WEBSITE EXCITEMENT!

Tell me that the Active Collective page on the new school website is not the coolest thing in the entire world. I particularly like how it has my name in in huge lettering at the top ;)

Thanks so much to Ms Judge and the web crew for all their hard work on the website, which looks fantastic!

I want to vote!

That pretty much sums it up...


I want the chance to vote... its just a shame that the poltically aware people can't vote...
I know people who know more about the parties and polices than some adults...
Heck I certainly know a lot more than some adults and yet they decide whats happening to this country which we will run in the future...
Shouldn't we being the youth have a say in shaping the future NZ?

I'm talking about teens(16-17 not 14) that are poltically aware and are worried about our countrys future...

its a bit unfair...



I WANT TO VOTE!!!

Love kermit_2.0

ok just remembered that jo did a blog on this.... sorry guys.... totally spaced

Anti-National Banner Pics Finally Here! (Thanks Elsie!)

These pictures are from our anti-National banner holdings at the basin on the 16th and 21st of October. Of course, The AC is a totally non-partisan group... But, as everyone sane knows, NATIONAL SUCKS!

If you are keen to do anymore banner holdings, you can visit http://www.botheyesopen.org.nz/ or talk to Julia for more info.

Hope you are all having a fantabulous holiday weekend, and don't forget to read Jo's great blog post below me, whose space I have entirely swallowed up (sowee!)

What is it?

So i've been wanting to address this, but i've been to busy doing illegal med procedures (a.k.a. bout of lazyness).

Skin Whitening. You can bleach your skin, choose from an amazingly silly range of creams, face wash...ect.ect.

So, is it racial?

As i'm sure you know, i am a parasol tottering person who most of the times smack my face in this mineral foundation that makes my face paler per usual (btw, the foundation is called "geisha" and i like the geisha look). Half of that is for medical reasons, i carry a parasol because:
1) exposure to strong uv rays/sunlight causes me to break out really badly with MILIA, as my dermatologist has said to me "you have underdeveloped eye glands", so sadly, my milia does not disappear like it should, and there is no cure for it but a nice sharp needle to push under my skin and get those tiny cysts. And it really hurts.
2)i can't use sunscreen or any cream that has alot of chemicals or oil in it because it will cause me to break out.

Now, there are such products as "Ponds Flawless white" a 7 day regime to make you "achieve the desirable whiter/fairer and visibly clearer skin" or a money back guarantee- is this racism in disguise?
In India, it is acknowledged, the more fairer you are, the more "beautiful" you are. And skin bleaching is done, even to kids. This thinking has been ingrained through the ages- so is that alright? Or is it still "wrong" in terms of being racially correct? There was an ad in india where a
dark-skinned girl used whitening skin creams to make her father happy because she got a well-paid job as a flight attendant. (huh??!)

So the markets are flooded with skin whitening products- especially in Asia. In my magazines i brought back from japan, in the face cleansing section they happen to have, its all flooded with "super photo white c gel cream", "super photo white c mask", "camu camu whitening lotion", "UVC's white plus", "Pond's double white", "labo+labo moisture white", "fancl white essence"....I mean, when did the world get so obsessed with being "fairer"? as blogger Nikki has said "Is it some form of self-loathing so much that people think they will be deemed more attractive if they have a lighter shade, or different color? It sounds like a clear statement about how we perceive our racial image or class image. Is it racism? Or are we merely a victim of beauty companies cashing in on society’s desire for white skin?"

when did white skin get equated with social acceptance, and seen as a "higher" form of beauty?(in asian countries)

There are people whom i know who like their fair skin, so alls fair (no pun intended) and well- they like their fair skin, and they don't mind other skin colours, but its their preference.

But of course, there are skin bronzers out there, which is quite the western craze...and...it seems alright- it doesn't provoke the same kind of response "skin whitening" does...but, i think, most of them, they're it both doing for the same reason- they think it makes them look more attractive. So how does this all ad up?

p.s. i'm sorry for the disjointedness, my eyes feel funny in a bad way.

