What do the following have in common?a) Psychedelic
b) Al-Qaeda
c) Carbon footprint
An unlikely little group; though those of you who were brought up in the 60s might possibly link ‘psychedelic’ with ‘carbon footprint’ as both being linked in some ways with the hippy do-gooder lifestyle – but that leaves out ‘Al-Qaeda.’ Some might link ‘Al-Qaeda’ with ‘psychedelic’ as being types of mind set which have fatal results – but that leave out ‘carbon footprint.’
Let me put you out of your misery: they are all terms which were well known as words before people knew what those words actually meant. For at least two of those terms the impossibility of spelling them correctly is also a linking feature.
Psychedelic became associated with the so-called permissive society (which passed me by, let me tell you) of op-art, Oz Magazine, recreational drugs, and the special visual effects of ‘Top of the Pops’ on BBC. I was never really convinced about the mind expanding elements of flares for example, so the whole concept of the ‘psychedelic’ was problematic for me.
Equally problematic, though for very different reasons, is Al-Qaeda: its foundation shrouded in the usual political corruption which always results when western governments come into contact with the almost laughably corrupt and corrupting regime of Saudi Arabia. The risible aspect of Al-Qaeda is its supposed leader, Osama bin Laden, the spoilt Saudi prince who plays at terrorism like a schoolboy with his model train set bought by a wealthy parent. The, ‘who what and how’ of Al-Qaeda, if answered, would be a disturbingly bitter condemnation of the foreign policy of most of the so-called civilized world. The operations of this fanatical organization, with the misguided responses of its opposition, end in fittingly bloody tributes to the moral bankruptcy of both sides in this conflict.
And now the ‘carbon footprint!’ Most of us have some awareness of the concept of global warming and have a hazy idea that it is somehow linked to the increase in carbon dioxide. We also have the moral imperative to cut down on our carbon emissions and work towards being carbon neutral. These are pious resolutions; what do they mean in reality?Who knows? It’s not like wearing your seat belt or using lead free petrol, this is something where what we do has to be “offset” by something else. So, when I take a cheap flight to some European city for a weekend break, my petrol quota must be balanced by, by . . . what? Perhaps it would be easier for me if I was a Roman Catholic, as it sounds very much like some concept of
Pardons: those interesting documents issued by an inventive church which promised remission of sins in the afterlife for the price of good works in this life. Inevitably this was devalued into a monetary payment in lieu of the person actually completing good works. How different from the present day where rich western companies buy quota from other less fortunate organizations to compensate for their carbon sins!What do individuals do? Should we buy cylinders of oxygen and let their contents diffuse gradually into the atmosphere, turning up the speed of diffusion when we have committed sins like buying petrol? It seems to me that this is a golden opportunity for those of us in the affluent west to indulge our guilt feelings by giving a little extra to Oxfam to placate those troublesome twinges of morality.
This morning another vist to BBC Wales and participation in 'Something Else.' This time the subjects ranged through the wearing of suits; the Archbishops texting people in Lent with good things to do; how to be happy; power couples; the effect of 'Little Britain' in Wales; Swiss bank accounts; the usual sort of variety. It was a lively show and enjoyable. Patrick was in good form and looking forward to visiting America with the BBC NOW and his wife.
Some people have hard lives, eh?
No comments:
Post a Comment