Archives for posts with tag: Mutual Respect

Image

A couple of days ago I stumbled upon a link from Upworthy about an al Jazeera interview with a legislator who is pushing an antiabortion bill. Since the story was nicely packaged I followed the link.

Rachel Maddow/MSNBC resuming what happened in the interview before the question that started all this:

“He tells al Jazeera that what he really wants is for there to be no legal abortion at all in Ohio except to save a woman’s life.”

And now we get to see an excerpt from that interview:
“- Reporter: What do you think makes a woman want to have an abortion?
– State Rep. Jim Buchy: Well, there’s probably a lot of… I’m not a woman, so I… I’m thinking, if I’m a woman, why would I want to get a… Some of it has to do with economics. A lot of it has to do with economics. I don’t know, it’s a question I’ve never even thought about.”

As an ethnic Romanian who lived for 20 years in a country were women were sometimes left to die at the orders of the secret police if they had tried to induce abortions on themselves and doctors were regularly sent to prison if they dared perform one outside the extremely narrow limits of the (communist) law I shared the link on my FB wall.

I received this very pertinent and absolutely logical comment:

“Somebody proposes we have a law that prohibits individuals killing other individuals… unless in self-defense. Someone asks somebody – Why would someone want to kill somebody? I never thought about why someone would want to kill somebody… he just forgot to add that that has little to do with the proposed ordinance … which seeks to protect life! Now why would one want to protect life… the answer is self evident!”

And this was my answer:

“(Dear friend) from the point of view that ‘life has to be preserved, no matter what’ you are, of course, right. All that is left for us to do is to settle among ourselves the exact moment when an embryo becomes life.
I’m afraid though that all this is about something different. Not more important than (individual) human life, just different.
About how others get to determine what happens to/with US based on THEIR convictions.

‘I don’t really care about what makes a woman wish to have an abortion, I just say she shouldn’t have any opportunity to do such a thing’.”

The world is turning on its head and he’s spinning fairy tales…
Besides that, what  on Earth does Putin have to do with anything?

Image

Bear with me and your curiosity will be satisfied.

Most of us believe that bed time stories come from the ancient past, that they were passed on across generations by the regular folks, from the ancient equivalent of you and me to our nephews.

Lets give this idea a second thought.

First of all there weren’t so many ‘you and me’-s readily available until recently. No more than 50 years ago very few people had enough free time, or energy, to spend on such frivolous topics. In those times most people worked/fought hard to make a living and a small minority was rich/powerful enough to live somewhat insulated from the daily worries of the commoners – ‘what will I be eating/feeding my kids tomorrow’. The rich and powerful had their own set of worries, even if of a different kind: how to rule efficiently enough as to maintain/enhance their power and how to pass on to their heirs  the skills they needed in order to ‘keep the show in working order’.
In those times the commoners, and their children, worked so hard that they usually fell asleep while eating ‘dinner’, thus having no use for any bed time stories.
Meanwhile the rich and powerful were so busy with their daily business/routine that they didn’t have time to spend with their children so they hired teachers and helpers to raise their offspring. Oftentimes this entire ‘nursery crew’ was under the authority of a spinster aunt or something similar but regardless of that almost none of them had the guts to  contradict and chastise the ‘young princes’ directly. The deadlock was at least partially solved through the use of bed-time stories and fables.

Seems far-fetched? I must remind you of two things. Not so long ago, Europe, and the Arab world, were choke full of story tellers. Remember the minstrels who spread out the story about Tristan and Isolde or Scheherazade, the world’s first spin doctor? So there were plenty of stories waiting to be reshaped into learning materiel for the offspring of the ruling class. And the second thing was that the ruling class had enough means to hire the best teachers available. So sharp minds plus plenty of raw material equals a lot of excellent  ‘bed time’ stories that actually started as lessons for future rulers.

