Archives for category: Respect Mutual.

It is up to us to decide how we put traditional precepts into practice!

islamic law about marriage

And what is there to stop the father from accepting her choice except for his ego or self serving interests?

Click on the picture, watch the video and then tell me what ‘higher instance’ forced any of those people to do what they did, to make the choices they made..
All individuals featured in this video belong to the Afghan people and, presumably, to the Muslim faith. Yet their attitudes cover the entire spectrum. Don’t tell me there is no such thing as free will and individual responsibility.

What forced the father to give away his daughter as compensation for his son’s “sins”?
Peer pressure?!? (‘Relatives’ that may become belligerent if their demands are not met.)
But who are these ‘peers’ if not human beings themselves?

When are we going to understand that we can not quell yesterday’s conflict by inflicting fresh sufferance?
This just doesn’t work!

Pentru cei care nu isi aduc aminte de razboiul rece: MAD nu insemna doar nebunie ci si ‘Mutual Assured Destruction’.

Ideea era ca fiecare dintre cele doua parti avea suficiente bombe incat daca incepea razboiul ambele parti urmau sa fie, in cele din urma, distruse. In situatia asta nici una dintre ele n-ar mai fi avut vre-un interes sa inceapa ostilitatile. In perioada aceea rationamentul acesta s-a dovedit a fi fost valabil.
Sa nu uitam totusi ca aceasta valabilitate a avut loc in anumite conditii. Comanda era extrem de centralizata, ‘butonul’ nu era la indemana oricui, iar distrugerea ar fi fost efectiva. Absolut nimeni nu avea unde sa se ascunda pentru asi putea continua viata. Bine, daca nu cumva socoteai ca traiul, pentru cateva luni sau ani, in niste pesteri de beton si la cheremul unor masinarii ar putea fi considerat viata …

Mi-am adus aminte de nebunia asta gandindu-ma la ce se intampla de ceva vreme la noi in tara.

Presedintele este acuzat de ani buni ca ar fi fost ofiter sau informator al securitatii, ca ar fi vandut flota si ca si-ar fi dat singur o casa pe vremea cand era primar. Mai nou a iesit la iveala si ca una dintre fiicele sale ar fi cumparat niste teren agricol care ar fi fost retrocedat in mod ilegal.
Un fost prim ministru condamnat la puscarie in doua spete diferite.
Un alt prim-ministru, in functie, acuzat de plagiat.
Un vice prim ministru, tot in functie, cercetat pentru fraudarea unor alegeri.
Nici nu mai stiu cati ministrii la puscarie, unii eliberati deja. Nici nu conteaza daca au intrat pe merit sau nu, si intr-un caz si in celalalt ‘ceva e putred in Danemarca’. (Nu conteaza pentru analiza rece a situatiei, fiecare dintre acesti oameni trece in mod evident printr-o drama intensa, iarasi indiferent daca sunt sau nu vinovati de cele ce li se pun in carca).
Fratele presedintelui aflat in arest preventiv pentru trafic de influenta
Votanti alergati de procuratura si pusi sa jure cu mana pe biblie daca au fost sau nu la vot.

biblia electorala

 

Si acum ne pregatim de un nou demers electoral… Avand in vedere ce au patit ultima oara or mai iesi oamenii sa voteze?

Ca pentru a-i incuraja in ultimele doua saptamani lucrurile au luat-o si mai repede la vale.

O intreaga pleiada de figuri importante din intreg spectrul politic a fost acuzata de ‘relatii incestuase’ cu Microsoft, sau mai exact spus cu un distribuitor al acestuia pentru Romania.
Iar cand procuratura a cerut un aviz parlamentar pentru anchetarea unora dintre acestia dosarul care a ajuns la comisia de resort nu respecta niste norme ‘tehnice’ extrem de banale. Comisia a amanat luarea vreunei hotarari. Incompetenta crasa? O intamplare nefericita? Incercare disperata de a trage de timp?
Presedintele tarii il acuza pe primul ministru, care este si cel mai bine cotat candidat la presedentie, ca ar fi fost ofiter de informatii sub acoperire pe vremea cand lucra in procuratura – situatie de incalcare flagranta a legii.
Dosare de coruptie din ce in ce mai importante incep sa iasa la iveala pe banda rulanta, cel mai recent referindu-se la fratele vitreg al regelui, printul(?!?) Paul ‘de Romania’ (?!?) care ar fi primit vreo doi trei munti ‘moca’. In dosar fiind implicati si membri marcanti ai PSD-ului. Nici partea cealalta n-a fost uitata, personaje cel putin la fel de celebre refugiindu-se deja ‘prin tarile calde’…
Se pare ca si securizarea frontierelor de stat a fost un bun prilej pentru ca ‘unii’ – de ambele parti ale ‘frontierei’ – sa-si ‘rotunjeasca veniturile iar dosarul cu privire la chestia asta a fost reactivat tocmai acum.

