bullshit, we’re all supposed to just pick our favorite flavour, and go on with our lives.

Sure, my vote “counts” in terms of it being…well…counted in the number of votes for somebody, but did I make my decision based on everything that needs to be known, or did I just pick the guy whose commercials I saw the most frequently.  And this doesn’t just stop at me.  I’m sure hundreds of thousands of people in Canada vote based just on this.  They’ll hear one guy say he’ll lower taxes and create more jobs.  “Well, that sounds amazing!  He’s got my vote!”  And it ends at that.  Personally, I don’t think even 50% of the people in Canada should be voting, based on the premise that they know fuck-all about politics and are just won over with glossed-over statements about how ideal things will be if so-and-so is elected.

Politics is definitely not rocket science, but it’s quite convoluted in many ways.  And just in the same way I don’t want to put my life in the hands of some idiot to give me brain surgery, I don’t want a bunch of morons deciding who should be running the country based on nothing but misleading news sources and gut instinct.  So please, when election time comes around again and again, I urge my fellow Canadians to think about whether they know all the facts before stepping into that voting booth.  I urge you all to stop voting.  Besides, in the grand scheme of things, does it really matter anyway?

A recent article at the Toronto Star had me thinking of the youth these days.  Now, I don’t want to sound like a 70 year-old man complaining about the loud music and funny clothes; rather I feel as if this coming generation of teens have things way too easy because of the increased pressure for parents, teachers, and authorities in general, to be politically correct. 

The article states that teachers and principals in public schools are required to keep the failure rate at a minimum, inflating grades wherever possible.  What does this mean?  Well, basically they’re handing out Highschool Diplomas to just any idiot who will show up to class.  How drastic does it get?  Well, an example in the article is about a girl who received a failing grade of 30% by her teacher, but the principal felt it was necessary to bump that to 50%, to allow a pass.  Another girl skipped 30 classes straight, and never handed in an assignment, but was given a chance to hand everything in at once, without penalty.

Now, one thing that just gets to me is, what about all of the kids who worked damn hard to get that 90% average, and walk down that stage to get their rightfully earned diploma?  Where’s the fairness in this?  Why does Joe fucking Schmoe who can’t even pass Grade 9 Math (apparently the class with the highest failure rate), get to walk next to everybody else, who worked their asses off to get where they are, only to find out that they didn’t really need to work that hard to begin with. 

Well, the answer’s simple: we don’t want to hurt anybody’s feelings.  We’re too worried about Joe’s self-esteem when he turns 17 and still has to take classes with 13 year olds.  Well you know what?  Joe should’ve thought about that before he started slacking.  This world is too full of unrealistically optimistic people who continually tell students/their children/friends or whatever, that they can be whatever they want to be, and that they just have to work hard.  Well, half of that is right, you DO have to work hard.  But you can’t be whatever you want to be.  Some kids just don’t have it.  They’re not fit to be doctors, or astronauts, or teachers.  They’re dumb.  Period.  Get over it.  Indulging them in this whirlwind of bullshit and fairytales only makes things worse.  People are not all equal, and you can’t always have your way.  Live with what you’re given and don’t lie to yourself or your children. 

We were taught at a young age (hopefully by parents, if not then by your kindergarten teacher, at least) that you have to work hard in life.  Somewhere along the way, the kids these days lost sight of all of this, and want the easy way out.  And now knowing that they can’t even fail if they try to, well, this is a whole new low.  The world gets a lot harder after highschool, and now it’s going to be even harder with all the pampering teachers and parents are doing, just to keep a child’s inflated self-image up. 

“Religion is the opiate of the masses.”  --Karl Marx 

I have always believed this statement to hold true.  However, a part of me has always seen a “bright” side to religion; it brings people together, gives people hope, and instills morals in an otherwise chaotic society.  Yet, upon further thought, it seems that organized religion does the exact opposite.  Religion causes raging wars between nations, give false hope to people wondering where their messiah is to save them when things go wrong, and teaches people to become another cookie-cutter version of everybody else or face being an outcast and shunned.  Organized religion is a way to keep people in check.
 

Religion shelters you from the real world and makes you see what they need you to see, as long as it keeps your “faith” in their religion.  “Our god is the real one, and everybody else is wrong”, a bold statement indeed, but how many people can claim this until you’re just too confused, or until you just stop giving much of a damn about it anymore.  Personally, I think religion is a thing of the past, along with sorcery and magic.  To believe that there is one superior being controlling every thing you do, everything that goes on around you, and everything that will ever happen…sounds awfully improbable and dare I say, idealistic, in this day and age.

