Tedenski izbor

reading-hipster

Ali, dragi levičarji, razumete perverzijo, ki se dogaja na Mladini? Ta tednik ni proti privatizaciji, ker sovraži Janšo, ni proti privatizaciji zato, ker so partizani umirali za našo svobodo in slovenski jezik, niti ni proti privatizaciji, ker ne prenese kapitalizma, proti je zaradi tega, ker je proti njihov lastnik, politično upravljani zmazek, imenovan NLB! S tega vidika je enačba Mladina = politično upravljana NLB = interesne skupine, ki so penetrirale v vlado, najlepši model za opisovanje motivov Mladine.

Kako kazino kapitalizem hrani Mladino – Kizo, Portal Plus

***

Oblast govori o reševanju krize, hkrati pa zaradi socialnega miru marginalizira in v tujino izganja sodobnemu svetu najbolje prilagojen del prebivalstva.

Namesto da smo “mladi” in naivno čakamo, da se “postaramo” – ali pa pristanemo na izgon možganov – se že enkrat opredelimo in politično organizirajmo kot generacija. In sporočimo – dovolj, tudi mi si zaslužimo enake priložnosti. Zaslužimo in izboriti si moramo generacijsko neodvisnost; torej sposobnost sprejemanja lastnih odločitev kot posledice vsaj približne premoženjske neodvisnosti. Naša moralna odgovornost v prvi vrsti ni in ne sme biti do staršev in starih staršev, ampak do lastnih partnerjev in – morda ravno zaradi katastrofalne socialne situacije nerojenih in zato povsem neupoštevanih – otrok. Socialna država je super; ampak veljati mora v istih ključnih točkah za vse, ali pa je ni.

Odj**ite že s temi mladimi – Davor Hafnar, Torek ob petih

***

Tantalisingly, there is a good solution to be grabbed for both Greece and Europe. Mr Tsipras has got two big things right, and one completely wrong. He is right that Europe’s austerity has been excessive. Mrs Merkel’s policies have been throttling the continent’s economy and have ushered in deflation. (…)

Mr Tsipras is also right that Greece’s debt, which has risen from 109% to a colossal 175% of GDP over the past six years despite tax rises and spending cuts, is unpayable. Greece should be put into a forgiveness programme just like a bankrupt African country. But Mr Tsipras is wrong to abandon reform at home. His plans to rehire 12,000 public-sector workers, abandon privatisation and introduce a big rise in the minimum wage would all undo Greece’s hard-won gains in competitiveness.

Hence this newspaper’s solution: get Mr Tsipras to junk his crazy socialism and to stick to structural reforms in exchange for debt forgiveness—either by pushing the maturity of Greek debt out even further or, better still, by reducing its face value. Mr Tspiras could vent his leftist urges by breaking up Greece’s cosy protected oligopolies and tackling corruption. The combination of macroeconomic easing with microeconomic structural reform might even provide a model for other countries, like Italy and even France.

Go ahead, Angela, make my day – The Economist

***

ZEIT ONLINE: In Deutschland fürchten viele, dass dies eine Ausrede ist, um Reformen zurückzudrehen.

Varoufakis: Die Deutschen müssen verstehen, dass es keine Abkehr vom Reformkurs bedeutet, wenn wir einem Rentner, der von 300 Euro im Monat lebt, zusätzlich 300 Euro im Jahr geben. Wenn wir von Reformen sprechen, dann sollten wir über Kartelle reden, über reiche Griechen, die kaum Steuern bezahlen. Warum kostet ein Kilometer Autobahn bei uns dreimal so viel wie in Deutschland?

ZEIT ONLINE: Warum?

Varoufakis: Weil wir es mit einem System der Vetternwirtschaft und Korruption zu tun haben. Darum müssen wir uns kümmern. Stattdessen debattierten wir über Öffnungszeiten von Apotheken.

ZEIT ONLINE: Viele Regierungen haben versprochen, etwas gegen diese Missstände zu tun. Geschehen ist wenig. Weshalb sollten man Ihnen vertrauen?

Varoufakis: Sie sollten uns nicht vertrauen. Aber Sie sollten uns zuhören. Hören Sie sich an, was wir zu sagen haben und lassen Sie uns dann unvoreingenommen darüber diskutieren.

“Ich bin Finanzminister eines bankrotten Staates” – Interview mit Yanis Varoufakis, Die Zeit

***

Syriza’s victory presents two lessons for the rest of Europe. First, no one votes for a 15-year-long recession. Second, you can’t run a gold standard in a democracy. Either the gold standard goes, or democracy goes, and that is the choice Europe may face sooner than it thinks.

