luni, 7 septembrie 2015

Blind Politicians

The incapacity of state to help the poorest or the most disadvantaged citizens of society is one of the most powerful objections of right wing politicians against the leftist theory about the redistribution of the goods of the society.

It is powerful, because it is confirmed in many countries. Besides, the state often helps citizens who only pretend to be in need.

If the state commits such errors, it will commit more of them if it helps the citizens to whom the people point.

The people do not have the mechanisms of surveillance for detecting the social needs. They only see other people in need, most of all looking to what media provide to them. And the media does not even intend to offer a comprehensive picture of the people in need, but only look for most emotional cases at stake which have a greater visibility.

In the problem of migrants, the media will show the people who actually leave their country, though the most disadvantaged ones are those who cannot afford to move from their fearful birthplaces. Also, the people who suffer great atrocities, but do not find the migration as an adequate solution are always ignored by the media and so by the public opinion and by the authorities preoccupied to answer to the public concerns.

In fact, there is a continual confusion between moral emotions and political virtues. The public opinion is rightly concerned and moved by what it sees, since it belongs to the living people with a limited capacity of being informed. The politicians of different countries must translate the public emotion in the language of political virtues in the name of the state which is an abstract entity with better sources of information. The actual emotions for migrants should correspond to the political resolutions for making the countries from which their people fled to respect the human dignity of their people, both of those who have and have not a good appearance in the media.

Otherwise, the mechanism of benefiting from visibility in order to receive help is easy to be learned by anyone and easier by the ones who want to cheat the small capacity of seeing of a country ruled by blind politicians who see only with the eyes of its people.

sâmbătă, 29 august 2015

Democratic Longing for Dictatorship

The people are not so hostile to dictatorship even in democratic countries.

On the contrary, during the electoral campaigns, when the people show most intensively than ever their interest in politics, they are generally preferred those politicians who speak like virtual dictators. The greatest success belongs to the candidates who speak as if their future position will depend entirely on their will like in dictatorial regimes.

Since people’s interest in politics harshly diminishes once their candidate has been elected, we don’t really know if they would tolerate a real dictatorship from their past favorite candidate, if the political constitution would allow it.

Maybe, they would not. However, the reason does not seem to be their refusal of the idea of being governed by the will of a single person, but rather their habit of being free from a continual appreciation of the elected politician. The dictators always want to invade the personal life of their people, but the people are mainly interested in the problems of their own lives. The tolerance to dictatorship is covertly used by many democratic politicians whenever they impose to the citizens certain beliefs which concern their life, for instance, concerning the sexual conduct, their relations to some categories of people, or their wealth. Generally, the way of hiding their person is to speak in the name of the people or of the country.

miercuri, 26 august 2015

Which 'us' is the state?

It is easy to discover that apart from its geographical place the identity of a country mainly consists in a bundle of myths and legends. There are myths because the main character of all the statements on the authority of the state is a fictional one. The state is not as concrete as his geographical position and it is self-contradictory to say that is identical to the people who live inside its borders, since the people speak against it whenever they consider that the authorities act in abusive ways. Moreover, the authorities say that they represent the state, not that they are the state.

However, the state is most often considered to be a mythical ‘us’. The people who speak against it are unsatisfied that it is less ‘us’ than they expected to be. Thus, they may protest that the mission of state to protect them from internal and external enemies is not fulfilled in their interest or that the civil rights do not protect all of ‘us’, especially the individuals hardly to be numbered among the majority of people.

Shortly, the people unveil the myth of ‘us’ for pointing to some real ‘us’.

To some extent, such protests are useful, because they prevent the authorities which claim to represent the state to not figure out that they are that ‘us’ and to act as such against the rest of the people.

On the other hand, the protests contribute to a great misunderstanding of the identity of state, forcing to bring the mythical ‘us’ to the concrete ‘us’ of the community of the protesters. They cannot be the state either, but they downgrade the myths of the country in a conflicting affair between individuals. There is not a national defense or the justice which guarantees the respect of civil rights anymore, but only brutal and cruel soldiers and police officer or unjust judges. Since the authorities has generally a weaker voice in the public space than the protesters, the men who represent it may easily to cease to act in the name of the mythical ‘us’,  and to search for being a part of the concrete ‘us’ of the protesters.

