Thoughts on the 2015 Hugo Awards

This year's Hugo Awards were presented last night.  It's been a vicious, biased, socio-political-cultural-oriented campaign, and the results reflect that.  No fewer than five categories (Best Novella, Best Short Story, Best Related Work, Best Editor: Short Form and Best Editor: Long Form) were not awarded - in other words, the electorate deliberately voted not to present any award rather than give it to one of the nominees (many of whom were put forward by the anti-Hugo-establishment Sad Puppies or Rabid Puppies campaigns).  To put that in perspective, that equals the previous total number of 'No Award' winners over the entire 62-year history of the Hugo Awards.

I've written about this years' award controversy on several occasions.  My personal response is summed up in these two articles, and I also endorse Eric Flint's perspective on the matter.  However, I didn't actively campaign for any candidates, either as individuals or as a 'slate' presented by either the Sad Puppies or the Rabid Puppies.  That's because I believe that voting should always be a matter for the individual's informed judgment, not something tied to political, social, economic or other perspectives.

Last night saw both triumph and defeat for both sides of the Hugo debate.  Consider:

1. The anti-Puppy side (variously known as Social Justice Warriors or SJW's, Puppy Kickers, and so on) clearly dominated the voting for the major categories, out-weighing Puppy voters by a massive margin.  They mobilized all their support, and did so impressively.  Five 'No Awards' in major categories where their preferred nominees had been 'shut out' was a clear demonstration of their determination to defeat the 'other side' at any cost.
2. Unfortunately, it also illustrated their determination to ignore the letter and spirit of the Hugo Awards.  They clearly did not vote for the nominated works based on their literary or other qualities, but voted on the basis of a partisan perspective, a determination to 'punish the other side' for daring to interfere with what they consider to be 'their' awards.  Many of them openly campaigned for this to be done, and proudly admitted their intention to disregard the quality (or otherwise) of the works or individuals in question.
3. As far as the Puppies are concerned (whether Sad or Rabid), their slates dominated the nominations in several categories, but clearly could not command enough support from a mobilized, partisan and highly motivated electorate to actually win them.  This, of course, may change.  The Puppies have now seen the extent of the opposition confronting them, and they realize that it had to mobilize almost all its resources, on an unprecedented scale, to defeat their slate of candidates this year.  If the Puppies can organize their supporters and come back five to ten times stronger (an entirely achievable goal, IMHO), then future Hugo campaigns may be even more divisive, disruptive and negative than this year's.  Indeed, I suspect that the scale of their defeat may drive many of the formerly-more-moderate Sad Puppies into the more radical Rabid Puppies camp.

The big losers in this years' Hugo controversy have been civility and reasoned discourse.  The open bitterness, bias and confrontational attitudes expressed by some individuals on both sides during and after last night's awards is mind-boggling.  This was evident at the award ceremony itself by jokes at the Puppy campaigns' expense, and loud applause at the announcement of 'No Award' results.  I'll pick out a couple of the more polite responses (I'm darned if I'll demean this blog by sinking to the level of some of the more vitriolic commenters).

Speaking for the Rabid Puppies, Vox Day said:

I understand that Toni Weisskopf of Baen Books walked out of the ceremony after hearing all the jokes about this being the year of the asterisk. It is just as well, because the no-awarding of her, John C. Wright, and Jim Butcher is conclusive proof that the Hugo Awards are no longer fit for purpose and need to be burned down in their entirety. That was my original position, but this year we Rabids followed the Sad Puppies lead and pursued the "fair play" approach.

Now we know the result of that. This is a cultural war, not a literary sport. They are practicing a scorched earth strategy, and we can certainly assist them in that since we do not value their territory. I still think it was worth trying to take Berlin and end the war in one fell swoop, but even though our attempt [to] break them once and for all failed, that only means that the victory was less than complete. What the Puppies accomplished was incredible when you look at the numbers involved and clearly indicates that the Rabid strategy, not the Sad one, is the only viable strategy. There will be no reconciliation.

For the SJW side, let John O'Neill sum up their reactions:

In short, the Puppies insisted that their team had been unfairly shut out of the game for too long, and gamed the system so that their superstars could finally take the field. And when they did, it became painfully obvious fairly quickly that this team simply couldn’t play ball.

The Puppies have stayed in their echo chamber for long months, and to be honest, I don’t expect even this stinging repudiation of their selections to penetrate it. My guess is that they will lay this burden at the feet of another liberal conspiracy, or simply claim that the vast majority of the Hugo electorate voted against their slate without bothering to read it (just as I did).

But when your only defense is to convince yourself that the electorate spurned you because they found what you did to be against the very spirit of the Hugos and your ballot to be wholly illegitimate, then you’re hiding sub-standard taste behind moral bankruptcy.

I can see it's going to be a long, hard winter until next year's Hugo campaign . . .

