Tedenski izbor

branje12

Since Thomas Hobbes, many people have embraced the illusory notion that society is made up of individuals. According to this view the only fair competition is between individuals, without undue benefit from family connections.
But no society has ever been this way. Individuals don’t come fully formed. They emerge out of families and groups. The family and the group are the essential social unit. These collectives have always shaped public life.
(…)
The philosopher Michael Oakeshott once observed that it takes three generations to make a career. That is, the skills that going into, say, a teacher — verbal fluency, empathy, endurance — take a long time to develop. They emerge in grandparents and great-grandparents and are passed down magnified through the generations. I bet you can trace ways your grandparents helped shape your career.

Mothers and Presidents – David Brooks, The New York Times

***

Cameron states that for too long ‘we have been a passively tolerant society’ and is presumably ‘pumped-up’ at the possibility of actively changing this image. But, in truth, Britain has strayed a long way from the Enlightenment conceptualisation of tolerance, which advocated robust engagement with others over matters of principle while recognising and accepting the need to live side-by-side.

In recent years, British society has become not tolerant but indifferent to the mores of others, preferring to turn a blind eye to outlooks and activities deemed not too threatening. You can believe anything you like, so long as you don’t believe in it too much, has been the unstated outlook of the authorities. Now, Cameron seeks to shift gear from passive indifference to active authoritarianism.

Anti-terror: the perversion of tolerance – Bill Durodié, Spiked

Continue reading

Advertisements

Tedenski izbor

branje8

Ne more pa gospodarski liberalizem biti udarna točka programa NSi, njihova naslovna zgodba, pozicijski slogan, jedro prepoznavnosti, edinstvena primerjalna prednost (…). Ker to nikakor ni zgodba večinskega potencialnega volivca NSi. Čeprav kakšen nadobuden strankin funkcionar, ki je pravkar odkril eleganco liberalne ekonomske misli, zdaj meni, da ga morajo zato kar naenkrat imeti radi vsi njegovi potencialni volivci. Ki jim v večini primerov za eleganco liberalne misli bolj ali manj visi dol.

(…)

Po vsebini pa mora NSi svoj liberalizem postaviti nekoliko v ozadje in postati, če želite, žlahtna konservativna stranka. Nikar, prosim, ne dovolite, da bi vam asociacija na Kučana za vedno onečedila to lepo besedno zvezo. Raje si tule preberite, kaj naj bi to zares pomenilo: www.kirkcenter.org.

NSi se mora dovolj jasno profilirati, da bo prva izbira za vse krščansko usmerjene volivce, tako tiste, ki bolj stavijo na tekmovalnost in meritokracijo, kot tiste, ki bi v ospredje prej postavili sožitje in solidarnost. Tudi kakšen krščanski socialist se mora prej najti pri njih kot pri kakšni naslednici Zveze komunistov ali pri kakšni skrajni novolevičarski združbi tipa Luka Mesec. Tudi vsem tistim kristjanom, ki so se ob vsaki priložnosti pripravljeni pridušati čez pohlep, sodobni materializem in brezdušni kapitalizem, mora znati pokazati, da ni pravi odgovor zatekanje h karšnemkoli kolektivizmu in centalnoplanskemu etatizmu.

Slovenska krščansko-liberalna stranka? Hm. – Blaž Vodopivec, Finance

***

Desetletje, v katerem se je zgodila finančna, gospodarska in socialna kriza, ko je država zdrknila na obrobje EU, smo se novinarji, politiki, sodniki in odvetniki ukvarjali s Patrio. Medtem ko so druge države iskale poti, kako iz krize, smo mi bojevali versko vojno med dvema religijama, med verniki v “kriv je” in verniki v “ni kriv”.

Proces Patria je samo zgovoren dokaz, da nam je tranzicijska povzpetniška elita ukradla državo, ki je ni sposobna voditi. Tako kot osemletni otrok ni sposoben voziti avtomobila, ker je pač premajhen, nevaren sebi, sopotnikom in drugim udeležencem v prometu, tako naša tranzicijska elita ni sposobna upravljati države v korist in blaginjo vseh državljanov. Ne zmrdujte se nad Hrvati, ki kupujejo naša podjetja, to je za nas sreča, naši politiki jih uničujejo.

Ostaja zgolj vprašanje, ali smo se iz Patrie morda le kaj naučili. Odziv Luke Mesca, da je ustavno sodišče spet pristransko, kaže na to, da se tudi tranzicijski podmladek sploh noče nič naučiti.

Luzerji – Uroš Urbas, Siol.net

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

branje1

What must one take for granted in order for same-sex marriage to be intelligible? (This is not a question about the motives or beliefs—which can seem quite humane—of those who support same-sex marriage.) It is commonly argued that marriage is no longer principally about the procreation and the rearing of children but that it centers instead on the companionship of the couple and the building of a household. The courts have repeatedly accepted this reasoning. And yet, if same-sex marriage is to be truly equal to natural marriage in the eyes of society and the law, then all the rights and privileges of marriage—including those involving the procreation and rearing of children—must in principle belong to both kinds of marriage, irrespective of the motives impelling a couple toward marriage or whether, once married, they exercise these rights and privileges.

With same-sex couples this can be achieved only by technological means. And so the case for companionate marriage has been supplemented again and again by the argument that we must endorse reproductive technologies that eliminate any relevant difference between a male–female couple and a same-sex couple. This elevates these technologies from a remedy for infertility, what they principally have been, to a normative form of reproduction equivalent and perhaps even superior to natural procreation. But if there is no meaningful difference between a male–female couple conceiving a child naturally and same-sex couples conceiving children through surrogates and various technological means, then it follows that nothing of ontological significance attaches to natural motherhood and fatherhood or to having a father and a mother. These roles and relations are not fundamentally natural phenomena integral to human identity and social welfare but are mere accidents of biology overlaid with social conventions that can be replaced by functionally equivalent roles without loss. The implications are enormousexistential changes to the relation between kinship and personal identity, legal redefinitions of the relation between natural kinship and parental rights, and practical, biotechnical innovations that are only beginning to emerge into view and will be defended as necessary for a liberal society.

(…)

Whether this is the logical outworking of the metaphysical and anthropological premises of liberalism or a radically new thing (…), it marks a point of no return in American public philosophy. And it effectively brings the civic project of American Christianity to an end.

The Civil Project of American Christianity – Micheal Hanby, First Things

  Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

Man_Reading_a_Book

Today is a dark day for Europe. The barbaric assault on the offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo is an attack most immediately on the journalists and cartoonists who worked there, 12 of whom are dead, executed in cold blood for the ‘crime’ of saying what they think. But this horrific act was also an attack on Europe itself, on all of us, on our fundamental right to freedom of thought and speech. None of us can feel the pain currently being felt by the friends and families of the murdered journalists and illustrators – but all of us should feel assaulted by this massacre, for it is designed to chill us and make us cower, to make us censor ourselves or else suffer the consequences.

(…)

Our response should be to reaffirm our commitment to freedom of speech and most importantly to the right to be offensive, to provoke, to mock and ridicule any belief system we want. From John Wilkes’ royalty-bashing pamphlets to Thomas Paine’s questioning of religion, offending gods and kings, kicking against the orthodoxies of one’s age, has been central to the Enlightenment, to the birth of the modern world. To fail to offer solidarity to Charlie Hebdo and other modern offenders against religious or political correctness would be to turn the clock back on the Enlightenment itself and propel Europe back into an era of self-silencing and moral obedience.

In solidarity with Charlie Hebdo: fight for the right to be offensive – Brendan O’Neill, Spiked

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

nun-reading

The contrast illustrates a characteristic of Lincoln’s which his biographers have never sufficiently emphasized. His mind was capable of harboring and reconciling purposes, convictions and emotions so different from one another that to the majority of his fellow-countrymen they would in anybody else have seemed incompatible. He could hesitate patiently without allowing hesitation to become infirmity of will. He could insist without allowing insistence to become an excuse for thoughtless obstinacy. He could fight without quarreling. He could believe intensely in a war and in the necessity of seeing it through without falling a victim to its fanaticism and without permitting violence and hatred to usurp the place which faith in human nature and love of truth ordinarily occupied in his mind.

When, for instance, the crisis came, and the South treated his election as a sufficient excuse for secession, he did not flinch as did Seward and other Republican leaders. He would not bribe the South to abandon secession by compromising the results of Republican victory. Neither would he, if she seceded, agree to treat secession as anything but rebellion. But although he insisted, if necessary, on fighting, he was far more considerate of the convictions and the permanent interests of the South than were the Republican leaders, who for the sake of peace were ready to yield to her demands.

