Blame is something which is attributed while responsibility is something which is assumed.

Let’s return to rape.
The recurring question here being:

As stated by the Chinese proverb above, victim blaming will get us nowhere. For as long as we’ll ‘blame first, ask questions later’ we’ll never understand what’s going on. Remain stuck in ‘status quo’.
Where some of the victims will feel entitled to say:

Can you blame them?
Should we blame them? After all, the broadness of the accusation ultimately reduces it to a shot in the foot…
But haven’t we agreed earlier that blame will not move us forward? No matter how we feel about the whole thing?

How about ‘manning’ up?
How about each of us, men and women, assuming responsibility? Each their own!

Why?!?
Simply because it is us who have to deal with the consequences!
We, the women who get raped.
We, the fathers, brothers, partners, sons, friends, etc. of the raped women.
And we, the mothers of the raped women.

We, all of us, have ‘condoned’ a society where male children are taught to be assertive. Chivalrous, maybe, but, certainly, assertive.
And, simultaneously, a society where female children are taught to behave nicely and to refrain from becoming a ‘nuisance’.
These are, roughly, the gender roles our society – read ‘we, the parents’, continue to imprint upon the young generation. The Dolce and Gabbana advertisement above being only one of the myriad examples which illustrates this fact.

What next?

In the name of ‘playing it safe’ are we going to presume that each male (?!?) is a potential rapist?
And take the ‘necessary’ precautions?


Ooops!
How is a potential victim going to protect herself against a (close) acquaintance?
What kind of clothing are they supposed to wear and what kind of a behavior should they adopt in order to avoid being raped by a “current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend (?!?)”

OK, let’s consider we’re done with the ‘blame-game’.
Let’s play ‘responsibly’ now. Who should assume it?

We! As in ‘All of us’.
For the simple reason that it will always be us who will ‘foot the bill’. Have to deal with the consequences!

From having to overcome the experience of being raped to helping towards healing the wounds to actually bearing the costs – not only the financial ones, of so many people being hurt.

We, the parents, need to educate our children in such a way as to understand that rape – in any shape, way or form, is unacceptable.
We, both men and women, need to educate ourselves about what to do when in ‘dire straits’. How to avoid ‘dangerous situations’ – from not going to ‘sleazy’ bars to not taking our dates to ‘unsafe’ places.
We, all of us, need to educate ourselves towards openness. Towards coming forward when something like this happens. Towards helping those who suffer it. As in being an ‘active’ participant instead of pretending nothing happened.
And, last but not least, we – all of us, need to learn how to overcome this.
And how to help the victims to overcome their tragic experiences.

Well, all knowledge is, ultimately, false. Or, at least, incomplete.

Bearing this in mind, we understand there is no such thing as false knowledge.
Only people unwilling to adapt their understanding of things to the newly discovered facts…
In this sense, it’s not the false knowledge which is dangerous, it’s those who worship ‘self made idols’!
Those who are so convinced that what they know is enough.
That their understanding of the world is so right and so complete that it has reached ‘perfection’.
That their Weltanschauung is, hence, ‘sacred’. ‘Worship-able’, if you’ll allow this word.

“Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God.”

How about this ‘interpretation’ of Shaw’s words?

Further reading:
Do not love your neighbor as yourself. If you are on good terms with yourself it is an impertinence: if on bad, an injury.

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!

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

One of my FB friends shared this meme and created the ‘opportunity’ for an interesting conversation.

“Say the same about the antics of parading gay pride activists…if you dare.”

I couldn’t resist:
“Gay activists parading peacefully are no threat for anybody. ‘Activists’ who actually whip other ‘activists’ during a parade… Same thing here. You really want/need to make your point? OK, take your 9mm Beretta for a walk. But an AR-15?!? Common…”

I have the ‘bad’ habit of proofreading my comments before hitting enter…

That was when it hit me!