And when did all this come to an end?
When the rulers had became careless and/or unable to maintain the entire kingdom in working order?
When the entire situation had became complicated enough so no individual ruler, no matter how capable, was no longer able to remain on top of things?
When the commoners, enticed by the incessant humming of the minstrels who kept distributing to the general public the same stories which were originally meant to the future rulers and somewhat empowered by the technological advances which had made even their humble lives a little easier and a little safer, became emboldened in their natural quest for autonomy? When all these three conditions/developments ‘merged’ into the explosive situation commonly known as pre-Revolutionary France or, in other circles, as the Enlightenment?

The point I’m trying to make here is that ‘bedtime stories’ are extremely important.
The next generation needs to be initiated in the mores of the old one.
Each new generation needs to understand and keep alive the traditions which have helped to build the society which had borne and educated its members.
Simultaneously, the young must maintain enough independence to understand that traditions are only guidelines and that they can be fine-tuned in order to fit each particular situation

If, for no matter what reason, the flow of information that needs to run from one generation to another is perturbed in any way the ‘train’ is in great danger. If the flow is too strong and the manner in which the information is presented becomes too imposing the ‘education process’ becomes a ‘training session’, the next generation looses it’s ability to think for itself and to solve by its own the smallest of crises, The whole thing eventually ends up in a catastrophe.
If the flow is too weak, either because the ‘teachers’ have lost heart or ‘the pupils’ were allowed to become too cocky – or both – the situation starts to resemble a railway with no rails: the train simply has no clue as to where ‘the way’ is and either grinds to a halt or ends up in a ravine.

OK but …”what  on Earth does Putin have to do with anything?”
Well, my favorite story is the one about the emperor who, at the advice of two of his courtiers (his ‘esteemed couturiers’  actually) started to walk naked through the main square of his capital city.
Do you remember that story?

http://www.andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheEmperorsNewClothes_e.html

“Tu ce planuri ai vara asta? Venim cu tine :)”

Am gasit mesajul asta in mail. Ma uit sa vad de la cine si hopa surpriza:

“eMAG.ro <oferte@newsletter.emag.ro> Unsubscribe”

N-am ce face, deschid mesajul si ma trezesc cu astia 4 in casa:

Image

Pe bune ma? Nu ca tipii n-ar fi simpatici, dar parca nici chiar asa…

In orice caz solutia e simpla.

Daca nu v-ati prins inca uitati-va la paragraful urmator:

““eMAG.ro <oferte@newsletter.emag.ro> Unsubscribe“

Eh?!? Se poate spune ca si-au facut-o cu mana lor, nu?
(A, nu ca au pus ‘butonul’ de unsubscribe ci pentru ca trimit reclame din astea extrem de agresive!)

Image

“God cleans up your past, fixes your present and makes sure your future will be bright.”

I’d rather put it a little differently.
God offers you indeed all these generous opportunities but doesn’t do your part too.
It’s you that has to perform the hard work needed to put them in practice.

So stop ‘liking’ or whatever you were doing and start building your future.

Image

Well… the fact that we’ll indeed never completely get rid of bullying shouldn’t stop us from trying.
As to what we should be teaching our children… How about both?
Standing up for themselves will teach them how many things are within their grasp and that some are indeed outside that grasp. It will also teach them that they need to try in order to determine which thing lies where.
Standing up for others will help them, all of them, live in a better world than we did. And that will be a world of victors, not victims. ‘Cause bullies don’t stand a chance if enough of us stand up when needed.

Wearing pink shirts and passing bylaws doesn’t turn us into victims. Refusal to stand up for someone else does. The bullies love that, they would just take us down one by one while the rest of us turn their heads ‘it’s not my business, let that pussy fend for himself’!

And yes, there is a second way by which we can become a society of victims. A short cut of the first one. Let somebody else take care of the situation. Instead of standing up ourselves, together, to let/expect somebody else do that for us.
That would be akin to inviting a bully to ‘take us under his wing’!

Image

A friend of mine shared this on FB. Thanks Sheeja!