The Euro is the gold standard that pretends that it’s not one—and therein lies the rub.

Austerity vs. Democracy in Greece – Mark Blyth & Cornel Ban, Foreign Affairs

***

It’s not hard to understand what The Economist called “Germany’s hyperinflation-phobia.” The premier economics magazine in the world wonders “the extent to which these lessons remain appropriate. Deflation is now a greater risk than inflation in Europe.”

However, memories run deep (…)

“The collapse of money and the collapse of morals became identical,” writes Taylor. Flesh was for sale as is depicted in “Cabaret” and not just with traditional prostitutes but “the newly dispossessed daughters (and sons) of the educated middle class, who had now also taken to the sex trade, were endlessly available at a price–preferably in cigarettes, precious metals or hard currency rather than paper marks.”

(…)

Out of control government that can’t borrow or tax enough to pay its bills?  Zimbabwe, Iran, Venezuela…what country is next?

The Reason for Hyperinflation-phobia – Doug French, Mises Canada

***

Like Milošević, Putin is prepared to use every instrument at his disposal, with no holds barred. In his war against the west he has deployed heavy military equipment, energy-supply blackmail, cyber-attack, propaganda by sophisticated, well-funded broadcasters, covert operations and agents of influence in EU capitals – oh yes, and Russian bombers nosing up the English Channel with their transponders off, potentially endangering civilian flights.

There is a Polish saying which translates roughly as “we play chess with them, they play kick-arse with us”. (Dupniak, or kick-arse, is a Polish game in which people try to identify who kicked them from behind.) This is the problem of the democratic west in general and the slow-moving, multi-nation EU in particular.

Putin must be stopped. And sometimes only guns can stop guns – Timothy Garton Ash, The Guardian

***

On the morning of 8 January, the first police bus drew up and cordoned off the embassy, and people wanting to leave flowers had to produce ID and have their details recorded. Information and ideas about possible actions in solidarity with the staff at Charlie Hebdo appeared in social media about 24 hours after the atrocity, but deciding when these would take place was more complicated – various things were proposed but then postponed.

(…)

Meanwhile, a Moscow court has sent Mark Galperin and Vladimir Ionov to jail for 38 days for picketing, and they may also receive a further five-year sentence under a new law on ‘multiple violation of the law on public gatherings’. Meanwhile, the State Duma is planning to remove Russians’ right to take part in demonstrations at all; at present it is debating a ban on attending public gatherings for people who have been previously charged with minor offences at such gatherings, even though this measure would contravene Russia’s Constitution. In Russia, nobody can be ‘Charlie.’

In Russia, nobody can be ‘Charlie’ – Ksenia Babich, Open Democracy

***

China has actually become something of a US ally. Though the conclusion of long-negotiated gas deals between Russia and China may seem to reflect a deepening of the bilateral relationship, China extracted an exceedingly low price from Russia for the gas that it will receive. This, together with the fact that China has cut lending to Russia since the Crimea invasion, suggests that, in the longer term, the Chinese envision Russia as a natural-resource vassal, not an equal ally.
(…)

These power shifts are the result less of Russia’s expansionist ambitions or China’s military and economic rise than of America’s declining international leadership. With Obama unwilling – or unable, due to rising political partisanship at home – to take the lead in addressing crises like those in Egypt, Libya, and Syria, challengers to American primacy took heart in 2014, and US allies took fright. Global power must be allocated somewhere; if the US would not fill its leading role on the international stage, an understudy would have to step in.

The Grand Strategy of Xi Jinping – Yoon Young-Kwan, Project Syndicate

***

‘So the verdict is clear’, he said. ‘Middle-class economics works. Expanding opportunity works. And these policies will continue to work, as long as politics do not get in the way.’  As long as politics do not get in the way: this is a remarkable thing for a president, or any other career politician or leader, to say. Obama is telling us not to engage in a battle of ideas, and urging us instead to work together to move to the middle ground, the safe space where we can all just get along and not question decisions. To my mind, this is a scary place, and somewhere I don’t believe most Americans want to go.