Abraham Lincoln Was Not a Man of the People – Herbert Croly, The New Republic

***

Lahko rekonstruiramo genezo Zgodovencev? Na našo srečo so kolumnisti v tem smislu povsem jasni: Zgodovenci so nastali, ko so se zgodovinski Slovenci »zataknili« pri eni stvari. Ne pri desetih ali petintridesetih stvareh v preteklosti, ampak zgolj pri eni stvari, ki je niso »prebavili«, »predelali« ali »presegli«. Ostali so na neki stopnji in se pač niso premaknili naprej. Na zunaj živijo sodobna življenja, v svojem bistvu pa se vedno znova vračajo k enem problemu, v katerega se neuspešno zaletavajo in si tako razbijajo betice. Povsem logično je, da si kolumnisti niso povsem edini, kaj naj bi bila ta »stvar«, ki je ustvarila zgodovenskega belcebuba. Še največ zagovornikov imata hlapčevstvo in tlačanstvo, zanemariti ne smemo tudi majhnosti, katolištva, komunizma, revolucije, pa še kaj bi se našlo.

Zgodovenci – Marko Zajc, Airbeletrina

***

Iskanje krivca za vsako stvar je zgolj obsedenost naše civilizacije, da mora biti vedno vse brez napak, da če pa gre kaj narobe, je pa nekdo kriv. Nekdo drug. Ne jaz sam. Zgoraj je, upam, naštetih dovolj “drugih”, da boste imeli lep dan.
Pokaže tudi, upam, da prava debata ni o tem, kaj je krivo za poplave, ampak, kaj se da narediti, da bi bile posledice blažje.

***

Kritiko pri nas razumemo kot element promocije. Vsakršna kritiška refleksija, ki zazna slabosti umetniškega dela, je obravnavana kot ad hominem napad na umetnika. Kot »nesramnost«, ki si jo kritik od časa do časa »privošči«. Ko si jo, pa mora za svojo nesramnost tudi »odgovarjati«.
Osebno sem se s tem fenomenom prvič soočil, ko sem prejel prošnjo piarovske službe nekega ljubljanskega gledališča, če bi lahko naslednjo predstavo prišel ocenjevat kdo drug, ker je bil moj zapis »preveč negativističen«; še jasneje pa se mi je razkril, ko mi je na enem od festivalov ugledni gledališki ustvarjalec diskretno svetoval, naj prihodnjih nekaj sezon pišem le pozitivne kritike, ker je slovensko gledališče »trenutno res v redu«.
Gre torej za stanje duha, ki že skoraj meji na bolestni optimizem stereotipne predkrizne evforije korporativnega sveta, v kateri je vsaka negativnost šteta kot »slaba za posel«; evforije, v kateri so tiste, ki so poskušali opozarjati na rdeče številke, najrajši po hitrem postopku odpustili, češ, ne kvarite razpoloženja, dobra volja je najbolja.
Seveda si nihče ne želi, da bi grenko obračunavanje z neuspehi postalo osrednji modus slovenskega kritiškega diskurza. Navdušenje nad dosežki in presežki mora vselej preglasiti nerganje ob spodletelih podvigih. A če res želimo prve, je pač treba tudi druge vselej iskreno analizirati, ovrednotiti in poimenovati.

Oklofutaj svojega kritika – Matic Kocijančič, Pogledi

***

Mojmir Mrak je prepričan, da se bo spremenilo razumevanje narave gospodarske krize, ključno vprašanje v Evropi pa je že postalo “kako priti do neke stabilnejše obnove gospodarske rasti v pogojih, kjer je fiskalni prostor praktično zelo omejen. Cela vrsta držav – tudi Slovenija – je v situaciji, kjer drugega fiskalnega prostora ni.”

Ponekod, denimo v Grčiji, bo za rast treba najprej odpisati dolgove ali močno podaljšati njihovo ročnost. Drugod, denimo v Sloveniji, se bo treba bolj odpreti tujemu kapitalu. Privatizacija ni nujna zaradi zmanjšanja dolgov: “Osebno vidim privatizacijo bolj v kontekstu korporativnega upravljanja.” In izboljšanje upravljanja lahko pripomore k rasti.

In pa, Slovenija ob nevzdržno visokem javnem dolgu še vedno nima izgovora za opustitev proračunske konsolidacije, naše varčevanje je bilo medlo in bilo bi“nekorektno primerjati, da je naše varčevanje bilo tako drastično, kot je bilo drugod”. “Kar pa smo res naredili, je, da smo celotno varčevanje izvedli na investicijah.”

Moralo pa bi biti obratno: manj varčevanja pri investicijah in več reform, ki bi ustavile naraščanje javnih izdatkov, pravi Mrak.

Mrak o krizi: drugačna diagnoza, drugačni ukrepi – Maja Derčar, MMC RTVSLO

***

Ste eden tistih ljubljanskih voznikov, ki pri zelenem semaforju najprej malo razmislijo in pogledajo, nato počasi in previdno speljejo, si pustijo razkošno varnostno razdaljo in potem zelo zelo zelo zložno pospešujejo do naslednjega križišča? Ker verjamete, da tako varčujete gorivo? Za vas imam novico – motite se. Fizikalno gledano, porabite enako energije, da od nič do 60 pospešite v petih sekundah, kot če za enak pospešek potrebujete 20 sekund.

Očitno ne veste niti tega, da taka ležernost povzroča tudi nemajhno kolateralno škodo. Če vsi speljejo po polževo, bo šlo v zelenem intervalu skozi križišče samo pet avtov namesto 10 ali 15. Postopoma se bodo naredili zastoji, križišča se bodo navzkrižno blokirala, tisoče avtomobilskih motorjev bo teklo v prazno, kurilo gorivo in povečevalo izpuste. Zapomnite si, torej: naslednjič, ko boste spet speljali takole po principu »previdnost je mati modrosti«, bo zaradi vas še en severni medvedek nekje na Arktiki izgubil bitko za preživetje, ker se mu bo zaradi globalnega segrevanja stalila njegova ledena gora.

Cijazenje prometa po naši prestolnici je metafora za naše reševanje gospodarskih težav. Strukturne reforme se vlečejo v nedogled. Sanacija bank se vleče v nedogled. Privatizacije se vlečejo v nedogled. Insolvenčni postopki se vlečejo v nedogled. Postopki zmanjševanja presežkov zaposlenih se vlečejo v nedogled. Sodni postopki se vlečejo v nedogled. Postopki prestrukturiranja podjetij se vlečejo v nedogled. Likvidnostnemu in razpoloženjskemu krču dajemo čas, da metastazira po dobaviteljskih verigah in omrežjih. Zaradi dolgotrajne negotovosti zmrznejo še porabniki in kar naenkrat ves center stoji, vsa križišča so navzkrižno blokirana, prometnikov, ki bi razčistili situacijo, pa od nikoder. Počasi se vse več ekonomskih subjektov zakrči, izgubijo voljo do iskanja dela, do iskanja podjetniških priložnosti, do investiranja in rasti. In za piko na i jih zaradi dolgotrajnega stresa zatolčejo še psihosomatske težave.

Prestavite vsaj v tretjo, prosim – Blaž Vodopivec, Finance

***

Contrary to standard definitions of sociology as an a-telic pursuit of insight and knowledge, Smith argues that sociology has an agenda, “visionary project of realizing the emancipation, equality, and moral affirmation of all human beings as autonomous, self-directly, individual agents (who should be) out to live their lives as they personally so desire, by constructing their own favored identities, entering and exiting relationship as they choose, and equally enjoying the gratification of experiential, material, and bodily pleasures” (7-8). Sociology isn’t philosophically neutral, but pursues a vision of the “good life and society” as one that “throws off the restrictive, repressive constraints placed on the gratification of individual pleasures and frees everyone to satisfy any pleasure that she or he so desires” (17).

Borrowing from the aims of Christianity, sociology unsurprisingly offers “a secular salvation story” with roots in the “Enlightenment, liberalism, Marxism, reformist progressivism, pragmatism, therapeutic culture, sexual liberation, civil rights, feminism, and so on” (20). Some sociologists are true believers; others are tacitly friendly to the project. Describing sociology in this terms has a couple of advantages: It’s sure to shock, and so has some rhetorical punch. But it also helps to explain some of the behavior that Smith describes in the book. As he shows, the reaction to sociology’s “heretics” isn’t rational discussion and dispassionate weighing of evidence.

Sacred Sociology – Peter Leithart, First Things

***

The disintegration of the ruble is merely a symptom of something much deeper and more worrying. This is Putin digging in; this is Putin reinforcing his foxhole and preparing for the long fight ahead. He will not let go of eastern Ukraine, and he is trying to keep the reserves full so that he can survive the long fight ahead.

The problem, though, is that the pressure inside the system is rising. Food prices are jumping and, though so far, Russians mostly blame the West for their country’s economic malaise, it’s not clear how long that will last.

