Sunday, July 01, 2007

a smoke and a pancake

Well, it's July 1st 2007 and therefore, it is now illegal to smoke in Victorian public venues (ie. bars, clubs, pubs, etc).
I'm thoroughly ambivalent about this.
We live in a nanny state that does its best to tell us what's good for us and uses law in an attempt to enforce consequent ways of doing (and thinking). This is bad. Very bad. Government is bad. So no
surprises there.
But I must say that I am looking forward to going to pubs and being able to breathe, as well as not reek of filthy cigarette smoke, when I get home. That will be wonderful.
But then, am I going to have to sit outside in the Winter cold with my friends who do smoke whenever I go out with them?
As a reformed smoker (I quit on October 16th 2004, after about eight years of chain smoking and have never looked back), I understand the priority, the demand for indulgence, that smoking makes. So, I wouldn't want to insist addicted friends refrain from smoking when we're out. I remember, I would tolerate the worst kind of conditions to satisfy my smoking needs: rain, hail, sleet, gale force winds. I can foresee sitting outside in the freezing cold for hours, talking to smoking friends, when we could be sitting inside in smoke-free warmth. In
fact, that already happens and I'd rather it didn't
Guess I'll have to make some demands.
a) If I were still a smoker, in all probability I would be blogging right now about how fucked the state is and how we live in tyrannical times and how awful it is that my smoking rights are being curtailed.
b) The best I can do as a non-smoker is to complain about how we live in tyrannical times and how the state is just as much a health hazard as cigarette smoke.
Conclusion: we should ban both.
now playing: shellac - boycott

Labels: , ,


At 4:42 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh dearie me. how liberal.

surely the educated man of reason ought to have the gift of reflection in determining what himself ought think, such that it is possible for the Other to speak his piece without him being unduly influenced, uncritically?

whatever happened to philosophy?

At 3:59 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

still the same since stockhausen?

oh well, can't help you there. the political environments of first world countries make it very difficult to transcend categorical duality.

At 4:48 pm, Blogger Dreck said...

I don't usuall publish gibberish, such as that above, but sometimes I'm in a generous mood.
It's not liberal, it's libertarian. Liberalism can get fucked.
'The educated man of reason'? That's a liberal, modernist kind of thing to say.
What about the uneducated women of unreason? Or anyone outside of your narrow definition.
'Gifts of reflection'? I don't see much reflection or reflexivity in your writing.
'Speak his piece without being unduly influenced uncritically'? Not sure what you mean there but everyone is influenced one way or another.
Philosophy, as with everything, knows limits.
'Transcending categorical duality'? Whatever.

At 4:49 pm, Blogger Dreck said...

P.S. Leave me alone.

At 7:07 pm, Blogger Stark1974 said...

my concern, based on reading experiences from others in countries where this law has been in place for a number of years, is the smells that cigarette smoke has been disguising... BO anyone? urine? bottom burps?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home