Several months ago I said:

Some argue that if one side won't compromise, there's no point in the other side being 'gentlemanly' or courteous or civilized, because such approaches won't be reciprocated.  Rather, the other side must respond just as forcefully (if not more so) in order to overcome resistance to its 'legitimate demands'.  To them I can only say, look at human history in any sphere you like:  academic, literary, cultural, economic, political, military, whatever.  When such attitudes prevail, breakdown and destruction tend to take over.  What is lost - often irretrievably - is some, if not all, of the good that existed prior to the breakdown.  The baby is thrown out with the bathwater.  The good is destroyed along with the bad. I'm trying very hard to prevent that happening here.

I fear it may be a losing battle . . . but that doesn't mean it's not worth the effort.  I only wish some of the more partisan elements in this debate could see it that way ... Now it's up to those on both sides to decide whether they're going to go to the mattresses, or behave like civilized people.  If anyone isn't sure who needs to take the first step in that process . . . look in the mirror.

I saw and heard nothing last night to make me reconsider that perspective.  I can only hope and pray that others share it, and will work towards realizing it.  If not, I daresay the Hugo Awards will be mired in controversy, libel, slander and mutual distrust for years to come.  I don't think they can survive that.

Peter

The deadly danger of microbursts

I'm obliged to an anonymous reader for sending me the link to the first video below.

Microbursts pose a deadly danger to aircraft on final approach to a runway.  This video shows a microburst over Tucson, AZ earlier this month.  It's the clearest example I've ever seen of this weather phenomenon.  Watch it in full-screen mode for the best effect.

Tucson Wet Microburst | August 8th, 2015 from Bryan Snider Photography on Vimeo.

This is the sort of localized storm that brought down Delta Air Lines Flight 191 in 1985.  Here's an excerpt from a Smithsonian Channel documentary on the crash.

Miss D. informs me that it's actually easier to handle a microburst in a light aircraft like hers than it is for a jet airliner, because piston engines respond instantly to throttle demands, whereas jet engines have to 'spool up' to provide the thrust.  The slight delay while doing so can contribute to a crash.

Peter

Doofus Of The Day #854

Today's award goes to a construction worker in New York City.  A tip o' the hat to reader Snoggeramus for sending me the link.

A worker who lit a match to check if gas was coming out of a fuel line in a science classroom sparked the blast that destroyed part of a Bronx school Thursday night, officials suspect.

Construction workers were remodeling a science laboratory on the sixth floor of Marble Hill’s John F. Kennedy High School at about 8 p.m. when a powerful explosion destroyed parts of the fourth, fifth and sixth floors of the building, sending three workers to the hospital, one in serious condition.

Sources say the workers were supposed to shut off the gas to the lab at a source and then pump another less volatile but noxious fuel into the line, pushing the dangerous and odorless gas out the other end.

When the line is completely free of the odorless fuel, workers would normally smell the secondary fuel, which signals that the line is safe to work around.

But sources say a worker allegedly decided to test the line by striking a match near its tip — and it exploded with such force that a wall facing Terrace View Ave. was blown out onto the street.

There's more at the link.

Well, at least his test worked - it showed there was, indeed, still gas in the pipe (and the entire area, come to that!).  What's more, after his test . . . there wasn't.

Peter

More than ever, I'm worried about small drone aircraft

Last year, writing about the growing numbers of 'hobby drones' flying around, I said:

What worries me most is that terrorists can't be blind to the possibilities of this technology.  They must surely have among their members and sympathizers many individuals capable of controlling these small drones in flight.  What if they deliberately began launching them into the approach and landing patterns of major airports, seeking to cause a collision?  Even worse, what if they succeeded in seriously damaging or even destroying an airliner?  Can you imagine the panic among air travelers?  It'd shut down US air travel for a much longer period than 9/11, because there are literally thousands of these things out there, and no-one could be sure when one might not be launched from cover such as a clump of trees, or a city rooftop high above traffic, or something like that.  There'd be no way to trace it back to its launch point or locate the person controlling it.

Now we read this report in the Washington Post.

Before last year, close encounters with rogue drones were unheard of. But as a result of a sales boom, small, largely unregulated remote-control aircraft are clogging U.S. airspace, snarling air traffic and giving the FAA fits.

Pilots have reported a surge in close calls with drones: nearly 700 incidents so far this year, according to FAA statistics, about triple the number recorded for all of 2014. The agency has acknowledged growing concern about the problem and its inability to do much to tame it.

So far, the FAA has kept basic details of most of this year’s incidents under wraps, declining to release reports that are ordinarily public records and that would spotlight where and when the close calls occurred.

The Washington Post obtained several hundred of the rogue-drone reports from a government official who objected to the FAA’s secrecy. An FAA spokeswoman, Laura Brown, declined to comment on the reports obtained by The Post.

The documents show that ­remote-control planes are penetrating some of the most guarded airspace in the country.

There's more at the link.

