One of the subjects Krossfire attacks often, and I come from the dark to contradict him, is the ethics of socialism vs capitalism or wealth redistribution vs meritocracy.
This is a debate worth having, and I can easily argue for either side, particularly since the arguments seem evenly distributed. As the antagonist on Krossfire’s article, I argued that “poor people who vote” is a scarecrow and that most people who are poor are not so necessarily because of inability but rather because of circumstance. I then counter-argued that “free market” does not exist in reality, who your parents are is more important for success than almost anything else and that in a deflationary recession is particularly important to give money away and make sure it goes to the poor.
At this point, another reader, ‘alin’, interjected with a rather grim point of view, talking about suicide. I previously covered it on this blog in 2008 (translated in 2013), then, Nastase’s Suicide Option, and even with Pepsi, but then and there I wanted to reply with Monty Python’s song from the Life of Brian. Instead, I chose to suggest he tries a more metaphorical suicide, as in “today the old alin dies and tomorrow a new one is born”, quoting Marin Sorescu:
I wanted to replace myself with a better model,
Searched for it with a candle in the dark,
Immaculate white, tall as a pine and with an aromatic bark,
Who sleeps at night like a post-crack supermodelWho will proudly declare: one
Copy of me in the world doesn’t exist
Handsome, with a worldview that’s atheist
Can’t find him when your search is done.
Seriously, adopting a system of values that holds that you are in charge of your destiny and blaming less others and your circumstances you stand a better chance to change your life in whichever direction you wish. “All you need is positivity” – Spice Girls.
When he insisted questioning the Meaning of Life, Monty Python came again to my mind. Google has a number of suggestions, even a definition. I suggested, nonetheless, that until you get a better understanding of it, you may consider that the meaning of life is to find what is the meaning of life, i.e., it’s a personalized answer that only you can find for yourself, and finding it is obviously the first step in fulfilling it. Until you do find it, you might want to aim for moments of joy rather than general happiness.
Gratitude is a big component of joy and happiness. Until you find the meaning of life, you can find some happiness or joy in being grateful – your parents could fulfill this role quite well. Religion also helps, because through prayer, it forces you to be grateful to someone (JC, for instance) for something. Focusing on others’ achievements you will always be unhappy because “grass is always greener on the other side.”
Other small life hacks, but with counterintuitively large effects (explained at large in lh-start) are Make a change, Look for support, Exercise.
But all this talk about success vs failure hides an even greater, systemic issue, unravelled by Ivan Krastev in a conversation with Vlad Mixich (hn-krastev):
You could decide to go to the West and realize there what you couldn’t do here, or you could stay, you could be successful here, but all the while others continue to leave. The result? A critical mass does not form here and even if you are successful personally, you feel like you failed collectively. Except for Baltic countries there are very few places in Eastern Europe where there is a sense of collective success. You made it personally, but your country has failed. And this is how the disappointment with democracy is born.
*(*This article is unfinished – it was scheduled to appear in the hope that it will be finished before, but since this message is here and until it is removed, the article is to be considered work in progress*)*.
Sources / More info: krossfire, opencube, mbadea-zoso, hn-krastev, lh-start, yt-mol
Gifs: MJ, fatso, buha
I was mostly vexed about the results of poverty than of poverty as a general principle. I'm not "afraid" of poor people voting, I'm wary of uninformed/uneducated people voting en mass.
ReplyDeleteBy calling it a scarecrow I didn't imply that YOU were afraid; my point was that right-wing discourse often uses "poor people who vote on how to take your money" as a scarecrow to whip their electoral base to vote, as even people who are themselves poor are often afraid that even poorer people will come to vote to take their money away. That being said, if you want to be involved in political strategy, you need to develop language that sends the message to rich people that you are on their side and share their disdain for the poor, while not being more outrageous than others so that you wake up the poor from their apathy :)
ReplyDeleteThat is indeed a common political theme. However, Romania has had a larger share of "populist" (left wing, actually) speeches, mostly centered upon the "good of the people", and not the "good of the hard working people" or "the confort of the few".
ReplyDeleteThat being said, if you want to be involved in political strategy, you need to develop language that sends the message to rich people that you are on their side and share their disdain for the poor - That doesn't work in Romania, especially since the ''rich'' people don't have an actual culture. The ''gentry'' has been largely hunted to extinction by the communist regime so most rich people today don't owe it to hereditary fortunes, but mostly to a "rags to riches story'' or a ''thievery to riches'' legend.