‘Is this for real?
Was the guy actually ‘open carrying’?
Was it staged?
Could it be that the guy just bought it? Had it repaired? Or any other situation, but trying to make a fool of himself?’

OK, open carrying a gun in a public setting is… an exaggeration. For me, at least.
But this is besides the point.

The point being that we’ve reached the stage where appearance is more important than substance.
The point from which we no longer carry guns for protection but to make a point.
The bigger the ‘gun’, the more important, for us, the point we’re trying to make.

The more preposterous the meme, the more convincing we feel ourselves to be…

I’m afraid FB got us where it needs us to be!

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!

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

The above phrase makes a lot of sense.
Every beating which had become ‘public knowledge’ does make life ‘easier’ to those men who are known to be ‘peaceful’. In a sense…

On the other hand, every beating which becomes public knowledge but the beater isn’t chastised for his actions makes life harder for everybody.
For women. The beaten ones are discouraged from making their plight public. Those not beaten yet are taught that being beaten isn’t such a big deal.
For men. Those who already do it, feel no compulsion to stop. Those who would do it feel encouraged to ‘experiment’. Those who would like to do it but cannot – for whatever reasons, feel frustrated. Those who abhor it feel ashamed for belonging to the same gender. And discouraged from doing anything about it.
For the entire species. Violence become normalized. Socially accepted. Expected, even… Mothers and fathers don’t teach their sons that this is an unacceptable behavior while teaching their daughters to not be ‘surprised’ if it happens. All the more so when children witness their mother being abused while nobody does anything about it. Not even the abused mother… Not even when the abusive husband abuses the children along with the mother…

So what ‘awards’ are we talking about here? What’s the real meaning of “All men benefit from the actions of violent men”?
Or the real meaning of the phrase is that there is no such thing as a really good man?

Another logical ‘extension’ would be ‘All people benefit from the actions of thieves. This is why locks are being built and the police is being paid’. For humans are, by definition, nothing but sinners… right?

How about doing something about the whole situation instead of peddling in double edged memes?
Because the only explanation for women – along with children and peaceful men, being abused is the lack of social reaction whenever a beating – or any other form of abuse, becomes public knowledge.

Respecting other people’s opinions means respectfully telling them how wrong they are – when they are, of course, instead of shouting, in their faces, about how stupid they are – in that precise moment.

In this sense, this meme is, actually, inflammatory.
Nobody who has paid some attention in high-school – and has maintained a working eye-sight, will ever opine about something like this.
Only those who
1. don’t see/know the difference between a ‘factor’ and a ‘base’ and/or
2. don’t care enough to pay real attention – and want to get it over with,
would fall prey to this ‘ruse’.

Using this example to demand ‘stop the antiscience movement’ is, in fact, disrespectful!
And counterproductive.
It will only deepen the chasm between those who believe in science and those who see the ‘science peddlers’ as being arrogant know-alls.

Math isn’t that complicated, after all…

30 years ago – 32, to be precise, Francis Fukuyama had come up with the notion that people – as in the human race, had finally realized that liberal democracy was the only reasonable way forward. Hence ‘the end of history’. The end of conflict… the end of ‘misunderstanding’ between people…

“WASHINGTON (AP) — The Democrats’ sweeping attempt to rewrite U.S. election and voting law suffered a major setback in the Senate Tuesday, blocked by a filibuster wall of Republican opposition to what would be the largest overhaul of the electoral system in a generation.”
“The bill, known as the For the People Act, would touch on virtually every aspect of how elections are conducted, striking down hurdles to voting that advocates view as the Civil Rights fight of the era, while also curbing the influence of money in politics and limiting partisan influence over the drawing of congressional districts.
But many in the GOP say the measure represents instead a breathtaking federal infringement on states’ authority to conduct their own elections without fraud — and is meant to ultimately benefit Democrats.
It failed on a 50-50 vote after Republicans, some of whom derided the bill as the “Screw the People Act,” denied Democrats the 60 votes needed to begin debate under Senate rules. Vice President Kamala Harris, the first Black woman to hold her office, presided over the chamber as the bill failed to break past that filibuster barrier.”