However, the ‘us’ of the protesters which sometime succeeds in attracting the authorities on its side leaves out those other citizens of the state who do not speak against the state, but expect that it will always act in the name of the mythical ‘us’. Many times, those silent citizens are more than the vocal ones, but they have to obey to a state that could become a paramount voice of the minority of protesters.

duminică, 23 august 2015

Urban Weight

It is difficult to say that the passers-by seen on the streets are perceived as humans or not only as parts of the urban landscape. Maybe when we walk without paying much attention to them, they seem indeed to form a sort of moving landscape.

The thin people with swift steps look like moving statues. They may mean something if we look closer to them, but essentially they walk and run to give meaning to the things they meet without clarifying anything to us about their person.

Meanwhile, the fat people look like some huge buildings. Their slow movements allow us to see them almost like immobile houses. Their weight seems to say that wherever they go, the things they meet will be housed in them. The fat people will give them a meaning in this way. Differently from the thin people, through the appearance of being able to receive the things like dwellers of the houses they are, we can partly perceive those meanings just looking at them.  All those things should mean some sort of food or comfort for the fat people.

Since the urban landscapes often inspire the feeling that we do not matter so much in their largeness, the image of fat passers-by may help us to think that our city or town is really ours like food. At least, they prepare us to accept to be swallowed by the huge buildings we enter.

sâmbătă, 22 august 2015

Those Annoying Human Rights

Tissot, Emigrants
The crowds of migrants which invade European countries show in many faces that human being searched by many European thinkers for discovering the human rights.

It was that human being who is free from any political authority, who is defenseless, who struggles for its survival.

Many past thinkers collect the examples of that being from the savages met in colonial countries or from the stories about feral children in order to determine which are the primary human needs and rights.

Now, that human being is before European eyes in the flesh. However, it is not an object of study, neither an occasion to apply the respect for human rights, but a trouble for those countries which claim to be founded on the principle of respecting the human rights and on the principle of guaranteeing the chances for prosperity to every individual.

Those allegations prove to be wrong. The primeval human being they used seems to be an illusion. It was the illusion of a man who cannot really act for modifying the political and economical reality.

The significant change of society supposed by the focus on the human needs and rights was tempered by a sort of subjective emotional reactions concerning humans and animals.

Through the actual technological devices, many people can feel strong emotions about a humanitarian case or another. Such emotions are not caused by real people, but about their images represented in the media, which are in fact as illusory as the images of primeval human beings used by the past European thinkers. Moreover, the actual images are more vivid than the past ones, so that their watchers consume much of their sympathetic feelings only by watching them. The action for helping the people in need is viewed as an annoying complication. Similarly, the new migrants are considered by the political authorities annoying persons.

Therefore, the Europeans found themselves again in the past condition of only thinking about primary needs and rights of human beings. In the past, they thought of them and then they have been able to destroy some authoritarian political regimes. It is far more difficult to modify if not to destroy the great and convenient lie about human rights and prosperity which allegedly founded the new democratic regimes.

vineri, 21 august 2015

The Egalitarian Ideal

Shaun Downey, 'Boy Amongst the Birches'

Our first image of society is not egalitarian. Firstly, we see the people standing upright around us. They are taller than us, so that they seem to us as mastering the troubles of the world by being above them. The world looks to us cloudy and mainly indifferent, full of unknown people and things, many of them apparently without any sense.

Those people are familiar to us, often being our own parents and relatives, or educators who are perceived as existing for our help.

For this reason, the upright posture from which we can master the troubles of the world seems also familiar and reachable in the future.

Afterwards, we understand that to stand between other people and things did not mean to be above them. On the contrary, the standing position reveals itself as a way to stay firmly under other unreachable people and things or to attempt eagerly to be above them.

Meanwhile, the world cannot get more sense to us; it keeps to appear cloudy, sometimes dark and threatening. Moreover, it seems to provide all those troublesome people and things which do not let us to rise.

The egalitarian ideal comes especially as a need to give a sense to that cloudy world, and not as a personal benefit, since we deeply want to be upright by ourselves, not equal to other persons.

