Had I been obsessed with ‘efficiency’, as too many of my earthling children are, I would have distributed pretexts for happiness in a different manner.
The more an individual was capable of being happy, the more reasons for ‘that’ I would have given to that person.
Since I’m more interested in personal development, I let them exercise their freedom. Their freedom of choice.
Hence I spread ‘reasons for happiness’ in a random way. Having nothing to do with their personal merit nor with their ability to transform those ‘reasons’ into actual happiness.
And I continue to wait. For them to learn.
One-Time
Monthly
Yearly
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
Or enter a custom amount
$
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated! Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
Pentru cei 4 români care încă nu sunt la curent cu scandalul momentului, coaliția PNL, UDMR, USRPlus e pe butuci.
Pretextul fiind o chestie care se cheamă PNDL- Anghel Saligny. Parcă… Adică un program care va moderniza localitățile rurale. Va băga apă, canal, va asfalta drumuri… O reeditare a unui program inventat pe vremea lui Băsescu și condus, atunci, de Udrea.
Unii critică ideea pe motiv că este o formă de mituire a primarilor. Că e o groapă fără fund și că marea majoritate a banilor cheltuiți în felul acesta ajung la clientela de partid. Promotorii programului susțin că USRPlus ar fi împotrivă tocmai pentru că USRPlus nu are prea mulți primari și că se folosește de acest prilej pentru a-și șantaja partenerii de coaliție. Că USRPlus ar fi fost dispuși să accepte PNDL-ul dacă varianta lor de reformă a justiției ar fi fost aprobată în coaliție.
Las la o parte faptul că USRPlus a declarat foarte clar că ar fi fost de acord cu PNDL-ul dacă banii ar fi urmat să fi fost cheltuiți conform unor reguli clare.
Eu unul sunt de-a dreptul îngrozit.
Primul motiv fiind apetitul cu care noi, publicul, am pus botul la chestia asta! Entuziasmul cu care ne-am regrupat în tranșeele ideologice. Ochelarii de cal cu care examinăm, cât se poate de atenți, ce ni se transmite pe posturile preferate de media. Preferate de noi, de fiecare dintre noi, bineînțeles.
Subiectul discuției.
Niște bani de la bugetul statului care ar trebui să ajute zonele rurale rămase în urmă. Ce e de discutat la chestia asta? Principiul în sine?!? Sau modul în care aceste zone ar trebui ajutate? Care dintre ele și de ce? Pe ce criterii?
Știu deja pe unii care vor spune că fac propagandă USR…
Mai departe.
Cum se desfășoară discuția. ‘Pe cei de la USRPlus nu-i interesează subiectul pentru că nu au primari. Vor doar sa-i șantajeze pe partenerii de coaliție pentru ca aceștia să accepte varianta USRPlus pentru reforma din justiție.’ OK. Doar că argumentul ăsta este de-a dreptul îngrozitor. Confirmă implicit că banii urmează să fie dirijați partinic. Partinic, nu politic. Să nu facem confuzia asta. Chiar dacă unii încearcă să ne-o bage pe gât. Și mai confirmă ceva. Că ‘partenerii’ trebuie să fie șantajați pentru a accepta aplicarea până la capăt a programului de guvernare. Hopa!!!
Consecințe.
Păi fără reforma justiției, fără una de substanță, canci bani europeni. Adică ioc! Cel puțin așa se vehiculează pe coridoarele de la Bruxelles. Dăm bani doar celor care respectă statul de drept!
Păi da, numai că banii pentru PNDL vor veni de la bugetul de stat, nu de la UE!
Păi nu vorbirăm că prima sursă de finanțare trebuie să fie banii europeni, și abia apoi bugetul de stat?
Păi da, dar OLAF e mai al dracului decât DNA. Mai ales dacă nu se face reforma justiției.