The end of misunderstanding between people?!?

During the Cold War – the end of which had prompted Fukuyama to draw his conclusion, the ‘misunderstanding’ was dividing the two ideological blocs. Between those who had learned to value of the individual and those who didn’t yet had a real chance at doing this.

Nowadays the misunderstanding had seeped deeper. Way deeper…
The two parties of the country which had been the stalwart of democracy during the Cold War don’t see eye to eye as to how the electoral process should be organized.
The Guardians of the Revolution and the Supreme Leader do not agree – at least apparently, on who should be approved to run for office.

Meanwhile, Putin enjoys the limelight….

The end of history, eh?!?

Maybe, but not the one envisioned by Fukuyama…

PS
Fukuyama must be so fed up about this…
Well, I don’t think he was wrong!
I do see liberal democracy as the only reasonable way forward.
The enthusiasm with which the world had met his work was a very strong signal that things were going in the right direction…
The problem resides in the fact that other people had other plans. Had identified other ‘opportunities’.
And in the fact that we, the people, have been sleeping with out boots on!

LE.
The Moldovan officials in charge with running the 2021 snap legislative elections are tying hard to keep the Moldovan citizens living abroad away from the polling stations.


Last minute edit
The Electoral Committee, CEC, had unanimously decided that 150 polling stations will be organized, despite the Foreign Ministry asking for 191 and the Supreme Court ordering them to comply…

Do you see a pattern here?
Well. I see a question mark!
If things like gerrymandering and voter suppression can happen in America, what chances are that authoritarian wannabees won’t spring up all over the world?

“We arise as human beings in the experience of observing ourselves observing.”
Humberto Maturana, The Origin and Conservation of Self-Consciousness, 2005

Thinkers are divided when it comes to ‘reality’.

Some of them, the self styled ‘scientists’, study reality as if it was an ‘exterior’ fact.
At the other end of the spectrum, other people are convinced reality is nothing but a projection/illusion.

To me, this whole thing is yet another example of ‘which came first’, only simpler. Way simpler…

You need a chicken to lay an egg to hatch a chicken. This is indeed complicated…

‘Reality’, on the other hand, is, first and foremost, a human concept!

There was no such ‘thing’ as ‘reality’ until one of our forepersons had come up with the word/concept!

‘And where did that foreperson came ‘in’ from, huh?!?’

Have you noticed the scare marks?

The ‘thing’ we identify as being ‘reality’ had existed since… the Big Bang… I don’t know….
But I do know that nobody called it that – or thought of it in that manner, until somebody did!
And until the peers of that person agreed to use the term and to think about ‘it’ – the ‘thing’, not the word – in that manner.

‘Does this mean that we made ‘reality’?

No, not exactly made it… more about this later…
Only ‘found’ it and ‘measured’ it.
Named it, to put it in a simpler form.

As for who made it… this is another good question.

God?
I argued, in my last post, that ‘God’ – the concept, is yet another human artifact.
The only bridge we could trust to take us to the future.

I don’t know, with absolute certainty, whether the whole thing we call ‘reality’ has been made (is constantly being made, as according to the Ash-Arite tradition) by an ‘outside’ agent or it had evolved naturally. But I do know that if our ‘reality’ had been made by somebody then a ‘small’ question begs to be asked.

Who made that somebody’s reality?

I can accept the notion that we are lab rats. Playing in a pen made by some experimenter. Just as we do with/to our lab rats. But exactly as I’m trying to find an answer to ‘how did we come about’, the moment I’ll accept that we’ve been made by some agent will be the moment I’ll start wondering about ‘who pulled this creative agent out of the proverbial hat!’.

Let’s stick with the naturally evolving reality! The alternative is far too complicated…

‘But if it had evolved naturally, then nobody made it… right???!’

