Dr. Gonzo

I have a hard time listening to celebrities talk about politics. If I wanted to hear him talk about something serious, maybe something he's got good experience in, like talking about the difficulties of overcoming drug addiction - or using comedy to give social commentary. I didn't even really know how political of a person he was until he started bitching about covid incessantly.

I don't think it's really surprising that people prefer relative political stability, even in rough economic times, compared to daily scandals during the rough times. The constant state of absolute chaos in US politics was tough to take even during the stable times, but I think COVID under Trump really pushed more moderates away from his brand of "governance" & I also think the constant defense of the use of violence to promote political causes has turned a lot of moderates off from many of the Republican candidates that were floated. I don't think the recent attack on Pelosi, where her husband got beaten with a hammer, and the reaction from certain republican leaders... not just not condemning the attack, but making jokes and seeming to condone it... I don't think that really presented the best optics to a lot of voters. It's funny because if Trump had just a bit of competence, I think things could have gone very differently for Republicans. All he really had to do was throw the weight of the US government into a strong and serious COVID response instead of waiting around, not really doing anything, and blaming people for taking a pandemic seriously. Clearly American voters reward action in the face of crisis. So constant states of political crisis in a time of crisis outside of politics... it shouldn't be surprising that people aren't so into that... I think it's telling that these midterms went differently to how must US midterm elections went. Especially when you look at voter ages and how certain generations turned out to vote - it's more younger people than typically voting in a midterm election too. Republicans need to adapt if they want their policies to resonate with more voters. And it's something these 24/7 news channels need to come to grips with as their average viewer age is really high, mostly watched by people over 55 (Fox News' median voter age is 69!), and flipping between their 3 big news channels on election night was absolutely hilarious. They were stunned that their predictions were all bollocks and that they didn't really have a pulse on the voters of the country. Which is a bit weird because they didn't really have a pulse on the voters of the country in 2016 either. But I do think it's interesting that typically the biggest issue for voters is the economy. And that was definitely true of the US elections in 2022 as the world is facing energy costs having exploded & global inflation... and yet the party in the white house did not take an absolute battering in the election. But I think it's got to be because enough people who turned up were worried about what divisive morons who only push culture wars and tax cuts would do in these times where the world seems like a tinderbox and many people are feeling economic pressure.

Why on earth are you watching politics videos by Russel Brand?

Election results are bad reading for Trump tbh, which is good. DeSantis having such a strong showing in Florida indicates to me that he's probably got the best chance out of every republican out there to get the presidential nomination. Honestly, I think that's pretty grim. He's got the fascist tendencies of Trump... but unlike Trump, he's not an absolute fucking moron and is actually quite competent. I think he could do some real damage if given power over the US's executive office. But it's nice to see a "red wave" that was predicted by the corporate backed media didn't come to fruition, and in fact... is a pretty poor showing given how mid-term elections typically go very poorly for the sitting president. And I'm hoping the Trump loyalists and the Republicans that want to move on from the divisive moron by moving to DeSantis end up at each others throats and divide the party in the next couple of years. Republicans with unity are fairly good at consolidating power - to see them have a sort of split, like the democrats did with Sanders v. Clinton, would be something I've not seen in American politics today. But that didn't go well for democrats, so here's hoping the republicans follow in their footsteps and fuck themselves over.

Isn't this always a dirty game of world power and politics? Like that's basically the story of human history, with regular people just sort of living as the people in power go around fucking the world up.

I think it streams for everyone in the party so it’s like we’re watching it together when we aren’t. Idk though it would be my first one

If it’s on Netflix then absolutely

Adobe are cunts - charging a subscription fee for photoshop is probably just the start of them doing this with more and more things

Karaj (west of Tehran) is an absolute bloodbath after today. But the good news is many protestors were able to overpower basijis, despite being fired on by live rounds (which means these people just swarmed the basijis like zombies, I imagine many died - but holy shit, how brave)... beat them and got their guns.

Netanyahu back in charge in Israel...

I watch low budget horror flicks for the comedy mostly tbh.

Aw that’s shit. Best time to come is February or in the weeks right before the summer rush though, imo. But hotels everywhere have been absolutely fucking mental, I can’t imagine what it’s like for San Diego now… but judging by the prices of pretty much everything in San Diego now I imagine “not cheap” is an understatement.

I just think it's hilarious they've turned WInnie the Pooh into a horror story. I hope he says "oh bother" after slamming an axe into Christopher Robin's head

Official trailer: it's coming out in February. Looks fucking hilarious tbh.

But what does Paul Merson think?

When? I'm not familiar with that happening at all. But if push came to shove, the US would absolutely fall on the side of Azerbaijan because: 1.) Turkey and NATO, 2.) oil and gas. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan also have precious metals... but I think that oil and gas would be more of a draw to the US.

