> Life is like biryani. You move the good stuff towards you & you push the weird shit to the side.  

post a new message


lorem ipsum

May 25, 2025 -- 5:11 PM
posted by ( )

Add an image    

Add a link


go back to maingo to old version

December 14, 2004 -- 5:58 PM
posted by Al

Who is remotely knowledgable in that area of the world? They could probally help you out. Probally Eric, Mary, Tony or Percy.

December 14, 2004 -- 4:43 PM
posted by nobody knows my face

Why is "Huevos Rancheros" so notoriously infamous? It seems like society has some sort of fixation with Huevos Rancheros, because the name always comes up whenever referring to Mexican food, and yet I've been to few restaurants that actually even have the dish. I've personally never had it before, but it always seems like people make it out to be the Mexican equivalent of haggis or something like that. Truth be told, I think it looks pretty good. Can anybody fill me in on what the deal is? I've been wondering about this for a long time.

December 14, 2004 -- 4:32 PM
posted by Par

Hooray for obscure comic references to feature length video game commercials.



I don't own this doll- I own the ken for this line and have been glaring at Blaine everytime I enter a toy store. See, I don't know the story of what happened with Barbie and Ken breakupwise, but I know that the original Ken is nearly as old as the Barbie. He was created in the erly 60's I belive. That was when barbie had stopped being a bilt lille bite-off (I may have mispelled that).
-- Amazon review of some doll.

Haha... "I may have mispelled that." Brilliant!

December 14, 2004 -- 3:59 PM
posted by eric

Huevos Rancheros:


http://www.batista.org/huevos.html
do you want that fritos y revueltos?

talk about punk.
*things to consider when changing the name of the band.

December 14, 2004 -- 3:56 PM
posted by Par

How do you end up with the name John Patrick Ennis? (Is it more obvious if I write "John P. Ennis"?)

Also, apparently, he feels that Wikipedia sucks, because they wanted balanced articles (a situation that sparked a bit of a tiff between him and the Wikieditors.)

December 14, 2004 -- 2:26 PM
posted by eric

sorry i forgot to mention, my point was, Real activism is like most anything else, completely (brutishly) unglamorous. and if the kids who read Adbusters are lead to believe otherwise they are not likely to continue on the path towards actual subversion

December 14, 2004 -- 2:23 PM
posted by eric

yeah. i agree. Adbusters is mostly irrelevent now. as a gateway drug to real activism, i dunno, hard to say. it definately sexed up the stodgy notioned activism, but at the same time as the article pointed out, it was the commercial gloss that helped it become so sucessful.

i remember a time when the magazine was very much on the fringe, and prior to the internet the only way to really find out about it was through word of mouth- or that crazy newsworld show that Daniel Richler used to host.
i don't think much of the magazine now, but i think the article failed to recognize that the magazine did capture the political attitudes at the time and capture/document the emergence of "culture jamming"

December 14, 2004 -- 2:06 PM
posted by alison

hey Paras, going back to your "counter-culture capitalism" link, here's something more from that website:

"Did Adbusters sell out?

Absolutely not. It is essential that we all see and understand this. Adbusters did not sell out, because there was nothing to sell out in the first place. Adbusters never had a revolutionary doctrine. What they had was simply a warmed-over version of the countercultural thinking that has dominated leftist politics since the '60s. And this type of countercultural politics, far from being a revolutionary doctrine, has been one of the primary forces driving consumer capitalism for the past forty years.

In other words, what we see on display in Adbusters magazine is, and always has been, the true spirit of capitalism. The episode with the running shoes just serves to prove the point."




Meagan and I actually came to the conclusion that Adbusters is pretty much the gateway drug to real activism. They like to say they're outside of the box, but I don't think they actually are. They serve a purpose, but it's still fully entrenched within the system.

Actually, what really pisses me off about them is that Adbusters is supposedly a Canadian magazine, but it never talks about the ills of Canada, in fact it quite regularly ignores Canada all together. And though we may like to think of ourselves as so much better than the United States, we really aren't super hot, and someone needs to start pointing that out to people.

Adbusters is to activism like people keep trying to tell us marijuana is to drug addiction. (though I'm not qualifying that... it's based off of the preconceived notion that marijuana use leads to the use of heavier drugs... hence "gateway drug" not that I'm actually saying it is... we just like calling Adbusters a gateway drug.)

December 14, 2004 -- 2:01 PM
posted by eric

well according to Pitchfork the Vinyl is supposed to be out sometime in January, so the CD shouldn't be too much longer than that. but yeah, i'm pretty sure the wax hits first.

too bad. that'd be a great stocking stuffer.

December 14, 2004 -- 1:32 PM
posted by Pete

Hey, when is frances the mute supposed to be released in stores?

load more posts . . .