…No…, not exactly, anyway!
It may have evolved naturally but that doesn’t preclude any factors – and even agents, from chipping away at it!

‘What?!?
Are you gonna make up your mind?
As in once and for all???’

No, I can’t promise you anything like that!
My mind will never be ‘made up’.
My understanding is a work in progress.
I’m constantly adjusting my opinions according to the evidence ‘presented’ to me by ‘reality’.

‘And what about this constantly evolving reality? What/who drives this ‘evolution’?’

What do you see here?
A ‘Nature Made’, volcano whose flanks had been eroded by naturally occurring factors.
The debris had been transported to lower altitudes, by other naturally occurring factors and then transformed into fertile soil by a different class of equally naturally occurring factors.
The factors belonging to the first class had been rain, freeze, wind and gravity while in the second class we point out algae, microbes, plants and animals.
On top, literally, of these natural occurrences we find the consequences of our own actions. Of our own agency.
Of our own choices!

The buildings you see, the farms you know are there, the roads people take when going from their houses to their farms… and so on, up to the top of the mountain. Where we find snow full of other ‘evidence’ of our own existence. Soot, various industrial dust, etc., etc.,…

So. We live at the intersection between the natural evolution of things and the consequences of our previous existence/choices.

We live in a reality increasingly influenced by our own existence.
Are we truly aware of this?

Are we conscient enough?
Enough to realize how much of our reality is of our own doing?

Bonkers, right?

Here’s a more elaborate expression of the same concept:

“Al-Ash’ari (873–935), the founder of the theological school that al-Ghazâlî belonged to, had rejected the existence of “natures” (tabâ’i’ ) and of causal connections among created beings. In a radical attempt to explain God’s omnipotence, he combined several ideas that were developed earlier in Muslim kalâm to what became known as occasionalism. All material things are composed of atoms that have no qualities or attributes but simply make up the shape of the body. The atoms of the bodies are the carrier of “accidents” (singl. ‘arad), which are attributes like weight, density, color, smell, etc. In the cosmology of al-Ash’arî all immaterial things are considered “accidents” that inhere in a “substance” (jawhar). Only the atoms of spatially extended bodies can be substances. A person’s thoughts, for instance, are considered accidents that inhere in the atoms of the person’s brain, while his or her faith is an accident inhering in the atoms of the heart. None of the accidents, however, can subsist from one moment (waqt) to the next. This leads to a cosmology where in each moment God assigns the accidents to bodies in which they inhere. When one moment ends, God creates new accidents. None of the created accidents in the second moment has any causal relation to the ones in the earlier moment. If a body continues to have a certain attribute from one moment to the next, then God creates two identical accidents inhering in that body in each of the two subsequent moments. Movement and development generate when God decides to change the arrangement of the moment before. A ball is moved, for instance, when in the second moment of two the atoms of the ball happen to be created in a certain distance from the first. The distance determines the speed of the movement. The ball thus jumps in leaps over the playing field and the same is true for the players’ limbs and their bodies. This also applies to the atoms of the air if there happen to be some wind. In every moment, God re-arranges all the atoms of this world anew and He creates new accidents—thus creating a new world every moment (Perler/Rudolph 2000, 28–62).”

On the other hand, we currently have our own struggles.

Determinism.
Is it possible to determine the ultimate cause of anything? Forget about ‘everything’… even the ultimate cause for something seems to be far beyond our capabilities…

Freedom.
Is it real?
Or is it only a figment of our own imagination?

Reality.
Is it real?
Or is it created by our own conscience?

No links provided. Do your own googling.

Here’s what science teaches us on this matter.

Heisenberg’s ‘Uncertainty Principle’:
It is impossible to simultaneously measure with absolute precision both the position and the velocity of any object.

For many everyday instances, this doesn’t present any problem. For practical purposes, our technological prowess is enough. Philosophically… Heisenberg’s principle is yet another irrefutable indication that we’re very far from ever being able to determine the ultimate cause of anything.