Deci nu vrem bani europeni pentru dezvoltare rurală. Dar nici restul? Parcă era vorba să vină nu știu câte zeci de miliarde în următorii 6 ani. Eu așa înțelesesem. Că centrul-dreapta a dat la o parte centrul stânga de la robinetul cu bani pentru că cei de până nu de mult n-au știut să-și țină mâinile acasă. Și că Bruxelles ne-a amenințat că ne ia jucăriile cu totul. Că s-au ars, rău, cu gulașul lui Victor Orban și acum suflă și-n mămăligă…
Dar și mai nasol e altceva. Toată chestia asta are la bază o fină cunoaștere a jocului politic. A realității politice românești și a psihologiei sociale. Ei bine, ce nu înțeleg eu e ce urmăresc cei din spatele perdelei de fum.
Și cei care se expun în fața acestei perdele.
Poate că toată chestia asta o fi fost pusă la cale de actorii vizibili. Și/sau de consilierii lor. Poate că nu e nici un ‘deus ex machina’ care să-i păpușeze fără ca aceștia să-și fi dat seama.
Doar că indiferent cine a pus la cale toată tărășenia, e clar cine o duce la îndeplinire. Și în capetele cui se vor sparge toate oalele.
Că cioburile vor ploua și peste capetele noastre, ale tuturor, ne-am obișnuit…
Măcar să ne vină odată mintea la cap! Si nouă, și lor.
Pot să înțeleg genul ăsta de logică. Sau, mai bine spus, pot urmări firul logic al spunerii.
Doar că… Oscar Hoffman! Omul acesta, profesor de sociologie – PROFESOR de sociologie, de fapt, ne tot repeta:
NU este suficient ca o propoziție să fie corectă din punct de vedere logic. Pentru ca o propoziție să fie adevărată ea trebuie să aibe sens din punct de vedere epistemologic.
După ’90, luptele „intestine” – atât în PNL cât și în PSD, au avut loc după tipicul ‘recomandat’. „Liderii din țară” s-au tot adunat, ‘la ceas de seară’, și au hotărât mazilirea – scuze, „raderea”, celui în cârca căruia a fost aruncată responsabilitatea pentru eșecul care precipitase adunarea ‘cinstitelor fețe’.
Și cu asta ‘ce-am făcut’?!?
Cam tot progresul înregistrat în ultimii 30 s-a ‘întâmplat’ mai degrabă în ciuda politicienilor. Nu e locul aici pentru o discuție despre ineficiența guvernanților – în general, sau despre neisprăvirea celor dâmbovițeni. Mai țineți minte zicala asta?
‘Cine știe cu adevărat, face cu mâna lui. Cine are ceva habar, face pe șeful. Iar cine n-are nici un habar, învată pe ceilalți.’
Din câte țin eu minte, ‘adunarea la ceas de seară’ și ‘raderea’ șefilor atunci când aceștia calcă pe bec sunt niște apucături mafiote.
Asta ne dorim?
Asta ‘îți doresc eu ție, scumpă Românie’?!?
Bineînțeles că tot ceea ce se întâmplă acum este un circ ieftin. Care nu doar că dezamăgește… Partea cu adevărat proastă a ceea ce se întâmplă acum este demotivarea, nu dezamăgirea.
Dezamăgirea, atunci când ne vom trezi din demotivare, va fi un lucru bun. Abia după ce ne vom fi dezamăgit destul, vom reuși să ne debarasăm de complexul „lui Tătuca”.
De speranța deșartă că va veni cineva, ales/numit ‘la ceas de seară’ de către … ?!?, și care va rezolva, în sfârșit, toate problemele. Toate problemele NOASTRE! Fără ca noi să mai trebuiască să facem nimic. În afară de să-l votăm atunci când îi va fi venit rândul…
Odată! Că după aia, va avea el grijă să nu mai piardă următoarele nu știu câte alegeri…
Uite de aia, și nu din masochism, accept ca fiind firesc circul la care asistăm cu toții. Măcar avem ocazia să ne dumirim. Să vedem și noi cine ce părere are. Și ce idei susține.
