»Živel Prvi in Drugi maj!« ali kako težko se je upirati samemu sebi

Obstajajo ljudje, ki ne marajo valentinovega. Pravijo, da zaljubljenci ne potrebujejo posebnega praznika, saj je za prave zaljubljence valentinovo vsak dan. Analogno kritiko nekateri namenjajo tudi prazniku dela. Za nekatere (teh je letos prijavljenih slabih 130 tisoč, realna številka pa je seveda bistveno večja) to ni le dan ali dva v letu, temveč način bivanja. Seveda z dvema bistvenima razlikama: da se ne vsak dan bašejo s čevapčiči v Opatjem selu in da za njihovo zabavo ne skrbi sindikat. No, seveda, ti redni praznikarji pravzaprav sploh nimajo sindikalnega zastopstva, niso »socialni partner« v pogajanjih o reformah, niso, razen z lepimi besedami, vključeni v program kakšne stranke. In vendar so. Obstajajo kot določen nevidni sloj. Nezaposlenost v Sloveniji namreč ni neko prehodno obdobje, nekaj začasnega, neka trenutna nemilost, v katero smo padli samo zato, da bi se lahko kmalu – in opremljeni z novo izkušnjo – spet postavili na noge. Ne, tako kot obstajajo redno zaposleni, obstajajo tudi redno nezaposleni.

Zanimivo je seveda to, da vseh teh stotisoč in več nezaposlenih ne sedi nujno križemrok, jokajoč nad svojo usodo. Mnogo nezaposlenih dela dosti, tako kot mnogo zaposlenih ne dela ničesar. Vsi moramo jesti, piti in plačati položnice za telefon. Z dvesto pa nekaj evrov socialke, ki jih lahko dobijo od države, brezposelni tega gotovo ne zmorejo. Vendar, bi dejala zaposlena gospa na zavodu za zaposlovanje, njihovo dodatno delo je nezakonito. To je žalostna zgodba tega sloja: ne le, da niso reprezentirani, niti zakoniti niso.

Continue reading

Advertisements

O vprašanju prioritete

V naslednjih tednih se bodo mediji znova ukvarjali z vprašanjem družine, kar bo znova onemogočalo ukvarjanje z veliko bolj perečim vprašanjem dela. V Sloveniji se sicer skoraj nihče več ne poroča, hkrati pa je tudi vse več ljudi brez dela. Vzroke za to moramo iskati v ekonomskih dejavnikih, s katerimi pa se tudi v naslednjih tednih ne bo nihče ukvarjal. Mnogi se namreč ne poročajo zato, ker s tem ne pridobijo nikakršnih ugodnosti, mnogi pa so brez dela zaradi neprilagojenosti delovne zakonodaje dejanskemu stanju. Tako levičarjem kot desničarjem je v medsebojni bitki ljubši kulturni boj za simbolno definicijo družine, ne pa strukturne spremembe, ki bi posledično omogočile tudi večje število družin. Šele dovolj preskrbljeni posamezniki lahko začnejo razmišljati o skupnem življenju in potomstvu. Navsezadnje je poroka vedno bila ravno oblikovanje nove ekonomske celice, ne pa le goli simbolni akt oblikovanja zveze dveh posameznikov.

Manj kot tri leta po referendumu o družinskem zakoniku, kjer se je celotna kampanja pred tem bíla le glede vprašanja kdo lahko je družina, kdo se lahko poroča in kdo lahko posvaja otroke, je parlament izglasoval točno tisto točko, ki je bila kamen spotike. Predlog o izenačitvi partnerskih zvez pa sploh ni prišel iz vladajoče koalicije, temveč iz opozicijske Združene levice, kar lahko nedvomno štejemo za njihov prvi dejanski uspeh kot parlamentarne stranke. Hkrati pa je to sploh prva vidna zadeva, ki jo je ta parlament sploh naredil (če odštejemo glasovanje in posledičen odvzem mandata legalno izvoljenemu poslancu, a to je že druga zgodba, saj gre za ukvarjanje parlamenta s samim seboj). Opozicijska stranka je torej prepričala vladajočo koalicijo, da je to tako pomembna in nujna zadeva, da mora iti skozi hitro proceduro. Kot se za vse razsvetljene ideje spodobi, jih ne smemo prepustiti ljudstvu, uveljaviti jih je potrebno čim hitreje in s čim manj javne diskusije, ki itak ne pelje nikamor.