I've lived in a country where terrorist attacks were an everyday occurrence.  I've visited other countries where it was just as bad.  I can't help but be more and more worried about these uncontrolled drone flights.  They're an almost perfect tool for terrorists, even if they aren't 'weaponized' by putting guns or explosives on them.  They hold the potential to disrupt normal air travel simply by swamping the airspace around airports with dozens of collision hazards - and there's very little chance of finding those controlling them.  What's worse, autonomous drones, that can be programmed to fly a set course or circle a given point (say, the approach end of an airport runway), can be launched and then left to do their thing while the operator simply walks or drives away.

I note that no-one in official circles is saying much about the potential for terrorism posed by these drones.  To me, that silence speaks very loudly indeed.  I have a very strong suspicion that not all these drone flights in the vicinity of airports are 'innocent' mistakes by 'over-enthusiastic' or 'thoughtless' drone owners.  I'm sure that at least some of them are deliberate, and I'm equally sure that we're going to see more of them.  I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a concerted campaign on high-profile, high-traffic days to disrupt air travel into a particular venue (say, a presidential inauguration, or a sporting event such as the Kentucky Derby or the Indianapolis 500 or the Augusta National - anything that might attract a high volume of extra airline flights or private aircraft).  The publicity that could be generated by such a campaign, even if no aircraft are brought down, would be of great value to a terrorist organization.

What's more, drones of this type could be employed by terrorists planning an operation.  Let's say an ISIS or Al Qaeda cell wants to mount a Beslan-style assault in the USA (which I'm sure they'd love to do).  They could have a couple of drones that they can launch when the strike is under way, using them to monitor responses by security forces and adjust their defenses accordingly.  They might even use drones controlled by sympathizers outside the perimeter of the operation, feeding information to them and perhaps bringing in messages if normal communications are disrupted.  If armed forces across the world are doing this, right now, why can't terrorists?  Some micro-UAV's are so small they're almost undetectable, and countermeasures against them are almost non-existent at present.

I reckon this is yet another reason to drive to one's destination, rather than fly, unless urgency dictates the faster method of travel.  I'm seriously concerned about this.

Peter

A new "Simon's Cat"!

Time for some fun.

Peter

The last of the 'human torpedomen' has died

One of the less-well-known units of World War II was Italy's Decima Flottiglia MAS.  It was extraordinarily successful for its size, winning an astonishing total of 29 individual and one unit Golden Medals of Military Valor (Italy's then-highest combat decoration for enlisted men and junior officers) during that conflict.

One of those medals was earned by Emilio Bianchi on the night of December 19th, 1941, when he was one of six divers to attack the Royal Navy base in Alexandria, Egypt.  The Telegraph reports in his obituary:

Emilio Bianchi, who has died aged 102, was the last survivor of one of the most audacious coups of the Second World War – the sinking by “human torpedoes” of two British battleships in Alexandria harbour. Winston Churchill described the feat as demonstrating “extraordinary courage and ingenuity” and it won Bianchi Italy’s equivalent of the VC.

On the night of December 18 1941, the Italian submarine Scirè came up to periscope depth off the coast of Egypt. It was commanded by the British-educated Prince Junio Valerio Borghese, who a few days earlier had picked up a six-man team of naval commandos on the Greek island of Leros.

While Italy’s armed forces did not always give a good account of themselves during the conflict, there was one sphere of operations in which they led the world – underwater raiding. In 1918 two Italians riding a primitive submersible armed with a limpet mine had made the first successful attack of its kind . The development in the Mediterranean between the wars of breathing apparatus for spear fishing had subsequently prompted the formation by Italy of an elite frogman unit, the Decima Mas.

Bianchi had joined this as a navy sergeant in 1937. He later recalled that the training regime was gruelling, and that even in the depths of winter he had often spent all night submerged in icy water . Much of the unit’s equipment was experimental and unreliable, notably the two-man “chariots” which the commandos used. Essentially no more than electrically driven torpedoes, they were commonly known by the men as maiali or pigs (shown below) because of their irksome unwieldiness.

Several attacks with these had already been attempted against the British fleet in Gibraltar before the Italians’ focus switched to the Royal Navy’s last two battleships in the Mediterranean, the First World War-vintage Queen Elizabeth and Valiant. These lay at anchor in the inner harbour of Alexandria, heavily defended by nets which could not be penetrated by a submarine, but which the Italians thought could be overcome by a small group of swimmers.

Borghese dropped three maiali about a mile and a half out from the port. The mission was commanded by the aristocrat Luigi Durand de la Penne, whose second man aboard his craft was Bianchi. Just before he boarded his chariot, Bianchi learnt that his wife had given birth to their first child, a girl.

The maximum speed of the machines was just 3 knots. Yet after two hours of travelling on the surface of the waves the teams were well ahead of schedule and stopped to revive themselves with figs and cognac. As they approached the main boom, by a stroke of luck it opened to admit three destroyers. At once they followed directly in their wake, with only the head of the man at the prow of the maiale showing above the water. Those seated behind, such as Bianchi, breathed a mix of oxygen and helium.

