iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

Nearly doing something regrettable (being rude to a foreign dignitary when you're the president, hitting a pedestrian), but averting disaster at the last second, is pretty much the opposite of actually doing something regrettable, then... well, regretting it

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

After insulting your erstwhile compatriots, it came as a shock to you that some of them were less than sycophantic in response? My one-word response: diddums

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

Lying, in other words. The only media outlets that meet that description are shoestring publications read by, to a first approximation, nobody, which any reasonable person instinctively avoids anyway. And every ethnic group has one or two, so in a sense they cancel out

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 27/09/2026

There is a world of difference between using a pejorative word, and committing murder. Nobody forswears insults—literally nobody. To really commit to that bit, one would have to make no value judgements whatever about anyone; and even insane people are not THAT insane

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

You could argue that Sheeran was naïve if he thought he could sit out the fight as a noncombatants, and have this choice respected by the woke mob. But forgivable. That he didn't realise just how vicious the free-Palestine crowd does make him naïve, but it doesn't make him a fool.

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

If he'd announced his brother had a boat for sale and advised people of how to go about buying it, he might have been saying entirely true things, but on stage in front of a captive audience is not the time or place to advertise—either your brother's business, or your own political leanings.

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

And your argument "He had ever right because what he said is right" may sound well on a fortune cookie, but it's piffle. Even if we accept his views on Palestine are not infantile nonsense (and they are) their being true does not give him the right to say it whenever, wherever.

110

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 25/09/2026

Comprehension is not your strong suit. I'm not saying he did OR DIDN'T break a legal contract; but he certainly broke an implicit pact with the audience: to entertain and enhance their experience; not use the stage as a soapbox. It wasn't his show.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 24/09/2026

Ah, there it is. The old "You're upset" chestnut. The most squalid, below-the-belt rhetorical trick in a sophist's repertoire. I'm not upset: merely right. And even if I were a quivering blob, my emotional state is not the issue. Sheeran is blameless: this is true however either of us feel

101

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 24/09/2026

I don't know the legal fine print, but I know that his job was to entertain, not lecture or broadcast his politics. Hopefully the contract reflects this. If it doesn't, it should. Not denying his right to free speech; just his right to hijack the event.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

I note you haven't addressed, or even tried to address, the point I raised: if Macklemore has the right to hijack the stage, why don't the sound technicians have the same right? At any time they could cut the performers' feed to broadcast THEIR politics. But we all know they shouldn't

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

If Macklemore accepts a contract to be a support act for fifteen minutes, then during those fifteen minutes he does NOT have the right to do or say whatever he pleases. Once he's off the stage and no longer paid for his time he can do and say what he likes, just as I can now.

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

It's not the message per se I'm denying Macklemore's right to broadcast. I'm denying is right to hijack a stage to broadcast it. If you're a paid entertainer, do what you're paid to do and entertain. Then when your job is done you can post your "Free Palestine" nonsense on Facebook or wherever

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Yes, language evolves over time. "Woke" was coined by people who didn't intend the word to have negative connotations. But it acquired such connotations nonetheless—and deserved them, largely because the people who coined the terms were precisely the clueless ratbags the term now denotes

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

But when he's contracted to be a musical support act, and accepted payment for so doing, he should stick to doing that—until he clocks off. And I'm sure that's the kind of thing you'd be saying if a sound technician had cut Macklemore's mike feed to broadcast a contrary message

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

Does this violate anyone's right to free speech? Why, no, of course not. Like any other citizen, Macklemore can log into Twitter or publish a blog and broadcast whatever idiotic opinions he likes—on his own time, and on his own dime...

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

You're right that music MIGHT be used to express pretty much anything. But Macklemore, who really should have mackled much less, wasn't doing this. He was hijacking the stage to deliver an uninvited speech. If a sound technician had done this, he'd rightly have been fired...

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 23/09/2026

"Woke" describes a real character type, the same way that analogous terms like beatnik, hippie, yuppie, bogan, etc. do. These terms have pejorative or favourable connotations; these connotations may be accepted or rejected; but either way, the terms are meaningful.

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

Also, your jibe "using 'woke' shows you don't understand what the term means" strikes me as a catch-22 if ever there was one. The only people who can legitimately use that word, by your argument, are people who don't use it.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

Someone else's stage show is not the place to broadcast your political opinions (which of course the broadcaster will always frame as "expressing support for people who need help" or some such baloney).

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

His only mistake was to offer any kind of concession to the woke mob. That's never a good idea, unless you're happy to sacrifice your self-respect completely, and usually not even then. But perhaps he overestimated his enemies' humanity. (It's certainly hard to underestimate)

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 22/09/2026

He could have done all that, but why should he have to? He's an entertainer and he tried to go on with the show, while weaselly little shits like Macklemore tried to hijack the enterprise to broadcast their squalid political opinions. Sheeran is the decent chap here—and almost the only one.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

For those who DO want to go to Uluru, I think it's a pity their options are diminished; but for the people in this thread, at least, the pleasure they get from sanctimonious priggery is probably ample compensation.

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

Everyone including me, actually. I'm not forswearing holidays altogether; merely going other places instead, where I have a greater likelihood of having a good time...