Far more alarming, though, is the struggle over resources that is starting to take shape among the billionaires in Putin’s orbit. In January, I quoted Elena Panfilova, now the vice president of Transparency International, who predicted that the elites will start to cannibalize themselves as they fight over a rapidly shrinking economic pie. These men are used to a certain level of income and it is one that is hard to maintain when your economy isn’t growing. At all. And so, over the last year, we’ve seen the system eat two men who were once quite close to Putin. Earlier this year, Sergei Pugachev, the man known as the “Kremlin’s banker,” fled Russia, a warrant out for his arrest. This fall, Vladimir Yevtushenkov, one of the wealthiest businessmen in Russia, was arrested. In record time, a court said that an oil company he owned actually belonged to the government, and it was gone.

Russia’s Ruble Value Is Plummeting and Putin’s Billionaires Are Canabalizing Each Other – Julia Ioffe, The New Republic

***

Today, the positive emphasis on a war of aggression goes well with tendencies in the Russian media, where defiant declarations of Russian anti-fascism are increasingly submerged in rhetoric that may seem rather fascist. Jews are blamed for the Holocaust on national television; an intellectual close to the Kremlin praises Hitler as a statesman; Russian Nazis march on May Day; Nuremberg-style rallies where torches are carried in swastika formations are presented as anti-fascist; and a campaign against homosexuals is presented as a defense of true European civilization. In its invasion of Ukraine, the Russian government has called upon the members of local and European far right groups to support its actions and spread Moscow’s version of events.

In the recent “elections” staged in the Russian-backed eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, as in the earlier faked referendum in occupied Crimea, European far-right politicians have come as “observers” to endorse the gains of Russia’s war. Far from being an eccentric stunt, the invitation of these “observers” reveals why the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is meaningful to Moscow today. Although Putin would certainly have been pleased if actual German or Polish political leaders were foolish enough to take the bait of agreeing to a new division of Europe, he seems satisfied for the moment with the people who have actually responded, in one way or another, to his appeal to destroy the existing European order: separatists across Europe (including the UK Independence Party, whose leader, Nigel Farage, calls Putin the world leader he most admires); anti-European right-wing populist parties (of which the most important is France’s National Front); as well as the far-right fringe, including neo-Nazis.

Putin’s New Nostalgia – Timothy Snyder, The New York Review of Books

***

Zionism, which did not undergo a metamorphosis in 1948 and did not desist in 1967, became a kind of revolution-in-progress and thereby became like the other revolutions-in-progress of the 20th century. It forged a situation that a liberal democrat cannot live with and cannot accept. This is a situation that cannot endure indefinitely.

(…)

I will tell you where you differ from the Zionist left. For most of us, the key concept is the “State of Israel.” As we see it, the Zionist enterprise was intended to bring into being a place where the Jewish people would constitute the majority and enjoy sovereignty. If there is no majority, there is no sovereignty and no democratic-Jewish state; there is no point to all this. It’s more convenient to live as a minority in Manhattan. But for you the basic concept is the “Land of Israel.” In that sense, you resemble the right wing and the Palestinians. You have a soil fetish. You come from the soil and you live the soil and you speak in the name of the soil.

It’s true that I live the story of the soil. I live the whole land and I am mindful of all the people who live here. That is how I know that the land cannot tolerate partition. And I know the land is hurting. The land is angry. After all, what two great monuments have we built here in the past decade? One is the separation fence and the other is [architect Moshe] Safdie’s terminal at Ben-Gurion Airport. The two monuments have something in common: they are intended to allow us to live here as though we are not here. They were built so that we would not see the land and not see the Palestinians, and live as though we are connected to the tail end of Italy. But I see all the fruit groves that were demolished in order to build the fence. I hear the hills that were sliced in two in order to build the fence. The heart weeps. The heart weeps in the name of the soil. For me, the soil is a living being. And I see how this conflict has tortured the soil, the homeland. I grieve for the torments of the homeland.

Jerusalem-born thinker Meron Benevisti has a message for Israelis: stop whining – Ari Shavit, Haaretz

***

Why was the South so well suited to fill the demand for congenial Catholic voices? The standard explanation holds that their inability to retreat to insular, self-sufficient “ghettos” made Southern Catholics more appealing on the national scene. Forced to find their way in a largely non-Catholic world, they grew adept at expressing their moral vision in terms accessible to outsiders. The flowering of Catholic fiction in the mid-twentieth century bore witness to this dynamic. Readers who wished to penetrate the inner workings of a self-contained parochial universe could listen to the musings of J. F. Powers’ upper-Midwestern clerics. Those who wanted to explore broader applications of Catholic soteriology attended to the harsh twang of Flannery O’Connor’s “good country people” or the more gentlemanly drawls of Walker Percy’s cosmic wanderers. In political matters, meanwhile, the Southern Catholic voice remained optimistic about the basic congruity of civic aims and Christian commitments. It was yet another South Carolinian, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, who emerged as the Church’s leading architect of moderation and consensus amid our late-century culture wars.

Stephen Colbert and the Southern Catholic Charism – Drew Denton, First Things

***

According to Bromwich, Burke’s importance must be understood in terms of a theological crisis in the late 18th century. This was, Bromwich tells us, the crisis of “secularization.” In the old Thomist view of politics, the state was a practical extension of the moral law. But in Burke’s day, Bromwich explains, this vision of politics had become increasingly untenable. In its absence, what arguments could be levied against the Machiavellian image of politics as an amoral arena in which statesmen recognize only the dictates of power and prestige? If statesmen are to obey gods higher than the will to power or the logic of the market, then in the wake of religion’s collapse a new justification for political morality is needed. This is what Bromwich thinks he has found in Burke.

Again and again Bromwich repeats Burke’s mantra that “the principles of true politics are those of morality enlarged, and I neither now do nor ever will admit of any other.” For Burke, he argues, political morality was grounded in the natural human ability to empathize with one’s fellow man. Rather than divine command, Burkean morality is based on human psychology.

Occupy Edmund Burke – Jonathan Green, The American Conservative

Tedenski izbor

Churchill-reading

 

Yet [Greece’s] recent comeback masks deep structural problems. To tidy its books, Athens levied crippling taxes on the middle class and made sharp cuts to government salaries, pensions, and health-care coverage. While ordinary citizens suffered under the weight of austerity, the government stalled on meaningful reforms: the Greek economy remains one of the least open in Europe and consequently one of the least competitive. It is also one of the most unequal.

Greece has failed to address such problems because the country’s elites have a vested interest in keeping things as they are. Since the early 1990s, a handful of wealthy families — an oligarchy in all but name — has dominated Greek politics. These elites have preserved their positions through control of the media and through old-fashioned favoritism, sharing the spoils of power with the country’s politicians. Greek legislators, in turn, have held on to power by rewarding a small number of professional associations and public-sector unions that support the status quo. Even as European lenders have put the country’s finances under a microscope, this arrangement has held.

The fundamental problem facing Greece is not economic growth but political inequality.

Misrule of the Few: How the Oligarchs Ruined Greece – Pavlos Eleftheriadis, Foreign Affairs

***

I agree entirely with Ryan that libertarianism (“rugged individualism”) is hard to reconcile with Christianity and the history of Christian political thought. His comment, though, highlights two ideas I’m trying to work out within my own thinking on religion and politics.

First, to say that Republicans, especially Christian conservatives, have “given up on America” because they no longer have Tocquevillian ideals is, I think, sort of true — but then, is it not the case that America has given up on itself in that regard? Who really believes in the common good anymore? We have become an atomized nation of individual consumers who believe our preferences must be indulged no matter what. It’s true of the Right as well as the Left. The main reason it’s so hard to talk about the common good is that so few people are willing to recognize an independent authoritative standard for determining that good.

Has the GOP Given Up on America? – Rod Dreher, The American Conservative

 ***

This updated conservative tradition consists of several complementary propositions:

As human beings, our first responsibility lies in stewardship, preserving our common inheritance and protecting that which possesses lasting value. This implies an ability to discriminate between what is permanent and what is transient, between what ought to endure and what is rightly destined for the trash heap. Please note this does not signify opposition to all change—no standing athwart history, yelling Stop—but fostering change that enhances rather than undermines that which qualifies as true.

Conservatives, therefore, are skeptical of anything that smacks of utopianism. They resist seduction by charlatans peddling the latest Big Idea That Explains Everything.

Counterculture Conservatism: the Right Needs Less Ayn Rand, More Flannery O’Connor – Andrew Bacevich, The American Conservative

 ***

Zgodba o vlačenju Anuške Delić po sodišču postaja bizarna in se spreminja v institucionalni spin, ki je mogoč zgolj zaradi tega, ker je to politično mogoče. Da ne bo pomote: Delićeva, ki, kot smo razkrili na našem portalu, pridobiva informacije kar pri Pristopu in z njimi obdeluje bivše Pristopove poslovne stranke, je v primeru desnih ekstremistov naredila tisto, kar bi vsak novinar moral in k čemur je zavezan – objavila je vse zgodbe.

