Status-Q

If I read that someone is

…working on debates within inter-disciplinary urbanism around notions of ‘Darwinistic individual selfishness’ – or ‘Who Dares Wins Urbanism’ attempting to make apparent the predictable, though overlooked failures of individualism within and apparent across the ‘leadership’ of the centre, left and right.

and is preoccupied with

…how social relations (dissolving of nation states and rise of cities) might change on earth with the colonisation of other planets

but has now created a non-profit that intends to

inject a criticality into discussions about cities via creating a platform for existing, though overlooked multi-disciplinary critical actors and provocateurs

then I can’t help feeling that he must find it difficult to get people to take him seriously, and that wrecking the Boat Race must have been a last desperate attempt to get himself noticed.

The above quotes come from the culprit’s RSA profile page. (You shouldn’t read anything into the fact that he’s an RSA Fellow, by the way, even though it sounds good. The RSA is a pleasant-enough club in London, of which anyone can become a ‘Fellow’ by stumping up 150 quid a year.)

But as I read about what he does, the very worrying thought occurs to me that someone, presumably, is paying for him to create this kind of mumbo-jumbo, and I really hope it’s not the taxpayer (i.e. you and me).

The broadcaster Richard Madeley put it nicely: ‘God, the monumental ego and selfishness of the swimmer who screwed the Boat Race. Imagine sharing living space with someone like that.’

But wait a minute… that’s much too obvious an explanation. I’m off to apply for a grant to do some interdisciplinary research which will explore the creation of a forum to inject a criticality into the suggestion that such actions are simply the predictable, though overlooked failure of individualism.

An elderly woman in Manhattan walked into the door of an Apple store. Rather literally: the door was too shiny and clean, and she broke her nose on it. Now, that’s no fun for anyone, but she’s suing Apple for a million dollars. Must have been quite a nose.

I wonder what the success rate for this sort of case is? I mean, could I make a living out of walking into doors, slipping on floors, etc? I’d be willing to sustain quite a few minor injuries at $1M a time.

The law of costs is a wonderful thing, and it helps most nations avoid a great deal of the silliness that afflicts the American legal system. This case is very reasonable compared to some. I don’t think Apple should be fined $1M, but something should probably be done – they should apologise and should be required to buy a roll of stickers to put on their doors. Giving her an iPad would be a nice gesture.

It really bugs me that so many people in the world seem to operate on this basic principle:

IF

• Something bad happens to me

AND

• You have lots more money than me

THEN

• It must be your fault

AND THEREFORE, NATURALLY

• I should have lots of your money

If exactly the same thing happened at, say, your sister’s house, would you ask her for a million dollars? Of course not. It’s attempted redistribution of wealth through forceful means, that’s what it is. Communists.