Prin ce se deosebeste situatia de la noi de cea din timpul razboiului rece?
Dupa cum devine din ce in ce mai evident taberele se pregatisera din timp cu tot felul de dosare numai ca nu prea stiau unii de altii. Nu ca n-ar fi stiut ce au facut ceilalti… pur si simplu nu credeau ca ceilalti sunt la fel de hotariti.

Cand a cazut prima lovitura replica a venit cat se poate de promt. Iar acum situatia a inceput sa semene cu o partida de ping pong… Nu ca ce se intampla ar fi ceva rau, mai ies scheletele de prin dulapuri…Mai cred si ca fenomenul a fost amplificat de faptul ca celor din Ministerul Public li s-a cam facut lehamite de tot circul asta… plus ca in ultima vreme chiar au posibilitati reale de a cerceta pe bune… iar cand doi se cearta chiar ar fi cazul ca cel de al treilea sa nu se mai lase calcat pe cap de niciunul dintre cei doi.

Cum de s-a ajuns in situatia asta?
Pentru ca au dat de fundul sacului. Nu ca n-ar mai fi… problema e ca nu le mai ajunge!
Si mai ales pentru ca isi inchipuie ca au unde sa se ascunda. Mai un paradis fiscal, mai un pic de uitare din partea populatiei, mai o prescriptie…

Si inca ar mai fi cum ar mai fi daca tot ce se intampla i-ar afecta doar pe ei!
Partea proasta este ca ei se cearta iar oalele sparte ne cad noua in cap!
La o adica ei pot merge si cu elicopterul, in schimb noi trebuie sa ne multumim cu gaurile din autostrazile care ba sunt drumuri rapide, ba nu se mai fac deloc… iar cand se fac nu au ‘parapeti de siguranta’…

Oare cand vom intelege o data ca nici unul dintre smecherii astia nu poate face nimic de unul singur?

Acum vreo cativa ani l-am auzit cu urechile mele pe Basescu la televizor – era la o intalnire cu Camera de Comert Romano-Americana in decembrie 2011 – spunandu-le ‘oaspetilor straini’ ca nu se poate ‘coruptie fara corupatori’ si ‘partii romane’ ca ‘nici un ministru n-ar putea sa-si faca de cap daca unii dintre cei din jurul lor nu i-ar ajuta iar ceilalti n-ar intoarce capul’.

Cred ca ar trebui sa aplicam si de data asta intelepciunea populara: ‘fa ce spune popa, nu ce face popa’.
Pana la urma MAD inseamna si Make A Difference.
Fiecare ce alge.
Trebuie totusi sa alegem cu foarte mare grija pentru ca alegerile noastre influenteaza si vietile celor de langa si de dupa noi. Si nu stiu daca vom avea toti pe unde sa ne ascundem de consecintele colective ale alegerilor noastre.

idiot cu o agenda

Un exemplu perfect despre cum un idiot cu o agenda – cel care a trimis drona pe teren, indiferent de cine ar fi fost el – poate trage inapoi doua natiuni care incearca sa normalizeze relatiile dintre ele.
Intr-adevar cei mai multi dintre sarbi au dat dovada de multa retinere, lucrurile ar fi putut degenera mult mai urat.
Iar puținii care s-au manifestat violent au ratat un excelent prilej de a demonstra o adevarata intelepciune:

De cate ori te lasi provocat de atatea ori ii faci jocul provocatorului!

 

Mi-a trimis cineva bancul asta pe mail.

“un tip de la o multinationala munceste zilnic 14 ore. de ziua lui hotaraste sa-si ia o zi de concediu si sa inchirieze o escorta. da telefon la o firma:
-vreau ce aveti mai bun!
-ok dar va costa 1000e seara si daca doriti si sex inca 1000e fetei.
-nu-i pb ok! maine la ora 18.30 la restaurant la hilton!
ajunge tipul ajunge si fata o tipa super, vorbesc ei cate in luna si stele, tipul entuziasmat
-acum hai sa mergem si la tine
ii da fetei 1000e si ajung la ea acasa…aici vede o multime de carti in engleza, germana…
-tu citesti aceste carti sau sunt pt decor sa dea bine?
-evident ca le citesc eu! am absolvit filologia, vb curent engleza, germana, italiana, spaniola, franceza…
cat timp se pregateste fata, tipul vede un raft cu kant, schopenhauer…
-cu filozofii astia ce faci?
-pai am un master si in filozofie…
– bine draga dar curva cum ai ajuns?

-printr-un mare NOROC!
Evident ca m-au apucat toti dracii:
“Da idiotul ala pentru ce lucra 14 ore pe zi?