In fact, what Obama is trying to address in his pitch against politics is the popular disenchantment with America’s ‘polarised’ and ‘broken’ politics. But contrary to what partisan pundits would have us believe, the American people want unifying ideas and policies that will move this country forward and make it a better place for its citizens. The disenchantment is not with politics per se; it’s with a politics bereft of substantial goals. Republican Sarah Palin learnt this the hard way at the Iowa Freedom Summit earlier this week, where her rambling and barely coherent speech effectively removed any chance she ever had of winning the Republican nomination for president. Much to the disappointment of the left-leaning media, Middle America is not made up of a bunch of hillbillies, rednecks and bible-bashers who will believe anything a Conservative Republican tells them. In fact, like Obama, Palin fails to inspire precisely because of her focus on the politics of culture and identity.

 Obama is wrong: we need more politics, not less – Neil Ross, Spiked

***

Mahmood satirically pretended to denounce “a white cis-gendered hetero upper-class man” who offered to help him up when he slipped, leading him to denounce “our barbaric attitude toward people of left-handydnyss.” The gentle tone of his mockery was closer to Charlie Brown than to Charlie Hebdo.

The Michigan Daily, where Mahmood also worked as a columnist and film critic, objected to the placement of his column in the conservative paper but hardly wanted his satirical column in its own pages. Mahmood later said that he was told by the editor that his column had created a “hostile environment,” in which at least one Daily staffer felt threatened, and that he must write a letter of apology to the staff. When he refused, the Daily fired him, and the subsequent vandalism of his apartment served to confirm his status as thought-criminal.

(…)

Political correctness is not a rigorous commitment to social equality so much as a system of left-wing ideological repression. Not only is it not a form of liberalism; it is antithetical to liberalism. Indeed, its most frequent victims turn out to be liberals themselves.

(…)

Politics in a democracy is still based on getting people to agree with you, not making them afraid to disagree.

How the language police are perverting liberalism – Jonathan Chait, New York Magazine

***

The reality is that there are contexts where making people afraid to disagree is actually a pretty successful ways of settling political and cultural arguments.

(…)

And homosexuality and same-sex marriage really are cases where what once seemed like hothouse ideas and assumptions — an expansive definition of homophobia, a dismissal of traditional arguments as sheer bigotry — first took hold college campuses and then won over the entirety of elite culture. (…) So even if they’re mistaken about how to apply the lessons of their victory, I think it’s very natural for left-wing activists, on campus and off, to see that trajectory as a model for how other cultural victories might be won.

(…)

The strongest answer, as I’ve tried to suggest before in debates about pluralism, has to rest in doubt as well as confidence: In a sense of humility about your own certainties, a knowledge that what looks like absolute progressive truth in one era does not always turn out to look that way in hindsight, and a willingness to extend a presumption of decency and good faith even to people whose ideas you think history will judge harshly.

Does Political Correctness Work? – Ross Douthat, The New York Times

***

The illiberal policing of speech, the demonizing of dissent, and extreme identity politics have now transcended the academy and arrived in social media with a vengeance. Twitter and Facebook encourage mutually reassuring groupthink, in which individuals are required to “like” anything that isn’t white, male, cisgendered etc., in which an ideology is enforced by un-friending those with other views instead of engaging them, and in which large numbers of Twitter-users can descend on a racist/sexist/homophobic etc miscreant and destroy his or her career and social life in pursuit of racial/gender/orientation “social justice”.

I’m an established blogger with an independent site and have witnessed several such campaigns now – and they cannot but exact a toll. I’m fine with being called a self-hating gay or homophobe or misogynist or racist or anti-Semite, but what of those with much less independence?

(…)

The only “dialogue” much of the p.c. gay left wants with its sinners is a groveling apology for having a different point of view. There are few things in a free society more illiberal than that.

The Left’s Intensifying War on Liberalism – Andrew Sullivan, The Dish

***

The research paints a picture of students keen to discourage racism but sometimes with almost comic effect. Birmingham university’s student union has banned “racist” sombreros and native American dress from being worn on campus. Lancaster union has banned initiation ceremonies, defined in part as “engaging in public stunts and buffoonery”.

(…)

Some academics, however, are worried by student unions’ determination to rule on what students should and shouldn’t see or discuss – and by what they characterise as universities’ failure to challenge it.