I did a small share of political strategy, back in my early days. The politicians themselves largely ignore the advice around them (even when they don't have the image capital to do so).
Are you saying that every Romanian "knows better" and is stubbornly stupid and incapable to learn from their own or other people's mistakes? :)
ReplyDeleteI'm saying most stubborn Romanians have gotten pretty far in life :P
ReplyDeleteI'm in my Vaterland, the Romglish language. As it's written at the top of the page, under the header (see the marquee). Please don't drink and comment.
ReplyDeleteEte fleoșk! Cine vorbește...
ReplyDeleteI was honestly going to comment on the stuff in that blog. The problem is that it's too much of it. They keep posting and then comment and it's all wrong (well, most of it). It'd take me ages to go through all of it. Meanwhile, life happens. There's more interesting stuff to talk about. I don't expect you to understand what "interesting" is.
ReplyDeleteCorect...
ReplyDeleteDa' măcar șterge aia cu "unfinished" - că derutezi naivii.
....................
Interesant, am avut (și am) aceeași percepție. Citesc ocazional - din cauza stilului literar - dar e absurd să ai conversație - senzația e de restaurant plin de gălăgie, unde cântă o orchestră și merg trei televizoare pe trei posturi diferite: fotbal, politică și știri externe.
Dar ca să mă revanșez - iată 2 chestii "interesante":
ReplyDelete• http://www.nebraskapress.unl.edu/Supplements/press_kits/UNP_Mantegazza_PressKit.pdf
•
http://www.amazon.com/View-Year-3000-Michael-Hart/dp/0967107717
Desigur, doar pentru tine în mod special:
http://web.archive.org/web/20110629171612/http:/www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/mhhart01.html
:-)
Nu-s chestii interesante de discutat despre, da' par interesante de citit.
It's not that easy. If I don't discuss it, the title is completely unwarranted. So if I abandon the idea, I'd have to change the title. But if the title doesn't match the URL, Google might penalize me and I wouldn't even know it. So if I change the title I'd also have to change the URL & set up a redirect for the old URL. And then there are more changes I'd have to make. In the end, it's easier to just write a little bit about that blog in a second installment or even here, but that takes time and I don't like it, so I'm procrastinating. Capisci?
ReplyDeleteI think you wanted to reply with these on Dacia, Gypsies & Romanistan :)
ReplyDeleteInteresting the thought experiment with partitioning USA.
Aaa..., nu.
ReplyDeleteDoar încercam să hărțuiesc liberalu' dîn tine, nimica special.
:-)
A rather poor execution, I should say :)
ReplyDeleteProcrastination is MY monopoly, don't try to steal from me!!!
ReplyDeletePerhaps would be enough to c/p your comments on the subject and mine?
This would inform any intelligent reader as to why an in-depth analysis would be futile?
BLEGU' (arătând colții): "Aaa... așa care vaz'ică? Ei, încerc mai agresiv data viitoare!"
ReplyDeleteAn intelligent reader would be able to check them out. The comments are here, why copy them? Did you vote PSD or studied with Nastase?
ReplyDeletePăii... nuș', poate unii-s neatenți?
ReplyDeleteThat's their problem, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteNu mi se pare. Tu ții un magazin, treaba ta e pui marfa la vedere, să fie ușor de văzut de clienți.
ReplyDeleteFaza cu "dă-i în paula mea, dacă-s fraieri" nu se aplică în marcheting.
Wrong, because the merchandise exposed is free. So the merchandise that's visible to all Neanderthals is simply advertising, the free samples some guy gives passers-by outside the store. The real merchandise is inside the store, behind a password.
ReplyDeleteThe question is, could people who miss bits and pieces of info - are they worth going after and trying to convert into customers? The answer is no, at least, not at this point.
Oooh... now it's 2 level marketing... "afară-i vopsit gardu'/înăuntru-i leopardu'..."
ReplyDeleteNYTimes, te halesc, da' n-am scule...
NYT is not making money - poor model. The Economist is, but they're full of it. The path is somewhere in-between.
ReplyDeleteAha... am hînțeles...
ReplyDeleteTu ejti ceva mai sus dă NYTimes, da' mai jos de Economist.
Sper că măcar ești corporație non-profit.
Yes, in terms of profitability, I could be if I focused on this. Unfortunately I don't have the time, it's not my main goal and even if I did put in the effort, the chances of success are extremely low. Which makes your second last comment somewhat surprisingly appropriate for your critical thinking abilities :D
ReplyDeleteIn short, I'm playing along a successful model without putting in all that it takes to make it successful. Just for the sake of consistency..