Friday Fun Time! (All teachers avert your eyes!)

GOREBAMA. YOU KNOW IT MAKES SENSE.

Friday... The best day ever. School's over and we have THREE whole days of no school ahead of us (unless you're like me and have to go into school to do your sucky folio).

Anyway... To celebrate, let's watch some fun but socially concious videos!

• First up, awesome spoken word artist Kelly Zen-Yie Tsai has made a video called Black White Whatever drawing attention to the way the presidential election campaigns target only black and white voters, ignoring other races and relagating them to "whatever". It's really cool. If you're not familiar with spoken word poetry (like me, is that even what it's called?), then you might think it's a bit weird, but very entertaining and thought-provoking at the same time. You can see Kelly's other work at yellowgurl.com.


• On a related note, vlogger Adrian Luis takes on John McCain for his use of that the phrase "that one" when referring to Barack Obama in the second presidential debate. Hip-hop activism? Me likes! (BTW thanks to the AWESOMELY WONDERFUL Latoya Peterson at racialicious.com for the links)


• Rose Petal Cottage... Epicly sexist commercial? Jessica Valenti at Feministing.com thinks so. Agree?


• This made me nearly cry... Adorably useless at presidential campaigning Senator Bob Dole falls down during a really in '96 in this video... He is possibly my favourite Republican everrrrrr (apart from Clint Eastwood).

Happy weekend everyone!

P.S. Re: The picture. I do not wish to suggest there is anything "unmanly" (though what's wrong about men wearing dresses?) about Obama, it's just the only slashy picture I could find of him and Al Gore.

The Week in the US Presidential Election

What a busy week it's been for the US Presidential Elections:

• Former US Secretary of State and registered Republican Colin Powell has made news by publicly endorsing Democratic Presidential candidate Baracak Obama. This is a huge bonus for Obama's campaign and a big blow for McCain's, as Powell is a hugely respected politician. It's not a huge surprise, as Powell is a fairly moderate Republican, and has often supported liberal and centrist causes such as gun control and is even pro-choice. Read more about his endorsement here.
• On a related note, well known Republican satirist (he wrote Thank You For Smoking!), author and columnist Christopher Buckley has also endorsed Obama, leading to his resignation at Republican magazine National Review, the very publication his own father William F. Buckley Jr. founded. Read Buckley's endorsement here and his explanation of his resignation here. (He's a great writer, I would recommend reading them.)
• Sarah Palin appeared on Saturday Night Live. Cynical move to win votes or a good-natured poking fun of herself? You can decide by watching it here, I couldn't bring myself to.
• The Third Presidential Debate was on Tuesday, read the transcript here (or you can watch it on youtube.) There were some pretty excruciating moments from McCain, asked why Sarah Palin would make a better running-mate than Joe Biden, one of his reasons was "Her husband's a pretty tough guy". I kid you not. He also thinks it's okay to use airquotes when referring to women's health. Can you believe this guy used to be pro-choice? It's nice to know though that Obama supports women's reproductive rights, even though he's in favour of late-term abortions except for when the mother's health is in danger (late-term abortions are also carried out when the fetus is not viable outside the womb). They discussed a lot of other issues, of course, but that's something I feel passionate about.

There's plenty more news where that came from! To keep up on the US Presidential Elections, I strongly urge you to watch The Daily Show, on at 10.30 Tuesday-Friday on C4. Okay, so it's a comedy show, but it's more reliable than CNN, Fox or even TV3. Plus Jon Stewart is a total hottie! Don't agree with me? Okay, I'll shut up now.

I know I should write something about the NZ elections... But it's too depressing. Get your news from scoop.co.nz instead.

BTW, I am completely addicted to The Living Room Candidate, which has an archive of pretty much all the presidential campaign commercials from 1952 to the present. Why don't presidential campaigns have jingles anymore?

Also, I have made some changes to the layout of the blog. Feedback please! I want to make it look as good as possible but I'm not sure what good looks like.

I'm totally an original Maori.

