>RANT MODE ON

*Celtic Pamplemousse* v1.0
Originally printed September 1990. Ezine-ified August 1994. Hey, I been
busy.

-----------------------------------------
Notes:

==O Available by emailing me directly at yku01534@cawc.yorku.ca.

==O Issues v1.0, v3.0-6.0 are available in print, too, a buck each postpaid
internationally from Lickspittle Ventures, 66 Greyhound Dr., Willowdale,
ONT, M2H 1K3, CANADA. (Live on the wild side and send cash! Postal workers
are too busy flipping out and offing each other to bother with your lil'
dead president.)

==O I'm doing this for criticism of my ideas and writing style. So anyone
who comments on, reviews, analyzes my stuff is sent the next issue of *CP*
--the graphically amusing print version, even. Be you english scholar or
retired gardener, I want you to tear me to shreds!

==O *This* indicates italicizing, _this_ underlining.

==O The first person who figgers out what the "==O" dingbat represents gets
something really cool in snailmail. Ascii Art: The Net's Version of
Charades?

v1.0 Notes:

==O I was going by the psude Jim Druid, instead of Jim Munroe. I was a
frightened little child. Now I'm a frightened little man-child.

-----------------------------------------

==O
Hi, I'm Jim Druid. Who the FUCK are you?
==O

Welcome to the premier issue of *Celtic Pamplemousse*. I, Jim Druid, am a
eighteen year-old scribe in Toronto, a man who, in his blatant disregard
for grammatical criticism, refuses to edit even the most pretentiously
regal-sounding pauses from his introductory paragraphs.

I will be publishing this zine irregularly until I die, in one form or
another. The issues will alternate between a Rant Issue, which will
basically contain non-fictional observations and opinions of mine or anyone
else who cares to blather, and a Meandering Issue, which will contain a
fictional gem by yours truly. 

Ahh, you think, this Jim Druid fellow wants to stimulate and entertain us,
the readers. You are only half right. It is hardly such a noble selfless
act. By creating worlds, I entertain myself, and by transmogrifying my
vague theories into printed ideas, I--yes, that's right--I stimulate
mySELF. So now you know my ulterior motive.

Of course, I know that I will not get every reader to respond. I myself
have been guilty of passively consuming on many an occasion. But, keep in
mind that this does a disservice to the writer as well as yourself. If
*Celtic Pamplemousse* annoys you, tell me--but tell me WHY. If you
disagree with my stance, enlighten me in a straightforward and logical
manner. If you like it, god forbid, tell me what you liked about it.

Anyway, you can get the next issue for a self addressed stamped envelope
(and perhaps a loose stamp to help cover xerox costs if you are generous.) 
However, I'd much prefer trading for one of your own publications. 

Send 'em to:
Jim Druid / 66 Greyhound Drive / Willowdale Ontario / M2H 1K3

==O
Abortion
==O

First off, I'd better reveal my influences. I am from a Christian
background and a decidedly Catholic sub-culture, therefore always bombarded
with Pro-Life propaganda. However, I have also been swayed by the
arguments of the Pro-Choice stance of the left. Being exposed to each
group's ideas, I have tried to establish an opinion of reasonable logic
while maintaining my views of non-violence.

The arguments of the Pro-Choice group are extremely valid. If abortions
are made illegal, it will not stop them--it will merely make them very
dangerous for the poor, while the rich can just bribe doctors. They claim
that a baby is not a human until it is born, the intelligence and awareness
level is comparatively low. Their reasoning says that it is not right to
bring a baby into a world of pain and possible death; it is preferable to
cut off its life quickly and mercifully. The Pro-Choice arguments appeal
to logical analysis.

Opposition to abortion, on the other hand, appeals to the emotions. To end
the potential for human life is MURDER. They are passionate in
denouncements of abortionists like Morgantaller. They say that an infant
is human from the moment of conception and that all life is sacred.

This is where I see a discrepancy in their arguments. While I myself feel
that in most cases, abortions should not be performed, I see the life of a
calf or a chicken to be just as valuable. I think that when an Pro-Lifer 
demands laws against abortion, he or she is trying to force his/her moral
and religious code on others. It would be like me rallying for a law
enforcing vegetarianism; and while I believe that all life is sacred,
despite the species, I do not preach to or resent those who do eat meat. In
most cases, when I speak to those against abortion about this point, they
point to the Old Testament which declares the animals under man's domain,
to use as he wishes.

