Nous sommes tristes

ligne copy

We at The Inconsequential have a continuing attitude of support for any legitimate, reasonable and intelligent dissenting voice that aims to hold the powerful up to scrutiny and question, in an age of narrow, coercive, manipulative and stealthy censorship, globally. We admire those who dare to speak, think and act against destructive powers that seek to extinguish legitimate dissenting voices.

Material intended for publication in The Inconsequential has to meet our shared criteria for inoffensive, non-confrontational, but critiquing satirical commentary of how power works to the detriment of greater and more sophisticated debate about how our societies are organised and the gross inequalities therein.

In addition to these guidelines, we have a policy of not giving publicity, even bad publicity, to any “celebrity,” politician or headlining group whose sole purpose is self-aggrandisement.  Their egos are massaged and their inflated social worth is sufficiently served in the gossip magazines and so-called serious media.  We DO believe in ridiculing and exposing these people, but through allusion, so as to avoid becoming part of their PR machines that create inequalities in terms of free speech and freedom of expression and influence in societies. By using such as inference and allusion we are keeping free of mere personal attack on public figures that might be easy and not seriously influential targets.

We badger at the philosophical, moral and ethical bases of human behaviour that form, or at least should form, eternal questions in our struggle for authentic freedoms that are protected by rational, fair and intelligently necessary laws and responsible restraints on anti-social and murderous reaction to such free expression of views; but if the caption fits! Expression through violence and murder should be dealt with through existing law that should intend to prohibit and prosecute such destructive and unsophisticated reactionary behaviour in contradiction to tolerant and authentic diversity in societies.

Without proper critique and discussion of the fundamental issues raised by this recent atrocity, we run the risk of self-serving pseudo compassion that inadvertently furthers the cause of the promotion of credibility by default for political power. Political power that doesn’t truly believe in free speech or freedom of thought and expression, and which only provides us with unhelpful lynch-mob equipment rather than the intellectual means of understanding how to organise our societies on the principles of freedoms being mourned.

In our loosely-collected-together grief, all the more ripe for manipulation in its sincerity in the hearts and minds of significant swathes of any national populace, we need to remain vigilant. We need to see through our tears and continue to recognise, and call to account through philosophical consistency, analogous but more covert acts of destruction.  Those creeping and insidious infringements of our freedoms of speech, thought and expression being perpetrated by some of those now condemning the inexcusable murders in Paris.  Such public political figures are now gaining credibility by default regarding such freedoms.  Our reaction to this latest atrocity should be informed by knowing that some who are irrationally intolerant use overt weaponry-based means and some who are apparently rationally intolerant use the legislative powers at their disposal to infringe on, restrict and eradicate true dissenting voices.

Yes, we mourn the loss of legitimate championing of freedoms by courageous individuals but we should not let the political powerbrokers gain principles by headlining association with such activities that they condemn on a daily basis in their legislation and ideological attitude.

This constitutes the attitude of all connected with The Inconsequential to freedom of thought, speech and expression.

We at The Inconsequential have a continuing attitude of support for any legitimate, reasonable and intelligent dissenting voice that aims to hold the powerful up to scrutiny and question, in an age of narrow, coercive, manipulative and stealthy censorship, globally. We admire those who dare to speak, think and act against destructive powers that seek to extinguish legitimate dissenting voices.

Material intended for publication in The Inconsequential has to meet our shared criteria for inoffensive, non-confrontational, but critiquing satirical commentary of how power works to the detriment of greater and more sophisticated debate about how our societies are organised and the gross inequalities therein.

In addition to these guidelines, we have a policy of not giving publicity, even bad publicity, to any “celebrity,” politician or headlining group whose sole purpose is self-aggrandisement.  Their egos are massaged and their inflated social worth is sufficiently served in the gossip magazines and so-called serious media.  We DO believe in ridiculing and exposing these people, but through allusion, so as to avoid becoming part of their PR machines that create inequalities in terms of free speech and freedom of expression and influence in societies. By using such as inference and allusion we are keeping free of mere personal attack on public figures that might be easy and not seriously influential targets.

We badger at the philosophical, moral and ethical bases of human behaviour that form, or at least should form, eternal questions in our struggle for authentic freedoms that are protected by rational, fair and intelligently necessary laws and responsible restraints on anti-social and murderous reaction to such free expression of views; but if the caption fits! Expression through violence and murder should be dealt with through existing law that should intend to prohibit and prosecute such destructive and unsophisticated reactionary behaviour in contradiction to tolerant and authentic diversity in societies.

Without proper critique and discussion of the fundamental issues raised by this recent atrocity, we run the risk of self-serving pseudo compassion that inadvertently furthers the cause of the promotion of credibility by default for political power. Political power that doesn’t truly believe in free speech or freedom of thought and expression, and which only provides us with unhelpful lynch-mob equipment rather than the intellectual means of understanding how to organise our societies on the principles of freedoms being mourned.

In our loosely-collected-together grief, all the more ripe for manipulation in its sincerity in the hearts and minds of significant swathes of any national populace, we need to remain vigilant. We need to see through our tears and continue to recognise, and call to account through philosophical consistency, analogous but more covert acts of destruction.  Those creeping and insidious infringements of our freedoms of speech, thought and expression being perpetrated by some of those now condemning the inexcusable murders in Paris.  Such public political figures are now gaining credibility by default regarding such freedoms.  Our reaction to this latest atrocity should be informed by knowing that some who are irrationally intolerant use overt weaponry-based means and some who are apparently rationally intolerant use the legislative powers at their disposal to infringe on, restrict and eradicate true dissenting voices.

Yes, we mourn the loss of legitimate championing of freedoms by courageous individuals but we should not let the political powerbrokers gain principles by headlining association with such activities that they condemn on a daily basis in their legislation and ideological attitude.

This constitutes the attitude of all connected with The Inconsequential to freedom of thought, speech and expression.