Comments on: Latte Heroes

By: mj » Blog Archive » H is for ipocrisy

mj » Blog Archive » H is for ipocrisy — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:20:58 +0000

[...] see perhaps 1% of the population tackling the really thorny issues. So, what, we want more Latte heroes? I don’t blog much about US politics because I’m inundated with that shit on the [...]

By: LKM

LKM — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:44:00 +0000

In many countries, open comments are a legal liability, which I learned the hard way. If anyone wants to respond to any of my blog posts, they need to do so on their own host or on a public blogging service, making sure that I can’t be held responsible for their words by acting as a publisher for them.

By: mj

mj — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:05:11 +0000

I’d rather there was debate as well and your closed comments have annoyed me a couple of times (which again is a finger pointing at the sheer pointlessness of it all). Thanks for opening them up. I promise to be constructive or inflammatory

You can also label me and pretend it solves anything.

Okay

By: Jesper

Jesper — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:02:12 +0000

That was a better way of putting it. (I brought up my example because, by your comparison, it seemed like you had some different ideal in mind that we should all aspire to, especially since you seemed to be ashamed to be one of ‘them’.)

I’d rather have a storm in a teacup than nothing in the teacup at all, although the sheer invented drama of some people begins to tear at you after a while. But if I’m going to take a stance on something, I’m going to take an unequivocal stance, such is my style of writing. You can cope with it or you can stop reading. You can also label me and pretend it solves anything.

By: mj

mj — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:52:58 +0000

I didn’t say anything about that. This isn’t about berating others for not going out and saving the world, one disadvantaged child at a time. This is about the ridiculousness of people who get all het up about the distribution model of the iTunes App Store or the theory that google might be evil (based on the weird assumption that anyone at Google cares about individuals as opposed to crowds).

The recent hubbub about whether bloggers declare their sponsorship is a perfect example. Storm in a teacup.

By: Jesper

Jesper — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:43:37 +0000

TouchÃ©.

As you say, people may starve in this world, which is why I donate a fair bit of money to charity and has done so since I was a student and already tight on money. There are two ways you can look at this: you can say that I’m just consoling and drugging my conscience and that I really should go down there and save people myself, like so many brave doctors and liberators have done, and how dare I compare myself to them by feeling the least bit good about contributing anything. Or you can say that it’s good that I’m doing something, when I just as easily could do nothing.

One way argues that we must all be heroes. Another argues that even those who can’t be can contribute. I feel that we should all do as much as we can.

In the case of the proverbial “latte hero”, I’m not even sure what it’d mean to be a “real hero”. In the case of the Guinness Hero, there’s a historical backdrop. One could assume that the real heroes fought for their country and for (or against, were they not Nationalists) reunification with Ireland.

By: mj

mj — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 11:03:29 +0000

Yes. Yes, it is.

I’m sure lots of Guinness Heroes didn’t actually drink guinness.

By: Jesper

Jesper — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 10:59:00 +0000

I’ve opened up comments again. There was a decent reason to close them, but there’s no good reason to not have opened them again. Thanks for the push. (For the record, I don’t drink coffee and I don’t visit coffee houses, so stereotypes are just that – stereotypes.)

Is your point that we can’t feel outrage about anything unless it’s a lasting commitment, or unless we dedicate ourselves to solving the problem instead? And is it really so wise to start by supposing that everyone is equally useless on this front?