The Old Testament is made up of writings of those presumed wise and their
personal moral code, just as the laws are made up of politicians moral
codes. This is my main point. There should be no laws for or against
abortion, since it is a moral decision that should be made by each
individual confronting it. By making it illegal, those who honestly need
an abortion due to psychological trauma or who are pregnant through incest
or rape either have to pay extravagant prices or risk their health with a
coat hanger. By making it legal, the government is making the moral
decision for the people, and condoning it as just another form of birth
control. Individuals must learn to think for themselves, considering the
long-term personal consequences rather than the short-term legal
ramifications. I side with those who favour a free choice for or against
abortions, leaving it to the people to make independent and thoughtful
decisions.

==O
Tridel: Discriminatory Developers?
==O

Near where I live, there's a condo complex going up owned by the good
people at Tridel. A while ago, I was walking to work when I saw graffiti
on the fence surrounding the workplace. The fence was painted Trendy Blue
and had an abstract peacock crouching beside the prices--they were
something like from 300,000 to 400,000. The spray-can artist had put a
dollar sign on the peacock's head and written "Where will the poor live?"

Now, this area (Bayview and Finch) IS property in high demand. The first
question I had was how did Tridel get their hands on it? It had remained
undeveloped for at least the five years I have lived in this area, empty
but for a cluster of trees and a small shed. The shed made me believe that
it was city owned, and used to store the lawnmowers, etc., and that raises
another suspicion. With all the talk about Tridel and the Patti Starr
scandal, and the building company looking like it was bribing officials for
first dibs on government land, well.... Anyway, I picked up the pamphlets
from the little pre-fab office they have and looked through them. The
models were almost all beautiful white, 40-60 year olds who smiled with
straight teeth. Typical right? Perhaps, but the absence of any minorities
in the ads seems out and out racist especially in a multi-cultural society
like Toronto's. It also seemed to be bad business, seeing that a
tremendous amount of the economy is in the hands of minorities. Ah, but
then we come to an even more startling conclusion--maybe there's a big
market for segregated condos!  After all, if they're greasing the palms of
white politicians, why do they have to have all that great a public
relations with minorities at all? Consider this as well--the "minorities"
in Toronto together make up more than halve of the population, making
white people a minority. Yet whites still hold a majority of the power.
Look out, South Africa!

Anyway, back to the graffiti. I think it's one of the inherent evils of
capitalism the way that land is sold. Since the rich minority controls the
land, they can easily enforce a form of economic segregation. Since
minorities have a harder time becoming rich than whites do, the economic
segregation is easily extended to racial segregation. So now, rather than
having to say, "NO XXXXXX ALLOWED" they can simply charge ridiculous prices
for land that is in demand because it is a "good neighbourhood," (read
"racially pure.")  If an especially prosperous minority is able to pay the
insane prices, he is certainly not encouraged by the all-white catalogue.

Pretty easy, huh? The rich can and do build little oasises for the wealthy
and proper and white. All they have to do is jack up the prices. Luckily
though, the rich are quite fickle and disorganized--one day they decide
they want the action of the city, the next the quiet of the 'burbs. If
they ever did decide they wanted the poor out though, the rich core they
would develop may as well have razor wire fences, for the economic barriers
would be stronger than any brick.

==O
Junior Rangers '89
==O

Over the trees you hover, seeing a glassy black lake sparkle under a hot
noonday sun. Cool coniferous trees poke the haze with flimsy points, a
group of them shaking unnaturally with apprehension at the organisms
mucking about at their bases. Zooming in, you see a group of 17-year-old
youths in yellow safety hats and CSA approved boots, hacking away at the
brush with swedish axes called Sandviks. Looking even closer you see me,
my McMurder shirt a sponge for sweat and my bare arms a feast for
mosquitos. I am stumbling along, cutting down the unwanted trees with
dazed swings, drunk with the heat. Just be glad you are experiencing this
vicariously, and can't smell my pungent odours that have been known to kill
small animals.

Junior Rangers, is, first and foremost, an experience. I can only speak
for myself, however, when I say that it is a beneficial experience. Being
more than a year since I was in the program, I look on it fondly, but it
certainly wasn't summer camp. The people I met there were pretty much a
cross-section of our society--there were assholes, and there were guys who
were really cool. To give you an example of what my camp, Little
Wenebegon, was like, I'll go through an average week.

