As the line goes 'one person's terrorist is another's freedom fighter'- an idea that expresses how perceptions of terrorism depend entirely on the eyes of the bomb-holder. 

As Koran-gate in the US escalates to fever pitch, two equally stupid sides face each other and the line gains particular relevance.

The Farenheit 451 recreationists are going to burn Korans to protest against Islam and Islamic radicals are going to react by a or some mysterious acts of violence.

Not to sound too utopian, but can the Koran burners and people exploders- for a second at least- look at one another and see that their views aren't really representative of the society that each party hates?

And can't they just- after their moment of revelation- go into a room and kill each other so the rest of us can live in peace?

In comparison to other passages from Joseph Heller's Catch-22 it isn't often quoted, but it should be.

The haunting and beautifully simple piece reads:

'Man was matter, that was Snowden's secret. Drop him out a window and he'll fall. Set fire to him and he'll burn. Bury him and he'll rot, like other kinds of garbage. The spirit gone, man is garbage. That was Snowden's secret. Ripeness was all'.

The passage takes place after the protagonist Yossarian watches young Snowden die in the back of his plane. The event is repeatedly told throughout the novel always teasing at this great revelation that Yossarian had experienced- the revelation that 'man was matter'.

Not special, not a product of a breath of divinity but matter like everything else. 

After being in a potentially fatal car accident last week this line has been constantly coming back to me. I remember waking up just after the accident in a hospital with a doctor telling me I was having a cat-scan to check if I had brain damage.

Man was matter, and the centre of man (the mind) was also matter. We might generally conceive of the mind as somehow separate to the body- a floating you that is intangible and neverending, but in one fell swoop it can be brought back to what it really is: a fragile and spongy bit of tissue that can be destroyed in the stupidest and swiftest of seconds.

Like cheese, wine and surrendering, France is famous for it's protests; yesterday though they misfired when they stood against changes to the state's pension law.

With the world's demography dramatically widening at the older end of the spectrum there will have to be vast changes to how we think about welfare, work, and tax the world over- the French though are sticklers for tradition and retiring at 60 is a tradition they want to keep.

Too bad frankly. 

Rising the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62 years old will save the country 70bn euros.  

So for all the old people who have managed to manipulate a keyboard, don't pretend you're not (or won't be) a burden to the rest of us.

Shut up, get back to work and blame your parents for creating your booming generation which should be going out like a whimper- allowing the rest of us to mop up after you.

Ask any kid what they'd do if they were Prime-Minister and the most likely response you'll get is that they would spend more money in areas like education, health, transport etc.

Somehow in the passage of time between playground and politician this wisdom of needing to spend is lost and all sorts of excuses are made not to invest in infrastructure.

To me it should be called inferred-structure; it's inferred (or it should be) that a state needs efficient, sustainable, and easily-accesible public infrastructure to suceed.

Apparently parts of Australia's clunking public transport infrastructure seem to have missed what should be common knowledge and the virus of ignoring inferred-structure also seems to be plaguing vast quantities of the world- including the rust belts of the UK and the US.

But possibly for no longer.

Barack Obama in what could be a defining point of his Presidency has announced a 6 year plan to invest in America's infrastructure to make it world class again.

Rail, roads, runways- the country will get moving again.

A lesson for the rest of the world that should be inferred but might need to be enforced if it isn't learnt quickly.

Obama 'ends' the Iraq war while body bags continue to pile up, Tony Blair weeps for the dead but refuses to apologise, Australians continue to fight in Afghanistan to secure a shaky government while Australia's shaky government fights for relevance.
 
With even our most inspirational politicians failing us, what is the point in having the audacity to hope?

Can we still be stupid enough to believe our problems will be magically solved for us?

And with the world stagnating in war, environmental collapse and economic inequalty has there ever been a better time for anarchy?
 

Sitting in social circles from hostel to hostel, I have met forceful disagreement with my criticisms of the oppressive nature of India's cast system and their large Islamic community. The smug, "oh, you just don't get it" attitude you receive for owning such opinions is both condescending and misguided.

This is an enraging example of the pseudo, naive belief that this "exotic"society is unintelligible to (most of) us westerners. In this beautiful, richly diverse and all round fun country where, by the same token, you will be greeted by zero empathy of female lib, homosexual equality or my own personal faithlessness, I wish that travelers would not deny their education and morals on arrival. Is it not possible to balance both romance and a sense of rationality?