In bodimo iskreni, objavila jih je še z večjim veseljem, ker je šlo za informacije, ki so neposredno škodile volilni mobilizaciji SDS. Problem pa, institucionalno gledano, ni v Delićevi, ampak v viru, ki je informacije s točno določeno agendo (ki je lahko samo politična) odcurljal do Dela.

Ali je Sova ušla izpod kontrole? – Kizo, Portal Plus

***

Potrebujemo iniciativi Reset in Gremo na volitve na steroidih. Takšni, ki se ekipirata skrbneje in dlje časa od izvirnika in ne ponovita začetniških napak Državljanske liste. Potrebujemo kritično maso razumnih ljudi, ki bi skupaj z ranjeno desno-sredinsko opozicijo, brez Desusa, na volitvah lahko dosegli 51 odstotkov  ter izvedli trajne spremembe. Nemogoče? Sploh ne.  Naj brez posebnega vrstnega reda in brez vedenja oseb, ki jih bom namočil, naštejem nekaj posameznikov, ki bi jim kot ekipi zaupal svojo podporo in glas: Romani Jordan, Janezu Šušteršiču, Marjanu Batagelju, Blažu Vodopivcu, Bojanu Travnu, Igorju Mastenu, Žigu Turku in Igorju Akrapoviču Bi jim tudi vi? Ne pravim, da se bo takšna politična opcija pojavila. Pravim le, da bi tudi apatični volivci in volivke prišli na volitve in podprli spremembe, če bi zanje ustrezno ponudbo. In da torej ni res, da je vse izgubljeno!

Reset na steroidih – Tomaž Štih, Reporter

***

The Putin personality cult appears to be rising. Vyacheslav Volodin, first deputy chief of staff to the president, told the conference Wednesday that Western “attacks against Putin are attacks against Russia.”

He went on to say that Russia’s people understand “that if there is no Putin, there is no Russia.” (…)

Mr. Volodin’s remarks spurred political pundit Stanislav Belkovskiy, a Putin critic, to tell the independent Ekho Moskvy radio station: “The search for Russia’s national idea, which began after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, is finally over. Now it is obvious that Russia’s national idea is Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin as an individual.”

It is hard to imagine that identification between state and ruler being made in the U.S. or Western Europe, in private or in public. It is another illustration of how those in power in Russia think differently from their counterparts in the West.

Russia and West Grapple with Alternate Realities – Allan Cullison, The Wall Street Journal

***

The collapse of Ukraine would be a tremendous loss for NATO, the European Union, and the United States. A victorious Russia would become much more influential within the EU and pose a potent threat to the Baltic states with their large ethnic Russian populations. Instead of supporting Ukraine, NATO would have to defend itself on its own soil. This would expose both the EU and the US to the danger they have been so eager to avoid: a direct military confrontation with Russia. The European Union would become even more divided and ungovernable. Why should the US and other NATO nations allow this to happen?

The argument that has prevailed in both Europe and the United States is that Putin is no Hitler; by giving him everything he can reasonably ask for, he can be prevented from resorting to further use of force. In the meantime, the sanctions against Russia—which include, for example, restrictions on business transactions, finance, and trade—will have their effect and in the long run Russia will have to retreat in order to earn some relief from them.

These are false hopes derived from a false argument with no factual evidence to support it. Putin has repeatedly resorted to force and he is liable to do so again unless he faces strong resistance. Even if it is possible that the hypothesis could turn out to be valid, it is extremely irresponsible not to prepare a Plan B.

Wake Up, Europe – George Soros, The New York Review of Books

***

Tisto, kar je bilo včasih samoumevno in potem izgnano iz narodovega spomina, počasi a vztrajno spet dobiva prostor pod soncem. Hvala Bogu, očitno postajamo normalni.

Pred par meseci sem slišal osebno pričevanje nekdanjega partizanskega borca iz manjšega kraja v zamejstvu na Goriškem. Pripovedoval je o svojih izkušnjah v partizanskih vrstah, ko se je kot mobiliziran mladoletnik septembra 1943 udeležil bojev na t. i. goriški fronti. Samo za osvežitev spomina: Partizanske enote na Primorskem so želele sredi septembra 1943 zadržati nemški prodor pred Gorico. Toda bile so nepripravljene in preslabo vodene, tako da so nemški okupatorji, ki so zamenjali Italijane, kmalu krvavo zatrli partizanski odpor ter povzročili velike in nepotrebne žrtve.

No, omenjeni možakar je pripovedoval, kako so se nič kaj junaško skrivali v Trnovskem gozdu, tam pri Rijavcih, ko so pač videli silno nemško premoč. In tam, v skalni votlini, je dvanajst primorskih mož in fantov ždelo nekaj dni. Lačni, žejni, prestrašeni. Na dan vseh svetih, 1. novembra popoldne, je eden izmed njih rekel: »Sedaj so naši domači zbrani na domačem pokopališču na grobovih rajnih in molijo, dajmo tudi mi kaj zmoliti za naše rajne.« Iz žepa je najmlajši med njimi potegnil rožni venec, in vsi, prav vsi, so v en glas molili s priprošnjo k Svetogorski Kraljici za rajne.

Pravica do normalnosti – Renato Podbersič ml, Časnik

***

Treba je začeti znova in projekt narediti na civilizacijski normi, da ima vsak človek pravico do groba, kar izhaja iz pietete in dostojanstva človeka. Obuditi je potrebno sočutje, ki je izraz dobronamernosti človeka in preprečuje zlo, ki ustvarja sovraštvo, da se zadeve ponavljajo. Tu smo na mestu, kjer so se dogajali nasilje in zločini, materam so jemali otroke in ljudi odvažali na morišča v razne jarke in Hude jame. Tu so ljudje umirali in bili tudi ubiti in zakopani. Torej to je kraj, kjer se mora človek zjokati in to dvakrat: prvič zaradi zločinov in drugič zaradi neetičnega odnosa do trupel in neresnega urejanja okolja za prikrivanje resnice.

Nedokončan park, nedokončana demokratična prenova – Franc Zabukošek, Časnik

***

Se torej splača študirati?

Prepričan sem, da ja. Za take razmisleke ni dovolj analizirati, kako je zdaj, ampak se je treba ozreti v prihodnost. Slovenija bo morala doživeti svojo katarzo in prav zato, ker smo tukaj, namenoma nisem omenil možnosti odhoda v tujino. V Sloveniji radi živimo in samo skupaj jo bomo lahko premaknili z mrtve točke. Vseh stvari se preprosto ne da znanstveno dokazati, kaj šele napovedati. V nekatere stvari je treba preprosto verjeti. In glagol »splačati se« nima zgolj finančnega pomena.

Ali se splača študirati? – Jaka Vadnjal, Finance

Tedenski izbor

reading2

 

Mass clientelism, Fukuyama writes, is different from outright corruption. It creates a primitive (but economically highly damaging) form of democratic accountability. Citizens, after all, can say that they’ll only keep casting their ballot for a politician who actually delivers that plum job in Athens.

Fukuyama argues that the real division in Europe is not between a disciplined, hard-working north and a dolce far niente south, or between countries with generous welfare states and those harder on the needy. The real opposition is between what he calls a clientelistic Europe and a nonclientelistic Europe.

Francis Fukuyama’s ‘Political Order and Political Decay’ – Jan-Werner Mueller, The Irish Times

***

Miti so vsegliharska poceni promocija različnih interesnih grupacij, ki se prolongirajo z mediji samo zaradi tega, ker obstoj mitov garantira donos. Če ne bi bilo mita o zlati dobi Janeza Drnovška, bi se slovenska levica referirala zgolj na Tita, kar pa je slaba popotnica za zajemanje sredinskega volilnega telesa. Če ne bi obstajal mit o racionalnosti in progresivnosti levice, bi se levičarji razgalili kot vsebinsko prazni blebetači, požrtni hohštaplerji, homofobi in odurni nacionalisti. Če ne bi bilo mita o reformatorski desnici, bi desnica morala sama reformirati. To so slovenske kosovske bitke.

Trije najbolj odurni miti o slovenski politiki in ekonomiji – Kizo, Portalplus

***

Bergant, Starič, druščina, dobro jutro. Pred dobrim letom je bil vaš kolega na TV Slovenija suspendiran, ker je povedal, da Bratuškova v svojem govoru v Mariboru ni povedala nič. Takrat neke velike zaskrbljenosti glede kratenja novinarske svobode niste pokazali. Je mogoče zdaj, ko je njeno vsebinsko praznost uradno potrdila tudi Evropa, trenutek za katarzo? Boste na odgovornost pozvali odgovorno urednico, ki je odgovorna za tisto? In še pomembneje, boste končno odložili rožnata očala in pogledali svet v njegovih pravih barvah? Je mogoče bruseljska blamaža Bratuškove priložnost, da postanete neodvisna, nepri­stranska in neobrzdana četrta veja oblasti in se resno lotite resnih zgodb?