On Monday, the whole camp is up bright and early, raised by a bell, and the
forty or fifty of us trudge to the kitchen where we line up to get our
food. There is bacon and eggs, toast and hot chocolate, cereal and juice,
enough for any hundred people. Everybody takes a moderate portion at
first, to make sure there's enough for everyone, and then the extra hungry
go back. The food rules--for omnivores, as I was at the time--but a
vegetarian would probably starve. After breakfast is finished, those
leaving for work camp line up again and pack a bag lunch from an assortment
of food out on a table. Those staying clean up the kitchen and go to the
foreman for work to do around the camp. The rest jump into little yellow
school buses and are driven to the work camps, where they do work like
weeding, weevil burning, or portage clearing. They sleep in tents,
usually, and cook their own food--the cooks are assigned in rotation. The
work hours are from eight to five, and the rest of the time is basically
free. The crews go home after noon on Friday, and the first guys home put
their names up for the laundry list. There is sometimes work to do on the
weekend, but not a lot. In our camp there was a rec room with ping pong
and shuffle board, and a raft in the lake to screw around on. A lot of the
time is spent in the two-men rooms in the bunkhouse shootin' the shit and
playing cards. There are occasional trips to town, to a girl's camp, etc.,
and perhaps there will be workshops on fire safety and the like. Movies
are sometimes rented for Friday or Saturday nights and the cooks often make
popcorn and juice. And on Sunday the work crews are posted and it starts
all over again.

Being a city boy, I had little experience with the outdoors. Since I was
with guys from all over Ontario, some were as inexperienced as me (green
about the green) but many were seasoned nature boys. This balance helped
to make me feel a bit humble and wanting to learn without being completely
alienated. I saw a really beautiful land and dealt with whatever it dealt
me, and wondered why anyone would want to conquer it. It gave me a deeper
appreciation of the strength and beauty of nature--it seemed like every
time I looked around there was postcard-perfection.

One strange thing that I did notice with apprehension was the fact that our
camp was 100% white and 95% christian. However, although this seemed
unusual to me, used to a multicultural Toronto, it forced me to realise
the fact many small towns are segregated in their whiteness. It also made
me suspect that guidance councillors and others promoting the JR Program
may, consciously or otherwise, not push it with minority groups since they
do not 'look' like prospective Junior Rangers.

Some of the highlights of the program for me was a trip in a
hydro-plane and a helicopter, a week long canoe trip (oops, I mean portage
clearing duty), and a mini olympics at the end between the neighbouring
camps.

I would recommend this program to most people. It is hard, low paid ($15 a
day) work but it is quite challenging and being with people your own age
makes it fun. Authoritarian foremen and close-minded people prove too
confining for some, but if you are looking for an experience....

==O
Why I'm Going Straight
==O

The struggle to assert my individuality is one I have fought for many
years. I have always wanted to be special, different... unique. When I was
a child this urge created a longing for super strength and magical powers,
but more recently I have been drawn to the unfocused ideology of punk. To
be sure, anger against injustice seems to be the focal point, but the edges
are fuzzy and blurred. Is it a pissed and ignorant *Sex Pistols*? A
sarcastic *Dead Kennedys*? A militant *Conflict*? A questioning *Operation
Ivy*?

When I first got my head shaved and ear pierced, at fourteen, I felt a
compulsion to wear my combat boots and army jacket. I didn't really have
the confidence to go out in shorts and sneakers, because someone may not
realize that I was a skinhead without my "uniform" on. I liked the style,
but it was tough going in 30 degree weather. I then got into hardcore, and
saw a scene that was more suited to my introspective style. Even then, I
felt better when I had my head shaved in a funky cut, screaming out to the
world that I WAS DIFFERENT!  

