We need dreamers - La La Land - A Review

Went to watch La La Land (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_La_Land_(film)) with Christine. The movie the uses the term "La La Land" for two things. Firstly LA is short for Los Angeles and secondly we often say someone is is living in La La Land to say that he or she is a dreamer.
The two main characters of this film certainly seems like dreamers. On the one hand we have Seb the jazz musician who wants his own jazz club in the "classical" jazz style but he is way behind in his bills. On the other hand we have Mia who is an aspiring actor who keeps getting knocked back.

The movie starts in what seems like a boring traffic jam scene somewhere in LA the audience is left breathless when driver after driver came out of their cars to start singing and dancing in the middle of the traffic. The whole movie is very visual, Emma Stone (Mia) wears brightly colourful clothing and one can't help but remind us of famous musicals from the 50s like Gene Kelly dancing in the rain. We see Seb and Mir breaking doing their tap dancing moves!

One of these dancing scenes occurs when Seb takes Mia out on their first date which somehow ended in the LA Griffith Observatory. They dance round and round the Obervatory's Focault pendulum. From the Focault pendulum the couple ended up in the planetarium where the they started rising up into the sky and the starts  almost like Mary Poppins. Were we supposed to see this as another reminder that we are watching a pair of dreamers in love?

The theme song "City of Stars" talks more of dreaming but now we don't dream alone.

Sebastian's Verse: Ryan Gosling & Emma Stone]
City of stars
Are you shining just for me?
City of stars
There's so much that I can't seeWho knows?
I felt it from the first embrace I shared with you
That now our dreamsThey've finally come true
[Mia's Verse: Emma Or Ryan  Gosling]
City of stars 
Just one thing everybody wants
There in the bars
And through the smokescreen of the crowded restaurantsIt's loveYes,
 all we're looking for is love from someone else
A rush
A glance
A touch
A dance


Well you will need to go and watch it and see if you too is a dreamer!

Advocacy 2016

2016 must be one of the worst year in terms of world politics and democracy. IS (Islamic State) has been waging conventional and unconventional warfare against the West since 2014. To even call it the Islamic State is giving legitimacy that it doesn't deserve. Nevertheless we are now stuck with the label. We shouldn't be surprised that the political pendulum has swing to the right. Starting BREXIT, our own federal election and then the election of Trump as the incoming president of the world's most powerful country - the United States. Clearly a large number of people in the West believe that they only safe if they can regain what they feel is the status quote.

In January, I suggest that the only way to Peace in Iraq is for Sunnis and Shite to work together

In Feb of 2016 my response to Dennis Atkins article

A letter in March 2016 on ISIS

Just like clock work, we have Pauline Hanson rolling out the new (but not improved) One Nation. They gained 4 seats in the Australian Senate. Don't be fooled by the number. Australian senators are voted into the upper house through proportional representation. It is not as if there is a now majority of people wanting to vote them. You only need 14.3% of the state vote to be a senator. And thanks to Malcom Turnbull, we had a double dissolution election which mean all senate seats were up for grab and each senator only needs 7% and not 14% to get in.

On Saturday 19/11/2016, the Courier Mail in their Saturday colour magazine made a great deal about how One Nation is going to be threat to the major party in the next Queensland State election. Nothing like a bit controversy to sell newspaper. Here is what I wrote to the editor:

  

But we cannot just tell the truth about the Australian Politics in light what  I feel is the almost irrational move to make controversy leader. Apparently, One Nation supporters like way that Pauline Hanson say what they want to say but are too afraid to say because of political correctness. Political correctness and self censorship only exists because we are not willing to try to know the truth through better understanding. This is something that Auntie Jean (an Australian indigenous elder) tells me. 

You can understand why Australians are so upset, especially when one sense that our leaders care less (by the way that includes One Nation, see their infighting). Take for example, the numerous high rise that are being constructed in the inner suburb of Brisbane. Has any actually explain the LNP dominated Brisbane City Council (BCC) that Brisbane is not an Asian city and that the BBC don't have to do their bit choke us all to death! And so I wrote a letter to the Westside News. They are great because they combined my letter with others who have similar concern. Really the BCC really needs a kick up its backside.