If you think about it, what kinds of crazy theories does religion still have to support its case?  Well, let’s just go for a really simple one for now: “God lives in heaven which is up in the clouds.”  Now, this sounds stupid, and maybe it’s just something told to children to help them sleep at night, but I’m sure those space shuttles that pass through the stratosphere didn’t make a stop by heaven.  I’m sure as they were flying by, they looked out their windows only to say “Hmm…..no God…”  And surely the theory of evolution makes a much stronger case than the Adam and Eve theory of creationism.

Religion just seems to be the easy answer to a lot of complicated questions.  “Why is my life so hard?”  God is testing you.  “Why did I have to be born with one leg?”  God is testing you.  And so forth.  I mean, in theory, “God” could technically be the answer to any “why” question.  Of course, you’d have to be pretty naïve to believe that as true; or you would just have to be a very devout Christian.

The reason I decided to go on this long rant, is because I recently visited a site that reminded me of how free thought and expression are inhibited by this thing we call religion.  Anything that appears to be questionable to the teachings and beliefs of any given religion are deemed unacceptable and should be excluded from your every day life.  Cultures, outside of your religion, are backwards and scary, so don’t even attempt to understand them. 

This site claims to be a website with a focus on the family, shining a light on the world of popular entertainment, a light obviously provided by God.  Anyhow, after reading a few reviews on some CDs, one thing was made abundantly clear.  All music that isn’t in some way related to or mention God is bad, and you shouldn’t let your teens listen to it.  And, on top of that, they recommend similar Christian artists you should listen to instead.  They also break every album down into categories, and assess how they relate.  For example, they have a “Pro-social content” paragraph, and an “Objectionable content” paragraph.

Let’s get a few examples:

A line from "High All the Time" says it all: "You don’t want me to be your kid’s role model." As well as Get Rich or Die Tryin’ has sold, 50 Cent has the ears of a lot of young music fans. Don’t let yours be among them.  –www.pluggedinonline.com review of Get Rich or Die Tryin’ by 50 Cent

American Idiot serves up the honest cynicism, angst and wry self-deprecation fans have come to expect, this time as a concept album. Without meaning to, its belligerent opposition to Christian faith helps to explain the band’s futility and emptiness. But that’s nowhere near reason enough for teens to tune in.  --www.pluggedinonline.com review of American Idiot by Green Day

“This time as a solo artist, Dre once again racks the record stores with advocation of crime, drug use, explicit sex and graphic violence (a chronic problem!). Another socially irresponsible record.”  --www.pluggedinonline.com review of The Chronic by Dr. Dre

We’ve all seen the ads.  The ones where it shows a bunch of scenes of people, criminals, if you will, stealing things, with brief text flashing on the screen.  “You wouldn’t steal a TV” etc.  At the end, you see a teenaged girl starting a download, possibly of a movie that she wants to see, and then leaves the room while it downloads.  “Piracy is a crime” it says.  Illegal Downloading: Inappropriate for all ages.  Roll credits.

Come on now…what are these commercials supposed to do?  Is it really meant to deter the mass of internet users from downloading pirated movies?  I can imagine a 19-year-old university student sitting in his dorm watching it, and suddenly thinking “My god!  All these years…how could I have been so stupid committing these crimes?  I’ll go turn myself in now.”  University enrollment in the years following would dwindle and civilized society as we know it will cease to exist, because the majority of us will be locked up in prison because of our good values and morals against piracy.  Good for us.

Well, that may be a stretch, but personally, I don’t see many problems with it.  Now, from a legal standpoint, I don’t know the technicalities of everything, but from what I understand for myself, yes, piracy is a crime.  Piracy, by definition, is the “unauthorized copying, distribution, or use of another's production.”  With that said though, if it really is a crime, wouldn’t the person who initially pirates the movie/game/software and places it on the internet for distribution the real pirate.  I mean, if we really needed to pinpoint one particular group of people, why not go for them, instead of slapping teens and old ladies with lawsuits.

Pirated movies and music have existed for a long time before the internet even started becoming popular.  I remember walking down the streets of Chinatown in Toronto as a kid, seeing the latest movies being sold on cheap VHS tapes for 4 bucks a pop.  Which, I think is actually worse than doing it on the internet.  People shouldn’t be profiting financially from piracy.  It should be done out of the goodness of one’s heart.  But that’s not always the case, I guess.  There will always be purchasers of pirated materials, so why go for them instead of the providers?

Of course, I don’t want this to happen either.  I’m quite a fan of free movies and music.  Does that make me a bad person?  Well, I don’t like to think so.  I’d like to think of it as…money conscious.  Everybody could agree with this.  If you had a choice between paying $29.99 plus tax for a movie on DVD, or even just renting it for $5, or alternatively just downloading it for free (of course, take into account your monthly internet service fees), why wouldn’t the last choice be the only sensible choice?  I like free stuff, and I’m quite sure everybody likes free stuff.  If you could walk into a restaurant, and they’d serve you free food that’s exactly the same as the restaurant next door charging $30 a plate, wouldn’t you just naturally take the free food?  Makes sense, doesn’t it?

