Hutton delivers Kelly verdict

Well… so what? I’m not impugning Hutton’s character. But this inquiry is a sideshow and a distraction and always has been. There should have been an inquiry into why we went to war (IMO, to protect the Bush family’s interests and their battle with the house of Saud for control of the world’s oil).

And Hutton is dressed up to look like it does do that… but it doesn’t. So Blair can be cleared of a minor charge, absolved of a side issue, without even being questioned about the central issue. It’s a masterful display of spin and was from the get go. Nobody even gets to debate why we really went to war — not in a political context.

Similarly the manufactured crisis of university tuition fees, which isn’t a crisis at all. Yes, fees will dissuade working class people from going to university.

But that doesn’t matter.

Because the real class issue in equality of access to education isn’t about three grand here and there for tuition fees (which BTW in a world without fair taxation of the rich is pretty easy to justify). No, equality of access goes much further back in the education cycle. I’ve heard and can well believe that the funding argument should be about nursery places for poor kids (especially black kids) and better teacher-student ratios in primary schools in poor areas.

In other words, the reducation in equality of access to education that is created by university tuition fees makes fuck all difference to poor people getting education because there’s fuck all poor people going to college anyway.

But to frame the discussion in that way would bring out into the open the crushing inequality of our society — and that, like why we went to war, or why we tax payers fund people like British Sugar or the Duke of Westminster to impoverish black people in poor countries, would be just a bit too uncomfortable for the ruling classes.

What a bunch of cunts.

I hang my head in shame and admit to STILL liking the Neptunes

JAY-Z – “Change Clothes”:

At first, I was like “cool new Jay-Z!”. Soon after, I was like “COOL new Neptunes!” Then I bought the album and I was like “ehh..” Then I was like “woo boy it’s Jay-Z again”. For an ever so brief while I was “oh just SHUT UP and retire” (even though my problem isn’t with Jay & his self-proclaimed unimpeachable stature, but with Pharell & Co.).

You know, I hear this track on the radio, and think, cor, that’s a funky bit of hip-pop! I wondered whether it was the Neptunes but wasn’t sure — I’m not a hipster about this stuff. I’m not a BIG Jay-Z fan — his flow is good, but the backing usually leaves me a bit bored — but this record rocks. Well, it’s good pop anyway.

So I don’t understand all the slag offs of the Neptunes I see around the place. Obviously it’s their production that makes the record. Same as with the “Diddy” track — first time I heard that I thought, good god, how can fucking Puff Daddy make a record that good? And then I found out how.

I think you’ve all been listening to too much music and not taking enough notice of your children…

Oh alright, one last one, then I’m off for a few months

I also picked up the Dizzee vs … oh fuck, who was it? Can’t remember… battle off the roll deep site. Firin! Like I said before, better as an accapella.

Now I’m gonna turn it into a tech-stop roller. You’re gonna HATE it!

Oh, a bit more news about a bunch of other new tracks I have up at the bassnation site soon — when I rescue my post off UKD. It’s some ragga techno, some electro-ragga, and some ragga jungle. Some of them are good!

I do TRY and get my facts straight (were there many glaring innaccuracies in Ra piece?), because essentially that’s laudable, but I’d warn readers that what I’m up to is imparting my enthusiasm. I don’t really want to get mired in research and I’ll freely admit that sometimes I haven’t got a fucking clue what I’m talking about (er, Italo for starters).

I’ve been meaning to talk about this for a while. Look, let’s get one thing fucking straight. The blogging scene isn’t some virtual kleenex so PROFESSIONAL writers can show off, let off steam, show us how it’s done — show us what they REALLY want to write. What a load of crap. I’d have thought anyone who’s ever heard of punk would know something about that.

But REAL blogging isn’t about Director’s cuts. It’s not some fanzine Heaven’s Gate. It’s about real people finding a voice and connecting with people, not about polishing your online CV. Criticize a a blog all you want — fuck, I’ve slagged off enough people on here, why I’ve even slagged off Ingram, and he’s slagged off me — but let’s not get too, ‘ow you say, bourgeois about it. Let’s not impose turgid PROFESSIONAL standards on the people’s press. Let’s not go all 1974 ya dig?

Don’t get me wrong. The PROFESSIONAL writers are alright in their place — they can join in. I like a PROFESSIONAL writer’s blog as much as the next man, but lets sort our values out here people. The reason why Reynolds — to pick a random (huh!) example — is thick with the blogging crew is that he does a good blog. It’s home made, it’s not subbed, it’s a FAN’S writing. That’s the deal. That’s what it’s about. Why do you think he rates Luka’s writing, and Matt’s for that matter? Cos it has the content and it has the chops and you know what? It wouldn’t get published in a PROFESSIONAL’S journal of record in a million years, not in that form. They’re not wannabes. They’re the real thing.

I figured this out real early reading one the first blogs — Doc Searls’ one. (Not to be confused with Doc Sheils BTW — oh for a Doc Shiels blog!) He’s both a real writer, and a real FAN, and he knows the difference, and can articulate the journalistic ethics he has to pursue when doing his thing. And, most importantly, he knows which side of the fence is most important in blogging. Of course, the tedious fucks slagging Ingram off probably have never heard of him…