Having located Valiant, de la Penne found it encircled by a net, but Bianchi hauled down on this and they were able to lug their craft – and its heavy warhead – over it.

. . .

[Bianchi] remembered feeling his way with his hands along the bottom of the ship as they both searched for the best place to place the mine. At most, he had surfaced a minute and a half before de la Penne.

What is certain is that when both men came up they were promptly spotted and captured. They were interrogated separately by officers who, Bianchi recalled, “spoke Italian better than us”, this being a time when many Italians’ first language was their regional dialect. There was a pistol on the table and Bianchi was threatened with being shot, but he realised this was merely intimidation and refused to compromise the mission by answering questions.

Knowing that they had probably placed a charge, Valiant’s captain Charles Morgan had the pair confined in separate cabins below the waterline in an effort to make them talk. By chance, they were placed directly above the mine. Half an hour before it was due to go off, de la Penne made Morgan aware by gestures that this would happen, in order that he might evacuate the ship’s company. This was done – but Morgan continued to keep the Italians below.

At 6am, the charge exploded. Bianchi recalled that it was “like an earthquake”, but he and de la Penne were largely unscathed and realised as they made their way on deck that the battleship was sinking. They then saw the mines placed by the other squads go up under Queen Elizabeth and a tanker, severely damaging a destroyer moored beside her. In one blow, the balance of sea-power in the Mediterranean had been wrested from the Royal Navy.

The ships sank in only a few feet of water on even keels and for many months the British denied any intelligence to the enemy by carrying on as though the ships were still afloat. So sensitive was their loss that it was not until four months later that Churchill, praising the men’s courage, revealed it to Parliament, and then only in a secret session. The Italian exploit also prompted the British to press on with their own development of midget craft, later used against Tirpitz.

There's more at the link.  Wikipedia also has an interesting article about the raid.

There are few men with courage like that in any country, in any war.  May Mr. Bianchi rest in peace, and may his example inspire many to follow in his footsteps.

Peter

Politically correct, he ain't . . .

I came into contact with Vox Day for the first time in connection with the Tor boycott for which I called a few months ago.  (It's still on, by the way, and will be for the foreseeable future, in the absence of any response from the company and its parent organizations.)  I know some people regard him as beyond the pale, making all sorts of accusations about him and publicly denigrating and abusing him at every opportunity.  However, he's been the soul of courtesy with me, and frankly I've seen no sign of 'the beast within' (or without) about which others complain so bitterly.

Be that as it may, I had to laugh out loud when I read this post on his blog tonight.  It seems some of his enemies got to publicly bashing him again.  He responded, in his own inimitable fashion.  Here's an excerpt.

Princess Content ‏@ContentPrincess
i didn't go [to Worldcon this year].  You ruined it.  and you don't even care.  You don't care at all that you have hurt people.

Vox Day ‏@voxday
That is totally unfair and untrue. I am rather pleased at hurting the people who claim to have been hurt.

There's more at the link.

Butthurt Yoda . . . I love it!  Frankly, based on the quality (or, rather, the lack thereof) of the enemies Vox has made, I'm honored to have made his acquaintance.  I'd like to meet him one day over a beer and a meal.  Perhaps we could invite the International Lord of Hate, the Scourge of SJW's, the Portuguese Witch and the Politically Correct Mr. Williamson to join us.  That should be a meal to remember!  If our partners are included, we'll be an even dozen - just right to toast each other using the skulls of Vox's enemies . . .




Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  Princess Content is clearly a quintessential SJW:

Princess Content @ContentPrincess
intelligence and reason are just code words for white male privilege.

Verily, the mind doth boggle . . .

Beautiful!

Courtesy of The Lonely Libertarian, we find this beautiful photograph of a woman tossing her long red hair in the sunshine.

Click the image for a much larger view.  Lovely!

Peter

Fred on (not) Art

Fred Reed hits another one out of the park - this time on modern art and art critics.

Art is mostly fraud perpetrated by narcissistic academic quacks on a public easily gulled. They should be prosecuted. This is as true of literature as of painting and sculpture. If modern sculpture were placed in a junkyard, art critics couldn’t find it.

. . .

Suppose a budding art critic visiting a museum discovers by chance his plumber, who is looking with admiration at, say, David’s Leonidas. This makes sense, never a good thing in art criticism. The Leonidas is a good paining, and looks like an actual person.

The critic is horrified. You can’t be a refined authority with a pince-nez and limp handshake and like what a plumber likes, for God’s sake. To distinguish himself from hoi poloi, he has to like something that his plumber doesn’t. So he starts appreciating maybe Modigliani, whose paintings sort of look like people but, finding that too many ordinary Joes like the guy, the critic moves on to perhaps Braque and Picasso. If you can like pictures of square people with three noses, you separate yourself from most of the competition. Not from third-graders, though, who have always done that sort of thing.