După toată chestia asta, întreaga responsabilitate ne va aparține. Nouă, nu lor. Ei își vor fi dat arama pe față. Politicieni, analiști, vectori de imagine…
De acum încolo… noi trebuie să alegem încotro vrem să mergem. Făcând, în primul rând!
Au trecut deja 10 ani de când Băsescu a ‘dat din casă’. L-a luat gura pe dinainte, a făcut-o expre’… Contează?!?
Tot ce contează e că am pierdut acești 10 ani! Ne-a dat mură-n gură și noi tot ne facem că plouă…
Pricepem odată? Toți cei implicați! Economie privată și funcționari ai statului. Că dacă o mai ținem așa – adică dacă ne mai furăm singuri căciula, vine frigul peste noi.
Și facem encefalită! Că vorba din străbuni e clară:
Peștele de la cap se-mpute. Da’ se curăță de la coadă!
PS. Va e lene să cautați ‘epistemologic’ pe net? Hoffman vroia să spună că propoziția trebuie să descrie o realitate. Un adevăr. În situația analizată, dacă suficient de mulți dintre cei în cauză ar fi avut bun simț și umanitate, n-am fi ajuns în halul în care suntem acum. N-ar mai fi fost nevoie de nici o ‘adunare mafiotă’!
And maybe the same kind of thinking had motivated this ‘concerned citizen’…
An almost empty beach. Half past five in the evening. One person – some sources maintain it was a woman, other refrain from specifying this, notices a woman ‘pleasuring’ herself. That person ‘duly’ records the incident using her phone and then reports it to the police. The ‘trespasser’ is identified – she didn’t even try to hide, admits to the ‘offense’ and is eventually “booked for indecent exposure and disorderly conduct”.
Remember that only one person had noticed what was going on. And was hurt in their feelings. So hurt that they had to alert the authorities.
There are some things each of us should do in moderation.
Drink, eat, ‘rest’…
There are some things each of us should never do.
Lie, steal, kill.
The things we must do ‘depend’ upon our DNA. Unless we do what our DNA tells us to do, we die.
The things we shouldn’t do have been determined culturally. Our fore-fathers have noticed that not doing ‘those things’ helped a lot. That communities who taught their members to not do those things survived a lot easier and fared a lot better than those communities who had been ‘lax’ about ‘things’. Teaching what to do and what to not do across generations transformed learned information into culture.
In time, culture has fulfilled the same function as DNA.
DNA had made it possible for life to exist. For species to survive. And to evolve when needed. When the environment had changed.
Culture had made it possible for communities to survive. Individuals belonging to each generation didn’t had to reinvent fire each time they were cold. Or afraid. Or hungry. They just remembered what their ancestors had taught them and put it into practice.
But there’s also a huge difference between DNA and culture. Both consist of information passed over generations and both are instrumental in the survival of those who depend on that information being put to use. The difference consists in the fact that DNA actually demands a certain behavior while culture only recommends certain ‘answers’.
There’s more.
DNA is a ‘language’. It has ‘letters’, ‘syntactic’ rules and even means to correct errors. Culture uses languages as a vehicle.
Both code information using ‘letters’ and ‘words’ but they differ in how that information is passed to the next generation. DNA passes that information in a way more ‘rigid’ manner than culture does.
While it is true that slight differences occur whenever genetic information is passed from one generation to another – that’s how evolution works, those ‘directly interested’ in the process have nothing to say about this whole thing. The differences occur accidentally and survive only if they don’t harm the organisms where they appear.
With cultural information things happen in the exact opposite manner. Differences occur only when enough individuals notice that it would be beneficial for them to change that particular habit in that particular manner.
And now we have reached the moment to contemplate another similarity.