Yes. I am aware of the fact that i sound like a broken record...and one day you are going to hit me with something very hard...like a large book. and it will hurt. but Racism is something very dear to my heart, especially since...i was born with plenty of dominant melanin chromosomes. (YES! there are 10 chromosomes that are responsible for your skin colour! betcha didn't see that coming!)

So when you think of racism, you think of BCR movement and the nazis and such, right? (All you history nerds...). Now, you are all seriously smart people...smart enough to know all this, but does anyone else ever realise that discrimination against certain races and people was taking place WAY before the black civil rights movement and the apartheid and the nazis?

Oh yes. I'm talking stereotyping. I hate stereotypes to the core. let me explain.

Are all Indians curry-munchers? Are all muslims evil suicide bombers? Are all asians bad drivers? What if you had never met me before? Would it surprise you to know that i am all three? Does that really make me a curry-muncher who has a secret agenda as a suicide bomber with bad driving habits? (You cant even munch a curry...WTF....)

But that's not really the end of the story, is it?  New Zealand gets its fair share of harsh racism too. Stereotyping is just the mere crust of the pie. Its one thing to say that NZ is awesome because we have so many different cultures...but of course there is more to it. Gangs are just as racist. The Bludz (is that spelt right?) bash the crips because they arent bludz and vice versa. Isn't that racism, too?

I guess im being hypocritical. I judge people too. Maybe not to the stereotyping and bashing extent...because the term curry-muncher is just pathetic. But yet, i judge people. And so does everyone else. It took me x amount of words to realise that there is no real point to my blog except that i was cheesed off with racist people and i wanted to write something semi-intelligent on the AC blog. So sue me.

I really really appreciate the fact that the people i hang out with (and school in general... with a couple of exceptions) are not racist. it would totally make me cry if they were.

~noodles

PS: sorry if i broke any of the "guidelines"!

At 16 years
decide whether yes or no on abortion
already licensed to drive
if you want to have a-sexxy time
go to jail from a crime you committed

but not to vote
and i'll be darned if it was not true that deciding on abortion is harder and bigger.

Both Eyes Open Banner at the Basin

Julia will probably post something like this later, but.....

All Active Collective members-and everyone else who thinks National is to New Zealand what Highlander 2 was to fantasy films-who can make it, convene down by St Marks @ 8:00am, Thrursday Morn.

There were shall wave the Banners that several of our members painstakingly painted, and try not to get arrested/Suspended/cause a major car pile up.

Whether or not to wear uniform is Debateable, given Haughtons opinion on uniform at such events....perhaps a jacket to wear over the Jersey?Oh, but that would violate "Perfect Uniform".

Bring whatever then.

That sould be another subject of debate-should we be allowed to protest in School Uniform? Perhaps.

-Lsie

Hilary Duff... Gay rights activist?

I totally grabbed your attention with that one, eh? Well, it's true. Hilary Duff stars in a new Public Service Announcement (click on the first video on the page) in the US that encourages teens to stop saying "that's so gay" when really they mean "that's so sucky/lame/stupid".

And you know what? She has a point. Using gay as a pejorative term reinforces homophobia, whether you mean it or not. The website thinkb4youspeak.com says it best:

"Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) teens in the U.S. experience homophobic remarks and harassment throughout the school day, creating an atmosphere where they feel disrespected, unwanted and unsafe. GLSEN�s 2007 National School Climate Survey found that three-quarters of LGBT teens hear slurs such as ''faggot" or "dyke" frequently or often at school, and nine in ten report hearing anti-LGBT language frequently or often. Homophobic remarks such as "that's so gay" are the most commonly heard type of biased remarks at school. Research shows that these slurs are often unintentional and are a part of teens' vernacular. Most do not recognize the consequences, but the casual use of this language often carries over into more overt harassment.

Studies indicate that students who regularly experience verbal and non-verbal forms of harassment suffer from emotional turmoil, low self-esteem, loneliness, depression, poor academic achievement and high rates of absenteeism. Research also shows that many of the bystanders to acts of harassment experience feelings of helplessness and powerlessness, and develop poor coping and problem-solving skills."