Ca sa aiba bani pentru curve cu doctorat in filozofie si sa-i imbogateasca pe cei cu firma care inchiriaza ‘escorte’?

N-ar fi fost mai firesc sa munceasca 10 ore pe zi si sa aibe timp de prieteni, de familie, de o viata normala?”

 

A FB friend of mine shared this post:

melted heart

(You know the drill, click on the picture if you want to watch)

The video is accompanied by this rather touchy caption:

Because they bring us joy.
Because they are at our mercy.
Because they teach us kindness.
And compassion.
And understanding.
Because they are voiceless.
Because they wish us no harm.
Because they are our companions.
And because we are all animals.
We will never stop being a voice, for them.

Help us create a kinder world for animals: www.bit.ly/vo2Aco

Video via TheHumpyObserver
Music: The Time To Run (Finale) by Dexter Britain”

Really?!?

“Help us create a kinder world for animals”? Wow…
Now why on Earth should we ‘create’ a ‘kinder’ world for them?!?
How about not destroying the one they already have and which has served them a lot better than whatever we might come up with?

“Middle Class doesn’t understand wealth”:

“Few people in the middle class really understand the mindset of the richest people.

After all, if they did, they would be among the top earners as well.

“Among the many money issues misperceived by the general public is the notion that acquiring great wealth is more about showing off than creating choices. While money certainly brings status, it’s acquired mostly for the purpose of attaining personal liberty.It’s impossible to be truly free without wealth. The middle class is controlled by employment, government, and other entities with superior resources that dictate what they can and can’t do. It’s tough to make a moral stand for freedom when you’re worried about making your next mortgage payment.Rich people can afford to stand up and fight oppression. They can afford to buy their way out of unhealthy work environments, bad bosses, and other unpleasant situations. They have the means to enlist the best doctors when they get sick, and they are able to make themselves as comfortable as possible when they can’t get well. When they want to raise money for business, politics, or charity, a few phone calls to their rich friends is all it takes. If they need more money, they throw a party or host an auction and charge $1,000 a ticket. The examples of how much money buys freedom are endless.Start thinking about the freedoms you’ll gain when you are wealthy!

“It’s impossible to be truly free without wealth. The middle class is controlled by employment, government, and other entities with superior resources that dictate what they can and can’t do. It’s tough to make a moral stand for freedom when you’re worried about making your next mortgage payment.

Rich people can afford to stand up and fight oppression. They can afford to buy their way out of unhealthy work environments, bad bosses, and other unpleasant situations. They have the means to enlist the best doctors when they get sick, and they are able to make themselves as comfortable as possible when they can’t get well. When they want to raise money for business, politics, or charity, a few phone calls to their rich friends is all it takes. If they need more money, they throw a party or host an auction and charge $1,000 a ticket. The examples of how much money buys freedom are endless.

“The rich really are different”

“This one-room house was about a mile away from any road. It had no floor, no latrine, no electricity, no running water, no windows. Twelve people lived in it, all under the age of 25, and every one of them were born in that house.
  Several of the kids were showing signs of malnutrition. Their only source of water was a fetid stream that was polluted with cholera.

 There were a lot of houses like this, but this one was the worst.

  When I tell my friends in the States about this place their responses are always “Wow. That’s sad.” or something like that.
   What my friends don’t do is ask questions like, “How do they do such-and-such?” The questions never occur to my working class friends because this level of poverty is foreign to them.

  Sure, people in America understand the fear of not being able to find work, or losing their homes, or having their kids go to bed hungry.
   But that isn’t 3rd world poverty. So while working class Americans empathize, they can’t understand it in a day-to-day way.

  As for the super wealthy, who have never experienced the fear of losing a home, or missing a meal, they simply have no associated experience.
  They say to themselves, “I work hard. Why can’t you?”
And one thing you can’t hold against the super wealthy on Wall Street and elsewhere is that a lot of them do work hard and put in long hours.
   What they don’t understand is simply not having opportunity. Something their lives are filled with. They don’t have empathy because everyone they have ever met has succeeded if that person worked hard.”

 

See what I mean? Both articles amply demonstrate one thing and one thing only. ‘Having it’ or ‘not having it’ dramatically changes one’s perspective on almost all things.

Why did I bother with such ‘common knowledge’?

Because this is NOT AT ALL ‘common knowledge’. Had it been common it would have created mutual understanding, as it is it creates a wider and wider chasm.

People knowing that something exists doesn’t mean ‘common knowledge’. It becomes so only after enough of those people have an at least partially overlapping view of that something.

cerebral palsy, painting

Computers can be used for painting or for distributing child pornography.
We, the users, are the ones who make the difference.

As in mob rule?

A British historian that went by the name of Lord Acton observed more than a hundred years ago that
“All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Judging by what historians keep writing and the politicians keep ignoring this observation tends to be pertinent.
Click on the highlighted quote to see some of his arguments in Ben Morrell’s interpretation.

