How to Be a Post-Modern Humanitarian… for Dummies.

There’s always been this key aspect of the whole “being a humanitarian” thing that seemed to stop many people getting on board the “humani-train” if I may.  The key problem’s always been to do with the fact that you can’t simply pick and choose when you want to be a humanitarian.  It’s not like a gym membership, which draws money from your account automatically each week and then you just decide when you want to appear to be a health-conscious human being in front of your friends so you go hit your once-monthly yoga class.  Nor is it like private health cover you can choose to suspend for a while when you feel like living dangerously.  For many though, that’s always been kind of the cool thing about being a humanitarian, it’s pretty much saying that you’re signing-up for compulsory compassion.  Basically that’s the low tolerance of douche-baggery and high-standard of decency that it demands.  It’s kind of a lifelong vow you take of not being a total wanker.  Kind of a bit too rigid though, right!?

So following on from that, and in the rich tradition of vegetarians who justify to themselves and others that it’s okay for them to hold that title while still regularly eating a Filet-O-Fish from McDonald’s, so to has evolved what I’ve come to call (and should it generate royalties, trademark) “The Post-Modern Humanitarian.”  It’s not an easy process of evolution and Darwin (both Charles and the Australian town) would be impressed at the sight of the evolutionary chart.  The post-modern humanitarian is a complex beast, who in a more local context until yesterday had no issue with supporting the destruction of its neighbour’s home but will today scold anyone not offering accommodation to said neighbour when they're left homeless.  It’s important to note that I must refer to the post-modern humanitarian as “it” and “they” because the post-modern humanitarian also becomes easily aggravated when a gender is assumed.  So without further ado, here’s a step-by-step guide on how one can take steps towards joining this elite club of elitists.

I don't think it's too early to start building the "best-seller" hype around my new book.

Well the first step involves accepting that transition into the life of a post-modern humanitarian is a difficult one.  Sure it makes it easier that post-modern humanitarianism is to classic humanitarianism what the “bro code” is to your classic codes of ethics.  The post-modern humanitarian has to preach peace, love and tolerance like it’s Woodstock ‘69 after most of their previous geopolitical philosophy has been based around every “boys’ trip” in history.  A philosophy based on the credo (and this needs to be read in the voice of a drunk American frat member) “hey bro, what happens in Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc, stays in Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, etc!”  It’s a particularly big transition for my Australian readers because burying one’s head in the sand is a massive of part of Aussie culture.  So much so that we have an emu representing half of our coat of arms.

The next important step is to make sure you’re easily offended.  To use a sporting metaphor, here’s the "game plan"; the best offense is finding everything offensive to the point where you make everyone else defensive.  That means taking every opposing viewpoint to heart.  It may also require regularly changing all of your profile pictures on social media and though you may feel super emotional about any given issue, don’t let your lack of fundamental understanding of the issue stop you from writing about it.  Sure, you can’t put together a well-constructed article based on research and examination, but a solid Facebook post or tweet will suit you perfectly.  Then you can tell people “hey, it wasn’t my lack of understanding that kept me from writing more, it was the 140 character limit!”  Also, not essential, but it’s going to really help if you hold deep anti-Russian sentiments.  Not necessarily based on anything, maybe you just watched one too many 'Bond' films or tripped on a babushka doll when you were a child.

If these guys are in are in 'The Hangover 4' then you know we're all getting a part as extras in 'World War 3'.

Cool fringe benefit by the way; you’re going to find that you get through a lot more of your newspaper than ever before because you’re going to save yourself a bundle of time by only reading the headlines rather than all that pesky body text.  Ignore that body text like you do that one friend’s annoying child.  Oh and for the "millennials" out there, a “newspaper” is basically a printed out version of the Ninemsn website that is either thrown at your home daily by a child for pocket money or sold to you at a “newsagency” by a middle-aged man/woman who appears to still live with their parents and dreads the idea of selling you a winning scratchie ticket.

Next, I want you to find the section in your vocabulary where the phrase “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me” is listed and I want you to scribble it out til it looks like a declassified FBI document.  You need to get to the point where harsh words affect you so much that you have no issue with a government that uses deadly weapons and chemicals abroad but the sight and sound of particular adjectives and exclamation points cuts you to your core.  There’s no room for thick skin here, just thick heads.

If I could, I would make memes of Kermit to explain everything.

