Verdejost on Tue, 15 Feb 2000 08:44:23 +0100


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Syndicate: Haider's minority and being left out


Peter wrote:

<< 
 Haider's party got abou 27 % of 85 % of the eligible voters. Which means
 that less than 23 % of the eligible voters put their  votes for his party.
  >>

And to place this in perspective, in recent US Presidential elections, where 
usually slightly less than half the eligible voters bother to vote (most 
commentators fail to acknowledge that not voting is perhaps a negative 
commentary on all the candidates, the process or....), the winner (usually 
announced as "by a landslide" should they nudge the other party out by 2% or 
so) usually has the actual consent of 25% or often far less of the actual 
electorate.  And then this person goes out to "represent" the whole populace, 
75% of which didn't choose them....  Democracy in action!!

Saman wrote, re left and right:
<< << Isn't the left/right political thing a holdover from the French 
Assembly?
 One voting block sat on one side of the house, the other on the other side
 of the house (post
 revolution as I seem to recall?) >>

I think this is one of the explanatory stories, though then one would like to 
know how it was decided whom would sit on the right and whom on the left - 
did they flip a coin?  Or did some linguistic smart-thinker decide?

In english left doesn't have such nasty undertones, but it does have a 
decidedly left out aura:  one is left out, left behind, there are left-overs, 
and I think (I might remember incorrectly) being consigned to playing left 
field in baseball is kind of low on totem pole of places to play (a good 
hitter/bad fielder might be placed there - but I might have it reversed since 
most batters are right handed and they hit, I think, normally to, from their 
point of view, into center and left field?).

And Trevor in Amsterdam wrote:

<<  Do you think your radical (as in root) attempt to turn radishes into 
beetroots
has anything to do with a background in a more formal medium such as film? >>

Maybe.  re your commentary on web art I can't say I've seen any so far that 
I'd actually call "art" not that I have looked that hard, but the looking so 
far (on tips from friends, etc.) hasn't prompted much desire to look for 
more.  I will be at ZKM starting end of March and will make it my duty, like 
it or not, to surf a bit and see if I can find something of interest.  And 
maybe toss some in the stew myself.  I have been rendering away on computer 
some things that I think might work nicely in the format(s) available.  I saw 
something that got in Whitney Biennale which was a OuiJa Board with sort of 
Hallmark Card graphics and you could push something around on it.  And 
apparently you do so with others on the net.  Very thrilling. (?!) Can't 
believe such twaddle could get in a so-called majar arts exhib like the 
Whitney thing, but I guess that's how low the arts world has fallen.  I saw 
the recent Venice Biennale and it was truly dreadful, a rather terrible 
sign-off for the century. 

<< I guess Amsterdam is a bit too far to deliver with your Vespa! >>

Well maybe we could works something out, and exchange of pizza for legal 
commodities in the Netherlands considered no no's here.   

Best all,

jon
roma
------Syndicate mailinglist--------------------
 Syndicate network for media culture and media art
 information and archive: http://www.v2.nl/syndicate
 to unsubscribe, write to <syndicate-request@aec.at>
 in the body of the msg: unsubscribe your@email.adress