Are we able to live with this uncertainty?

Are we able to go to bed at night without being absolutely sure that the sun will rise tomorrow?
OK, everybody somehow knows – even if nobody wants to accept it, that there’s a slight chance that they will not wake tomorrow… but the Sun?!?

Are we able to live with the notion that what we call ‘natural order’ isn’t fixed?

That a meteorite might come from nowhere and kill all the ‘dinosaurs’?
That a virus might spring up from nowhere and fuck up our lives?

“What we see is the fire touching the cotton and then the cotton being reduced to ashes. We wrongly assume that there is thus a necessary causal relationship between fire burning and the cotton being burned”.

Now please tell me something.
What is the subject here? Cotton being burned or our relationship with what’s going on there?

We see… we assume… He, al Ghazali, tells us that we are wrong to assume that what we see is what is really happening… He is ‘right’ – because…- and we are wrong…

The funny thing being, of course, that al-Ghazali is, partially, right!
Since Heisenberg had postulated his famous principle, we should refrain ourselves from assuming anything…

OK. Let me put it differently then.
What happened to that cotton?
Is it still white? Or had it been “reduced” to ashes?

Who brought the flame close enough to the cotton?
Was this an experiment? In a lab?
Or a tragedy? In a field/storage? By lightning? Or by an arsonist?

Returning to al Ghazali, we need to remember that his world was totally different from ours.

It’s safe to say that their culture was about as sophisticated as ours. Same arts, same subjects discussed in the philosophical circles, same religious ideas…

Civilizationally speaking, we live in a totally different world.
Civilization – the consequence of ‘culture’ being put to practice’ had advanced dramatically in the last 1000 years.

And since our thoughts are heavily influenced by the environment in which we’re doing the thinking…

The fraction of the population who enjoyed ‘food security’ was minuscule compared to today.
The fraction of the population who was pretty much sure they will awake the next morning was minuscule compared to today.
The fraction of the population who felt free – from oppression – was, practically, nonexistent.

Yet the ‘thinkers’ felt the same need for coherence as those thinking today. They felt the same need to know what tomorrow had in store for them.
They, like us, needed an explanation for disease. For war. For tragedy…
And since no pathogens nor dictators were available …

How come ‘no dictators were available’?!?
Who in his right mind would have called, then, the local ruler a ‘dictator’? In his face…
Look at what happened, now, to people doing that in Moscow!
Or even in Washington, DC

That was the role attributed to God. To be the bridge to tomorrow.

It was not the flame which reduced the cotton to ashes. Nor the experimenter/arsonist/dictator. It was ‘God’.
As long as we could accept that – and that God loved us, the future was still bearable.

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!

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

America este o țară aflată într-o stare avansată de putrefacție!
Da, dar uite ce frumos miroase….

N-am fost foarte surprins de căderea regimului Ceaușescu.
Prea se-mpuțiseră lucrurile…

În zilele alea am umblat foarte mult pe stradă. Vroiam, pur și simplu, să văd.
Așa că am văzut… Unde era o gramadă de oameni care striga ceva, hop și eu.
Să văd ce strigă. Să-i văd cum strigă…

Eram deja inginer. Și habar n-aveam că urma să devin sociolog.
Dar aveam o chestie în mine care mă împingea să fiu acolo. În „mijlocul maselor”…

Inclusiv în Piața Universității!