Now, many of my good friends use the word "gay" to describe something sucky. Heck, I've even used it myself a couple of times. But I hate it. Every time I hear someone use it I cringe inside. But I've never, ever told someone to "knock it off". How demoralising is that, not even being as brave Hilary Duff to confront someone when they say something so offensively homophobic, whether they intend to or not?

So now I'll say it: I hate people using the word "gay" as an insult, and if I ever catch anyone using it, you're getting a lecture, or at least an eye roll. Because, as cheesy as those PSAs are, they are right: it's not okay to use who someone is as an insult. Period.

So I encourage, you, Active Collective members (and lurkers) to take the pledge to not say "gay" in a derogatory by Saying Something Original and suggesting an alternative to "gay" (as an insult. Not to, you know, actually describe someone's sexuality). Okay, you can't really because it's only designed for teens in the US, so instead write your own suggestions in the comments section.

Here's some of my favourites that have been suggested so far:

That's so Raven

That's so notsome

That's so Epic Fail (classic)

That's so not the bomb diggity!

That's so gosh darn Joe Six-Pack

That's so mavericky

That's so free market capitalist

That's so Unbelievably Super Epic Fail

That's so obsequious

That's so your GPA

I'm sure you guys can do better than the oodles of "fierce" and "fetch" on the list.

twilight and feminsim

okay so i thought id contribte something useful to this blog
rather than my random ramblings about stuff
so (i kinda stole this off lilly im sorry!! if lilly wants to do a better version she can! in fact i think she should.. this is just my opinion/take on it....and lillys will probably be more...sophisticated and informed) i havent got a very strong argument on this. its just my thoughts
i present to you
feminism in twilight

so i wouldnt consider myself a feminist....or particularly aware of feminsim in todays society...
but all of you ladies out there who have read twilight will probably agree that bella is kind of anti-feminist..

i mean she leaves edward to save her..many a time. shes portrayed pretty much helpless (except for the end of eclipse and even then she gets told off for trying to help)
and she does the housekeeping for her father
i have talked to other people about this and what came up is that (im not having a bash at SM's religion here) but SM is a mormon. she stays at home, minds the kids, does the cleaning and cooking while her husband goes out and works (mind you now her book is a worldwide bestseller she probably earns more than he does but thats not my point)
and this is pretty much reflected in bella. like she is a bit of a clumsy soul and shes always looking for the big strong (hunky vampire) to come save her

so yeah...i havent got more to say...thats was probably pretty pointless anyway
please lilly..write a better one!!

i found this somewhere...okay it was under the FAQs for breaking dawn on Stephenie Meyers website
Its SM's response to people who think bella is anti-feminist...

Is Bella an anti-feminist heroine?

When I hear or read theories about Bella being an anti-feminist character, those theories are usually predicated on her choices. In the beginning, she chooses romantic love over everything else. Eventually, she chooses to marry at an early age and then chooses to keep an unexpected and dangerous baby. I never meant for her fictional choices to be a model for anyone else's real life choices. She is a character in a story, nothing more or less. On top of that, this is not even realistic fiction, it's a fantasy with vampires and werewolves, so no one could ever make her exact choices. Bella chooses things differently than how I would do it if I were in her shoes, because she is a very different type of person than I am. Also, she's in a situation that none of us has ever been in, because she lives in a fantasy world. But do her choices make her a negative example of empowerment? For myself personally, I don't think so.

In my own opinion (key word), the foundation of feminism is this: being able to choose. The core of anti-feminism is, conversely, telling a woman she can't do something solely because she's a woman—taking any choice away from her specifically because of her gender. "You can't be an astronaut, because you're a woman. You can't be president because you're a woman. You can't run a company because you're a woman." All of those oppressive "can't"s.

One of the weird things about modern feminism is that some feminists seem to be putting their own limits on women's choices. That feels backward to me. It's as if you can't choose a family on your own terms and still be considered a strong woman. How is that empowering? Are there rules about if, when, and how we love or marry and if, when, and how we have kids? Are there jobs we can and can't have in order to be a "real" feminist? To me, those limitations seem anti-feminist in basic principle.