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

The Anangu have not contacted me personally and told me I'm not welcome on their property; but if they did, I would certainly concede their right to do so. Not that they need worry. $500 each way for the flight, and I'm not even allowed to walk up the rock? No chance

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

Have I heard Rhea's analogy about climbing churches before? Sure I have. Yet for all that, when people who have never had to justify the Uluru climb ban before, because they surround themselves with people who know not to question it, I find I do get novel—if equally weak—arguments now and then

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

The absurd rationalisation you offer for the Anangu's arbitrary rule cannot possibly fool anyone with the slightest experience of the natural world, or human behaviour, who gives the matter even a minute's thought.

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

By that argument no humans should ever be allowed into a wilderness, more than say ten minutes' sprint from the nearest toilet. Yet you're currently allowed to walk AROUND the rock, where all the actual ecology is; just not ON the rock, where absolutely nothing lives.

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

And that closing line, "Closing the climb is not something to feel upset about but a cause for celebration": what fatuous twaddle. Of course that's what you'd say if you're getting what you want—even if what you want is to prevent other people from doing what THEY want.

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

You're not telling me anything I don't already know. I recognise Uluru is a private estate, and its owners have as much right to forbid rock climbing as the owners of Disneyland have to forbid visitors from wearing shoes. And visitors have the right to point out these rules are idiotic.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/09/2026

You can climb onto the roof of Milan Cathedral: the idea is not inherently ridiculous. Besides, this is not a fragile church steeple; it's a ROCK. Of all the places you could possibly walk, this solid ROCK is probably the one least possible to damage merely by walking on it.

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 15/09/2026

I struggle to see that as progress: a harmless outdoor recreational activity is now prohibited for everyone, at the behest of a stick-in-the-mud minority. If "reconciliation" is about amicable feelings, it seems unlikely this will bring it about

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 29/08/2026

Peanuts are delicious, nutritious food. Rarely is anything at once so popular and so healthy. They won't be banished from the wider world, and banning them from schools is so ludicrously stupid I can scarcely bring my to I believe it's happening...

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 22/08/2026

Give it a rest. Did Trump behave with poor grace when he lost the 2020 election? Of course. But "inciting a coup"? Please. I don't know if the people repeating that line have done so so often they've actually started to believe it, rather than merely pretending to. I hope not.

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 18/08/2026

I mean, really! Who, in their right mind, could look at the United Kingdom at the present moment and say: "You know, the one thing this country really needs, is less freedom of speech"

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 18/08/2026

Jason Arday really was a piece of work, wasn't he. A bullying charlatan while he was alive, he also managed to make the world a worse place by dying. His taking the coward's way out had the awful effect of turning this back into a woe-is-me narrative, and incited demands for more censorship.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

Anyway, if you're inclined to attribute the fall of every sparrow to capitalism™, it should be noted that life is currently long, and starvation rare, by historical standards. I'm not inclined to credit capitalism™ for this; I have no use for the concept at all, to be honest. But perhaps you should

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

"Systems theory shows that systems produce exactly what they’re designed to produce" That may be self-referentially true: "systems theory", a charlatan's subject if ever there was one, produces fortune-cookie deepities like that; and who knows, maybe it was designed to.

300

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

You can't, in one breath, define "capitalism" to refer to something invented 400 years ago, and in the next, blame it for things that have been around since the dawn of time

110

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

Can rich people cut better deals for themselves—by hiring better lawyers, buying influence, etc.? Of course, to some extent; but has been so since before the invention of money—since before the evolution of hominids, even.

110

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

There are laws applying to investors that don't apply to non-investors; that's certainly true. But then, there are laws applying to cyclists that don't apply to non-cyclists. So what?

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

Investors get whatever terms the people they invest in agree to give them, and by so doing they can lose as well as gain money. Maybe you're fine with this, maybe you object in principle for some cockamamie reason, but either way that claim in your final sentence is nonsense.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

I can see a distinction, certainly. And maybe it can be made usefully precise. But I don't those people who attribute all the evils of the world, or some bizarre specific one, to capitalism™, surely can't have anything so clear in mind.

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

To be fair to you, almost no one declaring themselves to be "against capitalism" has a good reason, or even a coherent meaning in mind. It serves the same social function as declaring oneself to be "against the bogeyman"

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

The government can always deny scientific consensus. Anyone can, under any economic or political system whatever; even science institutions (which indeed sometimes do). If that's your reason for being "against capitalism" it's a silly one

200

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

I don't remember this ever happening and I'm sceptical it ever did. Do you have a link to any verifiable instance?

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

Don't play coy. You know damn well such policies exist, whether or you know which ones I happen to have in mind. More Muslim voters means more pressure towards regressive policies. Of course, the rest of us ought to resist; but if we don't, surely SOME blame goes to those applying that pressure

000

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

With or without migrants, money is not the limiting factor, so more of it won't help. And even granted your armchair theorising is flawless, there is a time lag. The immediate effect of more bodies is more pressure on the housing stock—the actual observed effect, out there in reality

010

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 09/08/2026

In some cases migrants are partly to blame for poor policy: for instance, policies appeasing Islam, are surely partly the fault of Islamic immigrants. But only partly. Even here I don't think anyone would be inclined to let the non-Islamic appeasers off the hook

100

Henry Fitzgerald @henryfitzgerald.bsky.social · 09/08/2026

Whether migrants are in part "to blame" for poor policy depends on the issue. I don't think anyone thinks migrants are to blame for poor border policy: in that case the causal arrow always points the other way, and everyone knows this.

100