Once you get to this point, you’ll know you’re joining the proud history of people whose protests got the name of candy cigarettes changed to ‘Fads’ with just the exchange of a single consonant, the people who protested the book “To Kill a Mockingbird” before reading it thinking it was a how-to guide for shooting anything with wings, or even the people who got worked up over the prejudicial and stereotypical headline of the film “White Men Can’t Jump” before even watching the film and finding out in the end, hey, we actually can!  Albeit at the right moment and with the right pass from Wesley Snipes.

At this point you’re probably asking yourself, “but why are so many people choosing to become post-modern humanitarians?”  Well firstly – stop talking to yourself because it’s weird and secondly, it’s pretty simple; much like wet-look gel, cargo pants and the films of Mike Myers before it, it’s something that's really quite a popular choice.  And it’s easy to see why.  Unlike the classic challenges faced by humanitarians, post-modern humanitarianism really involves more “getting worked-up” than actually “getting up and getting to work”, so it’s more “keyboard warrior” than “rainbow warrior”.  Now that’s a pretty great sales pitch to a society made-up mainly of people who love to feel like they’re doing things more than they like actually doing things.  It’s why people post short life quotes from books they’ll never read about lives they don’t live.  It’s why Instagram has filters that literally only serve the purpose of making things look better than they actually are… and sometimes just more orange than they really are.  It’s why certain people on our Facebook friend lists are still somehow fat despite 12 months of incessant gym snaps, selfies and check-ins.

Not all heroes wear capes.  Some use keyboards.

The vibe I’m going for is along the lines of how I listened to my neighbour for 20 minutes while washing the car telling me that borders need to be opened to all refugees.  Which is great, however this is the same woman that I’ve seen threaten Mormons and salespeople if they try to set foot in her driveway.  If that’s what she’s going to do to a couple of white guys in suits, I can’t imagine she’s going to be too accommodating to a swarthy group of middle-easterners looking for long-term housing.

In the context of the Trump “border wall” plan, I’ll also take the time to highlight that as a next-level post-modern humanitarian it’s going to be important you become really “anti-wall”.  Like to the point where if it seems as if you’re going too far, just keep going because stopping now might mean you’ve hit some kind of metaphorical wall and you won’t stand for that kind of oppression.  That being said, if you’ve reached the point where you’re suggesting prison walls just be replaced with “sidelines”, then maybe pull back a bit because you probably think playing in traffic is a good idea too.  Maybe just start by making very broad statements like “no walls are good walls”.  Stuff it; retaining walls, firewalls, that broken one in Berlin, that great one in China, the one you saw made-up of players during a free-kick at the football, the one that ended the life of Humpty Dumpty.  Then being anti border wall just seems like a given.  I mean sure the borders exist, you’re not “anti-border”, you’re just anti “border-visibility from a distance.”  Your issue isn’t with the borders so much as it is with the height of the borders.  You’re not necessarily in favour of illegal-immigration but you're certainly in favour of giving illegal immigrants a fighting chance of breaking through.  Aaaand I think I just came-up with a brilliant idea for a new reality show – “Big Border!”

Residential fences are just wooden prison bars.  Let's end the segregation and intolerance.

Now almost 50% of Americans support Trump’s travel ban on certain countries.  So if my Grade 2 mathematics skills serve me correctly, that means about 50% of Americans don’t support the travel ban.  So it’s really a philosophical question; is America half inhumane or half humane?  Whichever side of the moral ‘Mexican border wall’ you stand on, it’s important to remember that short-term memory is the next key aspect of becoming a post-modern humanitarian.  Just look at the anti-Trump backlash from Americans based on this key migration issue.  I say this because it’s super admirable and mighty forgiving of Americans to take such a compassionate view of migrants seeking refuge in the U.S… seeing as the United States was kind of built on the Native Americans making exactly that mistake.  Too soon?

I’d also recommend focusing on the operative word “wall” because if you find out that five European countries (Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Hungary) already built border fences over a year and a half ago to keep out refugees and you stayed quiet while all that went on then the post-modern humanitarianism you’re fighting so passively for takes a bit of a hit.  If you can look past this, then it’ll really help you overlook facts like how the previous U.S president already implemented equally rigid immigration (and far more aggressive foreign) policies.  Oh by the by, it’s important that remember; every post-modern humanitarian is a self-proclaimed feminist too.  Don't ask me why, it just seems to be the case.

You either get demolished quickly enough to become a memory or you last long enough to become a tourist attraction.