Levo. Priden. Piškotek – Blaž Vodopivec, Finance

***

Seveda niso vsi novinarji neprofesionalni, manipulativni, kupljeni, pokvarjeni ali preprosto butasti. O številnih bi lahko napisal veliko pohvalnega. Toda večina teh ob vsem skupaj tiho gleda stran in se ne zgane. Čeprav splošno nezaupanje v medije, ki ga opisane slabe prakse povzročajo, najbolj škodi prav tistim, ki odstopajo od povprečja.

(…)
Tako kot niso vsi novinarji slabi, tudi vsi mediji niso enako neprofesionalni ali manipulativni. Nikakor pa zapisano ne velja samo za tiste, ki jim običajno pravimo levičarski ali dominantni mediji. Če uporabim duhovito domislico Blaža Vodopivca, piškotke za novinarje pečejo tako na levici kot na desnici in tudi v zasebnem sektorju. Sam zato za medije in roke, ki jih hranijo, že nekaj časa uporabljam izraz “krotilci javnega mnenja”

Sedem razlogov, zakaj bi morali novinarji razkriti svoje vire – Janez Šušteršič, Planet Siol

***

Ker se torej vračamo tja, od koder smo prišli, pravzaprav z dvojno plebiscitarno večino pobegnili, javna intelektualna vest narekuje, da je nekaj treba storiti. V nasprotju z Lukacsem menim, da alternative niso samomor, dekadenca in revolucija, temveč aktivna, javno-intelektualna državljanska zavzetost za evropsko Slovenijo. Pri čemer se je treba zavedati, da tu ne gre za ad hoc politični, ekonomski ali katerikoli kratkoročni interesni izziv, temveč za jedrno civilizacijsko vprašanje o tem, kakšna družba ali država bomo. Oblikovati je treba široko, vključujočo koalicijo razmišljujočih ljudi, zares vseh, »ki dobro v srcu mislijo«, da bodo s svojim delom in imenom aktivno branili tisti vrednostni civilizacijski minimum, ki nam ga zapoveduje slovenska ustava. Demokratično in pravno, ekonomsko odprto in socialno prijazno slovensko državo, utemeljeno na človekovem dostojanstvu, zasidrano v vsebinskem liberalizmu, ki naj nas popelje v svetovljansko smer zahodnega sveta, ne pa v provincialno samozadostnost semidespotskih režimov na obronku Evrope.

Samomor, dekadenca ali revolucija – Matej Avbelj, Časnik

***

Zakaj imamo torej takšne težave z zavračanjem smejočih županov, ki so v resnici navadni kriminalci? Zakaj vsi po malem goljufamo in utajujemo davke? Zakaj imamo problem s sprejemanjem lastne države in spoštovanjem njenih institucij? Zakaj dvomimo v pravno državo in enakost pred zakonom, zakaj smo prepričani, da sta klientelizem in korupcija osrednja problema naše državljanske eksistence?

Odgovori se skrivajo v intimnem dojemanju države kot slabe, nepravične in nefunkcionalne. Umanjkanje normativne integracije se stopnjuje do tiste skrajnosti, onkraj katere je prostor za vse in kjer je tudi dovoljeno vse. To je tisti pravi Balkan, katerega smo ponotranjili približno tako, kot so naši politični zaporniki in pošteni župani obtoženca Josipa Broza Tita, ki se je v bombaškem procesu leta 1928 drl iz zatožni klopi: »Ne priznajem buržoaski sud, jer se smatram odgovornim samo svojoj komunističkoj partiji!«

Banditi, Balkanci, titoisti – Dejan Steinbuch, Finance

***

Most of Mrs Merkel’s predecessors stood for at least one big, controversial project. Konrad Adenauer after 1949 bound the new republic to the West at the cost of making reunification seem impossible. Willy Brandt recognised East Germany. Helmut Schmidt allowed American Pershing missiles in West Germany to deter a Soviet attack. Helmut Kohl made the Germans give up the D-mark for the euro. Gerhard Schröder liberalised the labour market.

Nobody in Germany today considers Angela Merkel capable of a similar level of leadership. Her power is immense but mainly potential. “She has not tried out how much power she has. For that she would have to dare to do something, to go against polls and the Zeitgeist,” concludes Mr Kurbjuweit. “In a certain way, Merkel is thus a powerless chancellor.” She uses her power to block, not to promote. It is power amassed but unused. If she goes on this way, that will be her main legacy.

Sedating, not leading – The Economist

***

Russia has attempted to involve Poland in the invasion of Ukraine, just as if it were a post-modern re-run of the historic partitions of Poland. “He wanted us to become participants in this partition of Ukraine,” says Sikorski. “Putin wants Poland to commit troops to Ukraine. These were the signals they sent us. … We have known how they think for years. We have known this is what they think for years. This was one of the first things that Putin said to my prime minister, Donald Tusk, [soon to be President of the European Council] when he visited Moscow. He went on to say Ukraine is an artificial country and that Lwow is a Polish city and why don’t we just sort it out together. Luckily Tusk didn’t answer. He knew he was being recorded.”

Putin’s Coup – Ben Judah, Politico Magazine

***

Kiev feels like a Russian city, architecturally and linguistically. Check into a hotel, signal a waiter, enter a shop, and chances are you will be addressed in Russian. Television talk shows are bilingual — guests speak the language in which they are most comfortable. Taxi drivers still listen to “Russky Chanson,” Russian prison ballads that are something of a cross between gangsta rap and country and western music.

But recent months brought subtle changes. The young consider speaking Ukrainian cool. Some older Ukrainians have adopted the attitude that Russia does not own the culture.

“Some of my friends think that real patriots of Ukraine should not speak Russian because they are enemies,” said Irina Bekeshkina, a sociologist who specializes in political polling. “Why should we identify Putin with the Russian language? Russian language and culture has been around a lot longer than Putin.”

Conflict Uncovers a Ukrainian Identity Crisis Over Deep Russian Roots – Neil McFarquhar, The New York Times

***

I wrote a piece for the New Republic soon afterward about the Obamacon phenomenon—prominent conservatives and Republicans who were openly supporting Obama. Many saw in him a classic conservative temperament: someone who avoided lofty rhetoric, an ambitious agenda, and a Utopian vision that would conflict with human nature, real-world barriers to radical reform, and the American system of government. (…)

In my opinion, Obama has governed as a moderate conservative—essentially as what used to be called a liberal Republican before all such people disappeared from the GOP. He has been conservative to exactly the same degree that Richard Nixon basically governed as a moderate liberal, something no conservative would deny today. (Ultra-leftist Noam Chomsky recently called Nixon “the last liberal president.”)

Obama Is a Republican: He’s the Heir to Richard Nixon, Not Saul Alinsky – Bruce Bartlett, The American Conservative

***

Vatican II sought to respond to the changing circumstances of modernity.  Council Fathers wanted to discover how the Holy Spirit was moving the Church to present the teachings of her faith to a new world.  The Council Fathers sought to discover how to follow Our Lord’s great commission to “go and make disciples of all nations” (Mt. 28:19) in the cultures of modernity.  The attempts by the Council Fathers to answer these questions and to present the fruits of their deliberations, however, were hindered by a media contingent attempting to explain the conciliar debates in terms alien to the council and divorced from a deeply historical and nuanced understanding of the faith.  Thus, many misleading and false interpretations of council spread quickly. If nothing else, it allowed for the so-called “hermeneutic of rupture,” which saw Vatican II as a clear split with the tradition of the faith, to survive and take root. Those who were not already well catechized and firm in their faith were unable to differentiate the true faith from that presented to them by a largely secular media.

The Dangers of Transparency – John Macias, Ethika Politika

***

One exception to the generally positive religion-marriage link is Latin America, as the figure above indicates. In many countries in this region, cohabitation, single parenthood, and family instability are high, according to data from the World Family Map. And, yet, so too are forms of the Catholic and Protestant faith. Marriage is comparatively weak, and religion is comparatively strong, in countries like Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador. In these countries, religious faith may be a lifeline for women, children, and families in communities where the family is weak and poverty is common, places where—as political scientists Pippa Norris and Ronald Inglehart have argued—“existential insecurity” is high.