Do I think eighteen is a good age at which to get married? Personally—as in, for the person I was at eighteen—no. However, Bella is constrained by fantastic circumstances that I never had to deal with. The person she loves is physically seventeen, and he's not going to change. If she and he are going to be on a healthy relationship footing, she can't age too far beyond him. Also, marriage is really an insignificant commitment compared to giving up your mortality, so it's funny to me that some people are hung up on one and not the other. Is eighteen too young to give up your mortality? For me, any age is too young for that. For Bella, it was what she really wanted for her life, and it wasn't a phase she was going to grow out of. So I don't have issues with her choice. She's a strong person who goes after what she wants with persistence and determination.

The Ultimate Guide to Blogging at the AC Blog... Don't panic!

Hello Active Collective members (and lurkers),

WOW! Over 25 blog posts in the last month, ranging from topics from HIV to the economic downturn to bottled water to aspartame... Can I just say you guys are awesome??

However, as we head into the new term and the opportunities for more people (outside the AC) to become bloggers increases, I think it's time to have a set of guidelines for writing posts. I want to keep the blog as uncensored as possible, and you can help me by sticking to these guidelines.

Just to set your mind at ease, none of these things have been a problem so far at all, it's more of a reference just in case.

1. Don't be mean- We've got enough of that in the world already. Be kind to each other and respect each other's opinions, even if they differ from your own. On that note, no trolling. It's lame. I am the moderator, and I WILL delete if necessary.
2. Try to keep it relevant- Though you can blog about any topic in the world that you like, remember this is a blog for an activist group. If you do a topic which does not directly relate to current events or issues, or activism, try to make it thought provoking in some way, relating to the society we live in or have lived in. For example, a post about misogyny in Gossip Girl would be appropriate, while a post pondering the relative hotness of Dan vs. Nate would not be.
3. Keep it (relatively) clean- In other words, don't put anything on here you wouldn't want Ms Haughton reading knowing you wrote it. We want to maintain a vaguely respectful air. So no f-bombs, a-holes, c--suckers or anything of that kind.
4. This isn't bebo, folks- While a community spirit is essential for a grass-roots organisation like ours, discussions about your weekend and so on are best saved for those social-networking sites, not the comments section.
5. Remember, anyone can access this blog- It's open to the public at large for anyone to see, so I would advise being fairly private about your details in your posts. I'm sure you knew this one already!
6. Don't take it too seriously- To paraphrase Nora Ephron, if you work longer than one hour on a post, it's not blogging, it's writing an article. You won't get a Pulitzer Prize for your work here. As long as you get the message across, people won't care whether you crafted that perfect sentence or not. However...
7. NO TEXT LANGUAGE ALLOWED- i dnt cer f u cnt spl or wtvr, thts fyn. bt i RLY h8 txt lnge.
8. Substance over style- If you want to decorate your post with pictures, videos, fonts or colours, that's great! But remember, the actual content of your article is the most important part.

Think those are fair guidelines? Have suggestions for more? Leave your opinions in the comments section!

Happy blogging!

World financial crisis

so congress passed the bill, and financers heaved a sigh. Hmmm...thats going to cost taxpayers quite alot of ching, so some people will become unhappy with the government, and then they start to rebel which ends in a revolution, and USA becomes a communist country with a staple ration of beef jerky and fries. No burgers cause all their cows are mad and NZ doesn't negotiate with Communists(from then on). Ah, and the British Government has funded the banks by $140b to "stabilize" the financial system. So what say you the chances of the economy drowning? The 700b package seems like one of those thing were USA thinks it's going to be okay and that they will recover- albeit slowly- with time, and everyone will be ho-ha again, but of course, within a few years a magical loop hole is uncovered (like always) and will plunge the economy in absolute utter chaos, and they shall only eat bread. Unleavened. and drink milk. Unpasteurised.

p.s.almost 100 sleeps before george W. bush is ta-ta! in almost 120 years, it was the first time a man became president, who didn't have the most votes. cooolllective siiigh.