You see the critic’s progression. To maintain superiority, he has to appreciate ever worse daubs, so that he can be increasingly alone in his exalted insight. The up-and-coming critic goes through Mondrian, who painted what would normally be considered linoleum patterns, and arrives at Kandinsky, who sold his drop-cloths.

There is nothing worse than Kandinsky. The critic who appreciates him has reached the pinnacle.

. . .

I once took my daughter Emily, then seven, to the Hirshorn Gallery on the mall in Washington. The building looks like half of a 55-gallon oil drum made of concrete. Buildings ugly as warts are more advanced than those that are attractive and therefore pleasing to people with commons sense. Outside there is a Sculpture Garden, full of headless bronze torsos, some with gaping holes in them, and blobbish people without the usual supply of arms and legs. We are not talking the Nike of Samothrace. The impression is that a vocational school held a welding contest, and everybody lost. Tourists from Kansas walk through, apparently wondering whether they have somehow fallen into an asylum.

Inside we found inexplicable blotches and stripes. One in particular was a huge canvas, mostly of an off-white that suggested that it needed washing, with a sort of rust-colored circle in one corner. I asked Em what she thought of it.

Her analysis: “A red dot. Big deal. Gag me.”

There's more at the link.  Don't miss it.  Fred's at his acerbic best.

Peter

What's it like to experience an economic collapse?

I've been asked this question by a number of people after they've read one or more of my articles warning of economic difficulties ahead.  It's hard to answer them, because I've never been through an economic collapse as such - only severe economic difficulties.  Even when visiting African nations whose economies had collapsed, I went there with hard currency that enabled me to buy what I needed, and I could always leave and head back to the 'bright lights' of a more stable nation.

However, Ferfal (his chosen nom de blog) experienced the collapse of Argentina's economy some years ago.  In this video podcast, he describes what it was like and mentions things from which we can learn to prepare for what may lie ahead for us.

You'll find much more material on the subject at his blog.  Recommended reading.

Peter

Your feel-good story of the week

I couldn't help a smile and a warm fuzzy feeling over this report.

Georgia Bradley, 25, was on a beach [in Greece] alone when she was surrounded by aggressive men who grabbed her when she rejected their advances.

But just at that moment, [a] small, black dog "appeared from nowhere" and started barking at the men, scaring them off.

. . .

She said the dog must have noticed something was wrong and had "saved her".

After the incident, it followed Miss Bradley back to her apartment and she said they had an instant bond.

The Plymouth University student believed the dog, whom she called Pepper, had been abandoned as she had seen it wandering around the town alone.

"Pretty much every evening we saw her around outside the bars and restaurants, trying to get the attention of the tourists," she said.

"Every time we got close to her she wouldn't let you stroke her. She was very gentle, but was too scared to let you close."

She tried to persuade a local animal shelter to take her in but was unsuccessful and eventually had to return home to Calstock, Cornwall.

Miss Bradley added: "When we left to go to the airport, we looked back and Pepper was running after the car. It was heartbreaking.

"When I got home I couldn't stop thinking about her so I took the soonest flight back out that I could, which was two weeks later."

Desperate to be reunited with the mutt she began an epic five week mission to find the stray – that involved two further trips to the island. The student was amazed to find the stray on the same beach, in the small town of Georgioupoli, Crete.

The dog was confirmed as a stray and Miss Bradley had Pepper microchipped, wormed with a rabies jab and given a pet passport. It had to spend 21 days in quarantine in boarding kennels but was eventually allowed to travel to Britain.

When Miss Bradley returned to Crete for a third time to collect Pepper, the kennel owner told her that her new pet was pregnant.

A week after arriving back in the UK, Pepper, who is believed to be a Terrier Poodle Cross, gave birth to six puppies.

Miss Bradley said: "It has been such a crazy journey. But I am over the moon. Pepper has settled in brilliantly."

There's more at the link.

Yeah, I'm a sucker for a happy ending . . .

Peter

World's most mollycoddled prisoners?

I was astonished to read on Ferfal's blog that prisoners in Argentina are actually paid a salary by the state - one much higher than the national (state) pension.

Prisoners in Argentina get paid 46% more than the minimum payment received by retirees and pensioners. If you worked your entire life, chances are you’ll end up getting about $3.821,33 in Argentina once you retire. On the other hand, if you’re a murderer or serial rapist, you’ll make $6.060 and you’ll even get covered by the prisoner’s own Union (Workers Deprived of Mobile Freedom). No, none of this is a joke, just the sad reality. The nice part is that prisoners don’t even have to actually work to get paid, just being a prisoner entitles you to this, making becoming a criminal a great career choice for many. This is all part of the Kirchner government plan to incorporate criminals to their movement, with the Kirchner inmate political branch being called “Vatayón Militante” (misspelled Spanish for Militant Batallon). Not making any of this up, just the sad reality of a fully collapsed country.

There's more at the link.

I know Norway (and some other 'enlightened' countries) put many of their prisoners into so-called 'country club' establishments, including maximum-security institutions such as the well-known Halden Prison.  However, even Norway doesn't pay them more than it does its pensioners!

