Oct 29 00 is it daylight savings time? my laptop thinks it is. how odd. I never keep track of such things. however considering we woke up at 1pm unchanged-clock-time, if we have an extra hour that's pretty damn good.
The day after LDL came into town we went out to a new Drumnbass night at a place called the Soundshaft. Read about the event, and it gave the name of the venue but no street or nothin'. wasn't listed anywhere either. So I did a search on the trusty laptop and found someone had posted a question about another clubnight on a London clubbing discussion board, asking if it was still at the Soundshaft, behind Heaven. Aha! thanks to modern technology, we found the place, it was pretty kool, dark and industrial feeling, with a balcony. The crowd was very very young. Lot's of up-for-it teens. LDL was weirded out a little, especially by the yoof crowd. But the music was pretty good.

The next night we headed to a small club in Soho that had a rocksteady night. It was lovely. lovely! We danced together to sweet tunes from '65, and watched the small crowd get down. I like the vibe a touch better than the bigger night on Saturdays. It is a little more pretentious, but also less packed, and more laidback overall. The djs were a bit better too, actually mixing tunes, and having better flow overall. The only silly bit was the super-soho-fashionista girlies in off-the-shoulder '80s tops with dolman sleeves, a fedora and gold chains. heeedious. But most were chiller than that. and nothing beats dancing rubadub with your sweetie, rocking gently belly to belly, eyes closed, as the bass shivers..

Oct 26 he's here. hooray. out at night. or in keeping the roommate up. more later. fun now.

Oct 22 00 LDL comes in two days. can't sleep can't sleep. some anxiety too. on the plus side, got my course results and thesis grade last week. Friday. the dept. secretary emailed'em to me. Then I had to ask my supervisor for a 'translation' as the British grading method is incomprehensible to me. But basically, for the course overall, and for the thesis, you can either not pass, get a pass, a pass+merit, or a pass+distinction. For the whole course, I got a pass with a strong merit. For the thesis, I got a pass with distinction. woohoo! And this from an institution which was across-the-board suspicious of my thesis topic, and not sure that it was valid economics or history. It was both, y'all, with Law and Cultural Studies in there too. Pretty damn kool. I was able to please them and myself. the hardest combination of things, especially in a hostile environment. And my supervisor told me that I would have gotten a distinction overall, had it not been for all the crazy stress around my last exam (which was mostly LSE's fault) which meant my grade was low for me. nice to know, but I still think they're penalizing me for this petty bureaucrat's little power trip over me while my mom was going in to the hospital. o well. still not doing too bad.

Oct 20 00 Armchair Activism at its finest:
To: go@Lonelyplanet.com
I have just witnessed the head of Lonely Planet and a representative of an activist group for a free Burma make their cases for whether Lonely Planet should encourage tourist travel to Burma.
The Lonely Planet representative made a very disappointing and unimpressive case. The man seems absolutely craven. He was too cowardly to admit that the reason WHY LP still encourages tourism to burma is that his business makes money at it.
Because LP is so good at marketing itself to young seemingly progressive people, he doesn't want to alienate us by sounding too capitalist. but his pussyfooting around is even more pathetic. there is no other excuse for continuing to encourage and facilitate tourism in burma than LP being a business, and making a profit. not admitting that is utterly, utterly craven.
either way, I am not buying another LP guide, although I have generally been impressed with the information in them. Until LP stops encouraging tourism in burma, which the legitimate government has requested be stopped, I will not buy anything else from them, and I will encourage all my friends and acquaintances to do the same.
The head of LP should apologise, although I doubt he'll have the guts, and the current Burma tourbooks should be taken off the shelves.

To: trouble@her email
From:a guy @ lonelyplanet
Thank you for your email. You can take this whatever way you like, but:
1. I first went to Burma in 1974. I've been back quite a few times in subsequent years. So my experiences of the country far predates the current situation where visiting Burma is not 'politically correct'. My most recent visit was last year. I have always loved the country (which is easily the most fascinating in South-East Asia) and its people (who have always been kind to me and remarkably uncomplaining about their lot). My last two visits have been in connection with a book about cycle rickshaws (Chasing Rickshaws) and a book about the business of rice (as yet unpublished). For both those books I spent a lot of time talking with and hearing about the lives of everyday people.
2. Like anybody with any sense and any compassion I would love to see Burma have a democratic government and, furthermore, a competent government. In that vision I am totally in line with the Burma Action Group. Where I differ from them is their belief that withdrawing our Burma book from the market would speed the arrival of democracy in Burma.
3 (omitted because it isn't relevant)
4. Finally I don't care if our Burma book makes money or not. We do not make a song and dance about it but for quite a few years now we have followed a policy of donating a percentage of our turnover to projects that we feel in some way relate to the books we do. That money has gone ....to a list as long as my arm. The amount we donate each year comfortably exceeds what I earn from Lonely Planet. I resent, strongly resent, the implication that producing a book on Burma is some cheap, money grubbing enterprise. If a book on Burma was a licence to print money then surely [a competitor of LP]- a division of ****** which knows all about making money - would have put out a Burma guide sometime in the past 20 years when publishing material on Burma was quite OK, so that they could then politely withdraw it when that situation no longer prevailed?

