That’s it then, let’s live in the tunnel
If Trump is set to launch, best learn archery or loosen drug laws
Did we survive? Or did the combined sanity of Donald “The Braincell” Trump and Kim “The Brat” Jong Un finally collide, like two immature sub-atomic particles, boyracing inside a warhead?
I suppose if you’re reading this, nothing’s kicked off just yet. (Unless it has, and you’re the sole survivor. And a really big fan.) Are you draining precious post-apocalyptic battery? Maybe you’ve already watched enough YouTube videos on recipes for possum. Or maybe you’re reading this in print, by the glow of your forehead.
On the bright side, in the event of nuclear war, Auckland has a brand new tunnel for people to seek shelter in. Let’s hope the Government spent the extra for radioactive shielding, and didn’t skimp. That’s the thing about nuclear war. It may not be likely, but it only has to happen once. Come to think, new tunnels should probably have a WOF for postapocalyptic tenancy. And maybe the walls should be tested for meth, if only to give survivors an activity. And finally, we might get to find out what happens when you get bitten by a radioactive spider.
I used to think intercontinental was a brand of hotels. Yesterday’s news reminded me it also refers to a type of ballistic missile. Not surprising really. Trump himself went from hotels to nuclear launch codes.
In an age where qualifications and public spirit are sneered at as a stamp of elitism, we are post-surprise.
If nuclear war has eventuated, I expect Peter “The Passport” Thiel has already arrived in home waters, aboard his personal cruise liner (the one camouflaged to look like an iceberg.)
If there’s been a nuclear war
overnight, the inevitable question, playground-style, is who started it. Lobbing a DIY missile into a public stretch of ocean, even on a test drive, is surely a provocation, a neighbour dropping donuts on your berm. And Donald, as we know, needs a lot less provocation than actual weapons of war. Kim Jong Un should have taken a leaf from Saudi Arabia: don’t test DIY missiles. Buy missiles from America.
Need I remind you, North Korea did not choose the dictatorship of Kim. Kim’s one missile experienced more freedom of travel than all the imprisoned, hungry citizens of North Korea combined. America, on the other hand, deliberately chose to be ruled by Donald J. (And don’t forget the J.)
Anyway, how to spend our last days before Donald hits launch?
If Hunger Games is any clue, we should devote a lot of time to learning archery. That’s if you expect to survive.
For the rest of us, the ones with the plutonium allergy, now looks like a great time to re-think drug policy. Oh yeah.
It’s astonishing we aren’t all using drugs that the Beatles tried out half a century ago. Imagine how improved those primitive substances
If drugs were legal, think how cool the ads would be.
could be by now. It’d be like comparing 1960s coffee to coffee today. Or a 1960s motor car to one today. Drugs by now could have the equivalent of power steering, seatbelts and airbags, if only they hadn’t been driven underground by puritanical governments.
If there’s one thing America taught us: prohibition doesn’t work. Prohibition just made Al Capone rich. Prohibition drives some people to seek out moonshine. And moonshine makes you go blind.
Adults deserve pharmaceutical quality, tables of ingredients, and medical health warnings. And if public health is a priority, then putting people in prison is surely the last thing we’d want to do.
And if drugs were legal, think how cool the ads would be.
So many ads now try to make their products out to be drugs. From sports water to perfume, ads try to make their products out to be something Bill Cosby or Lance Armstrong would choose. Imagine if companies actually advertised drugs. We’d have rock stars endorsing the professional brand of cocaine. Or ads for the slimming, doctor’s choice of heroin.
For about 30 seconds this week, the drinking age entered the headlines. Would 18-year-olds vote the booze out of their own hands? I suspect the voting age might have to change first.
How’s this? Let’s allow groups who drink together to average out their ages. Let people team up, like a syndicate buying Lotto, and use their average age. Yes, school children will wind up drunk, but this will also see a lot more social engagement for the elderly, who become suddenly valued at parties for the insane capital value of their longevity.