Verily, the mind doth boggle . . .




Peter

Even the experts are conflicted

I've written so many times about the economic problems I see coming towards us that I'm sure many of my readers are bored with the subject by now.  Nevertheless, I found a perfect illustration today of why it's so difficult to forecast developments, and how different (and equally eminent) journalists can come to diametrically opposed conclusions from the same data.

First, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard argues that 'China's August scare is a false alarm as fiscal crunch fades'.

Gothic warnings of a Chinese collapse this year will look silly by Christmas. The reckoning has been delayed again.

. . .

On cue, the economy is already coming back to life after hitting a brick wall over the winter. Credit growth jumped to a 31-month high in July. The monetary base has grown at a 20pc rate over the last three months, implying an economic spike later this year.

. . .

Wisely or not - depending on your economic religion - the Communist Party has now reverted to stimulus as usual. The local governments issued almost $200bn of bonds over the two months of July and August. Beijing coyly describes its fiscal spending as "proactive". Turbo-charged would be another way of putting it.

The property crash is already a memory. House prices have risen for three months. Sales were up 18.9pc in July. This matters more than anything happening on the Shanghai stock market. Moody's says real estate in all its forms makes up a quarter of Chinese GDP.

. . .

At the risk of sticking my neck out, I think that Gothic warnings of a Chinese collapse this year will look silly by Christmas. The reckoning has been delayed again.

There's more at the link.

On the other hand, Peter Spence (looking more at the stock market than at property) claims 'China's stock market swings as investors fear Beijing stimulus is over'.

A turbulent day on the markets reflected concerns that the housing market could be overheating, and that Beijing might stop propping up equity prices.

Since turmoil hit Chinese markets in June, Beijing has sought to correct a sharp fall in share prices by restricting the number of stocks that can be traded and by leaning on state-backed bodies to snap up shares.

An estimated $4 trillion has been wiped off the value of Chinese equities in just three weeks earlier this year, although they are still higher than they were this time a year ago.

In addition, poor economic numbers in the last month have suggested that China's economy is slowing down. Recent data showed that exports fell by 8.3pc in July compared with the same month a year earlier.

Some experts had been expecting China to boost exports in a bid to shore up growth. Beijing's decision to weaken the yuan - also known as the renminbi - last week appeared to support this view, as a weaker currency should make China's exports cheaper.

However, the Commerce Ministry appeared to quash this theory on Wednesday by saying that China’s exports could continue falling in the months to come.

Analysts at Barclays expect that China’s moves will just be the first steps in a larger depreciation of the yuan, which they expect to fall by 6pc against the dollar by the end of the year. The devaluation added to concerns that the world’s second-largest economy is in a more fragile state than official numbers reveal.

Again, more at the link.

When two experienced journalists can look at the same country, on the same day, in the same publication, and read such different things from the publicly available signs, is it any wonder that people the world over are confused about what to expect?

The best advice I can offer is to determine what risks might directly and immediately impact you, in your current location and financial situation, then determine what you can do to minimize them or mitigate their impact.  This would include risks like disruption to essential supplies, a temporary bank closure or failure of the electronic banking and credit system, that sort of thing.  There are things you can do to safeguard yourself against them to at least some extent.  On the other hand, if the risk is something you can't do anything about, either through preparation or to avoid it, then there's no point worrying about it.  It's in the same class as an asteroid falling on you, or an as-yet-unknown seismic fault letting go beneath your feet and swallowing you.  As the old saying reminds us, "When you gotta go, you gotta go!"

Peter

Nightwish's latest album is different, and very interesting

The symphonic metal group Nightwish from Finland have produced some interesting music over the years.  I've enjoyed some of their songs, intensely disliked others, and had some real moral and ethical problems with what appeared to be a dark, almost Satanic influence that seemed to color some of their most popular numbers.  For example, one of their most popular songs, 'Wish I Had An Angel', refers to the Virgin Mary and angels in ways that I find very disturbing.  I know that in today's post-Christian society many entertainers choose to (mis)use religious symbols in that fashion, but as a man of faith I find it impossible to accept or condone.

However, Nightwish's latest album, released in March this year, is something bright and new from them.  They appear to have moved away from their darker roots and focused on being a band, instead of a collection of eclectic individuals.  'Endless Forms Most Beautiful' focuses on the theories of Charles Darwin, with an intellectual nod to Richard Dawkins.  I suppose it could be described as a musical consideration of the secular world, from a non-Christian perspective but nevertheless containing definite spiritual elements.  It concludes with an almost orchestral half-hour-long piece that's the longest track Nightwish has ever recorded.  Two new members, vocalist Floor Jansen and Uillean piper Troy Donockley, provide an international influence to mellow the sometimes harshly Finnish flavor of the band's remaining original musicians.  Orchestral and choral elements balance the metal/hard rock band and add considerable depth.