The impossibility of building an egalitarian society cannot be excused by the fact that many of us really succeed in standing upright. An inegalitarian society keeps the world cloudy or without a clear sense.  It remains a nonsense that some of us are up and other down or a matter of pure chance, far from that first image of the easy way to that future age when we will overcome the troubles of the world.

joi, 20 august 2015

The Remorseful Killer

When someone kills another person, we may say that he has the deepest experience of knowing her like a human being. We cannot know a human being better than by reaching to the point where its life ends. The love is also knowledge of an individual until to the point where he or she cannot be an individual anymore, but only a partner.

It is not a kind of knowledge similar to an act of learning theoretical matters, but a plain exposure of the human being impersonated by the victim.

It is so plain, so that the killer might see himself in that living picture of human limits, weakness, fears, and humiliation portrayed by the victim.

In spite of the killer’s desire to kill for getting power over his victim, he is under her power of revealing humanity in its lowest forms. When he continues to be bad, he in fact develops all those low forms of humanity in his person by losing his place among other people.

The remorse which could make him a better person is a form of estranging from his victim. Therefore, the remorse ceases to be about the victim, but rather about the aggressor and about his refugee in that field of shallow and egoistical emotions which dominates the human relations. Those emotions do not contain the knowledge of other persons until to their final point of their life. They are equally far from love and hate. The remorse might bring forgiveness, but not in the name of the victim which was abandoned by the remorseful killer.

vineri, 1 mai 2015

Easy slogans

The violent acts of the people with low education are seen with contempt because they are rudimentary forms of expressing themselves. However, they are not ridiculous like any other rudimentary gestures, because those people raise through them their low and insignificant rank in the society.

The political correct and pacifist slogans repeated and developed by the high educated people would be perceived as ridiculous if they would not possess the main means of public authority. Because the high educated people who reduce their education to a bunch of words ridiculously prove by themselves that their high education leans only on a few ideas which anyone could learn in one hour or two.

If they are not received like ridiculous, the slogans still count like a light stuff to be digested by the public opinion. The low educated people with an easy life assimilate them because they found in them the easiness of their life. None of them accept the slogans because of their truth. Otherwise, those who live a hard life cannot be instructed by any of them, even if the slogans are issued by the people who suppose to be some unofficial teachers of the entire nation.

duminică, 26 aprilie 2015

Lost possessions

A man is not a possession of another man, but they have each other through a net of connections. There are connections which express relations of agreement, disagreement, power, love, despise.

Some of those relations become social categories and groups, which spread their power over the entire society. A relation is a form of excluding the personal value of those who are in that relation. Someone who wants to become a member of those groups must renounce to himself, and thus become lacked by the self-possession which is the basis of all other possessions. He may have many things, since it is a main criterion of being accepted in a social category or group, but he cannot really possess them.

And if the material possession is irrelevant for being accepted in a social group, the spiritual acquisitions have a harsher fate. In spite of all the usual callings for developing a personal identity, someone who builds himself on the basis of his spiritual acquisitions is banned from any social group. He is accepted only if he diminishes their value and makes them parts of the social group.

The recovery of the material and spiritual possessions which we lose becoming members of a group take the form of the striving to climb on the top of the group and to make the other members to recognize your value, in spite of your lack of self-possession. The obedience of other people partly recovers your feeling that you possess something. In the case of material things, it is easy to lie yourself in this way, because the material things satisfy you like those who flatter you. In the case of spiritual possessions, they are totally contrary to any relation of submission, and once you accept a submitted public, you realize that you lost them twice, both by adhering to a social group for promoting them and by using them contrary to their purpose of having a value by themselves and not to be dependent on the public approval.

vineri, 27 martie 2015

False Rebirth

The discovery that you are in fact all that you talk about is putting you in the need of a rebirth. It should be a rebirth without words, as like as the first natural birth which happened through the speechless movement of two bodies.

The bodies were united by mutual love, but you have only the self-love.

Though we always love ourselves, it is hard to point to that sort of love without words and without external things and people. Only the creative spirit which stays behind our doings can be a proper expression of self-love.