Now if you’re worried about this all being a little difficult, well in the words of every cleaning products TV salesman ever, “worry no more!”  This is because the post-modern humanitarian focuses on leader likability above all else.  Hoorah!  Sucks to be you Donald!  You’re already painted as unlikeable, now you’re taking the job of the guy who (despite all the horrible crap he did on the side) was the most popular guy in the office.  And at the same time, you’ve forced him and his family out of his home?  You’re basically assuming the role of stepdad after one of the most amicable break-ups in history and taking sole custody somehow.  America played ‘catch’ with that dad… he was good at basketball… he was funny!  Sure he was at war for the duration of his presidency, but he always had time for America.  Sure he killed civilians abroad and allegedly supported terrorists in Turkey, but he cared about American civilians and he pardoned Turkeys at Thanksgiving.  Now ‘Donald the stepdad’ comes along, where even if he tells the same jokes as Barack, even if he says things that are totally reasonable like “hey Timmy, maybe stop flicking toothpicks at your sister and playing with matches”, Timmy’s still going to shout back “shut-up Craig… you’re not my dad!”  And Timmy’s right… but Timmy’s also a dick.  I changed Donald’s name to “Craig” for effect but you get this gist.

The gist being; the post-modern humanitarian doesn’t focus on the details.  The post-modern humanitarian knows deep down that homebrand “Wheat Biscuits” are exactly the same as regular “Weet-Bix” but it still always buy the latter because they’ve been marketed better and the packaging’s prettier.  Also, there’s my foreword for the book “U.S Presidency for Dummies” sorted!

I stand by all of the memes I create, especially this 'Liar Liar' based commentary on world politics.  Claw or no claw, it seems they're tough shoes to fill.

So whether you’re an aspiring post-modern humanitarian or you just know someone really annoying and were looking for an explanation as to why they are that way, I hope you’ve found this piece more amusing than informative.  I spend so much time writing tongue-in-cheek that it looks like I’m sitting at my computer with an everlasting gobstopper in my mouth.  And if you’re a post-modern humanitarian reading this, well I’m sure you’ve already stopped reading several paragraphs earlier before you realised this was just a piece of satire and you’re already leaving me a 700-word comment in the ‘feedback’ area.  Wherever you stand, I don’t mind one bit.  Because if “love trumps hate”, I’m pretty sure laughs cure everything.

** For more info, updates and photos, follow me on Twitter & Instagram **

Electile Dysfunction: A 'Trump VS Clinton' Voter’s Guide

'U.S election 2016'.  Or as it’s also known; 'the weirdest custody battle in world history'.  Where two crappy parents are fighting for custody of a fat child that doesn’t want to live with either of them.  I’m not going to take either side but I will say this, I know at least four people who are talking about the dangers of choosing Trump, yet I know for a fact that even after seeing the TV commercials, those four people opted to go with Coles insurance as their main insurance provider.  I say this because I think it’s important to establish where some people’s decision making abilities are at.  This year’s presidential election has basically been like watching a season of ‘X Factor’ in reverse; we started out with a pool of talent but ended-up with some unfavourable competitors whose families gave them an unwarranted amount of self-confidence.  So given that, here’s a pre-election voter's guide to take with you into the polling booth… or at the very least, into the toilet cubicle at work when you need reading material.

Longest. Cinematic run. Ever.

First things first; we need to stop expecting someone sane and normal to be elected U.S president.  Here’s why (and this goes for both candidates) – the job of U.S president pays $500,000 a year. Hillary’s already spent almost $1 billion on her campaign and Donald’s spent almost $500 million trying to get the job.  Now to put that into perspective, if you were going to a job interview for a managerial position at McDonald’s that paid $50,000 a year, but to get it you had to spend $100 million trying to persuade the interviewer to give you the job, how quickly would you be folding the application form into a paper plane instead of submitting it?  And on the off chance that you were still considering applying for the job, I can assure you that your family would already be fitting you for a "special jacket", throwing out all the metal cutlery in the house and padding your room.  When you understand that, you understand Hillary’s fashion sense and Donald’s hairstyle.

The U.S Presidency - when you're even too crazy for certain lines at Centrelink.

.

Secondly – dear ‘Murica, no offence and I know you might not want to admit it, but Trump pretty accurately represents the majority of you.  He’s the selfie you take without make-up and decide not to post on social media.  Hillary’s just the selfie you take after you let Maybelline special forces perform a bombing campaign on your face and then put it through several Instagram filters before posting to social media.