Finally for the end of 2016, I am able to use the idea of Richard Gibson (the principle of Brisbane School of Theology) sermon in St Andrews. Richard basically argued that we can't stop baby Jesus from growing into Jesus the man. The really cool bit is that my letter got published (the edited version). Even cooler is the fact that Leahy seems to have taken on my theme about raining peace. Well I hope has (on the opposite page).

Leahy's cartoon can be seen here.

https://www.facebook.com/leahycartoons/photos/a.10150656674687688.390716.321732052687/10154182759747688/?type=1&theater

Section 18C, Free Speech and Judeo-Christian Heritage

Politicians clambering to water down section 18c of the racial discrimination act needs to understand that the right to free speech is not boundless. This is clearly seen in our parliamentary debates. The role of the parliamentary speaker is to ensure that members of parliament exercise their rights to free speech in a way that honours the parliament and all Australians for whom her members ultimately serve. In addition, the saying: “play the ball and not the man” is universally accepted to imply that free speech is never meant to be a free for all.

This short essay raises two questions: Can we exercise free speech without reference to history and our responsibilities to our fellow Australians? How should free speech be exercised in light of our Judeo-Christian heritage?

In the recent Queensland University of Technology (QUT) discrimination case: One of the student involved, Alex Wood, is supposed to have complained on Facebook that QUT (is) stopping segregation with segregation. Presumably Wood tried to say that the preferential treatment given to indigenous students is a form of discrimination against non-indigenous Australians. The three QUT students involved do not seem to understand that the general public actually practice “positive” decimation. Australian society’s treatment of disabled Australians is an example of positive discrimination. If these three students were to be denied access to a disable parking at QUT, would they still be complaining about discrimination? They would not because they would immediately recognise that disabled Australians are disadvantaged. Are these students, their legal representatives and the judge (judge Jarret) in the initial trial even aware of the plight of indigenous Australians? Are they not aware that indigenous Australians have a much lower life expectancy than the average Australians? Are these students not aware of Australia’s poor treatment of indigenous Australians? If they are then is it not reasonable to expect them to be careful in how they exercise their rights to free speech on Facebook? Is it not reasonable for them to have some empathy for indigenous Australians and therefore defer their rights to access QUT’s computers designated for people less fortunate than them? 

If these students, their legal representatives and judge Jarret are not aware of the plight of our indigenous Australians then should they not be? George Santayana said "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it”. It seems that Santayana is right; we are no longer telling the next generation about some of the unsavoury parts of our history? White washing our history does not help anyone. A functioning democracy requires citizens who not only are aware of their rights but who are also willing to excise their rights within the context of their responsibilities to their fellow Australians.

Freedom of speech and many rights that we now take for granted actually originated from the Magna Carta. Lord Denning described the Carta as the greatest constitutional document of all times. Moreover, he argued that it is the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot.  2015 was the 800th anniversary of the founding of the Magna Carta. In that year, Thomas Andrew of the Theos think tank wrote “The Church and the Charter: Christianity and the forgotten roots of the Magna Carta”. Andrew wrote: “without the support of the Church, and without the theological developments which provided the Magna Carta’s authors with their intellectual framework, it is doubtful whether 2015 would be remembered as the 800th anniversary  …” If the Magna Carta is so closely linked to our Judeo-Christian heritage then should we not exercise our rights to free speech that is consistent with the same heritage. The rights to free speech empower those under oppression to speak out against their oppressors. In the QUT discrimination case, it seems free speech has (perhaps by ignorance) become a tool to distort history and to perpetuate old racist attitude. How then are we exercising free speech in a way that is consistent to our Judeo-Christian heritage? Or in common vernacular, have those QUT students, their legal advisors and even Judge Jarret given Indigenous Australians a fair go?

Finally as we approach Christmas, we need to remember that Jesus was born in a manger and not a palace and did not grasp on to his rights as the Son of God but instead he gave away his privileges so as to server all mankind.