Human Rights!

Lily finally added me as a contributor.  Yay!  

So today, boys and girls, I'm going to talk to y'all about human rights. I know you're excited.

This year, me and Romana attended the national Model United Nations (something you should all do next year).   The theme of the conference was Human Rights, as this year is the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.   As Guinea-Bissau and Cambodia, me and Romana were not the world's biggest advocates of human rights.  However, as people, we were both very interested in the topic and learnt some interesting things - most importantly, that the issue of human rights is not as simple as it seems.

You are probably all familiar with the UDHR to some degree, as we all would have studied it in yr 10 Social Studies. However, I'll recap.   The UDHR was adopted by the United Nations on December 10th, 1948.  It sets forth 30 fundamental Human Rights to which everybody is entitled to, without distinction of any kind,  whether it be 'race, colour, sex, langauge, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status'.  These rights include the right to freedom from slavery, the right to a fair trial, the right to education and many other things.  Furthermore, all governments have a responsibility to promote and protect these rights.

However, although it is 60 years since this these rights were declared, they are still not available to everybody.   Throughout the world human rights abuses occur all too regularly.   The question is, how do we stop it?  

The United Nations works hard to make sure human rights are protected by the law, however, any action taken by the United Nations must pass a vote, and may of those voting do not want to protect human rights.  And so we come to the first interesting point I discovered.   Human Rights are bad for governments.  Human Rights make things a lot more difficult for those in power, and not just the corrupt and power mad Robert Mugabes of the world, but also the Helen Clarks.   Human Rights protect individuals: they stop us from being held prisoner without a reason, they protect our privacy, they give us the right to seek asylum in another country.  Even a government with the best interests of its people at heart can find all these rights a nuisance - it is hard to protect the country from terrrorists, for example, if you cannot search people for bombs. Democratic and developed nations usually have better human rights records, as people vote for those who will protect their civil liberties.  However, as we learn in history, when countries feel threatened internal suppression increases.  So, in a post 9/11 world, we increasingly see developed nations, who usually have very good human rights records, taking actions which put the security of the country above individual human rights.  Most will be aware that the UK recently increased the amount of time you can be held without charge to 28 days and are considering increasing it to 42 days.  As for the USA, well, Guantanamo Bay just speaks for itself. 

Despite this, most governments of developed nations still support UN resolutions that aim to protect human rights.   But many of the UN members do not.  You can see the problem - in the United Nations every state has an equal vote, regardless of their human rights record.  They can, and many do, vote against the protection of Human Rights, fearing threats to their personal and national security.  This means that it is very hard to get resolutions passed which aim to counteract human rights abuses.  The United Nations is flawed, in the sense that it gives an equal vote to those who seem to working against what it stands for.  

Because of this flaw, many western political scientists have come up with an idea for an alternative to the United Nations, a "liberty league" or a "league of democracies".  They call for the foundation of a new international organisation, separate from the UN,  made up of western democratic nations.  Together they would be able to help those suffering from human rights abuses and take action to solve other problems, for which the presence of less principled and more corrupt nations has led to stalemate in the UN.   Sounds good doesn't it?

Maybe not.   As me and Romana discovered (in an excellent talk by Vic lecturer Robbie Shilliam), to solve human rights issues we may need to steer away from a victim and saviour model.  I'll elaborate.  In the west, we tend to see the development of human rights in a certain way, known as the 'Grand Western Narrative of Human Rights'.  It goes something like this:

The idea of human rights was first thought of by the ancient Greeks when they came up with the concept of democracy.  The idea continues to develop slowly with a few key events through out Europe - the Magna Carta is one, I have to admit I've forgotten the rest - until the French revolution in 1789.  Liberty, Equality and Fraternity!  Then there is the abolition of slavery, the fight against fascism, and a few other things.  