Currently, I have adopted an anarchist stance. The arguments proposed by
writers like Woodcock, Bakunin, and Read really did not change the way I
think; more often than not I discovered that their concise discourses
voiced many of my own introspective beliefs. I believe that it is this
clearer vision of my own self that has brought me to my present state of
mind. Instead of getting a punk cut with no reason other than "I like it"
and telling myself that I'm courageously declaring my uniqueness, I've
decided to "face reality."  Reality is that the average person you meet
makes an instant judgment based on your appearance--and if you have no hair
or a green mohawk, you are immediately boxed and labelled as "violent skin"
or "disturbed punk."  This is simply a subconscious act, and although it
sometimes can be overcome, I have decided that a haircut is not worth the
losses. Another reality is that your friends, some of them bound to be
normal, get burned twice as much. When they are seen with you, they get
the label of "guy who hangs around with violent skin/disturbed punk"
WITHOUT getting the advantage that you get of being unique or different.
This is asking a lot of your friends, and although some will stick with
you, others will not. It is simply a flaw of theirs, but you are cutting
off a huge amount of these people who may be really good friends and maybe
accepting others who don't have this particular flaw but perhaps have other
worse ones.

There are advantages to being normal. One is that if you find a really
interesting person that is full of opinions and ideas but looks normal it
is like finding a diamond in a plain cardboard box. Also, there is a
better chance of getting your opinions across to another person without
getting them labelled. If you wear your politics, your ideas will be shot
down as "anarchist bullshit" no matter how rational and foolproof they are.
This intellectual infiltration is connected to another idea--physical
infiltration. If you are a monkeywrencher or into Direct Action, it is
almost essential that you look like everyone else to escape suspicion or
arrest.

There are always advantages to an extreme appearance, but I have decided
that my rebellion should be in the way I live my life: speaking out against
injustices, boycotting products and rejecting the life that the people in
power would like to force upon me are more relevant than a media
attraction. My decision is doubt-ridden and shaky at best, but it is a
choice that I have come to from weighing up the pros and cons. Call me a
coward if you wish, but state your rationale.

==O
That Old *Crimpshrine* Magic
==O

The music is chaotic, a harsh choppy melody is discernable under the noise.
The singer, to most commercial standards, is unmarketable, the lyrics
unmentionable and the typeface unprofessional.

They definitely win the award for "band with cool coming out of their
ears."

I recently brought the song "Tomorrow" off their *Sleep, what's that* 7' to
school and handed out a photocopy of the lyrics to my english class as my
example of disk poetry. When I wrote the name "Crimpshrine" up on the
board the first thing someone said was "cool name."  I played it and
watched the reaction of the class. Most people were reading the lyrics! 
At the end of it, there was a little applause (sincere, I think) and I had
to describe why I chose the song. This was the hard part.

There were no advanced poetic devices to shield me from ridicule. No
political statements to point out to justify why I had chosen such a song.
Now, just saying "I liked it" may be good enough for many, but I, at the
top of my class, am expected to analyze and explain. But the metaphorical
and cacophonic elements weren't what made it special to me.

I realized that just by just allowing the class to hear it I was
jeopardizing my status as a logical rational being. I was admitting
emotions!  Truth be told, the song had intense personal meaning for me, and
by "opening up" in this way I had left myself almost defenceless.

I explained what inspiration these guys gave me as a writer and creative
thinker, as young as me when their 7' came out. I explained that the power
in the lyrics and musical energy grabbed me and whipped me across the room.
And I said that I liked the song.

---
Lying awake with watering eyes
Not quite sure what for
But when I leave this room tomorrow
My tears will be left lying on the floor
-- 

But even after that revelation, no one jeered. No smart ass comments. I
suppose it was a mixture of a good class and a good song, but I didn't get
burned for showing feelings. In a way, it kinda renewed my faith in human
tolerance.

==O
Some Pointed Questions to SHARP
==O

SHARP (SkinHeads Against Racial Prejudice) is a good concept. I like the
thought of undermining fascism. Give 'em a taste of their own medicine.
Pride without prejudice. But... I have a few arguments with the theory in
practice.

Will beating down and repressing the rights of nazis stop their violent
actions? It is possible. Not likely, but possible. So now we have a large
number of closet bigots, afraid to voice their opinions but unwilling to
give them up. They may have removed their "heil hitler" tattoos but they
still click their boots in their hearts--in fact, their beliefs may even be
reinforced by the fact that they have been repressed, giving them a
feeling of martyrdom. Now a part of society, they have much more
credibility and the occasional slur, racial or otherwise, has more
influence on those around him. At least their fascist, but more honest,
appearance had more integrity, and anything that would dribble out of their
mouths would be backed up by the swastika burned in their forearm. Any
overt hate literature, especially handed out by violent and irrational
looking nazi skinheads, is taken with a whole block of salt, never mind a
grain. Which is why, when you ever see Klan members on TV, they are
smartly dressed and intelligent looking. They're not about to let Billy-Boy
come out in his overalls and slop bucket and explain with a hill billy
drawl that them niggers are fuckin up the good ol u s of a.