Thirdly, voters need to decide what they’d prefer; a president they like or a president they can trust?  Sure Trump’s been accused of doing things that are inappropriate but Clinton’s been subpoenaed for doing things that are illegal.  It’s like this; metaphorically speaking in a social scenario, Clinton’s the person that urinates in public while Trump’s the person that uses the public bathroom but doesn’t wash their hands.  As distasteful as both of them are, one’s getting arrested and the other’s just getting a fist bump instead of a handshake when you greet them for dinner.  In a local context for my Australian readers – by ignoring the actions of Clinton and only focusing on the comments of Trump, essentially you’re suggesting that you’d rather be alone in a room with Ivan Milat than Nick Kyrgios.  Yes, both are pretty shitty individuals, but you’d still have to admit that one is distinctly more shitty than the other.

Mary Anne reminds us that not all heroes wear capes.

The real difficulty in making a decision between the two lies in the fact that he’s seen as a buffoon and she’s seen as evil.  And anyone that’s on the fence about whether Hillary’s evil should go watch the interview where she’s laughing like a sociopath in heat about how she helped orchestrate the killing of Gaddafi.  Regardless of your stance on Gaddafi, I point this out because if your mum cackled that hard after killing a spider in your kitchen, you’d have her committed before you considered getting her elected.  The other problem is that good decision-making is a massive part of the presidential gig, and it’s kind of hard to have faith in the decision-making ability of someone who not only married Bill Clinton but also stayed married to Bill Clinton.  With that in mind, women shouldn’t assume that just because Hillary’s a woman, she'll be better for women either. If anything, that could be worse because if there’s one thing I’ve learned from hearing women gossip over the years, it's that some of the biggest grievances women have, are in fact with other women! She'll probably want to invade North Korea just because she thinks their leader's name 'Kim' is short for 'Kimberley'.

For when your march into battle begins on a catwalk.

The other problem is that the whole situation's so confusing. On one hand, Trump’s being accused of indiscretions without evidence and it’s being presented as fact.  On the other hand, Hillary isn’t being charged with crimes despite the fact there’s evidence.  That being said, Donald’s been accused of inappropriate behaviour towards women while Hillary’s been involved in discrediting women who make such accusations.  Looking at it objectively, if they weren’t rivals it could be a great common ground for them to find and might even be a presidential and vice-presidential match made in heaven!  That’s obviously not going to happen so perhaps the solution is that there be no election.  The third debate should just be the decider.  And it shouldn’t be a debate, it should be a rap battle.  If both candidates are going to keep berating each other and trying to discredit one another, it should at least have to rhyme.  If it’s done to a beat and a melody, it’s not slander!  *Don’t quote me on that.

Alternatively, seeing as I already compared this to essentially a job that two individuals are applying for and given that the American public are the ones hiring their boss, it seems only fair that we weigh-up the two applicants based on a number of criteria and questions that I’ve put together, which one might be judged against on the most basic of job application forms.

.
So here’s the thing ‘Murica, it’s time to face facts.  The facts are, of the last three presidents you’ve elected, the first cheated on his wife literally while inside the White House, the second started a war abroad in a quest to look for weapons that didn’t exist and the most recent got a Nobel Peace Prize while he had your country involved in two wars simultaneously and was spending hundreds of billions of dollars on defence.  The characters in ‘Sex & the City’ have a less volatile history with men, and at least they had a chance of ending-up with Mr. Big.

There are a lot of us who have relatives that were made refugees because of the presidents you've selected and the fact that you're generally so pro-war would be tolerable, if only you'd agree to host one at your place for once.

Most departing U.S presidents'resumes read like a 'How-to Guide' for how to make foreign people hate you.

Therefore maybe the issue then isn’t who you’ll elect president, maybe it’s that you shouldn’t be allowed to elect your president.  Like when your dysfunctional friend Karen keeps dating a string of losers and you decide to take over control of her love life and set her up with a nice guy from your office… who’s possibly more interested in weekend antiquing than foreign invasion.  Someone who’s not going to hide their emails from you and someone who’s going to grab your hand rather than grabbing your… "pet cat".  Well that’s what I think you need to let the rest of the world do for you from now on.  Maybe that way we can finally help find you someone who's going to stop trying to make a move on the rest of us and is instead just genuinely into “YOU…..S.A.”

So if it's okay with you, I'd like to give your number to two people I think you'll be really happy with. Here they are...

They're really great guys.

** For more info, updates and photos, follow me on Twitter & Instagram **