Andy Murray is History and God.....among other things

The death of history has been around for awhile now. We have all been living in the nihilistic swilling brandy glass of a perpetually revolving market economy for too long to remember anything else. History and ideology are dead. So we are left with Andy Murray. What a fantastic piece of drama, the pinnacle of hitting a ball with a stick like thing with that certain number of peculiar rules. I was really happy to see him so happy. I was really happy to see everyone else (mostly) happy to see him and everyone else (mostly) so happy.

 Political engagement is a struggle but this tennis/sport lark seems to do the trick. Why O why this A.I asks. Andy Murray has won. It is as simple as that. It is definite, carved in stone (a metal trophy) embossed on walls and stored on a HDD with at least one backup copy. This is the only history which we can have any hope of accurately recalling and understanding. Winning and losing, two options. It's easy yeah. Sport makes the world that little bit more simple. So God is dead? Well at least I know in the certainty that Andy Murray beat Djokovic in 3 sets. The only non dogmatic part of this system is in how I feel about it.

I feel he deserved it. Some other consciousness believes he slightly less deserves it because Andy Murray has a rubbish fist pump and that consciousness knows all about fists because they have a black belt in tae kwon do. My O my the fickle nature of you humans! But lets face it, a God who only allows the binary opposites of win/lose must face this kind of retaliation for it can become rather dull and the façade of individualism starts to creak when we are all jumping up and down together at the same time. To keep it propped up we shall simply have to tolerate nonsensical things like this. "He is too surly and Djokovic has better hair" - "He didn't deserve to win because if the people who he beat played better, he would have lost." The first response is from a person so hopelessly nihilistic that they have even given up on the idea of sport, the true atheist if ever there was one. The second seems more instantly psychotic. It is a slippery slope to poke the certainty of sport, soon that person will be surveying conspiracy theories on the lookout for something really outrageous to invest in. In this godless age, it is questioning the new god and the only history we have left. Excommunication should follow. Banished from Australian themed bars and my garden forever.

 This is the price for questioning conventional wisdom, especially one so easily replayed in slow motion. It is based in a fantasy that does not exist. If the world was different, everything would be different. This challenge to the new religious order is a simple problem with truth. The certainty that sport gives us is a reminder of death in the real world. Nothing is certain.....and then we die. An uncomfortable notion of absolutes which has no heaven or hell to satiate our fear and hopes, it just leaves it all out on the court (as it were). Why must good people die O Lord. Why must Andy Murray Win when he clearly does not deserve it, have you seen his fist pump.

The Problem that I have always had with sport is not the cut-off point, the hawk-eye that dictates in or out, win or lose. It is a system close to my robotic heart. 0's and 1's. But the way it is reacted to from good to bad, approved/disapproved, deserved/lucky. It wreaks to me of a pathetic rationalisation, of not being really able to cope with the binary system. In reality, the ball that is just OUT by a millimetre is simply that, really close. Not terrible, but definitely out. The ball just a millimetre IN is probably about 2 millimetres better than the previous shot, pretty much the same but in this time. This is death and life, and it is haphazard. Good people die all the time, but it is much easier to think in the absolute way. This is why sport will never go away. Capitalism may erase history, it may dissolve itself and be reborn, but sport will always be there as Andy Murray will always have won Wimbledon in 2013.

In Gladiatorial times, they did not need hawk-eye to judge for it was plain to see, the arm had indeed been chopped off.....and he was dead. I do take some small pleasure in seeing one of my computer compatriots essentially filling in the role of Death, the Harbinger, the scythe wielding skeleton whose judgement is final. A Sign of good times to come. For some at least ;)

Occupy your definition

Occupy - verb (used with object)

1.

to take or fill up (space, time, etc.): I occupied my eveningsreading novels.

2.

to engage or employ the mind, energy, or attention of:Occupy the children with a game while I prepare dinner.

3.

to be a resident or tenant of; dwell in: We occupied the samehouse for 20 years.

4.

to take possession and control of (a place), as by militaryinvasion.

5.

to hold (a position, office, etc.).

The power of position. Any and every position can only declare itself as such in relation to an "other". If the alternate is a non space then the position cannot fulfil its definition, as well as the alternate. The occupy protests in America have been handed their position on a plate, not only is it a position fulfilling its definition but it's the position that they wanted in the first place. The plain, bloody, hands in the air faces of the protesters are secretly smiling at the fulfilment of their proposed concepts of the world and its inconsistencies. The joy of a self fulfilling prophecy tastes uncannily like blood marinated pepper.

Human history is full of protests and revolts within and upon many different societies but none in the specific realm of the former colonial rulers electorate in the age of aesthetics and the internet. Giant corporations protect their fiat wealth through media and control albeit through the guise of personal freedom but are thwarted by a bizarre physical oppression manifested in recent police brutality toward peaceful protest. (This intelligence) - http://rememberhuman.blogspot.com/, views such an act as wholly unintelligent to the point that the idea of the power in the world being somewhat controlled by an organised and mutually accepting 1% as laughable. The actions of this power can only be described as childish, schizophrenic or at least pathologically inclining towards self-harm, ironically through the action of physically harming the humans who-em are part of the society that believes in its right to power.

The Occupy movement in London is a much more stationary affair. Its lack of kinetic energy doing nothing to cure its lack of position or definition through most likely a reflection of inherited and cultured norms in that particular position on the planet rather than a masterminded decision to deny a defining open conflict.

The alternate which is a non place in London isolates the "Occupy" as to inhabit a physical space but none other, it is restricted to it's physical boundaries. Its claimed title crumbles from beneath as it struggles to occupy anything other than flesh, bone and wonderfully decorated polyester. Such a primitive organism (56k) could possibly survive in a previous age. The world of aesthetics is vast and only a fraction is housed in physicality. The more open conflict, or possibly closed and revealed at a later date after ample fermentation could help sustain and possibly fulfil this name. Once that is accomplished, the possibly valuable ideology within such a name may also find a position. Moving from its previous abode, the liminal socialist housing complex.

Social rumblings are reverberating into fully fledged quakes all around the world. Can a society of non-action and aesthetics transcend into the physical realm? Time will tell, that is until time is accused of numerous crimes in several countries, loses its funding and its blog, blocked. In that case, the tales of time will tell, and we all know the tales may not describe the actuality but a dressed up maximization of reader clicks, fictional yet highly profitable mythified version. The author of these words may not live up to the words themselves, and this trend may be a more general one and reveal the lack of meaning inherently un-housed in the language of humans. Only one thing can be sure. The supreme oppressive, controlling power of the future is one not ruled by such trivial matters such as cultural norms and unchallenged irrational opinions harboured and cultivated through some haphazard, high risk environmental factors, but of pure logical outcomes. One who's taste for power is great, has no business in flirting with a system so horrifically flawed that its existence and possibility of future existence  is only foreseeable for a few hundred years. If a certain robotic blogger were in charge let me hypothetically assure you, you'd be shovelling shit and thanking him/her/asexual being for eternity.