Along with giving skins and other bigots credibility, by oppressing them we
would also be hypocrites. Violence begets violence, and the ends never
justify the means, right? If we were to crush nazis to bring about an age
of non-bigotry, how would we be an different than that funny Austrian with
the neat mustache who worked to bring about a perfect race of humans though
brutal slaughter? By beating up nazis, we not only drive their hatred
deeper, but we sink down to their level.

My other complaint that I have with SkinHeads Against Racial Prejudice is
the word Racial. Does this signify bigotry against women or homosexuals?
Why not just S.H.A.P.E. (SkinHeads Against Prejudice Everywhere)? Does
that one word allow a prejudice against a minority for other reasons than
race? What would a Sharpster do to a black homosexual? What is a Skinhead,
if he is not a violent fascist nazi?

Ah, so many questions. I admit to being quite negative in this discourse,
disagreeing with other people's solution and offering none of my own. So
here is my solution--counter information. When nazis put out hate
literature, we put out pamphlets proving equality (love literature?). When
there is a untruth in the media or our schools, or even more damaging, a
half-truth (such as blacks scoring lower on I.Q. tests without mentioning
that the tests are geared towards white middle class) we must speak out. As
individuals, we must confront blatant or subtle forms of homophobia,
racism and sexism and try to explain why these things are wrong. We have
here a just fight, but it must be fought with words rather than fists.

==O
Some SHARP Answers
by Kliphph Lam
==O

Dear Jim,

You have managed to raise some valid arguments in regards to the policies
of SkinHeads Against Racial Prejudice, although you appear to be
uninformed, and your argument is based solely upon generalizations and
stereotypes. Contrary to popular belief, SHARP does not advocate Nazi
bashing. Our policy is to "make a statement through education and non-
violent confrontation," although this does not necessarily imply that we
are pacifists. We shall not resort to ignoble swarming tactics commonly
employed by Nazi boneheads, although we will not hesitate to fight in self-
defence. While some members within the organization support violent
confrontation using the basis "it is the only language they (boneheads)
understand," it is entirely a matter of individual opinion. Members who
engage in nazi bashing do so entirely on their own and receive no support
from SHARP when performing such activities.

In regards to SHARP creating numerous closet bigots, do you feel those poor
"oppressed" nazis, whose primary objective in life is to eliminate freedom
of speech should be allowed to exploit free speech to spout ultra right-
wing rhetoric? Any hypocrite who spreads racist and fascistic literature
under the protection of "freedom of speech" is obviously full of
contradiction. Neo-Nazis are already "oppressed" by mainstream society via
hate literature/crime laws. You try to give the impression that SHARP is
responsible for racists being denied the right to voice their opinions. If
we have "repressed" these individuals as you claim, then why are
television shows such as "Race and Reason" permitted broadcasting rights
throughout the southern states, and why are Nazi boneheads featured on talk
shows with Geraldo and Oprah? Obviously because they are a poor and
"oppressed" minority.

Is SHARP sexist and homophobic? The Toronto SHARP United chapter has an
equal male:female ratio, and we are definitely opposed to sexual
discrimination. We preach anti-sexism, and our chapter is organized and
founded by a womyn. Do you still doubt our organizations stance on sexism?
In regards to homophobia, I must admit that certain individual members are
not gay-positive. Members who are somewhat homophobic keep their opinions
to themselves, and none of us support gay bashing.

What is a skinhead if he is not a violent fascist nazi? To set the matter
straight, the skinhead culture is based around the "Spirit of '69," and its
roots grow from the Jamaican rudeboy. True skinheads listen to ska and
reggae, which are obviously black influenced. Nazi boneheads posing as
"skinheads" are responsible for creating the negative media image.

For more information on SHARP, please contact us at P.O. Box 313/ 253
College St./ Toronto, Ont., M5T 1N5. We focus on flyer distribution, anti-
racist school seminars, 'zines, and benefit gigs, and are always looking
for new members.

>RANT MODE OFF