It was then that I realized that I do sometimes worry.

Only I don’t worry for tomorrow. I worry for me.
Worrying ‘for tomorrow’, per se, is indeed ludicrous but wondering what I’ll be doing tomorrow seems only natural for a sensible person.

After all it’s me who is going to live that day so how about living it to my liking, not somebody else’s?
Provided that I don’t hurt anybody in the process, of course.

Crin Antonescu a anuntat ca renunta chiar si la pozitia de presedinte demisionar al PNL si ca nu mai intentioneaza sa candideze la presedentia Romaniei iar Antena 3 discuta situatia sub titlul de mai sus. (1 Iunie 2014, Duminica)

Cu 38 de ani in urma, tot pe vremea asta, terminam clasa a 8-a.
Profesorul nostru de istorie, domnul Bucataru – n-aveai cum sa-i spui tovarasu’, era mult prea domn – incepuse deja cu cateva saptamani in urma sa ne pregateasca pentru cele ce urmau sa ni se intample. Ne-a invatat multe in perioada aia, de la cum sa copiem sau cum sa invitam o fata la film (iar pe fete cum sa accepte sau sa refuze politicos o astfel de invitatie) pana la niste adevarate subtilitati de filozofie a vietii. Astazi voi face apel la doua dintre acestea din urma.

‘La liceu veti invata tot felul de chestii…Economie politica, socialism stiintific, democratie populara… toate astea sunt destul de incurcate si as prefera sa plecati de la mine cu niste lucruri cat de cat clare.
Democratia, de exemplu, nu are de-a face de loc cu numerele. Lumea crede ca daca ‘este democratie’ atunci ‘majoritatea hotaraste iar minoritatea asculta’. Cei care sustin asa ceva n-au inteles nimic. Democratia se refera la faptul ca inainte de a se trece la vot fiecare isi spune parerea iar ceilalti asculta. Cu atentie! Iar din momentul in care nu se mai discuta despre idei, cu respect, ci despre persoane, si eventual cu dusmanie, ideea de democratie s-a dus demult pe apa sambetei. Aia nu mai este democratie ci dictatura majoritatii’. (Pentru cei carora nu le vine a crede ca aceasta discutie, publica pana la urma, a avut loc pe vremea comunismului le atrag respectuos atentia ca atunci era cea mai fasta perioada postbelica a Romaniei. Ceausescu nu innebunise inca iar la chioscul din colt se mai gasea Kent)

‘Veti trece prin tot felul de examene, pentru care va veti pregati dupa cum veti putea voi mai bine. Sa stiti totusi ca in afara de pregatirea ‘clasica’, de invatatul propriu zis, conteaza foarte mult si atitudinea pe care o aveti la examene. Si sa nu uitati o chestie. De cele mai multe ori raspunsurile pot fi deduse pornind chiar de la modul in care sunt formulate intrebarile!’

Revenind la titlul postarii si aplicand invataturile domnului Profesor Bucataru raspunsul devine deja simplu:

Brucan s-a inselat amarnic, Antonescu si-a facut-o pana la urma cu mana lui iar cei care au de fapt de pierdut suntem chiar noi.

Pentru cei care nu tin minte, ‘oracolul din Damaroaia’ a prezis ca romanii vor avea nevoie de 20 de ani pentru a invata ce este aceea democratie. Avand in vedere ca in campania pentru europarlamentare s-a discutat despre orice numai despre idei nu este clar ca profetia asta nu s-a indeplinit inca.
“Nu vom lasa Romania pe mana baronilor rosii!…” Nici nu mai conteaza ce a mai spus Antonescu dupa aceste cuvinte. Pot sa ii inteleg starea de spirit, ba chiar sunt de acord cu el ca sunt prea multi baroni rosii in Romania. De fapt sunt prea multi baroni de orice fel… sa revenim. Cand te pregatesti sa candidezi pentru o functie eligibila nu iti poti permite sa imparti de la inceput electoratul in doua si sa acuzi implicit una dintre parti ca ii sustine pe ‘baronii rosii’. Nu are nici o importanta ca de aproape un an esti tinta unui foc incrucisat, atat din stanga cat si din propria reduta de dreapta. Pur si simplu nu ai voie sa spui asa ceva, cu atat mai mult cu cat pana atunci dadeai impresia ca duci lupta pe planul ideilor si ca nu ai nici o intentie sa te cobori in mocirla in care are loc ‘lupta politica’ de la noi.

