I don’t remember ever waking from a dream in which I did anything against anybody.
Every one of my dreams were about me achieving something, by my own or as a member of a team.
Then how come so many of us are plotting, when being wide awake, against others of our kind – against some of our brethren even?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikkun_olam
any one still wandering about how come the Jews managed to survive for so long, against the so long odds as they had to face?
As almost everything else on this world this also can be looked at from two different vantage points.
The disgruntled citizen says: “I know I’m stating/asking the obvious here, but with all the Big Corp. favoritism, what’s the point in the people voting? Big money talks louder than the peons. Fire every one of them- here and elsewhere.”
Yeah, OK, I get your point…but what if those already ‘at the wheel’ understand/interpret the act of non voting as approval of the current state of things/people being discouraged about the possibility of any change being made so they take it as a carte blanche?
So unless more of us actually going to the voting booths and manifesting our will the simple wish that: “I only HOPE that this next election, people will wake the fuck up and quit ALLOWING this to continue.” won’t mean much…
Alternatively, our mere ‘presence’ – even if unhappy about about everybody on the ballot we cancel out vote – means ‘hey, this guys have waken up, maybe we should clean up our act’!
Somebody just asked me:
“People all over the world are all about themselves these days?”
Unwisely so…
Actually it’s nothing wrong about being ‘about one’s self’!
The real problems start only when crossing the divide between one amongst/with others versus one above/against all others…
“Si mai vorbim despre “globalizare”…”
“And we are still speaking about “globalization”…”
“- What’s your opinion about the food shortages in the rest of the world?
– What does ‘food’ mean?
– What’s that a ‘shortage’?
– What’s that ‘the rest of the world’?
– What’s that an ‘oppinion’?”
“- Ce parere aveti despre lipsa de alimente din restul lumii?
– Ce sunt alea ‘alimente’?
– Ce inseamna ‘restul lumii’?
– Ce este aceea ‘lipsa’?
– Ce este aceea ‘opinie’?”
Pai da, vorbim!
Si pe drept cuvant.
Din pacate ‘globalizare’-a asta inseamna deocamdata ca toti alergam ca disperatii dupa bani. In loc sa actionam firesc, sa reactionam la imprejurarile in care ne aflam, incercam, in disperare, sa folosim aceste imprejurari pentru a ne umfla conturile din banci.
Si dupa aceea ne miram de ce a iesit…
Yes we do!
And rightfully so!
Because, until now at least, ‘globalization’ only meant a planet wide treasure hunt. Instead of acting naturally – reacting to the circumstances in which any of us happens to find himself – we desperately/obsessively try to use those circumstances with the sole goal of inflating our bank accounts…
And then we are flabbergasted by the outcome…
Bine, inteleg ca pentru asta ar trebui sa intelegem odata (?) ca bogatia este doar o unealta, ca telul suprem ar trebui sa fie doar ‘supravietuirea’/capacitatea de a evolua si ca astea doua nu sunt chiar identice … dar oare de cate argumente in acest sens mai avem nevoie?
OK, I understand we’d need to understand, once and for all (?) that wealth is nothing but a tool, that the sole reasonable goal is survival/ability to adapt and that these two are not exactly similar… but how many more proof do we still need?
OK, amu’ sa vad eu cine musca primul din cat-burgherul asta!
OK, now I’m anxiously waiting to see who’s going to take the first bite!
Complet de acord (altfel n-as fi preluat postul, nu?!?) iar singurul lucru care ar necesita o oarecare clarificare este ce mai inseamna ‘stanga’ in zilele noastre…
Daca la inceput, pe vremea cand la Paris se intrunea ‘Adunarea Starilor Generale’, membrii acesteia s-au impartit in doua – cei din stanga interesati in reducerea discrepantelor dintre stari pentru ca ‘asa nu se mai poate’ iar cei din dreapta interesati doar de pastrarea status quo-ului – ambele orientari erau relativ de buna credinta acum situatia e de-a dreptul crunta.
Atat stanga cat si dreapta nu sunt nimic altceva decat niste ‘poze politice’ asumate cu ajutorul unor consilieri si acordate fin in functie de ultimele ‘sondaje de opinie publica’.
Orbiti de marketingul politic actorii din scena publica interpreteaza un fel de vodevil uitand ca treaba lor nu este sa distreze lumea ci sa pastreze polisul in stare de functionare.