Having said that though, I still buy DVDs, and music CDs and video games.  If I really like something, I don’t mind spending a few bucks on it here and there.  They always say the studios are the victims, and the artists.  Oh, poor them.  But are they really losing out here?  If I wasn’t going to pay $12.95 to see Dukes of Hazzard in the theatres, why would I buy it for $30, or rent it for $5, when I could watch that piece of crap for free.  Hell, I still feel ripped off after watching it for free.  I think I would’ve shot myself if I had paid to see it.

To download the piracy commercial, click here.

Like I mentioned before, the video depicts a bunch of criminals physically stealing TVs and cars, and compare it to a teenaged girl downloading a movie off the internet.  I guess they’re trying to really blur that line between those criminals, and bad-ass no-good teenagers who break copyright laws by downloading illegal copies of movies.  Way to go RIAA.  Those teenagers will get what’s comin to them.  You’ve shown me their true deviance, I’ll never trust them ever again.

Really, what this video is really saying is that, well, instead of stealing movies off the internet, you might as well go out and steal a car or some lady’s purse, cause it’s essentially the same thing.  What a life lesson.  Thanks a lot.  Interesting side note though, I downloaded that commercial, which was ripped from a DVD.  Sweet, sweet irony.

On a particularly lazy night, I’m looking around on the internet, surfing some sites, and doing a bit of chatting.  Nothing out of the ordinary.  The net is a place a lot of people run to after work or school just to check around.  You might be checking your emails, browsing around your favorite sites, or talking to a few friends.  What was revolutionary technology some 10 years back during the dot-com boom, nowadays we take for granted all of the information we have floating around in this space we call the internet.  But, with all this information floating around, we are also bombarded with 100 times the amount of misinformation.  From spam emails about enlarging your penis or helping you earn $1,000,000 in 3 weeks, to people using fake identities in chatrooms and online chat programs.  The internet is a great place to retain your anonymity and be a prick all at the same time and in the comfort of your own home!

Now, with all of this said, it would be fine if it just ended there.  We have a basic intuition for common sense that we apply in real life.  If a random guy came up to you on the street and offered to help you earn $15,000 in a week, chances are, you wouldn’t take him up on his offer and not think twice.  Obviously, you’d be a little suspicious.  A guy walks up to you in a mall and claims that he can help enlarge your penis by 4 inches (a la Chappelle’s Show)…needless to say, you wouldn’t be extremely pleased with this, and that would certainly deserve a punch in the face.

So my question is, why don’t we apply this common sense we all have to the internet?  Are things more believable or convincing in cyberspace?  Whatever happened to seeing to believe?  My theory is that the consequences of believing and pursuing what we hear on the internet are far less than the consequences in real life, because, if worse comes to worse, we can always just close the window, or turn off the computer.  But then again…clicking on a suspicious link can lead to spyware and viruses, which I’m sure we’re all familiar with.  And if you are, you know how much of a pain it is to get rid of that stuff.  Not only that though, it’s a security risk, and you could lose all of your data.  Sure, that’s not as bad as being thrown in a truck and kidnapped, but that’s also worse case scenario.

So what brought up this topic anyhow?  Well, I was perusing through a site called Friendster, which is a site where “friends” are connected through one another, you get to meet new people, and they get to design their own sites for everybody to see…seems to be a popularity contest really.  But I digress, while I was looking at the “Most popular” sites, I happened to see one profile that looked oddly familiar (all profiles are listed by a profile picture, and a name).  This particular profile was of Paris Hilton.  Upon reading the profile, “Paris” insisted several times that it was the REAL her, and that she loves hanging out with her celebrity friends, partying, etc etc etc.


http://www.friendster.com/user.php?uid=28061168

If you have friendster check out that link, it goes to "Paris Hilton's" Friendster page.


Now, I’m not a fan of Paris Hilton at all…and frankly I don’t much care for her and..whatever it is that she does, but honestly, who in their right mind would think that this is legitimate?  Well, the answer is….a lot of people…just by checking out her testimonials, which are comments left by other users of Friendster.  Take a look at the above link, and you’ll see what I mean.  Does the logic center of their brains not click in…telling them.. “hmmm…don’t I think that the real Paris Hilton would have better things to do with her time than sit at home, spend this time creating a Friendster site to meet new “regular” people (as if she would hang out with these 13 year old boys instead of…I dunno…Justin Timberlake or whatever), and try to convince other people on the internet that I’m real….like, for REAL real?”  This example just shows how combining the weakness people already have at detecting lies on the internet, and the overwhelming love the public has for celebrities adds up to one big gathering of idiots in the same place.