Tot nevoia de a fi acolo m-a făcut să fiu observator la alegerile din Duminica Orbului.
N-am intrat in PCR. Nu atât din spirit civic ci pentru că ar fi trebuit să-mi fi ras barba.
Aiurea, nu? De trei ori, în trei ocazii diferite, mi s-a propus să intru în partid. Și de fiecare dată mi s-a spus că: „Asta este o treabă foarte serioasă. Ți se vor deschide oportunități mari dar va trebui să renunți la barbă!” Le-am răspuns, fiecăruia, că „am să mă gândesc”. Toți trei m-au lăsat în pace… Or fi zis că-s nebun…
Ca să pot fi observator, am fost nevoit să mă „întregimentez”. Așa că… am devenit membru PNL. N-au avut carnet să-mi dea, atunci. După aia… nu m-am mai dus eu pe acolo…

Fiind de față, n-am fost surprins nici de rezultatul votului.
Când îi vedeam cum își fac cruce înainte de a băga buletinul în urnă – după ce își confirmaseră, unul altuia, în secția de vot, că l-au „găsit pe Iliescu”…

Am fost oarecum surprins de insistența cu care au continuat cei din Piața Universității.
Era evident că elanul din Decembrie se istovise. Iliescu „și ai lui” reușiseră – cu banane, cu portocale, cu…, să pună batista înapoi pe țambal.

Am fost foarte surprins de 13-15. Un act cât se poate de gratuit.

Așa credeam eu…
Ce rost a avut să alungi cu tam-tam o gașcă de neadaptați?
Să te expui oprobiului extern?
Să riști alienarea unei părți din populație?
Să-ți creezi obligații? Cum să devii dator, politic vorbind, unei hoarde dezlănțuite?

Surpinderea asta a durat 31 de ani. Până azi dimineață…

Nici măcar nu știam ce zi era.
La radio, Radio Actualități, cineva a vorbit vreo cinci minute despre cele întâmplate acum 31 de ani. După care a urmat alt subiect…

Abia în momentul acela am înțeles…

Gașca de neadaptați fusese adunată cu schepsis!
Vă dați seama cam ce propagandă ar fi făcut toți tinerii aia dacă s-ar fi dus la ei acasă în loc să strige în Piață?
Una e să stai de vorbă, tete-a-tete, cu bunica ta și alta e ca aceiași bunică să afle de la televizor – un singur post, dar foarte „profesionist”, ce trăznăi faci tu la București!

Oprobiul extern a fost căutat!
Scopul era să rămânem separați, nu să ne aruncăm în brațele capitaliștilor veroși… „Nu ne vindem țara!”, dacă mai țineți minte….

Alienarea cărei părți din populație?
Cea care a fost extrem de bucuroasă că și-a primit „rația de libertate”?!?
Cea care și-a pus coada pe spinare după „evenimente”?
Primii îi ciuguleau deja din palmă lui Iliescu iar plecarea celor din urmă a fost un adevărat bonus pentru organizatorii atrocităților la care am fost martori.

Și, la final dar nu în cele din urmă, am ajuns la „obligații”…
Regimul Iliescu era deja dator vândut minerilor!
Sau, mai exact spus, celor care controlau hoardele venite din Valea Jiului.
Mineriada din Iunie a fost, de fapt, a treia!

Am început prin a vă povesti că am umblat mult pe străzi în zilele alea. Din Decembrie până în Iunie.
În primul rând trebuie să precizez că eu, personal, n-am pățit nimic.
În Decembrie mi-a țiuit un glonț pe la ureche – a doua zi m-am dus și-am găsit urma pe perete, undeva vis-a-vis de CC.
În 13-15 nu m-a întrebat nimeni de sănătate, cu toate că aveam barba până în piept. Or fi crezut că sunt popă…

Întorcându-mă la mineri, voi începe prin a vă spune că erau 3 tipuri. Care nu prea semănau între ei….
Și nici nu se amestecau!
Unii aveau treabă. Grupuri relativ organizate, mergeau cu capul într-o singură direcție, repede… În general, aveau salopete noi, cozi de lopeti noi, lămpașe noi…
Alții veniseră să vadă și ei Bucureștiul. Oameni, în general, de peste 30 de ani. Cu salopete uzate, dar destul de curate. Fără „scule”. Cel mult câte un lămpaș. Se uitau de jur împrejur, de parcă-și căutau locul. Încercau și ei să înțeleagă ce căutau acolo…
Și nelipsiții oportuniști! Tineri, zdrentăroși – salopetele de pe ei erau vechi, nereparate și, destul de murdare, cu ochii mereu la pândă… După un chioșc de unde să ia țigări pe gratis, după vre-o nefericită pe care s-o înghesuie într-un gang, după vre-un moșulică de care să facă mișto…