Now I didn't respond to part (1) in my letter below. but some thoughts here. Part one is the author's attempt to claim moral high ground via his connection to 'authentic' burmese people. which he seems to be setting against the majority of burmese people who voted for the groups which won the election but are not in power because the current government is refusing to allow it. The "pc" phrase is just baiting. implying that supporting the legitimate burmese govt is "pc". duhhhh. And he's claiming authority on the basis of his research. However, it's then a bit self-serving to defend the LP book on Burma, because presumably he used the earlier burma book to help him get his own research. Bully for him, but what does that have to do with ethics? fuck all, actually. My initial letter was frivolous in that I allowed myself to vent, somewhat self-indulgently, without restraining myself, and allowing myself to sound quite young and rah-rah. he is responding by trying to be patronising..
and when he really gets huffy is when I talk about LP being a business. first of all, I don't know if he can speak for the higher-ups at LP on the not caring if the book makes money. that doesn't have much to do with the charity work he describes. if they pay employees less so they can donate more, that's one thing. it doesn't mean they mightn't expect to turn a profit. How else could they donate, if the book doesn't make money? however he doesn't get the real cowardice that pissed me off on the TV bit, which is that the LP president wouldn't talk about the business side because he needs to appear cool so the cool kids will still buy the books. It actually made me feel rather like an economist. I do actually believe that a business can try to be somewhat ethical (despite the web of exploitation we are all entangled in), and I can respect that effort. However I don't find a convincing ethical reason to keep publishing the book, and if there isn't a business reason, as I say below, then what on earth do they think they're doing?

the letter I sent in response to that:

to: guy at lonelyplanet Thanks for your response. I was partly commenting or the awful impression that the head of Lonely Planet (I forget his name at present) made.
Just to respond to a couple of your points:

"2.Like anybody with any sense and any compassion I would love to see Burma have a democratic government and, furthermore, a competent government.In that vision I am totally in line with the Burma Action Group. Where I differ from them is their belief that withdrawing our Burma book from the market would speed the arrival of democracy in Burma."
What effect on burma does keeping the book have? if no effect, then why print it in the first place (if, as you say later, it isn't being printed to make money)? If the company *does* have ethical motivations, how is it ethical to refuse the request to stop the book? regardless of whether it can be measured to speed democracy, if the pro-democracy people ask that it *not* be printed, how is contradicting their request pro-democratic? are you saying that it is possible to be not pro-democratic, but also not anti-democratic? what ethical motivation or other motivation for releasing it does LP have, if it isn't a financial motivation?
Aside from this, isn't it possible that if many outside businesses were to demonstrate their solidarity with critics of the current regime within and outside the country in question (as had been done in South Africa), it might effect the chances of democracy?
"4.Finally I don't care if our Burma book makes money or not. We do not make a song and dance about it but for quite a few years now we have followed a policy of donating a percentage of our turnover to projects ....list as long as my arm. The amount we donate each year comfortably exceeds what I earn from Lonely Planet."

regardless of the issue of how LP pays its workers (which has ramifications of its own), if you are speaking for LP when you say you don't care whether the Burma book makes money, then WHY on earth are you printing the book? is it to altruistically make it easier for people to visit burma? is the good you are doing would-be burma travellers and researchers more important that the good you might be doing the pro-democracy movement if there was more of a united front internationally by supporting the pro-democracy movement's request? doesnt that contradict what the pro-democracy group is requesting?

" I resent, strongly resent, the implication that producing a book on Burma is some cheap, money grubbing enterprise."

you missed my point entirely. Although I might not approve, I would have understood if the LP people had said "we print it because people will be going there and we can sell to them" I understand that rationale. what was depressing about the interview was how there was no business-based rationale, and it was obvious why not, because LP wouldn't want to alienate its target market of lefty youth... who tend to equate business with "cheap and money grubbing"... but it sounded like there was no coherent alternate rationale for printing the book. Unless you are saying that you know better what will be good for the burmese people than those who have specifically requested that you not release the book.
I don't understand your point about Rough Guide at all. so they don't have a book on burma? so LP's burma book was an act of charity? are you saying that Rough Guide is less ethical than LP having one and keeping on releasing it after the pro-democracy activist groups have asked you not to?

I just thought this was a funny interchange. both sides. hee. still not buying any more LP books.

Oct 19 00 I have to agree totally with joe that the debates are an awful experience. depressing, enfuriating, even somehow humiliating, because these are the guys that are supposed to be the US' elected leaders. I tried to watch just the selected footage of the last debate (you don't get much of it on the BBC), and it makes me long for the golden days of oratory. Both the candidates that were allowed to appear were just came off as mean-spirited and hamming for the audience. At least if Nader and Buchanan had been present, people might have touched on actual issues, actual policy shifts. I'm not a big fan of Nader, and I think he'd be a terrible president. Buchanan of course is off his rocker in the other direction. But they should be included in the debates, not least because they could at least be defining slightly different approaches to the role of government.

I'm not an anarchist. i don't think infrastructures can be set up without some kind of state, and infrastructures are necessary, especially to provide a floor below which nobody should fall, but also, to get food and supplies across the land. I do think anarchists should be heard --although I'm not often impressed by their plans for how society should be organised AFTER the fall, I think they are extremely sensitive to power issues in many arenas. However, I've noticed both strong macho strains, and some rather petty competitiveness in a lot of anarchists. And an overarching competitive-individualist assumption. I'd like to see some anarchist families. Anarchist parents. How would they work? how would an anarchist deal with the fact that they have responsibilities for someone else's survival? All the anarchists I have met (and I've met a goodly number), are single people, often fairly young but not always, and way more men than women. that's not what I want the future society to look like. actually, that's not a society, that's a youth subculture. back next archive home