ReplyDeleteDa' ce faci bre toată ziua de n-ai timp?
ReplyDeleteCât despre abilitățilii mele dă gândire... ce să zic: io crez că tu ejti dăștept și tu crezi că io-s prost.
Clar, greșim hamîndoi.
:-)
................
Da' să mă leg dă un topic: dacă nu profitul te coafează, care e motivația ta în viață?
Mersu' pîn copaci, ca baronu' și maimuțele?
Elaborează, ca să știm ce să condamnăm - cu mânie comentaristică...
(hai, că krossfire dîrdîie la mantinelă...)
Clar... atitudine superior-'telectualistică.
ReplyDeleteDe ce nu scrii băh, pentru Dilema Veche?
Re: Dilema - Why pump gas in the cars of others (i.e., write for others) when I hardly have time to make my own engine run smoothly?
ReplyDeleteMotivation - see the article with Liiceanu and the ox (boul).
Pompezi gaz ca să iei bacșiș. Plus ceva salariu, acolo-șa.
ReplyDeleteNu degeaba.
Comparația e fleșcăită rău.
Liiceanu... e mare sculă dă basculă?
E d-ăla cu fofează la gât?
I really, really don't think you can make a living in Canada out of writing for Dilema in Romania. You don't have to like or admire Liiceanu to read that article and figure out my motivation to write. Unless, in your second last comment (again!) we were both right :)
ReplyDeletePăi... bagă și tu linc ceva, că altfel vorbim pă uscat.
ReplyDeletePoate nu faci carieră scriind pentru DV din T., da' poate ciupești ceva, devii cunoscut, acolade, alea.
Cărți poți scrie oricum, că cică nu-i interzis în Canada (încă).
:-)
You can search for it. I don't link in comments - I have a ton with asz dot com and now they're pointing to "enlarge something". And yes, telling a pseudonymous blogger about "becoming famous" is a sign of in-depth critical thinking :)
ReplyDeleteYes, notoriety and fame is what all anonymous and pseudonymous bloggers are after.
ReplyDeleteLinks in comments are not a good idea around here - I have a bunch pointing to alsosprachzamolxis dot com and they're nearly impossible to change now. Try searching, it's not forbidden yet either.
Taci!
ReplyDeleteAm găsit...
Al doilea rezultat la guglea după serci de "liiceanu boul" duce la hun harticol dîn iunie anu' curent la asadotzamoetc.
Ia să vedem...
Uauuu, e cîh, e scris în limbi...
BLEGU' (la mișto): "Uaauuu... chelalauuu... profund, chiar adînc, putem zice... deși cam gîjîit p-alocuri..."
ReplyDelete(serios): "E o motivație bună, o strădanie meritorie, un țel nobil. Mi-aduce aminte de
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfHnzYEHAow
?? in limbi?
ReplyDeletea comment meant for that article but written here? :)
ReplyDeleteBLEGU' (arțăgos): "Ia nu mai fă tu pă deșteptu' cu mine... că ți-o tai... scurt-scurt! Era parte dîn conservația d-acilea, nu d-acolo... Ei comedie... ăsta face pă prostu' cu mine..."
ReplyDeleteLimbi de lifte streine... păgâne... nicicum alea românești VERZI - fie alea oltenești, moldovinești ori ardilenești; ori miticești, că tot 'iceai c-ai fost pîn Drumu' Taberii... dăși aia deja e mahalaua bucurescilor, nicidecum centru' propriu al Miticiei! La vot ai fost?
ReplyDeleteCu cine-ai votat?
Hai... curaj cocoșel, că nu-ți taie nimeni gâtu'...
It should be obvious from what I posted. And you?
ReplyDeleteCa maidanez... și neromân... n-am dreptu'.
ReplyDeleteIlegalitate, alea.
Se pedepsește cu asprime, cică.
Acuma... lasă-mă că m-am întărâtat și compun continuare la postu' ăsta mizerabil neterminat.
ReplyDeleteO să dau pă email.
I'm torn between the image of a dog feverishly chasing its tail and that of a dog feverishly cleaning its private parts :)
ReplyDeleteTryin' to chase your email, iz zis zimple.
ReplyDeleteDeci, am dat ce-aveam de lătrat... la una dîn multiplele d-voastră hadrese d[ himeil.
ReplyDelete