As the DNA has become more elaborate, the ‘superior’ organisms had enjoyed more individual ‘freedom’. Or ‘lee-way’. Insects have more lee-way than worms, fish have more lee-way than star-fish, dogs have more lee-way than frogs and humans have more freedom than the rest of the apes have lee-way. Similarly, people belonging to the hunter-gatherer culture had accrued a lot more freedom when they had learned – and taught it to their children, how to make fire. And so on. Those who had learned how to grow their own food – and passed the information to the next generations, had far less chances of dying of hunger. And a lot more lee-way to conduct war… Those who had learned how to make metal tools were a lot freer than those who shaped their tools out of stone. And very soon the stone-shapers had been ‘subdued’ by those yielding bronze weapons.
And so on to the present day. Those who have become adept users of mass-media are seeding ‘change’ into the minds of the naive.
I only hope that they will eventually find out what Ernst Mayr had to say about this process.
The problem with the ‘lee-way’ generated by culture being that whenever it becomes too wide the whole system becomes fragile.
Whenever people get high enough on freedom they forget that in order to survive we need to remain inside the ‘straight and narrow’ mandated by DNA and endorsed by culture.
Otherwise put, being torn between musts and don’ts is far better than being stuck. In a grave.
One-Time
Monthly
Yearly
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
Or enter a custom amount
$
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated! Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
Cică unul era cam fustangiu. Avea și niște obiceiuri sexuale destul de ‘condimentante’. Colac peste pupază, avea și un papagal… Vorbitor!
Obiceiul tipului era să invite câte o ‘doritoare’ la el acasă și, înainte de a ‘trece la treabă’ să ‘negocieze’ cu ea ce urma să se întâmple. N-are rost să intrăm în amanunte.
Doar că tipul avea o problemă. Pe la jumătatea negocierilor și apoi pe toată durata ‘întâmplărilor’ papagalul se cam băga în seamă. ‘Insera’ tot felul de comentarii. Hazlii, nimic de zis, doar că diminuau concentrarea preopinenților. Nu e ușor să joci în Kama Sutra atunci când te umflă râsul!
Așa că tipul s-a hotărât. Că trebuie să pună piciorul în prag. Sau cortina pe colivie… Nimic! Papagalul continua să comenteze.
A fost nevoie de o discuție tete-a-tete. Sau tete-a-bec…
„Dacă te prind că mai scoți o vorbă, o singură vorbă, îți smulg toate penele!”
Treaba a funcționat o vreme. Papagalul se potolise. Mai ales că după un timp tipul ridicase cortina de pe colivie și papagalul se putea bucura din nou de spectacol…
Până când una dintre preopinente s-a dovedit a fi pe măsura tipului. Și a venit cu câteva idei proprii! Așa că cei doi au început negocieri serioase. Poziții, secvențe, alea alea…
La un moment dat, papagalul nu mai rezistă. Și face următorul anunț:
Îmi bag picioarele-n ele de pene, astea sunt faze de comentat!
19 Iulie 202130 August 202130 August 2021, mai pe-nserat
Cum era aia cu ‘doi iepuri dintr-un foc’? Uite ca în politică se poate…
I was arguing in my previous post that our job is to determine meaning.
And to steer our actions in such a manner as to disturb as little as possible the natural equilibrium. Primum non nocere. The most important thing is to not endanger survival. Of everybody and of everything.
Please compare the next two memes.
Which one makes more sense? What each of them tells us about how their respective author sees us, the rest of the people?
One-Time
Monthly
Yearly
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
Or enter a custom amount
$
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated! Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
Plants transform water, minerals and sunshine into organic matter. Herbivores transform plant matter into meat. Predators cull the misfit among the herbivores. Scavengers return the ‘discrete components’ back to where they belong. At the start of the cycle.
Please note that this train of transformations happens both above and below water. That it includes all living organisms we know about. And that it constantly reshapes the environment.