Somewhat unhappy with this vision, a sci fi writer, Frank Herbert, contradicted the historian:
“Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted.”

In fact it’s more like a completion than a contradiction but I’ll have to leave it at that because both are dead now and way past such mundane preoccupations.

Recently, things having not been properly set yet, a team of Swiss scientists lead by John Antonakis decided to sink their teeth in the matter. They gathered a group of people, ‘measured’ all sides of their personalities – including their honesty – and then involved them in a game of ‘lets play dictator’.
“The findings showed that those who measured as less honest exhibited more corrupt behaviour, at least initially; however, over time, even those who initially scored high on honesty were not shielded from the corruptive effects of power.”

OK, so Acton was right altogether, ‘power’ does corrupt. The problem is that Antonakis never tried to verify Herbert’s hypothesis. If he was right then the honest people stand no chance at becoming powerful enough to become corrupted because the already corruptible are fighting dirty to get on top, something the more honest would not do, at least not from the very beginning. Seen this way the very competition for power selects the people who get on top based on how corruptible they are.

Luckily things are not that simple. Really smart guys, no matter how corruptible, figure it out – sooner rather than later, that by ‘stealing’ too much/misbehaving really bad  they destroy the entire structure upon which their very existence, let alone power, depends.

So how come really bad dictators do come into existence?
From Lenin to Hitler, from Ceausescu to Pol Pot and nowadays from Putin to al-Baghdadi.

Here Antonakis’ findings fit in perfectly.
Participants “were given complete control over deciding pay-outs to themselves and their followers. The leaders had the choice of making prosocial or antisocial decisions, the latter of which resulted in reduced total pay-outs to the group but increased the leader’s own earnings.”

The key concept here is ‘complete control’. In fact this ‘dictator game’ is no game at all. It’s nothing but a solitaire. It has rules, certainly, but it’s up to the ‘player’ himself to decide whether to respect them or not. If the rest of the people concerned – those who suffer the consequences of the ‘game’, have no say in what is going on then they don’t count. And are not able to help, either. The final outcome will depend exclusively on the honesty of the ‘player’. And we haven’t, as yet, made any mention about skills…

Besides the very important insight Antonakis also offers us a valuable piece of advice:
” “We think that strong governance mechanisms and strong institutions are the key to keeping leaders in check,” concludes Antonakis. “Organisations should limit how much leaders can drink from the seductive chalice of power.” “

It’s a very good starting point. Add to it a renewed insistence on initial honesty – it helps, just as the study showed, coupled with intense surveillance and continuous feed back from the stakeholders and things might improve dramatically.

After all ‘governance mechanisms’, ‘strong institutions’ and ‘organizations’ are nothing but words. Powerful and meaningful words indeed but ‘words’ cannot do anything by themselves. They have first to be pronounced by pertinent persons and then diligently put into practice.

And this would mean that ‘power’ won’t belong to anyone in particular, not even to ‘the people’.

Keep tuned for the difference between real democracy and ‘mob rule’.

For some time I’ve been ‘wriggling’ my brain continuously yet I failed, as of now, to find the difference between those who ‘paint Islam using a big brush’:

and those who use a more subtle one to poke fun at Jews:

I only hope that people like Reza Aslan will go on explaining to us that ‘Islam is just a religion and like every other religion in the world it depends on what you bring into it”.:

and that those who ‘spread bullshit about religion’ will finally understand that they are not helping anybody. OK, they do increase their audience but at what price? Is it really worth it to pitch one community against another just in order to make ratings?

https://nicichiarasa.wordpress.com/2014/10/01/george-carlin-spreading-bullshit-about-religion/

 

 

 

This video is funny as hell and more than half true.

Unfortunately Carlin belongs to that group of people (religious as well as un and anti religious) that confuse ‘religion’ with those who ‘administer’ (use) religious passions of the people in order to reach their personal goals.

‘Religion’, per se, is nothing but a set of convictions held in common by the members of a community, convictions that have been accumulated in time and represent the affective memory of the community that partakes in those convictions.
‘People’, on the other hand, are individual members of the community who have been influenced all their lives by the afore mentioned convictions – regardless if a particular individual currently holds  those convictions or not – and who lead their lives negotiating continuously inside their minds, consciously or unconsciously,  about how to apply those convictions in their daily lives.

In this respect every ‘bullshit’ – perpetrated in the name of religion, against it or having nothing directly to do with it – is the ‘work’ of ‘people’ – who have ‘free will’ (= personal autonomy) – not the direct result of ‘religion’.

Christian teachers tell us that god works through man, never directly. Same thing applies to religion.
That’s why blaming ‘religion’ for anything is logically equivalent to blaming god for everything.

Not a very ‘atheist’ attitude, is it?