Proletariat Blogging in the Heart of (UK) Predatory Capitalism! Exploring the Interface between Matter and Perception, Chinese Buddhism, Daoism, Hakka Ethnography, and All Aspects of Radical Politics, History, Psychology and Philosophy – 全世界无产者联合起来!
A child reads a book at a sinkhole-turned library in Wuyuan County, east China’s Jiangxi Province on Aug. 26, 2026. A special sinkhole-turned library opened to the public recently in Wuyuan County of east China’s Jiangxi Province. It incorporates a natural sinkhole and surrounding rock walls into its architecture. The library features a carved spiral staircase and warm lighting, offering visitors a distinctive reading experience. (Xinhua/Hu Chenhuan)
Writers are very good at being both “honest” and “dishonest” in equal measure. No genuine writer will disagree with me – but will instead knowingly puff on their pipe whilst inspecting a duck – or something similar (the mundane is lifted-up by a competent writer). Am I being too harsh on Mr Teems – of course. Yes – I am – and for good class-related reasons. The bourgeois already possess control over the means of production – what more do they want? We are left a) with our “words”, and b) the use of those “words”. My words must penetrate straight through the ideological heart of the matter and I feel that the author’s use of Soviet-era exiles is indicative of his world-view and political bias. And even if it is not – it might as well be.
Let’s face, a “robot” is basically a car manifesting its fast manoeuvrability via “two-legs” – instead of wheels. A standard car, depending upon the skill of the driver, should be able to easily beat the fastest of humans. A human-body lacks the mechanical ability to accelerate from 0-60mph in five-seconds – on the grounds that it has not been an evolutionary necessity. The idea that an artificial machine, just because it has been given the moulded externality of a “human-shaped body” – does not mean it has any genuine relationship (or connection) to a “biologically-functioning” human-body. What is the difference between a “robot” and a “drone”? Answer – the ability to “flight”. And that’s about it. What’s next – parachuting? Rock-climbing? Diving? It is an interesting gimmick and I suspect the CPC might be using ths technology to intimidate the US by proxy – as these “funny little fellows” might be used as expendable infantry soldiers in a future war of self-defence against US aggression.
Thank you for your very interesting email. Years ago, when I was involved with formal academia (frequenting colleges and universities) the function of “amanuensis” was fairly common. I am not sure if this is the case today – as I am engaged in a broad post-doctorate study that involves researching in (and from) various sources of data. Generally, this is termed “field work”, etc, and can involve much travelling – but with the advent of the internet means that “without going out of my room – I can know all things” – to quote the Book of Change. I often find that examining the Chinese-language equivalent of Western words can give an important insght into the historical meaning of these terms.
I have added the single comment this article has a) attracted, and/or b) been filtered-out and included by the paper (who knows?). Although the readership does not possess all the details that the Tribunal considered – The Sutton Guardian thinks it is reasonable to include a comment from an obvious right-wing troll. Presumably the “presence” of a disabled child would be considered “disruptive” (regardless of disability or behaviour) – or perhaps the a “wheelchair” would be considered “disruptive” because able-bodied students have to “make adjustments” by walking around it? Or, the school needs to “ensure” that the alleyways and corridors are “wide-enough”? The far-right speculation is endless and it is interesting that Sutton Guardian feels the need to share it with the general readership.
For the Hindu – who worships a pantheon of gods – this process also involves painful and/or selfless acts (similar to the self-flagellation found within Medieval Christianity). Whilst a Buddhist, for a time, might feel pain whilst deliberately “not doing something” they are used to doing (like an addict giving-up the desired object) – the Hindu will quite often willingly “invite” pain and suffering into their mind and body as a means to “purify” the senses, remove the obscuring karma, and clearly perceive the deity in question. At the temple below, this process involves squeezing through a narrow stone passage. This indicates that “Dharma” (the spiritual path of self-purification) – is both “narrow” and “restrictive” – which is true. However, the path of Dharma tends to indicate that behaviour during everyday life is controlled and restricted as regards “choices”. This stone passage seems to be a metaphor in concrete terms – teaching the adherent that everyday freedom must be “restricted” (the stone tunnel) – if ultimate freedom is to be achieved – (emerging from the narrow tunnel). Ironically, the adherent often imerges from the tunnel just as deluded as when they went in. Herein lies why the Buddha propagated the message he did.