So, perhaps it’s no accident that Pope Francis has been making waves with his untraditional approach to tackling the issue of marriage. He may be less likely to associate strong families with strong faith, and more likely to see the ways in which religious faith can be a balm for fragile families. After all, in Francis’s native Latin America, the ties between hearth and altar are attenuated at best.

Religion and Family around the Globe – Bradford Wilcox, First Things

***

The central message, after all, of the New Atheism — the message that divides it from earlier forms of skepticism — is that it’s perfectly obvious that God and the supernatural don’t exist, and the only reason you might think otherwise is because you’re either a fool or a charlatan. Dawkins doesn’t know theology and is proud he doesn’t; P.Z. Meyers will happily tell you that the religious emperor obviously has no clothes, and any argument to the contrary is merely the courtier’s reply. It’s obvious, they’ll tell you, that the supernatural doesn’t exist, because science hasn’t found it, and we know that science is the only valid method of inquiry, because the supernatural doesn’t exist.

Duh. Obviously.

The mix of self-congratulation and playground taunts that defines the movement is, in essence, merely the flipside of the defining characteristic of religious fundamentalism: a refusal to acknowledge the intellectual experiences of others. Never mind that plenty of thoughtful, sincere people believe in God due to varying mixes of personal experience and ontological argument; it’s just so obvious that scientific rationalism is the only valid means of interpreting the world that the experiences of others can simply be dismissed out of hand.

Rape Culture, Fundamentalism, and the New Atheism – Luke T. Harrington, Presbylutheranism

***

Italijanski filozof Gianni Vatimo razume današnji čas kot »mnoštvo«. S tem hoče povedati, da se sodobni človek ne počuti več povsem vključenega v delo institucij, ki so se oblikovale v 19. in 20. stoletju. Korporativni model, kjer je vsaka panoga ali skupina reprezentirana s strani višjih, ponekod javnih institucij, danes ne deluje več tako organsko kot nekoč. Zato se v sodobnem mnoštvu nenehno rojevajo nove in nove oblike združevanja in delovanja, ki hočejo iz posameznikov ustvarjati javno: pobude, društva, zadruge, kolektive, gibanja, iniciative … Vendar ta združevanja, čeprav izhajajo iz zasebne pobude (s strani posameznikov ali skupin), niso nujno usmerjena le v zasebno dobrobit, temveč želijo doseči neko javno dobro.

Ta premik se je zgodil v vseh segmentih družbe, vendar je najrazločneje opazen prav na področju kulture. Zanjo ne moremo več reči, da je najboljše, najsodobnejše, najkvalitetnejše zaobseženo v javnih ustanovah. Konkretno: ne moremo reči, da so vsi interesi ustvarjalcev in odjemalcev kulture zaobseženi znotraj tradicionalnih kulturnih institucij, kot so kulturni domovi, knjižnice in gledališča. Mesta, ki so znana po svojem živahnem kulturnem življenju, to še dodatno dokazujejo. Berlin, Praga, Krakov, Varšava, Gradec, Gent, pa tudi Pordenone ali Ljubljana ne uživajo ugleda zanimivih in živahnih kulturnih središč zaradi svojih javnih kulturnih zavodov, pač pa ravno zaradi omogočanja spodbud od spodaj, da kulturna združenja bolj optimalno delujejo in s tem ustvarjajo svojo razpoznavnost.

Goriški kulturi naproti – Miha Kosolel, Anja Medved, Gorazd Božič, Goriška.si

Tedenski izbor

cigar-smoking-traveler-reading

Danes je moto dneva povprečnost. Danes seveda nihče z IQ, višjim od sobne temperature, ne bi upal Slovenije več postaviti v bližino kakšnega svetilnika uspešnosti. (Izjema je Alenka Bratušek, ki še kar misli, da nas je njena vlada pripeljala v nekakšen trajen gospodarski orgazem.) Pač pa nas danes vsi, na čelu s politiki levice, »resnimi ekonomisti« in »resnimi mediji«, prepričujejo, da je v Sloveniji stanje čisto povprečno, obdavčitev je čisto povprečna, obremenitev plač je čisto povprečna, kriza je čisto povprečna (itak je uvožena iz ZDA), rast je čisto povprečna, zadolženost je čisto povprečna, stroški javnega sektorja so čisto povprečni, brezposel­nost je čisto povprečna, državna lastnina je čisto povprečna, znanje naših otrok je čisto povprečno, vraga, še nesposobnost naše politike naj bi bila čisto povprečna. In če smo čisto povprečni, smo torej čisto O. K. in neke resne spremembe niso potrebne. In da bo natančno jasno, katere spremembe še posebej niso potrebne, je Mladina celo spet začela neskrupulozno in primitivno pogrevati stare pravljice o grdih domobrancih, češ vsakdo, kdor podpira privatizacijo in prilagajanje normam EU, je v resnici kolaborant in izdajalec, če že ne to, pa vsaj en ušiv hlapec. Kako nazadnjaško, predmoderno, blut-und-boden, res vredno tako imenovane progresivne novolevičarske publikacije.

Tako imenovani pogum, tako imenovana povprečnost in tako imenovane spremembe – Blaž Vodopivec, Finance

***

Trdim, da sistemsko preprečujemo, da bi imeli boljše politike. Razmeroma maloštevilen parlament le majhnemu številu ljudi omogoča preživljanje s politiko. Fluktuacija v parlamentu je velika, to preprečuje, da bi se ljudje s poslansko funkcijo gradili. Za ministra ni obvezno, da je izvoljen kot poslanec. Plače politikov, zlasti na izvršilnih mestih, so demagoško nizke. Zapenjanje pri financiranju strank še bolj zmanjšuje možnosti za ekonomsko preživetje v politiki in financiranje ustrezne strokovne podpore. Volilni sistem tisto malo politikov razprši v veliko strank, to pomeni, da skoraj v nobeni ni kritične mase – ne pameti ne denarja.

Vzorci prejšnjega sistema živijo naprej. Tam so partija in njeni sateliti razpolagali z dovolj velikim številom delovnih mest, da so se na njih lahko gradili politiki. Celoten samoupravni delegatski sistem, ki je zakrival partijsko diktaturo, je bil amaterski, jedro pa je bilo profesionalno. Stari mački danes odhajajo v pokoj. A naslednice partije imajo vsaj nekaj ustanov, fakultet in inštitutov, kjer se njihovi kadri, kot pravijo, »sončijo«, ko niso v politiki. Na drugi strani sta ducat, dva kariernih politikov in še amaterji, ki sem in tja nekaj pametujemo. Nimamo razvitega ekosistema think-tankov, kjer bi se razvijale politike in o njih tekla široka družbena debata, na katere bi se politiki lahko strokovno naslonili in od koder bo prišla, ko bo, politika 2.0.

Vse to zmanjšuje intelektualno raven in akcijsko sposobnost politike, da bi urejala javne stvari v državi. Na mesto politike vstopajo interesne skupine in neformalni centri moči, ki niso od nikogar izvoljeni in nikomur odgovorni. Politika je samo za vse kriva.

Več politike, prosim! – Žiga Turk, Reporter

***

Kako ste prišli do liberalizma kot tipični socialistični klon v Sloveniji: ali skozi LDS »liberalizem« ali skozi gospodarski liberalizem (prosti trg)?

Ne eno ne drugo. Skozi zdravo kmečko pamet, bi rekel. Predvsem preko spletnega foruma Financ, na katerem smo v tistih časih (10 do 15 let nazaj) zelo kvalitetno debatirali o perečih problemih Slovenije na področju borze, gospodarstva in politike. Šele naknadno sem izvedel, da se tej smeri razmišljanja reče liberalizem. Sam bi to poimenoval zdrav razum. Veliko vlogo pri usmeritvi foruma v to smer pa je imel takratni urednik Financ Črt Jakhel.

Marko Pavlišič, inženir v politiki – Robert Šifrer, Časnik

***

Če lahko pritrdimo dejstvu, da se je v 20. stoletju na nemški strani odpor do Slovencev podkrepil z rasnimi teorijami, pa moramo tudi priznati, da se je na slovenski strani podkrepil z enačenjem nacionalnega in razrednega sovražnega. Ko  je marksistična definicija razrednega boja postavila enačaj, Slovenec = kmet in se je sovraštvo do višjih stanov povezalo z nacionalnim sovraštvom. Nemci in v manjši meri Italijani so tako ”postali” zatiralci par excellence. To se je pokazalo tudi pri sovraštvu do Nemcev, ki je najverjetneje vsaj delno dobilo svoj izraz pri ravnanju po drugi svetovni vojni, saj vsega spet ne gre povezati z maščevanjem nad okupatorjem, tako kot ne gre vsega prebivalstva nemškega izvora in/ali identitete imeti za naciste.

Ne vrag, le Švab bo mejak – Andraž Kovač, Časnik

***

There may be lessons in Jeremiah and Jewish history for Christians and others concerned about their place in modern society. These can be sketched by three ideas.