The oxygen we breathe had been produced, at first, by some primitive bacteria. The soil which currently nurtures the plants which feed everybody else is a ‘by product’ of past and present organisms.
And so on.
Life is a web. Each of the species, a knot in this web.
Each member of a species gives some and takes some from the web. And, in doing this, keeps the web alive. Gives strength to each knot and keeps the entire web in one piece. In one functional piece.
At first, we – humans, as well at the rest of the apes, have been playing ‘top dog’. We’ve always taken more than we’ve been giving back. Apes have very few natural predators, except for viruses and bacteria. But what we used to take wasn’t that much out of proportion as to make a noticeable dent. As to endanger the big picture.
Until we, humans, have invented agriculture. Have actually enslaved plants and animals to serve us. Shaped the world to cater for our needs. Transformed forests into savannas to feed our animals and savannas into fields for our crops. Then fields into cities for our dwellings and industrial parks for our factories.
Enslaving the nature hasn’t been enough. We have enslaved our own brethren to work in our place. To take care of our animals, to tend our crops, to clean our houses, even to nurse our new-born.
And we have started to fight among ourselves. Attempting to control more and more of the Earth, we have stepped on each-other’s toes. Then ‘we’ have started to push back against ‘them’. By force, if necessary. By deadly force, if we saw fit.
Here’s were we stand now.
Our current contribution is negative. We have polluted the planet way beyond its short term capacity to cope with all the refuse we’re stacking on its back. We have burned enough of the fossil fuel which had been accumulated during hundreds of millions of years that we have thus changed the composition of the atmosphere. Changed it in the wrong direction… By hunting and by ‘repurposing’ the land we have contributed to the huge bio-diversity loss we are currently witnessing.
Some of us have started to understand what’s going on. Not only to understand but also to attempt to remedy the situation.
When one country had fallen under the ‘spell’ of terrorists – and a danger for all other countries, a large coalition of ‘interested parties’ have stepped in. And tried to make things right. For a host of reasons, that effort turned sour. And the ‘interested parties’ have decided to leave.
Amid all that mayhem, a lonely soul had remained steadfast. And spun the Earth in the other direction in his desperate attempt to save his protegees from the advancing Taliban. In his successful attempt to save his protegees from the advancing Taliban…
The way I see it, we – humans, are here to impart meaning to everything we get in contact with.
Now, what’s the meaning of the ‘story’ above?
Are we finally understanding the responsibility we have towards the rest of the living world? Or we’re still arrogant enough to do as we please? Without any consideration for what’s going to happen next?
As I said before. Humans don’t have any natural predators. Except for bacteria, viruses … and other people.
A little over three centuries ago, a certain Thomas Malthus maintained “that infinite human hopes for social happiness must be vain, for population will always tend to outrun the growth of production.” Let me add that Malthus had been educated at the Jesus College in Cambridge – where he had received his master of arts degree in 1791, and had taken his “holy orders” in 1797. Had been elected a fellow of the Royal Society in 1821, elected a member of the French Academie des Sciences Morales et Politiques, to the Royal Academy of Berlin… and so on… Until now, Malthus has been proven wrong. We somehow managed to feed ourselves. In fact, despite the fact that we’re now roughly 8 times more numerous than we were in 1800, most of us eat far better than most of Malthus’ contemporaries. Live way longer. Lead far happier lives. Not without ‘associated’ costs. Borne mainly by the environment. And by some of the ‘others’.
The problem being that the things which had worried Malthus – population growth and the limited nature of the Earth, are true only in part. Yes, population growth puts indeed a lot of pressure on the limited Earth we currently inhabit, but the main thing which limits our “social happiness” is our limited understanding of what’s going on here.
Our self centered and self serving image of the world. Our own inability to find a long term, life preserving meaning for the things which happen around us.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated! Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
OK. So the Spanish needed a word for ‘what to do when dealing with things royal’ and borrowed the French word for ‘label’. Things worked, the French noticed and borrowed the new meaning back into their own vocabulary. In the end, when the English developed the formal side of their ‘royal life’, they looked no further. Why invent a new word when there already was one which worked?
