Welcome to Vancouver. If you haven’t left your rock shelter for the last little while, you’ll be surprised to hear that the Winter Olympics have descended on our fair city. This huge event that is occurring in my back yard has left a deep personal conflict inside me. And that conflict is this:

How does one support all that is great about the Olympic games (i.e. the spirit, the coming together of the world, the celebration of sport and the greatest athletes in the world) while at the same time oppose all that is terrible about the Olympic games (i.e. VANOC and their complete disregard for human rights, civil liberties, the homeless and disadvantaged, the indigenous nations of our country, not to mention the huge cost overruns that are already leading to cuts in health care, education, social services and the arts. And let’s not forget everyone’s favourite: corporate greed and control)? I’m not sure how to navigate these waters yet. Any ideas?

This feels a bit like supporting the troops but not the war…

If you haven’t read “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein, you probably should. Or at least get a Cole’s Notes version. Or at least watch enough youtube videos of her talking about the book to understand what it’s about (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG9CM_J00bw). In it, Ms. Klein (author/pundit/activist/babe/genius) talks about the concept of “Disaster Capitalism:” the conscious effort of big business and government to take advantage of the mass state of shock that a society finds themselves in after a disaster (i.e. Terrorist Attack, War, Natural Disaster, etc.). When such events occur, people are sent into a state of shock and are in turn, very disoriented, unsure, and of course, malleable. They don’t really know which way is up and they look for anyone to lead them, to tell them what’s happening and what they should do. Enter from stage right the descendants of Milton Friedman and the corporations and government agencies who are awaiting such a moment to implement policies and money making ideas that would never be accepted by the public under normal circumstances. Examples of this include post 9/11, the implementation of The Patriot Act, as well as the unlimited outsourcing of the “War On Terror” to Halliburton and Blackwater. And let’s not forget the auctioning off of beach property to big resort developers after the Tsunami in South-east Asia, or the elimination of public services in New Orleans after Katrina. I could go on, but it’s probably best you read the book.

Well, in my extensive research, I have discovered a different type of Disaster Capitalism. And it involves two of our favourite things: Celebrities and The Interweb. Whenever a celebrity takes a nose dive, there is a firestorm of web based entrepreneurship waiting to snap into action, and make a shitload of money off the impending personal collapse.

The obvious culprits are the press. Brad and Angelina are merely rumored to be on the rocks at the moment and they are on the cover of every tabloid magazine that you see flying off the grocery store shelves. When something disastrous actually does happens, like our friend Tiger and his proverbial wood, even the “reputable” magazines, like Vanity Fair, get in on the action.

But beyond the papers, lays an online ocean of capitalistic capitalizing on our fellow human being’s sufferings. You see, when a celebrity disaster hits, the public doesn’t know what to do. We are shocked! Everything we thought we knew and loved about this person is suddenly put into question. We need more information, and more importantly, we need more products to satiate our thirst for scandalous blood.

If you will indulge me for a moment… some examples:

Remember OJ? How can you not? Who saw that one coming? That trial created a whole new industry: OJ merchandise trading, not to mention a complete redefining of 24 hour news networks. You could watch CNN all day and not learn a single thing about the rest of the world. Memorabilia from that trial is still worth millions: http://www.cnbc.com/id/20872506

And let’s not forget Billy Clinton. That scandal single handedly reinvigorated the cigar industry: http://www.politicalgifts.com/monicacigars.html

Even minor press scandals like Rosie O’Donnell vs. Donald Trump can garner an entrepreneurial fiesta: http://www.cafepress.com/+trump_odonnell_2008_womens_dark_tshirt,105300252

But the cherry on top of the crumbling celebrity sundae is Tiger Woods. This was as big a fall from grace as we’ve scene in years. And my favourite product to be released in the wake of this story is by far the “Tail of the Tiger Golf Balls”: http://www.tailofthetiger.com/index.html

But to be honest, I’m really not sure how to feel about all these celebrity disaster based products that I have just ordered online to be delivered to my home in 4-6 business days. I figure either all these online entrepreneurs are greedy, power hungry, manipulative disaster capitalists, or all those politicians and CEOs are just clever business people with quirky ideas. I’m not sure which is true… yet.

1. Crying

There’s a very distinct difference between the crying of an adult and that of a child. You never see a grown person wailing their lungs out after they’ve soiled themselves. And if you do, you agree that they should promptly be heavily medicated. And you never see an infant quietly sobbing to himself, tears quietly rolling down his cheek, with his shoulders bouncing. I think that’s one of the first transitions in the life of the human being: when you stop crying loudly and start crying quietly.

2. Movie Ratings

Overall the movie rating system makes sense to me. You have your G: good for everyone. PG: maybe a couple swear words. PG-13: a little bit more raw, perhaps some heavy petting. Then we have this 14A, which used to be called M: someone’s definitely getting shot and you might even see a boob. Then there’s the coveted R spot (or 18A? Is that the same thing?): this one’s strictly for adults, but only because people are getting slaughtered and using the F word a lot, not to mention the likely full scale nudity (which is apparently as damaging to a young mind as the image of mass scale human death and suffering). And then there is the oft internet searched X rating: we all know what this is about. And then this is where the wheels come off the cart for me. We go directly from X to Triple X. What’s with that? Is there no Double X? I have never in my entire life ever heard of a movie being rated Double X. Is that fair? I’m sure there are some people out there who watch an X rated movie and think, “Egh, it’s okay, but it’s a little tame for me,” who then go try out the Triple X and are repulsed. Where do these people go? At the moment, nowhere. Is there no in between? Have we as a society not yet acknowledged that the truth so often lay somewhere in the middle? I’m just saying, let’s be reasonable. Let’s add another category. Double X. Not that I have ever seen any films like that, nor do I have any interest in seeing them in the future. It’s just the principal of the thing. Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to get back to my “Girls Gone Wild” marathon.