Tbh I’m not even sure it was right to ban Russia from international tournaments for invading Ukraine. I obviously think their invasion was wrong - it’s clearly a crime against humanity. But it’s a bit fucking weird when countries have invaded other countries in our living memory… and they don’t get the same kind of treatment. I’m sure any Iraqis who saw Russia get banned for an illegal invasion probably thought “what the fuck?” At best, it comes off as just hugely hypocritical. At worst, it’s Europe & FIFA signaling to countries with brown people that their lives just aren’t worth as much as white peoples. And it’s a disgrace that the sale of weapons to Russia is what manages get the world pissed off about the Iranian government. Not like they hadn’t been slaughtering kids in the street for a month before this talk of kicking them out of the World Cup… and like you say, all the involvement in government & sport & women inclusion have been issues since this government came into power.

I think Israel also supporting Azerbaijan. When they celebrated their victory over Armenia 2 years ago they celebrated with many displays of the Azerbaijani flag between a Turkish flag & Israeli flag

Imo the biggest things changes to hope for are: 1.) Banning/ending Velayat-e Faqih (which means guardianship of the jurist - but this is basically the justification used for religious clerics having full control over the country) 2.) Removing the Supreme Leader & Guardians Council from the structure of Iranian government. Outside of these 2 things, Iran's got the framework for a robust democracy... so long as parties and candidates aren't barred from running (which getting rid of the guardians council would do) and as long as the president and majlis (their parliament) doesn't have to ultimately answer to a dictator. 3.) Banning IRI officials from holding elected office for at least 20 years (maybe for life). This one's maybe hypocritical because I've been an advocate for letting people make choices. The thing is, these people have demonstrated that if you let them they will take away all choice from people. 4.) Unbanning banned political parties (except MEK): Many of these political parties still exist, even though they are ultimately meaningless because they can never have power as things currently stand. Opposition groups are pointless unless they can back the opposition with representation. These would be massive changes that would fundamentally change life in Iran, political and otherwise, pretty drastically. Anything else, imo, should be addressed after Iran's figured out wtf it would be doing next if they are able to free themselves from the IRI.

I don't really think gun regulation is quite the same as a blanket ban on religious clothing, though. You can see on videos that basijis and police are getting beaten, stabbed, shot - this rebellion won't be successful without violence. They're up against people who are keen to gun them down to shut them up. This isn't a free country where the right to protest is respected. When protests are met with force, the only way for the people to really voice how they feel is to respond in kind. But I think history shows that if this government is to fall, it's better to not isolate large swaths of the population. And that's what a blanket ban over the hijab would do, for sure. The cities in Iran may be very non-religious (many people I'd even say are anti-religious) - but Islam is still by far and away the most practiced religion in the country. Even the IRI knew they couldn't start their version of the country up by isolating a large chunk of the population. It wasn't until about a year later that they started purging the secular and left-wing voices. For Iran not to go the way of Syria or Iraq post-Saddam, there's got to be a decent amount of unity if the IRI goes. Otherwise it's going to be an absolute shitshow. And inviting religious extremists to go mental on Iran is probably not the greatest way to start a potential life-after-the-IRI.

I think we're ultimately on the same page - especially if you say you don't care if they want to wear it or not & let them to. And I agree with you, the hijab is just a form of oppression and a means of exerting control over people. Honestly, I believe religion itself is just a tool to oppress and control the masses, imo. But at the end of the day, people in a free society have a choice as to whether they want to be religious or not. They have a choice to decide what they're going to wear or not. I think burkas and chadors are even more oppressive, but if a woman wants to wear one because of her beliefs... I don't think it's my place or anyone else's place to say "no, that's forbidden." It's different if they're being forced by their husbands, fathers, etc... but if it's their own belief and their own choice & it's not hurting anybody else there's no real legitimate reason to tell people they can't. But banning religious garb (or forcing religious garb) as a way to try to "force" secularism isn't a good move imo. Education is the way forward to free people from the shackles of oppression through religion. Banning it takes a way choice, so it's not really indicative of a free society... and it doesn't let people learn why or how religion is used to control people.

On paper Russia supports both Armenia and Azerbaijan. In actuality, that support is really just them selling weapons to both of them. When the two sides are in conflict, Russia (and it's peacekeeping forces) have proven to be generally useless.

Yeah, I think it worked better before there was another oil club in the league though. It's a bit harder when you've got the likes of City that have a similar nearly endless pit of money, the same desire to get results right away, but also have the stability that Chelsea don't have. It's not been unsuccessful since you've had another financial competitor... but it's been much less successful and I don't think it's coincidental. I think Chelsea would be an absolute force if they found that same balance City have. Granted, it's tough to say "just go get that balance" because you've got to get some sort of incredible manager like Pep and you have a shitload of money, but not the same unending pit of money that City have.

Tbf Chelsea haven't really operated the way most clubs do in a very long time - I think it's sort of become part of the club culture to not have much stability or long term planning. I think that's not going to change quickly.

Yeah that sounds like a pretty quality midfield.