De fapt asta voia si Iisus, sa-i ajute pe oameni sa scape de frica si in acest fel sa devina membri functionali ai comunitatii, sa-i scoata din starea de sclavi … ai ‘regelui’, ai ‘templului’.
In sensul asta inteleg eu si ‘da-i cezarului ce-i al cezarului’ (adica impozitul si nimic altceva) iar restul pastreaza-l pentru ‘Dumnezeu’ – adica pentru cel ce ne-a incredintat ‘liberul arbitru’!
“Sus : William, Ducele de Cambridge (viitorul rege al Angliei) și fratele său, Henry al Țării Galilor
Jos : …
Ambele inundații sunt din 2014“
Fratii Windsor n-au functii executive asa ca pot face ce vor, inclusiv ceva folositor.
Ceilalti doi fac parte dintr-un intreg aparat politic astfel incat sunt la intersectia/discretia multor si conflictuale seturi de interese.
Ce ma intriga pe mine este insistenta cu care adversarii lor dau vina exclusiv pe ei, fara sa vorbeasca nici un moment despre faptul ca ei n-ar fi avut pe ce sa se aseze daca nu aducea cineva barcile alea si nici nu s-ar fi vazut la televizor (ca d-aia s-au dus acolo, sa-i vada lumea ca ‘le pasa’) daca televiziunile (atat cele prietene cat si cele dusmane) nu s-ar fi inghesuit si ele in acelasi model de barca…
Poate pentru ca singurul lucru care ii intereseaza pe adversarii lor este sa le ia locul iar pe televiziuni doar sa faca rating? In conditiile astea e normal ca nimeni sa nu vrea sa deschida cu adevarat ochii electoratului ci doar sa-l traga dintr-o parte in alta…
Si atunci cum sa nu te intrebi cum de l-a luat gura pe dinainte pe Basescu: ‘Nici un ministru sau mare mahar din administratia de stat n-ar putea sa-si faca mendrele daca n-ar fi ajutati de o parte din subalternii lor si daca restul nu ar inchide ochii!’?
PS. L-am auzit cu urechile mele la un ‘telejurnal’, cu vreo doi ani in urma.
I remember that John F. Kennedy once said something similar
Yet now, fifty years later, we still act as if the planet was infinite, we had found a cure for death and we had given up about the fate of our children…
” “Hallel” means “praise” in Hebrew. You might know it from the first part of the word “hallelujah” which means “praise the Lord”. It’s also the name of a prayer that we say on festivals (like Passover), consisting mostly of psalms. But on the last day of Passover, which begins tonight, we don’t say a full Hallel; we shorten the prayer. Why? Because this is the day when Pharaoh’s army drowned in the Red Sea, and, though we want to rejoice in our victory, we don’t want to rejoice in the death of our enemies.
I think this is an important principle: we have a right to defend ourselves, but we shouldn’t demonize our enemies – the opposite: we should remember that our enemies are human too. More than that: we don’t *need* to demonize our enemies in order to defend ourselves; the right to self-defense is absolute.” (David Boxenhorn).
” So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” (Genesis 1, 27:28)
For some it’s not easy to understand how come the Jews have managed to survive. as a nation, for so long.
Reading the explanation about why the ‘hallel’ said in the last day of the Passover is shorter than usual did the trick for me.
I’m not a religious person, not in the general accepted meaning of the word anyway, but this doesn’t prevent me from finding wisdom in religious texts.
Reading the quote from the Genesis where God tells to his ‘made in his own image’ children “…fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the…” things start to become apparent:
– The most important is ‘survival’. Nothing can be accomplished after death, not ‘on this side of the grave’ anyway.
– ‘Survival’ is not something that can be done individually. It’s ‘…fill the earth and subdue it.”, not ‘conquer the earth and vanquish the others’.
– Take care of what’s going on around you. ‘Rule over the…’ means bearing the responsibility of whatever happens under your stewardship.
My explanation about how come the Jews, and other ‘very experienced’ people, have managed to survive for so long is that they were able to maintain the fragile equilibrium between the need to preserve their identity and the wisdom to respect the identity of ‘others’. After all it’s a lot easier to survive together with as many as possible than against everybody else.
nicichiarasa 