Free speech? Not at four in five UK universities – Louise Tickle, The Guardian

***

On college campuses across the country, a growing number of students are demanding trigger warnings on class content. Many instructors are obliging with alerts in handouts and before presentations, even emailing notes of caution ahead of class. At Scripps College, lecturers give warnings before presenting a core curriculum class, the “Histories of the Present: Violence,” although some have questioned the value of such alerts when students are still required to attend class. Oberlin College has published an official document on triggers, advising faculty members to “be aware of racism, classism, sexism, heterosexism, cissexism, ableism, and other issues of privilege and oppression,” to remove triggering material when it doesn’t “directly” contribute to learning goals and “strongly consider” developing a policy to make “triggering material” optional. Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, it states, is a novel that may “trigger readers who have experienced racism, colonialism, religious persecution, violence, suicide and more.” Warnings have been proposed even for books long considered suitable material for high-schoolers: Last month, a Rutgers University sophomore suggested that an alert for F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby say, “TW: suicide, domestic abuse and graphic violence.”

Trigger Happy – Jenny Jarvie, The New Republic

***

The difference between Christianity and secularism is not the difference between two competing worldviews, faiths, or philosophies, but a difference between a meaningful universe and and objective silliness. The project of secularism has not been to assert anything non-religious (for indeed, how could one assert a ‘non’?) but to rename the religious. The cathedral becomes the museum, Christmas becomes Wintertide, Charity becomes philanthropy, the ethics of Christ become the ethics of ‘rational and advanced human beings’ (with modifications), the sacrament of marriage becomes a ceremony, the City of St. Francis becomes San Francisco, baptism becomes a useful literary symbol, we forget the ‘holy’ in ‘holiday,’ the ‘God be by you’ in ‘goodbye,’ as the French forget the ‘a dieu’ (to God) in adieu — this ‘renaming’ is really no more than a separation of things from their origins and of words from their meanings. The universe that results is obscure, awkward, ill-fit, absurd — everything without explanation. But this is the perverse blessing of secularism, that the degree to which everything is without explanation is the degree to which Christianity asserts herself as the explanation.

The Blessings of Secularism – Marc Barnes, Bad Catholic

***

From ancient times it has been recognized that there is a certain integrity to the role of athlete, just as there is to that of a coach. We expect players to play well, coaches to coach well. In recent times, however, the integrity of these roles has been violated by athletes taking on identities extraneous to the main task of competing. This violation irritates me, and perhaps many other folks. Let me be more concrete.

(…)

Athletes take on the role of entertainer, too. They celebrate! They prance into the endzone, do a dance after a touchdown, invent little celebrative rituals, sprint from the scene of their tackle, do a war dance after a sack, pray ostentatiously, spike the ball—all of which call attention to themselves. I estimate that half the still shots and videos we see in the media are now of such antics.

(…)

Most outrageously, players have taken on the role of fans by giving themselves honor. They pound their chests, hold up their fists in triumph, flex their biceps, invite cheers for themselves, stand victoriously over their prone opponent, and shout that they are the greatest.

The De-Professionalisation of the NFL – Robert Benne, First Things

***

When people sometimes tell me they don’t get anything from worship, I am happy to answer, “That’s great! Because its not about you.” Our culture needs a place — we need a place in our lives — to tell us that not everything is always about us, about our personal happiness, our convenience, our frantic timetables, or shrinking commitments.

Some things are bigger than us. There needs to be a place where we are told uncomfortable truths about ourselves, our world and even about God — where we ask the questions our pop culture ignores or caricatures, and where we can look for answers. Where we pause — and reflect theologically.

Worship is a central act of proclamation of God’s grace to us — in preaching and in faithful administration of sacraments. It needs to be robust, faithful, engaging — but its focus must be the God

Christianity Cannot Survive the Decline in Worship – Kazimierz Bem, On faith

***

There was a sense in Benedict’s pontificate that the best response to the crisis of secularization might be a strong repudiation of secular culture and consolidation within a smaller, purer, and more assertive church. By contrast, Francis believes that the church

is called to come out of herself and to go to the peripheries, not only geographically, but also the existential peripheries: the mystery of sin, of pain, of injustice, of ignorance and indifference to religion, of intellectual currents, and of all misery.

The church must be “capable of rediscovering the maternal womb of mercy” in “a world of ‘wounded’ persons in need of understanding, forgiveness, love.” It must never retreat into itself, never opt for “rigidity and defensiveness.” It works with people as they are, not as they ought to be, taking pastoral risks to meet human need, even if in the process “its shoes get soiled by the mud of the streets.”

Who Is the Pope? – Aemon Duffy, The New York Review of Books

***

Richard Dawkins’ insanity has now become an English institution – like warm beer and rain. On Saturday morning, a tweet from his account asked why we don’t send lots of “erotic videos” to theocracies, adding that it should be “loving, gentle, woman-respecting” (I guess this involves the pizza delivery boy calling the next day).

