This rant is seemingly trivial, but by the end however, I hope to convince you that this is a symptom of a much much more insidious problem. Trolling the internet today looking for some dress shoes I liked (not easy in this day and age) I came across this… this… insanity… I can’t just explain it. You’ll have to see it you would never simply believe my words (though you really really should).

Um… I ah… KILL! KILL! KILL! KILL! Sorry I ah think I’m a bit calmer now. Ok folks lets start with the facts:

• Fact 1: The Spring-Summer Gucci “shoes” pictured here are what as known as Flip-flops or thongs by some.


• Fact 2: The flip-flops shown are not as I originally postulated based on price solid gold 24k braded wire straps set into a half-inch thick platinum sole topped with a space age cushioning technology.


• Fact 3: flip-flops of this style (i.e. cheap plastic strap set into a semi-rigid foam sole not) can be purchased for around $2 to $3.

These facts being stated I am forced to ask what kind of mindless fashion drone would pay at best $166 dollars more for a simple pair of flip-flops? It’s the butt ugly Gucci “G” pattern on them? Is a pattern that is made of a simple letter repeated endlessly silk screened in white on the part hidden by your foot worth $166 dollars (regular $327)? In a word, NO! I have nothing against the rich. They can spend money on anything they want. To overspend this much however for the cheapest of possible items… it’s the worst kind of snobbish superiority. To flaunt a huge yacht or gargantuan house is one thing. To flaunt the fact that you can waste money on something you could get for much less… is idiocy. The idea that this is “fashion” is even more preposterous than the “fashion” industry itself. The “fashion” industry is populated mostly by useless people who think that the most important thing in the world is the next stupid unwearable dress that will never make it to any shelves in any store anywhere. Why a person can be duped into seeing increased value in something that is either hideous or indistinguishable from a cheaper version because it has some designer’s or company’s name on it is beyond comprehension. AE for instance can sell a $3 t-shirt for $16 simply because it advertises the store that is selling it. Abercrombie & Fitch charges $29.50 for the same right to do their advertising for them. If you were wearing a shirt to support say AMD for example because you like their products that’s a different story. AMD’s product is not the advertising. AE, A&F, and Aeropostle are not so much clothing stores as they are advertising agencies that only advertise themselves. It’s a vicious cycle. A few years ago Sketchers was selling shoes solely based on the statement “It’s the ‘S’.” Nothing in the ads said anything about the shoe. Buyers were to simply get this footwear because there was an “S” on it. I don’t however blame these companies. A company that wants to stay in business can only sell what people will buy. The problem, therefore, is the people who buy this crap. Aye, there’s the rub. This is where this rant goes from trivial to vital in one quick logic jaunt. These empty mindless personality bankrupt drones are one of the reasons for the downfall of society. The mindset that makes you blindly follow popular trends and crazes is the same mindset that allows the politicians to convince you that rights are bad and that only the other party is trying to hold you down. This is the same mindset that buys into the fairytale that “the man” is holding minorities down. This is the same mindset that allows the populous to be herded behind a political cause like so many sheep. Blind patriotism is a result of this mindset. Racism is a result of this mindset. Religious intolerance is a result of this mindset. Originality, creativity, and free thought are the antidote. (more to come)
- posted by Jeffrey @ 03:03

 
I write this rant, admittedly, about a slightly less vital topic than political corruption or outright tyrannical conspiracy. To me however, it is still a matter of justice and vendetta. I speak today, dear readers, of King Kong. Not the classic vaunted 1933 classic, no. I speak of Peter Jackson’s 2005 daudle. Aside from that fact that it isn't an original idea, the man has OTHER responsibilities, namely THE HOBBIT. Ian Holm will be 74 next month and Ian McKellen is no spring chicken at 66. Time is running out. The oldest member of the King Kong cast that I could find will be 54 in October and he's not even a main character. Now I find out that Peter Jackass is suing New Line because he feels he's being cheated on the royalties from DVD sales. Hey Pete SUE THEM AFTER YOU MAKE THE HOBBIT! It's not like he's starving. I am calling to all the readers of this blog to boycott King Kong. If you HAVE to see it do it in a way the gives no money to O'le Petey Boy. You guys know what I'm talking about; You're all net-savvy individuals and you don't need me to spell out how to see a movie for free. Not only do I call for this boycott of King Kong alone but of every Peter Jackson film till he realizes his responsibilities and starts production of The Hobbit. I vow that the next Peter Jackson film I see will be The Hobbit or nothing at all.
- posted by Jeffrey @ 17:03