First, internal exiles should resist the temptation to categorically reject the mainstream. That does not mean avoiding criticism. But it must be criticism in the spirit of common peace rather than condemnation. Jeremiah is famous as the etymological root of the jeremiad. Yet his most scathing criticisms are directed against his own people who have failed in their special calling of righteousness, not the “mainstream” culture. /…/

Finally, Jewish tradition provides a counterpoint to the dream of restoring sacred authority. At least in the diaspora, Jews have demanded the right to live as Jews—but not the imposition of Jewish law or practices on others. MacIntyre evokes historical memories of Christendom that are deeply provocative to many good people, including Jews. The Jeremiah option, on the other hand, represents a commitment to pluralism: the only serious possibility in a secular age like ours.

What Would Jeremiah Do? – Samuel Goldman, The American Conservative

***

Unlike the military, who are trained in nonviolent options for conflict resolution, the police often lack such knowledge. Bonnie Kristian expounded this failure and reasons behind systematic police brutality earlier this summer, noting also that cops are rarely held accountable for abuse. “Only one out of every three accused cops are convicted nationwide, while the conviction rate for civilians is literally double that.”

The entrenched racial injustice behind Michael Brown’s death will be difficult to root out, as it has been over centuries of American history. But the decades of policy that allowed for police abuse of Brown, and his town’s peaceful protesters, could be reversed—and if the public outcry over Ferguson is anything to judge by, Americans will be keeping a closer eye on the police in the coming years.

What Ferguson Has Revealed – Catherine Addington, The American Conservative

***

The media’s handling of this case was no surprise: political correctness rules in America’s newsrooms. But imagine a hypothetical crime: two clean-cut black couples go into University McDonald’s during the daytime – and are viciously attacked by a mob of whites. An international media circus would erupt! Big-time journalist from all over the world would descend on College Station to deal with the deplorable state of America’s race relations caused by bigoted whites. President Obama would weigh in with a few comments about America’s racial sins; and Attorney General Eric Holder – just like with the Ferguson disturbances – would travel to College Station, where Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would be leading protest marches.

But the narrative they’re promoting is false.

It obscures where most of the hate is coming from. Crime statistics have long reveled the real problem: high levels of black-on-black violence, followed by black-on-white violence and mob attacks — and the latter has been on the increase at an alarming rate, underscoring deep pathologies in a growing black-thug subculture — even as liberals in the mainstream media and Washington are unwilling to acknowledge this fact.

Beaten to Death at McDonald’s – David Paulin, FrontPage Magazine

***

There’s no better example of that than Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, Jr., the Harvard professor who was arrested at his own house in Cambridge in 2009 by a white police officer responding to a report of a burglary. “Gates is as respectable and renowned as any black person in the U.S. and he is not shielded from this type of harassment despite being very affluent and even more prestigious,” says Dawson.

Gates is perceived as “respectable” for another reason, too: He preferssportcoats to  baggy pants. On that day in 2009, he was wearing a red polo and dark slacks, and still he was cuffed and thrown in jail. No amount of grooming changed the fact that he was a black man in America. 

“No One Treats African-Americans Worse than We Treat Each Other” – Julia Ioffe, The New Republic

***

To kar se v zadnjih letih proti moji krščanski skupnosti dogaja v moji rojstni deželi Iraku in v mestu Mosul, od koder izhajam, je genocid po vseh pravilih, je zločin in še ena črna stran več v zgodovini Islama in muslimanov. Na tisoče ljudi je ubitih, družine so uničene, ženske posiljene, otroci zasužnjeni, hiše napadene, trgovine ukradene, cerkve iz prvih stoletij krščanstva napadane in zažgane.

Resnica je, da se kristjanom v Iraku zelo slabo godi, da jih ne bo ostalo veliko v Iraku, da maloštevilni, ki ostajajo prosijo pomoč, saj ne vedo, kakšna prihodnost jih čaka. Egoistično bi želel, da moji bratje kristjani ne zapustijo Iraka, ker nočem izgubiti svojih korenin in naše dvatisočletne zgodovine. Po drugi strani pa jim tega ne morem direktno zapovedati. Sam namreč živim tukaj v Španiji dokaj varno, zares trpijo pa oni.

R. S. Naaman: Kaj pomeni črka  in kdo so “kafir” – Branko Cestnik, Časnik

 ***

Evangelijski kristjani, ki živijo na območju spopadov, so se znašli v nezavidljivi situaciji. Proruski uporniki so se zavezali, da bodo branili “sveto pravoslavje” in njegove tradicije pred vsakim zahodnjaškim vplivom in evangelijskimi “heretiki”, ki da kvarno vplivajo na edine prave ruske narodne vrednote.  Kot poroča Sergej Rahuba, pravijo separatisti, da se bodo bojevali proti vsakemu heretiku, vsakemu protestantu in vsakomur, ki predstavlja nemoralne zahodne vrednote. Evangelijski kristjani, pa ne le oni,  so torej postali smrtni sovražniki  edinih pravih ruskih vrednot.
 
Prišlo je že do zaplemb protestantskih cerkva, ugrabitev in brutalnih umorov. V mesecu juliju so uporniki ugrabili štiri prostovoljce, ki so delali za krščanski radio in jih pretepli do smrti. 9. junija so oboroženi uporniki med nedeljskim bogoslužjem vdrli v evangelijsko cerkev v Slavjansku in odpeljali v neznano štiri mlade pridigarje. Njihova trupla so pozneje našli v masovni grobnici zraven pediatrične bolnišnice.
 

Tedenski izbor

kertesz

Sam nisem voznik, zato vsaki kritiki, ki jo naslovim na samozavestnega slovenskega voznika, sledi: »Ko boš imel vozniški izpit, boš že razumel!« Dober voznik ne potrebuje legitimacije drugega, dovolj mu je dejstvo, da je on voznik in vozi tako, kot je pač v navadi v teh krajih. Legitimacije ne pridobi z odgovorno soudeležbo v občem prostoru prometa, kjer so pravila jasna in vsakemu udeležencu že prej znana, temveč sam od sebe, v neke vrste cehovski solidarnosti, s tiho zavestjo, da si to lahko privošči, ker je močnejši. Ni promet kot občost tista, ki nekomu podeli status dobrega voznika, temveč je dober voznik tisti, ki ustvarja stanje v prometu.

S takimi dobrimi vozniki se srečujemo na vsakem ovinku svojega bivanja. Ko se pogajamo z občinskimi politiki in lokalnimi veljaki, ko poskušamo sodelovati z odgovornimi v javnih inštitucijah na področju kulture in drugih družbenih dejavnostih, ko se moramo meniti s poldržavnimi gospodarstveniki, študentskimi funkcionarji itd. Nihče se ne počuti kot del neke občosti, da je odgovoren do nje, in da bo legitimacijo, ali dela dobro ali ne, dobil ravno v tem, ko bodo vsi njeni udeleženci bolj optimalno delovali. Ne, že samo dejstvo, da so se prebili do neke pozicije in počnejo stvari tako, kot je v navadi, je čisto dovoljšnje upravičenje za njihovo nadaljnje delovanje.

»Ko boš imel vozniški izpoit, boš že razumel!« – Miha Kosovel, Časnik

***

Redukcija politike na boj med klientelami je, res, značilnost Vzhodne Evrope. In sploh perifernih držav. To pa se dogaja prav zato, ker te države niso vzpostavile učinkovitega mehanizma izmenjave elit. Ravno zato, ker v premnogih družbenih podsistemih vlada kadrovska inertnost, postane skrajna politizacija edini način, kako stvari premakniti iz mrtve točke. Politični boj se sprevrže v borbo za pozicije v javnem sektorju in paradržavnih strukturah, saj se zdi, da po normalni poti, prek kriterijev meritokratske selekcije, ni mogoče spremeniti ničesar. Javni sektor postane sistem dodeljevanja rent in sinekur političnim privržencem, ki v zameno skrbijo za širjenje »ideološke« (beri: kulturnobojne) megle, ki zakriva, za kaj v resnici gre. To stanje je gojišče vse bolj nezmernih idej o raznih »neoliberalnih revolucijah« – ki pa ne morejo priti do besede drugače kot z jezikom kulturnega boja, kar je voda na mlin taistim predatorskim elitam. Začarani krog.