The point is, they are all examples of western nations saving themselves and others from being victims of human rights.  This narrative leaves out some key historical events.  One of these is the Haitian Slave Rebellion of 1791.  Inspired by the events in France,  the slaves of Haiti rose up against their white masters and took control of the island.  They wrote their own constitution, which not only abolished slavery, but gave universal rights to all Haitians.   The French declaration made no mention of slavery and only declared freedom and equality for all French men.  Futhermore, the narrative ignores the fact that many of the most advanced developments and ideas on human rights of the last century have come from the non-western world in response to western actions.  Mahatma Ghandi developed the idea of non-violent protest in order to fight British oppression in India, and his idea were adapted by Martin Luther King Jr. to fight for black civil rights in the USA.  Today their tactics are considered the most effective methods of protest.

The western human rights narrative suggests that we in the west came up with the concept of human rights and spread it to less developed nations; that the west has a duty to save the rest of the world from human rights abuses, and that those who suffer are merely powerless victims. However, perhaps what people who are suffering need most is not, in fact to be saved, but to be supported as they try to save themselves.   If we just simplify the problem into one of victims and saviours, we may prevent ourselves from hearing the contributions of those who we are trying to save. 

The idea of a 'Liberty League' does just that.  By saying that countries who have poor human rights records cannot take part in human rights discussions, we deny them the opportunity to do something about it themselves, and perpetuate the western image of ourselves as the saviors. Furthermore, (and this is where it gets complicated) it raises some interesting questions about the UDHR and who has the authority to decide what is and what isn't a fundamental human right.  The reasons that human rights abuses take place in some parts of the world has nothing to do with totalitarianism or even national security.  Many have more to do with tradition and religion than anything else.  Now, I'm not suggesting that we should just sit back and allow people to explain away mistreatment of others simply due to religion or culture, but we need to be aware that the UDHR contains very western ideas about what are human rights, which people in other countries may disagree with.  We cannot simply decide that we in the western world know better than everybody else, that we are more developed and so we alone can make decisions about what is right and what is wrong. That would be bad.  However, to me, and I'm sure to you, human rights abuses that are justified on the grounds of religion or culture do simply seem wrong.  So what do we do?  This is a question for which I do not have the answer, though it seems that we cannot force human rights on people who do not want them.  I guess we can only encourage others to claim their own rights, and offer them all our support when they do.

Read the UDHR here

Exciting Events!

Hello all AC members

This is an exciting time, close to two extremely important elections (the US general elections of the 4th November and the NZ elections of the 8th.)

There are a few events that are coming up relating to these elections.

• Tonight, there is the second US Presidential Debate, starring Senators McCain and Obama showing on CNN (channel 91 if you have sky) at 10pm. This is not essential to watch, but it could be interesting viewing. Read political commentator Gordon Campbell's analysis of the stakes of the debate here .


• Next Tuesday October 14th, Oxfam will be holding a debate involving politicians from the Labour, National and Greens parties about Fair Trade. More information is available on their website.
  
• It would be great if the whole Active Collective (schedules permitting) could take a field trip out to Karori to support Julia's group and get active with some banner painting! Because, seriously, no-one here supports the National Party, do they? (Apologies and respect if you do). Leave me a comment if this suits, if we can get enough of the AC I may schedule an Oxjam meeting for that day.

Love and peace

Lily

EDIT: Mr Lily Reid has just informed me that the debate has already happened and you can watch it here. Woops.

Hi everyone - you probably got my email but there is anti national party banner painting on Saturday the 11th (and also on Sunday but I wont be there) and the Karori Community Centre all day. We need more people and would be thrilled if anyone could come along for a few hours - you need NO artistic ability and the more people you could bring the better. Email me or text me to tell me if you can come, or turn up anyway. 