Și cum rămâne cu „obligațiile”? A făcut regimul Iliescu cu adevărat ceva pentru mineri? Ar fi putut, de fapt?
De unde bani, de unde viziune…

Dacă stăm bine să ne gândim. minerii au ieșit cel mai prost din toată chestia asta.
Mai bine de jumătate dintre protestatari au emigrat. Ceilalți au firme.
Restul țării o duce mult mai bine decât acum 30 de ani. Nu atât de bine precum s-ar fi putut… mai bine decât bulgarii dar mult mai prost decât ceilalți est europeni…
Valea Jiului e o ruină. Iar minerii o duc mult mai prost decât restul țării.

Aviz amatorilor.
Celor dispuși să se lase vrăjiți de „cântecul sirenelor”!

Îmi încep aproape fiecare dimineață cu revista presei de la RFI.

Cele mai multe articole se referă la nerealizările guvernului. Care o fi ăla.
Iar atunci când cei aflați la putere sunt rugați să explice situațiile actuale, cam toți scot în evidență nerealizările celor care au fost la putere înaintea lor.

Nimeni, nici ziariști și nici politicieni/activiști, nu vorbește despre greșeli, condiții obiective… sau orice altceva în afară de incapacitatea – sau, eventual, reaua voință, a celor aflați, în momentul respectiv, la butoanele puterii.

Ieri, 8 Iunie, toți indignații de serviciu vociferau despre inconștiența celor care au permis/lasat cascada Bigăr să se ‘prăbușească’. Necunoscând ce s-a întâmplat exact, nu pot comenta ‘faptele’. ‘Prăbușirea’….
Doar că însistența cu care activiștii în ale comunicării cereau socoteală autorităților pentru ceva care ține mai degrabă de Mama Natură decât de administrația statului m-a făcut să înțeleg cât de grea este, încă, moștenirea comunistă.

Este absolut clar că există o neîncredere funciară între funcționarii statului și restul populației.
Am vrut să scriu „între autoritatea statului și restul populației” dar m-am oprit la timp. Pentru că tocmai asta e problema. Neîncrederea dintre populație și funcționari face să dispară exact „autoritatea statului”.
Oamenii îndeplinesc, în dorul lelii, ceea ce li se spune pentru că nu au alternativă. Oamenii încearcă, tot timpul, să fenteze sistemul, tocmai pentru că nu au încredere în cei care populează sistemul. Adică, și de fapt, oamenii nu au încredere în sistem. Nici măcar cei din interiorul sistemului…

În țările cu tradiție democratică, sistemul a evoluat – sub presiunea maselor, către o funcționare organică. Toți trag la aceiași căruță – chiar dacă unii mai într-o parte și alții mai în cealaltă. Iar atunci când se întorc cu căruța de la moară fiecare dintre cei care au participat la efort se bucură de partea care i se cuvine de drept.

În țările cu tradiție autoritaristă, ‘vizitii’ își iau partea leului, argații se bat între ei pentru ce cade de la masa barosanilor iar populația așteptă, liniștită – de foame, să li se dea.
Pentru că sistemul este, inevitabil, ineficient, din când în când populația ajunge să moară de foame. Adică le ajunge cuțitul la os. Și se răscoală.