(…)

What irritates me is that his remarks are reported as though they are important. He’s not Oscar Wilde (who died a Catholic). He’s not even Benny Hill (who was funny). Celebrity atheism was a big thing ten years ago but now is old hat and rather tiresome. Oh, there are atheist thinkers out there whose opinions are worth hearing and there are eloquent people of faith ready to respond. But why must it always be the same old bores boring on about the subject? This yawnfest has to stop.

Richard Dawkins wants to fight Islamism with erotica. Celebrity atheism has lost it – Tim Stanley, The Daily Telegraph 

***

Kdo je bil glavni govornik v Dražgošah leta 1989? Tedanji šef komunistov Milan Kučan oz. predsednik predsedstva Janez Stanovnik? Nak, govoril je Andrej Verlič, sekretar ZSMS, medtem ko časniki niso poročali, da bi se svečanosti udeležil kdo iz slovenskega vrha. Pred tem je bila leta 1988 tako minorna proslava, da jo je ‘Dnevnik’ objavil na tretji strani celo brez fotke; govoril je le Tone Anderlič takrat predsednik ZSMS, nobenih drugih imen politike ni zabeležil časnik. Partija je nato ob pričakovanju prvih volitev popolnoma pozabila na dražgoški upor, saj je l. 1990 časnik ‘Dnevnik’ poročal o tekmovanjih v Dražgošah samo na športni strani. Med leti 1988 in 1990, ko je bil predsednik Slovenije, gospod Stanovnik še ni čutil potrebe, da bi grmel iz Dražgoš.

Mitsko in stereotipno v slovenskem pogledu na zgodovino – Tomaž Ivešić, Časnik

***

A striking contribution comes from the historians Jo Guldi and David Armitage. At a mere 165 pages, their book The History Manifesto is modest in scale but not in ambition: its first sentence mimics the opening of the Communist Manifesto: “A spectre is haunting our time: the spectre of the short term.” Guldi, who teaches at Brown, and Armitage, a British-born professor at Harvard, point to politicians trapped in the electoral cycle, business leaders fixated on profit returns and bureaucrats obsessed by performance targets. Academics, one might add, have also been sucked into the vortex, with the rigid six-year cycle of the Research Excellence Framework deterring big historical projects that take time to mature.

(…)

Public awareness of the interconnection of past, present and future has been particularly keen at moments of dramatic rupture or transition. The end of the Second World War, with the total collapse of Hitler’s European empire and the horrific exposure of his “Final Solution”, constituted one such moment; another was the end of the cold war in 1989-91, when the “Iron Curtain” disintegrated and the Soviet Union fell apart. Such evidently “historic” moments have kindled an interest in “contemporary history”, or Zeitgeschichte, as the Germans call it. In this area, too, historical awareness has relevance for political debate, by helping us to locate our contemporary problems in the longer sweep of events.

The return of big history: the long past is the antidote to short-termism – David Reynolds, The New Statesman

***

Jargon, when used precisely, can actually facilitate communication.

But encouraging this style, especially in publications trying to reach out to a broader audience and address contemporary political issues, pushes us all toward irrelevance.

At best, it encourages scholars who have something important to say to devote their energy toward preaching to the choir – and preaching in such obtuse language that even if someone happened to wander into the church mid-sermon, they wouldn’t have any idea what was going on, much less any chance to convert.

At worst, this style leads scholars to conclude that clear writing is ideologically suspect, if not downright reactionary. Too many of my colleagues with valuable political insights have learned to wrap their ideas in a layer of verbal fuzz for fear someone will understand what they’re saying and accuse them of not being on the “team.”

Academics Are Losing the War over the Middle East to the Thomas Friedmans of the World, Who Write All Too Clearly – Neeshat Afyonkara, Muftah.org

***

Naš jezik je izjemno prilagodljiv, lahko prevzame vse svetovne ritme in večino svetovnih glasov. Dovolj je bogat, da lahko opiše ves svet na več načinov. Lahko pove stvari kratko in jedrnato, lahko razpreda in se zgublja v zavojih lastne lepote. Slab mojster vedno krivi orodje. Slovenski jezik je občutljiv vrhunski inštrument, zato lahko zazveni v vsem svojem sijaju le takrat, ko ga vihti pravi mojster. Če pa želiš delati glasbo za tuje tržišče, potem to počni na tujem tržišču!

Dober raper ni nujno uspešen – Ana Cukijati, Primorske novice

Advertisements

Prosimo, upoštevajte, da so komentarji namenjeni civizirani izmenjavi mnenj

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s