Did everyone read national's deeply unimpressive tax package. First of all it is MINIMAL and secondly in order to do it they are going to screw over Kiwisaver and so stuff everyone's retirement funds. Aren't they amazing! At the banner painting most of them will be on tax cuts and their consequences eg tax cuts = health cuts which I was holding up in town at lunch time today. And apparently Iceland's economy just went down the drain. Us Next?! :)  

Water, water, everywhere but not a drop to drink

Yes, we all know buying bottle water is a sin. But its handy and dandy and tastes good and makes us feel more...how do you say it- "safe"? As i think we should all know- wars in the future will not be fought over land or religious beliefs ect., but over resources. I mean, if there was an independent island next to us whose ground was miraculously pumped with heaps of oil, and NZ was on a very very severe oil shortage, i think the government would all narrow their eyes and clear throats and rub their hands together in the direction of le island. Oil, water- water is the big un. Though i guess being in NZ has made us safe from water shortcommings like our...neighbour...hehe...hehehe*cough*unfortunateaustralia*cough* <- sorry for the evilness. We still need to be Active and O.O aware. Let me pull out le facts for you:

• It takes Three Litres of Fresh Water to produce one litre of Bottled Water.
• 2.5 million tons of Carbon dioxide was created by making the plastic bottles for bottle water in 2006- and the amount shall just grow as population increases.
• Study shows that 90% of bottles are not recycled and of course, they're not biodegradable so it definately makes it Not Okay.
  
• Someone is scamming your ching. Some investigations have revealed that bottled water (such as in Canada and the states) just stated fresh, "spring" water and ect. but it was basically distilled TAP water they use in a bottle with a picture of a nice scenic lake in some european country slapped on.

So we should aim for: no buying plastic bottle water, you get a chinese burn from Chairman Mao if you do. And besides its free.

Ok, Ok, you all know, jus re-instating, it should be part of every eco-warriors personal crusade.

and YAYS, kudos to Lily for securing sound. We boogie. You win. Everyone wins! >:D now we just need to advertise till we lose our pride/dignity/ or come to the realisation we never had any.

p.s. ohh eLLEN, your font colour totally blinded me for 5 secs.
i think we should make a McCain and Palin voodoo doll. HE CAN'T BE PRESIDENT, and cause i don't like Palin lady.

Hello all.

So, the blog has set off like the big bang. We have posted blogs on just about everything to the economy crisis to HIV to cancer causing food additives.

Now its time to think a little closer to home. Can we agree in a chorus of "YES!" Right, much appriciated.

To commence- I don't take art, not even photography (NO WAY!) but this blog is going to be about art and the right to personal expression. I will not outline the coterversial topic: graffiti.
When I say graffiti you may think about those ugly markings which are inconviently backed by a suburban garage, teen gangs and the word "vandalism". When some idiot with a spray can attacks our propety its yeah...annoying and costly. So graffiti has a really bad reputation here in New Zealand. At the other extreme (yum my mum just gave me an ice cream) we have those huge works by (space for drum roll/ the silence of antisepation) BANKSY. His works selling for millions. These two things contrast each other greatly but where is the line?

Where does vandalism become artwork?

This raises more questions in my head such as when do we know if it's art if its out of a gallery. Thats an easy answer. When an image expresses ideas or emotions. But heres the tricky part: graffiti is ILLEGAL. There are now strict bans on spray cans (you have to be eighteen to buy spray cans). My point is: should people be allowed to express themselves thorough grafftti?

Me and my dude...guy (ugh I not a fan of the word boyfriend) have come to release an entire underground network of graffiti artists making a name for themselves on our streets.

For furthur investagation look for "graffiti alley" just off left bank where the likes of satay kingdom are located. The alley way is finishes opposite emo park on ghuznee street.

Also an interesting website: http://streetarse.co.nz/archives/category/uncategorized

Goodo. For first hand information you can email my dude-guy at: Andrew91@windowslive.com. He has choosen to do a photography portfolio on graffiti and he is pretty much an expert (he is not a tagger though). Also send him jokes, funny stories or just say hi. He doesn't know I'm doing this but I'm sure that he will be ok with it...

see ya-bye.
Ellen

P.S. Nurul I did my blog in green for you and also to fit in with the subject matter.
P.S.S I may not take art but I do take ART HISTORY!

Good news AC members! (The General Public can go back to it's daily business)

Andy has agreed to provide the sound for the 08 Oxjam! YAAAAAAY! (In case you don't remember, he provided the rad sound system we had for last year).

Also, Left Hand Addiction has confirmed they will be playing at the concert.

That is all.