Since it stays behind and many try to keep it there in order to preserve the common world, the rebirth often takes the form of acquiring new things and people around us.

It is a usual experience. Whenever we become aware that our many talks exhaust our personality, we try to reinvent ourselves by showing us to other talkers as owners of things and friends of different people or members of a family.

Finally, we discover that those things and people did not help to any rebirth, being only new subject matters of conversations.

luni, 9 martie 2015

Departing consciousness

A bleeding or a dying animal seems to have consciousness, both because of its posture and of the fact that its wound or death makes it to slip away from its operative life and thus to stay behind it as we think to be the case of the human consciousness.

From this reason, an inquiry into human consciousness which assumes that it simply lies behind our active life and our beliefs should be wrong. It should rather study how the consciousness leaves the active life. Differently from other animals, humans have more means by which they go far from their active life, many of them being wrongly identified with impulsive emotions without the cognitive sense which belongs to the consciousness. On the contrary, the cognitive outcomes of our consciousness might tell less about consciousness, since the beliefs we express or think about are means of being in the outer space of the human societies where we actively live.

Moreover, the consciousness behind the facts or life and beliefs hardly can be separated from them.

marți, 3 martie 2015

Faceless friends

For feeling that you are among other people, it is often supportive the view of indistinct faces you always meet during the day.

The night hides the peoples in the precise shapes of the buildings where they found their shelters and homes.

It’s an occasion to think that the blurred image of the day might clarify itself into a non-human precision.

Therefore, if we want to be close to other people, we should restrain ourselves from seeing them better. Nonetheless, the closeness may be further jeopardized by a persistent view of ourselves, which proves to be more convincing than that blurred image.

duminică, 1 martie 2015

The light of the ages

The hope of the youth: nothing much more than an imprecise glittering of our shiny skin.

The fulfillment of the old age: the great effort of bringing light on the achievements which lay down in us, from the wrinkles of the skin to the firm, deep shapes of our personality.

The light once shown by itself in our life, then we try to show it by ourselves.

For this reason, the light might still shine on our life even if we are not able to make it to appear.

In the mature failures and delusions is still the imprecision of a youthful hope, but we need some younger eyes for seeing it still as a light.

luni, 16 februarie 2015

The Limits of Western Prosperity


Maybe the political world does not change too much from an epoch to another, clearly different being only the public discourses. Through those discourses, the members of the political world hope to extend their limited number by conveying their messages to the larger public. They hope that once the messages will be received, the public opinion will change itself according to their will, so that their decisions will be largely accepted.

However, it is often a minor change, since the public can accept the decisions of the politicians, but not to change their way of life in order to fit them better.

The most important change of discourses in the contemporary West is the move of the focus from the national themes to those regarding their citizens: prosperity, individual freedom, and human rights. The envisaged change of the public opinion through those themes is insignificantly small. The public can accept or refuse one or another plan or idea of improving their prosperity and freedom, but nobody will put questions about the necessity of being prosperous or free. Therefore, the Western citizens have become largely insensitive to the concerns of the nation as a whole, about which the politicians are obliged to discuss time to time especially due to the international pressures.

Meanwhile, the politicians from the Eastern countries, and nowadays Russia, use discourses preponderantly about the national values. If their citizens seem to be responsive to their discourses, even if the politicians promote values which endanger their comfort, as it is especially the military braveness, this is not because they were easier movable by their politicians than the western people. Surely, they continue to live for their own interests, in spite of their acceptance of the political decisions. At the same time, the clear difference between the political discourses and their way of life raises their interest in discussing the political values about which the politicians talk.  More the powerful are those values, the citizens feel lesser inclined to oppose them because of their personal interests which are anytime smaller. Since the talk is an essential feature of human life and the citizens come to talk about the accepted political values, they are ready for defending them even putting their lives into danger.

Hence, it is an illusion that the promises of prosperity of the West can ever fascinate the eastern citizens fed with nationalistic discourses by their politicians. Also, it is hard to believe that the western citizens will endanger their comfort for defending their prosperous and free life only because the politicians tell them that it has come the time of considering the interests of their nations. The Western politicians should learn to speak another kind of discourses than now.