O plemenitem poslanstvu Grege Repovža – Luka G. Lisjak, Časnik

***

Še vedno sem prepričan, da sta SDS in Janša glavna za kakršenkoli preobrat na bolje v Sloveniji. Na žalost pa kaže, da SDS sporočila volitev še ni dojela. Po objavi rezultatov so izdali javno sporočilo, ki še najbolj spominja na kakšen razglas zvezne partije v času, ko je nekdanja država že razpadala po vseh šivih, in se je nanašal na neko resničnost, ki je živela samo še v glavah zveznih funkcionarjev. Ko bo Janševa obsodba razveljavljena, mu Slovenija ne bo razvila rdeče preproge in ga povabila, naj postane imperator. Na žalost bo odziv sistema in tudi velike večine prebivalcev »business as usual«. Kardinal Rode je spomnil, da sta tudi Gandi in Mandela po prihodu iz zapora prevzela vodenje preporoda države. Vendar je prvi pogoj za to, da se nekaj podobnega zgodi tudi pri nas, da Janša pride iz zapora vsaj kot pol Gandi ali pol Mandela. Če pride kot stoodstotni Janša ali celo 150-odstotni Janša, se bo čedalje večji del zmernega volilnega spektra, tistega, ki ga je za premierski položaj podprl leta 2004, odvračal od njega.

Post mortem – Blaž Vodopivec, Finance

***

Če smo demokrati, imamo zato samo eno možnost: spoštovati voljo ljudi in strpno sprejeti dejstvo, da je Janez Janša poslanec. Ali so njegovi volilci normalni? Da. Preprosto verjamejo, da je nedolžen in po krivem obsojen. In glede na šlamastiko slovenskega pravosodja, ki je prepleteno z mafijskimi omrežji pokvarjenih sodnic in sodnikov, imajo svoje argumente. Ali je vso to dogajanje zdravo za Slovenijo? Niti slučajno.

SDS je stranka, ki je danes ni mogoče vključiti v politični proces vodenja države. Je stranka destrukcije, ki s svojim pomembnim deležem pridobljenim na volitvah zaradi svoje strategije krči parlamentarni prostor. Je stranka, ki nima namena sodelovati in se pogovarjati z nikomer. Niti z najbližjimi, celo partnerji. Tako kot ima Italija težave z destruktivnostjo predstavnikov Beppe Grilla, ima tudi Slovenija težavo s tem, da petina parlamentarnega prostora nima namena sodelovati pri vodenju države. Tej petini pa se je sedaj pridružila tudi Združena levica, ki destrukcijo vodi z drugega kota. Zato je maneverski prostor pomembno zožen in terja še toliko več dialoga med preostalimi zmernimi političnimi silami. Ta strategija SDS je z vidika volilnega rezultata samomorilska. Zaradi take kampanje so samo na zadnjih volitvah izgubili vsaj pet odstotkov. Z vidika politike, ki hoče uspeh na volitvah ter nato vladati, je taka strategija torej nespametna.

Toda ta strategija je z njihovega vidika povsem utemeljena in celo edina možna etična drža.

A je to demokracija, da je Janša poslanec? – Sebastjan Jeretič, Neurovirtu

***

I recognize the Fox Geezer Syndrome these readers identify. This is what happens when conservatism becomes an ideology instead of an approach to life. It indicates an extremely unconservative temperament, frankly. /…/ These Fox Geezers may well be conservative in their politics, right down the line. What they’re doing, though, is allowing politics to consume their minds and their entire lives, such that they are making impossible the kinds of things that true conservatives ought to be dedicated to conserving: that is, the permanent things, like family. I have been around Fox Geezers before, and I see absolutely no difference between them and the kind of self-righteous loudmouths on the left that make reasonable discussion impossible, because all problems are reduced to a conflict between Good and Evil, and decided in advance.

The tragedy — and I think it is exactly that — is that the elderly often have great wisdom to share with the younger generations, to say nothing of the fact that it is they who have the long view, and who ought to understand how important it is to nurture bonds among family members, especially across the generations. Yet in these cases, it is they who behave like teenagers and twentysomethings, full of piss and vinegar and a toxic certainty, plus a radioactive impulse to crusade. What they lack is the principal conservative virtue: Prudence.

Fox Geezer Syndrome – Rod Dreher, The American Conservative

***

It’s not that abortion opponents don’t really care about abortion as such, but only about sexual mores, but that political language is necessarily corrupt because its purpose is pornographic in the sense that it is intended to provoke action, not increase understanding.

/…/

I really, really do believe that the more seriously you take the proposition that abortion is categorically immoral, the more morally imperative it is for you not to hitch your wagon to the star of either political party. Nothing is more corrupting of the anti-abortion cause than its subsumption into a culture war that is fundamentally – fundamentally – about making it easier for politicians to get re-elected.

You Know What’s Murder? Politics Is Murder – Noah Millman, The American Conservative

***

It is not an accident that the three key planks of the Left-wing outlook today – the anti-Israel anti-war sentiment, the shallow anti-capitalism of Occupy, and the worship of those who leak info from within the citadels of power – should all have had issues with anti-Semitism. It is because the left, feeling isolated from the public and bereft of any serious means for understanding modern political and economic affairs, has bought into a super-simplistic, black-and-white, borderline David Icke view of the world as a place overrun and ruled by cabals and cults and sinister lobby groups. And who has always, without fail, been the final cabal, the last cult, to find themselves shouldering the ultimate blame for the warped, hidden workings of politics, the economy and foreign turmoil? You got it – the Jews.

 Is the Left Anti-Semitic? Sadly, it is heading that way – Brendan O’Neill, The Daily Telegraphy

***

Up until now, even European politicians who were paying attention to developments in Hungary — German Chancellor Angela Merkel, for example — believed that they didn’t have any political capital to spare amid the euro crisis. It was difficult enough for European leaders to bully Greek governments into drastic spending cuts; they didn’t want to be seen lecturing small central European nations on democratic norms as well. But given the current perception, right or wrong, that the continent’s financial crisis is no longer acute, Brussels and Europe’s bigger states may finally get serious about Orban. They should understand that the new ideological conflict — liberal versus illiberal Europe — is a greater danger to the foundations of the EU than the euro crisis. Of course money matters — but a rising antiliberalism inside the EU, inspired and materially supported by Putin, could tear the Union apart morally and, ultimately, politically. Orban has done the rest of Europe a favor by spelling out his illiberal intentions so openly — and making it clear just how high the stakes are.

Moscow’s Trojan Horse: In Europe’s Ideological War, Hungary Picks Putinism – Jan-Werner Müller, Foreign Affairs

***

I’d respectfully argue that libertarianism is neither dangerous nor doomed, and that people who think otherwise are misled by a double standard they use when analyzing this political faction. When they write about a “libertarian moment,” they act as if it would mean the immediate embrace of an extreme, ideologically pure version of a philosophy that most actual sympathizers embrace with pragmatic moderation. Yes, if the most radical faction of any ideology that has never before exercised power was suddenly put in charge, that might well end in disaster. But in the real world, libertarian ideas will only ever be implemented partially in a system of checks and balances where modest reforms are difficult to achieve, never mind sweeping, rapid changes. It’s true, but trivially so, that neither a libertarian nor a liberal nor conservative utopia is coming. But liberals and conservatives exercise power regularly, so no one is under the silly illusion that their ascendance would entail a pure ideological program untempered by reality.

“Is libertarian economics at all realistic?” Krugman asks, as if the question is coherent. There are deep disagreements among libertarians about economic policy. There is never a moment when an entire economic philosophy comes up for a vote. It may just be that libertarian thinkers are correct on the merits of some policies, like rent control, and incorrect on others, like the gold standard, and that the prudent thing for a pluralistic society would be to adopt their best ideas and insights, rather than preemptively declaring all libertarian economic ideas unrealistic.

Libertarians Can Be a Significant Force for Good in U.S. Politics – Conor Friedersdorf, The Atlantic

***

 

Prostitution is moving online whether governments like it or not. If they try to get in the way of the shift they will do harm. Indeed, the unrealistic goal of ending the sex trade distracts the authorities from the genuine horrors of modern-day slavery (which many activists conflate with illegal immigration for the aim of selling sex) and child prostitution (better described as money changing hands to facilitate the rape of a child). Governments should focus on deterring and punishing such crimes—and leave consenting adults who wish to buy and sell sex to do so safely and privately online.

Prostitution: A personal Choice – The Economist

 

***

Compared to virtually all comedians today, Williams was a gentleman. He certainly wasn’t a jerk in the mode of Johnny Carson or Seinfeld. Nor did he content himself with ironically orbiting life with sad eyes in the mode of Bill Murray. He was hardly ever gratuitously gross, because he knew, even as a performer, he had grown-up responsibilities. Even though, in my opinion, Louis C.K. is funnier and maybe deeper, he has a lot to learn about being a grown-up, to say nothing of a gentleman.

Williams, apparently, never achieved in his own life the self-confidence and self-knowledge of his best characters. He seemed never to have been quite comfortable in his own skin. Too much restlessness and not enough serenity. He was a great man.

Robin WIlliams as a Man in Full – Peter Augustine Lawler, National Review