To give you a taste of the new album, here's the third track, 'Elan'.

The whole album is interesting enough that after sampling it on YouTube, I bought it outright (the deluxe edition, including instrumental versions of all the tracks as well as the original vocal versions).  I'm thoroughly enjoying it.  If you like hard rock, metal and symphonic music, in any particular combination, you might want to give this a try.  I think you'll like it.  Also, the (mis)use of elements of faith in the group's earlier albums appears to be absent from this one - a huge improvement, IMHO.  I hope it continues.

Peter

The Trump card in politics

I've watched the fuss, fun and games over Donald Trump's candidacy for the Presidency with bemused interest.  I find it hard to believe that someone with his track record should be taken seriously as a candidate . . . until I consider the other candidates, and the state of both major political parties.  With very few exceptions, he's probably a better candidate than most of them put together.

Consider:

• Elected politicians may promise the earth to their constituents, but as soon as they take office they're bribed, bullied or cajoled into doing the will of the political class and the moneybags behind them.  Witness the fuss over Obamacare, or immigration, or any other hot-button issue.  The clearly expressed will of the people is routinely ignored by Congressional representatives and Senators, who proceed to lecture us on "what's good for America".  What they really mean, of course, is that it's good for them.
• Trump may not be a mainstream politician, but he is a self-made man.  He's made many mistakes along the way, making him almost a buffoon-like figure in the minds of many, but he's always managed to bounce back from them.  He's pretty much an 'alpha male' in human biological terms, albeit a flawed one.
• Trump comes across as a blowhard and a braggart, becoming almost a caricature of himself in the public eye.  However, he's backed up that caricature with amazing flexibility.  He can think fast, stay on his feet through the most turbulent times, and 'bounce back' from setbacks that would have destroyed a less self-confident man.  He's been accused of being pushy, arrogant, and uncaring about the feelings of others.  All those accusations are probably true - and he doesn't give a damn.

The scariest part of his candidacy, from the point of view of the major political parties, is that he's not beholden to the 'Establishment'.  He could finance his entire presidential campaign out of his own pocket.  It'll take a billion dollars or more to win the Presidency in 2016, but he's got a billion dollars and then some.  The 'Golden Rule' has often been misquoted as "He who has the gold makes the rules".  That's why most candidates for political office are beholden to those who donate the money to make their campaigns possible.  Trump wouldn't be subject to that sort of pressure - and the Powers That Be absolutely hate that.  They're petrified at the prospect of a candidate, and possibly a President, they can't control.  If I were in his shoes I'd be taking my personal security very seriously, not because I was afraid of the public, but because I wouldn't put it past the party political machines to take desperate measures to get him off the ballot by any means necessary.  No, I'm not joking.  I wish I were.

I don't know whether or not Trump would make a good President.  His emphasis on immigration reform sounds right to me - and I say that as a (legal) immigrant myself.  We do need to secure the rule of law in this country, and that includes securing the borders and kicking out all those who've come here in defiance of the rule of law.  In other aspects of policy I suspect he might lean towards "What's good for business is good for America", rather than constitutional or other principles:  but then, the policies of our political class have been biased towards "What's good for us is good for America, whether America likes it or not".

That's the real problem here:  I don't see how a President Trump could possibly be any worse for America than 90%+ of the other candidates out there.  I'd make an exception for Scott Walker, who I regard as a principled man of proven ability in his state.  Ted Cruz shows some promise, although he, too, can be a blowhard at times, and I think he needs more experience and seasoning.  On the Democratic side, Jim Webb also has a proven track record and appears to be centrist rather than hard-left or progressive in his politics.  I suspect any of those three candidates might make a viable President.  However, looking at all the other candidates, I think Donald Trump could do a whole lot better for America than any of them.  In some ways he reminds me of Teddy Roosevelt, at least in terms of his enthusiasm.

That's a hell of a condemnation of our political class, when you think about it.

Peter

Sexist "Heh!"

Received via e-mail from Miss D.:

Love the expression on the face of the demonstrator . . .




Peter

How to discombobulate the DMV

Dr. Grumpy describes how he took his son to get a driving permit.  How did zombies get into the DMV, anyway?




Peter

Do you remember the film 'Chariots Of Fire'?

The Chinese remember one of its principal characters as a hero.

A British Olympic hero whose story was illustrated in the film Chariots of Fire has been named by a Chinese city as a national hero.

Eric Liddell, who was nicknamed The Flying Scotsman, famously won a gold medal at the 1924 Olympic Games in Paris.

He had been due to take part in the 100m but could not because his strong Christian faith prohibited him from running in the heats which fell on a Sunday. He had to choose between his sport and religious beliefs - and retrained to win the 400m.

Imprisoned in an internment camp by the Japanese in World War Two, Liddell is viewed by many Chinese as a hero for his sporting prowess and acts of benevolence while in a japanese prisoner-of-war camp.

Liddell was born in Tianjin, the city in northeastern China which was recently hit with massive explosions.