But very soon the whole thing had grown out of proportion. At first a ‘simple’ guide teaching the neophytes how to avoid the wrath of the initiates, it had ended as a straight jacket. Stifling everybody, including the star of the show, the king himself. The very guy whose wrath was supposed to be avoided by adhering to the etiquette…
For instance, using ‘they’ instead of either ‘he’ or ‘she’. Specially in writing and as a must when the gender identity isn’t clear.
At first a ‘simple’ guide teaching the neophytes how to avoid the wrath of the initiates, it had ended as a straight jacket…
Why am I not astonished?!?
There is a whole literature about PC having gone mad. Some for and some against the idea, of course. Some blame the ‘enthusiasts’ on one side, others the ‘manipulative’ on the other. Which ‘enthusiasts’ and ‘manipulative’ can be found on both sides…
The end result?
When I grew up, being polite mandated a man to hold the door open for women to pass. For perfect strangers as well as for a wife, a daughter, a friend, a co-worker. Do this today and you’ll certainly get some angry frowns…
Does it make any sense?
Being politically correct or dismissing it as an attack against freedom? Of speech in particular and of freedom in general?
Neither. Does it make any sense to transform everything into a weapon? Both political correctness and freedom being included into ‘everything’!
Does it make any sense to frown upon somebody who holds the door for you, just because you are a woman? Does it make any sense to frown upon somebody who tells you it’s counterproductive to tell somebody they are stupid? Simply because the more stupid they are, the less are they inclined to understand what you want to convey…
So. We, people, have already managed to spoil two well intended ‘guides’. Which have both started as tools to facilitate interaction and ended up a straight jacket and a subject for quarrel, respectively.
What’s going on here? Am I the only one who believes this kind of behavior is self destructive?
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated! Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
I say this makes absolutely no sense. It’s not only insulting for the nay-sayers, it’s actually dangerous for ourselves.
For all of us. Vaccinated, unvaccinated and unvaccinables.
Let me explain. The US Army, and all other successful ones, live by ‘no one left behind’. Far more than its technological prowess, this constitutes its main strength. Each of the individuals involved feel that they belong there. That no matter what will happen in the battle field, none of them will be ‘left behind’. It is this collective sentiment which transforms a motley collection of ‘misfits’ into the most powerful army in the world. The fact that the ‘home team’ foots the bill for the most technologically advanced ‘tools of war’ only adds to that strength. That huge bill being itself a proof of the powerful bond which exists between those who ‘serve’ and the general population. ‘No one left behind’ once again.
Flash back to the nay-sayers.
I’m convinced they’re completely mistaken. That Covid is for real, that vaccines work – even if imperfectly, that the mask is useful – and that calling it ‘face diaper’ is insulting. And I’m also convinced that we should rather hear them out than call them ‘unhinged’.
For two reasons. The first, and most obvious, being that calling them names opens up the door for them calling us names. How soon after a session of name-calling do you think we’ll regain ‘mutual recognition’? How soon after a session of name calling will we able to regain our ability to ‘speak freely’? And to listen in earnest what the others have to say? The second, and the more important one, being that it’s hugely important for us, for all of us, to understand the reasons which fuel this ‘nay-saying’. What made the nay-saying propaganda so successful.
isn’t going to bridge the growing gap which yawns our society apart.
The fact that Trump – and his minions, have been instrumental in the digging of the gap is one thing. His ‘thing’. In which direction each of us pushes – what each of us does about the present situation, is quite another thing. Our ‘thing’, this time.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated! Another very efficient way to help would be to share my posts.
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
As much as I love writing, I do have to eat. And to provide for my family. Earning money takes time. If you’d like me to write more, and on a more regular basis, hit the button. Your contribution will be appreciated!
nicichiarasa 