În urma răscoalelor, se mai schimbă și cei din fruntea bucatelor. Noii veniți își încep domnia prin descăpățânarea câtorva dintre predecesori. Pe vremea fanarioților, cu sabia. Revoluționarii francezi au folosit ghilotina.
În ’89, de Crăciun, a fost utilizat plutonul de execuție. Acum… completul de judecată…

Faptul că de treizeci de ani ne răsculăm abia în fața urnelor de vot este doar o chestiune de nuanță.
Fenomenul a rămas același.
Încă nu am învățat să tragem cu toții la căruță.
Am rămas, încă, la trasul spuzei pe turta proprie.

N-am priceput, încă, de ce rămânem, aproape toți, cu pâinea necoaptă.

Și mai e ceva care mă roade.
Trăim în era ‘comunicării’. Jumătate dintre cei chemați să-și dea cu părerea, despre orice, sunt prezentați ca fiind ‘specialiști în comunicare’. Și vorbesc, firesc, despre cum ar fi trebuit să comunice guvernul. Sau opoziția…
Despre ce ar fi trebuit să fi făcut, guvernul și opoziția – adică să se înțeleagă asupra lucrurilor fundamentale, cum ar fi imunizarea anti-Covid sau construcția de autostrazi, nu vorbește nimeni!
Adică am rămas tot în era ‘luptei de clasă’. Când dușmanul este identificat cu precizie, arătat cu degetul și combătut cu elan revoluționar! Sau, măcar, cu râvnă perpetuu reformatoare…
Ei bine, în această eră a comunicării, specialiștii în domeniu turuie într-una despre

E chiar atât de greu de remarcat că o cascadă este, prin definiție, o „cădere”?!?

„Cădere naturală de apă pe cursul unui râu, provocată de o ruptură de pantă în profilul longitudinal al văii”

Întorcându-ne la greaua moșternire comunistă, voi reaminti motivele pentru care se prăbușesc toate regimurile autoritare.
Cei care le conduc se luptă între ei pentru putere, uitând de rolul pe care îl au de îndeplinit.
Uită de problemele reale. Să le identifice și să le rezolve.
Sunt atât de preocupați să se mențină la putere încât ajung să uite de condiția fundamentală a rămânerii lor acolo. Funcționarea sistemului în fruntea cărora se află.

Uită că scaunul pe care s-au cocoțat este ‘ținut în cârcă’ de restul societății.
Care societate se așteaptă, în schimbul acestei susțineri, la o singură chestie. Ca ‘sistemul’ să funcționeze în mod rezonabil.

Care funcționare ‘rezonabilă’ depinde de cooperarea dintre diversele segmente ale societății.

Care cooperare depinde de două lucruri.
De deciziile adoptate de cei aflați, temporar, la butoane.
De modul în care aceste decizii sunt comunicate și comentate în societate.

Deciziile pot fi bune sau proaste.
Dacă sunt bune, vor contribui la funcționarea sistemului. La ‘supraviețuirea’ acestuia.
Dacă sunt proaste…

Și iar ne-am întors la comunicare…
Chiar și deciziile bune trebuie comunicate bine. Deciziile trebuie puse în aplicare. Cu cât sunt mai bine înțelese, cu atât mai bine vor fi puse în practică. Cu atât mai repede vor apare beneficiile aplicării lor.
Și deciziile proaste trebuie comunicate bine. Cu cât mai bine sunt comunicate, cu atât mai repede va fi perceput caracterul lor dăunător. Cu cât mai adănc este ascuns rahatul sub preș, cu atât mai greu vor fi de înlăturat consecințele sale.
Cu alte cuvinte, este esențial ca și comunicatorii să-și priceapă menirea. Să-și practice meseria cu responsabilitate și cu pricepere.

Responsabilitate și pricepere…

Aveți grijă băăă!
Tocmai s-a prăbușit căderea!!!!

Pentru conformitate, trebuie să-i mentionez și pe cei care știu, cât de cât, să scrie. Chiar dacă nu reușesc să reziste, până la capăt, tentației. Pentru că așa or fi fost învățati la școală? Pentru că așa li se cere?!? Pentru că așa s-au obișnuit…