He was educated in Britain, but returned to China as missionary. He chose to stay on and continue his work even after Japan's invasion of China in 1941, despite having the opportunity to flee.

He was interned at a camp in Weifang, south of Tianjin - and it is here that a statue of Liddell has been unveiled.

The camp was liberated 70 years ago, and as the statue was revealed, some survivors of the camp were present, as were his daughters.

. . .

Winston Churchill had organised for Liddell's release from the internment camp, but he instead gave his ticket to a pregnant woman who was also in the camp.

He also smuggled medical supplies through barbed wire and helped to educate internees. His family fled the country in 1941 for Canada.

Liddell died in the camp in February 1945 of a brain tumour.

Liddell's family say that his strength and benevolence were forged by his Christianity - and his decision to stay even after the invasion by Japan made him into a cult figure in China.

There's more at the link.

Eric Liddell seems to have been a remarkable man in many ways, not least for living out his Christian faith in such exemplary terms while imprisoned.  Ten years ago, a fellow inmate recalled his example.

For many of the children, nearly all separated from their parents, Liddell became a father figure. As well as teaching classes, he ran a Sunday school and organised sports competitions.

He eventually came round to the idea of sports on Sundays, refereeing football matches after hearing that teenagers with little to do were getting into trouble.

"He gave me two things," Mr Metcalf said. "One was his worn-out running shoes." It was winter, and like many boys Mr Metcalf had nothing to wear on his feet.

"The best thing he gave me was his baton of forgiveness. He taught me to love my enemies, the Japanese, and to pray for them."

After the war, Mr Metcalf spent 40 years as a missionary teacher in Japan.

Again, more at the link.

A memorial to Eric Liddell (shown below) stands on the grounds of the prison camp where he died.  (Click the image for a larger view.)

I was interested to see that a Chinese company plans to produce a sequel to 'Chariots Of Fire'.  There's no information about what it will cover, but since it's of Chinese origin, I hope it'll show Eric Liddell's work there, and his quiet heroism as a prisoner of the Japanese.

The much-loved British film 'Chariots of Fire' about the Scottish runner and missionary Eric Liddell is getting a sequel thanks to his many fans in China.

Joseph Fiennes will play Riddell in a new movie filmed in China, co-written and directed by the Hong Kong director Stephen Shin with Canadian director Michael Parker.

It will be distributed by the Hong Kong-based Alibaba Pictures, who this morning also announced that they are to back the fifth Mission Impossible film.

. . .

China allows only 34 non-Chinese films to be shown in its mainland cinemas each year. Alibaba Pictures says that it "should" get such a release.

Such a focus on religion is unusual for a film in China, where the Communist government promotes atheism.

More at the link.

That's a movie I'll look forward to seeing.  The original was, of course, a superb movie in its own right, so any sequel will have to meet a very high standard.  I wish them luck.

Peter

A very nice holster

Readers will recall that a few weeks ago, I lucked into a minty Smith & Wesson Model 625 Mountain Gun in .45 Colt.

It's intended for use in the field rather than urban environments, so I wanted a holster that would be hard-wearing and protect the gun, as well as look good.  After quite a bit of research, I decided I'd heard enough good things about Simply Rugged Holsters and their Sourdough Pancake holster (with belt slots for both strong-side and cross-draw carry) that it was worth a try.  I placed an order for one to fit my Mountain Gun in oxblood leather, complete with a removable hammer strap (a very useful option for carrying a gun in the field), a Most Versatile Ammo Pouch and a Chesty Puller Conversion System, allowing the holster to be carried across one's chest as well as on one's belt.

The package arrived today, and I'm very pleased indeed.  See for yourself.

It fits the gun to perfection.

I'm very happy with Simply Rugged Holsters' handiwork, and their prices are very reasonable considering the quality of their products, IMHO.  (No, they haven't paid me anything to say that, or offered me any discounts or other incentives to publicize them. I simply appreciate good workmanship when I see it, and I mention it to my friends in case they might find it useful themselves.)

Peter

When bees attack

The Smithsonian Channel has released a video excerpt showing Africanized 'killer bees' attacking a film crew (which had carefully prepared itself for the onslaught).  Yahoo Tech reports:

First, the crew members prepare for the shoot by covering as much of their bodies as possible, for obvious reasons. They also put on very bright colored, protective suits because killer bees like to target dark parts of the body such as eyes, ears and the mouth, according to the video.

Once they disturb the hive, a swarm of bees immediately starts pouring out and attacking the crew. You can see the bees pounding the darker part of their suits, such as their masks, and even hear some of them make contact with the mask. The filmmakers also run a stick covered in black felt across the hive so you can see the angry bees pouncing on it. Try not to imagine any part of your body in place of the stick.

There's more at the link.

Here's the video.  Watch it in full-screen mode for maximum impact - particularly the slow-motion scenes at the end.

I'd rather not be there while they're filming.  Just sayin' . . .

Peter