“Lupta politica.”
Abia acum am pus degetul pe rana. Atat conform invataturilor Profesorului Bucataru cat si tuturor tratatelor de politologie (atentie, nu de marketing politic) care subliniaza caracterul participativ al procesului democratic, ‘politica’, cea adevarata,  are de a face mai degraba cu cooperarea decat cu lupta. Da, exista intrecere dar o intrecere de tip sportiv, o intrecere din acelea unde este important sa participi si unde toti au cate ceva de castigat.

Poate ca citind aceste randuri ma veti considera un naiv. Nu sunt in masura sa va contrazic.
Dar ce frumos ar fi ca ‘intrecerea politica’ sa se intoarca la menirea ei fireasca.  Aceea de a produce solutii benefice pentru cat mai multi dintre membrii societatii.
Din pacate in zilele noastre prea multi considera ca ‘politica’ este doar un cadru institutional in care se desfasoara ‘lupta pentru putere’ care macina societatile contemporane precum un cancer. De aceea alegatorii nu prea ies la vot iar prea multi dintre cetateni nici macar nu vor sa aibe de a face cu asa ceva.
Iar pana cand aceasta perceptie a societatii nu se va schimba scena politica va continua sa fie ocupata de cei pentru care puterea politica este un scop si nu o unealta.

Image

 

This 27,000-year-old dog skull unearthed in the Czech Republic has a mammoth bone fragment in its mouth, one of many discoveries that suggest Paleolithic people may have used dogs to hunt mammoths. 

Really? So we found a dead dog’s skull with a piece of mammoth bone between its teeth and we jump to the conclusion that men ‘may have used dogs to hunt mammoths’?

In fact the only certain thing that can be inferred for sure from this is that dogs, then as now, used to chew on bones.
And if we go on assuming things that might have happened what can stop us from asking ‘were mammoths bones toxic for ancient dogs, so poisonous in fact as to provoke instant death’?

Have you stopped laughing yet?

‘Cause this is no laughing matter. This is exactly how science works. Some people jump to conclusions, sometimes farfetched, and then try for decades to muster enough proof for their conclusions to be accepted by the ‘scientific community’ while others – earnestly, jokingly or sometimes even disrespectfully – try to prove them wrong.

The truth is that it doesn’t matter who’s right and who’s wrong, both sides are doing the excellent job of keeping alight the flame of knowledge.
Had one side, no matter which, given up its efforts, science as we know it – a dynamic process that churns out continuously vast quantities of new information only to be proven false or at least incomplete at a later time – would grind to a halt.
If the ‘enthusiasts’  would get the upper hand in no time they would drive ‘science’ so far away from the hard reality that what they would eventually propose as a ‘corpus of knowledge’ would be absolutely useless.
If the naysayers would be as ‘aggressive’ as I was in the beginning, get things out of context, just as I did, and then criticize the ‘findings’ grounded on a seemingly logical failure then the whole process would stop altogether. In these conditions further improvement in our understanding of the world would become practically impossible.

So let’s keep going as we are already used to, only a little less emphatically.
After all nobody is exactly right in the long time, right?

For those of you who want to learn more about how ancient people might have been using dogs to hunt mammoth, you have here a link to the article that inspired this post. It appeared in the Science magazine.

Image

There are two sides of this.
1. Be frugal and use only the least disruptive tools at your disposal, even if it means subjecting yourself to increased personal danger.
2. Kill everything in sight, move over when done and repeat…