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


reading-stairs

Across Eastern Europe, local oligarchs and investment groups — some directly connected to their countries’ political leadership — are snapping up newspapers and other media companies, prompting deep concerns among journalists and others about press freedom.

It is just one of an array of developments across the region raising questions, a quarter century after the fall of the Berlin Wall, about progress toward Western standards of democracy and free speech. As in Russia, there are increasing worries about a potentially dangerous concentration of power in the hands of people who have managed to acquire both wealth and political influence and are increasingly extending their control to media outlets.

Oligarchs of Eastern Europe Scoop Up Stakes in Media Companies – Rick Lyman, The New York Times

***

Povprečna mesečna bruto plača zaposlenih v slovenskih sindikatih je po podatkih državnega statističnega urada avgusta letos obsegala 2.445 evrov. Za primerjavo: povprečna slovenska bruto plača je avgusta letos dosegla 1.517 evrov.

Plačni rekorderji so po podatkih iz baze GVIN v Sindikatu zdravstva in socialnega varstva, ki ga vodi Zvonko Vukadinovič. Lani je povprečna bruto plača v tem sindikatu, ki sicer zaposluje pet ljudi, znašala 5.071 evrov bruto. Med prvo deseterico najbolje plačanih sindikalistov se uvršča tudi Sviz Branimirja Štruklja s povprečno plačo 2.607 evrov bruto. Ob tem povejmo, da več kot 2.600 evrov zasluži le 10 odstotkov najbolje plačanih v državi.

Razkrivamo: sindikalisti med slovenskimi plačnimi rekorderji – Jurij Šimac, Jure Ugovšek, Finance

***

You can’t succeed in politics if you give too much appearance of despising the low arts by which we govern ourselves. Fastidious distaste for the roughness and meanness of political life may work in a seminar room, but it’s fatal on the campaign trail.

This distaste is common among people who’ve enjoyed success outside of politics, in academia or journalism or business, and who go into politics with the reasonable assumption that the prestige they achieved in their former profession should automatically transfer into politics. It doesn’t. People who think they’re entitled to standing—because they are brainy, rich, or famous—almost always lose. They forget you earn your standing, you are not entitled to it. That’s the best thing about democracy, the single reason why we’re not yet entirely governed by wealthy oligarchs.

I may have come into politics with an unacknowledged condescension toward the game and the people who played it, but I left with more respect for politicians than when I went in. The worst of them—the careerists and predators—you find in all professions. The best of them were a credit to democracy. They knew the difference between an adversary and an enemy, knew when to take half a loaf and when to insist on the whole bakery, knew when to trust their own judgment and when to listen to the people.

 I Wish Someone Had Told Me This Before I Became a Politician – Michael Ignatieff, The New Republic

***

Dejstvo je, da je ta družba, ta politična nomenklatura, ta slovenska levičarska falanga spravila SDS na rob propada. Bolj kot s političnimi metodami – legitimnimi ali nelegitimnimi, obsojanja ali skomiganja z rameni vrednimi – pa jim je to uspelo s psihološko vojno proti njihovemu karizmatičnemu voditelju. Pravilno so domnevali, da se mu bo nekega dne utrgalo in da bo pri tem nastal vtis, da ni poti ne nazaj ne naprej.
Odnos politike in javnosti do SDS – in obratno! – je vseh dvajset let nekakšna samouresničujoča se prerokba. Dogaja se to, kar hočejo drugi – oni pa ostajajo na svoji liniji.

Na svoji liniji: edini možni reset SDS – Marko Crnkovič, Požareport

***

Spodaj objavljam, kar sem bil takrat napisal. V skoraj štirih letih se je zgodilo marsikaj. Zadeva Patria je naredila svoje. Marsikaj, kar je SDS v začetku leta 2011 še bila, danes ni več. Marsikaj, kar bi leta 2011 lahko postala, danes ne more postati več.

(…)

SDS nagovarja ljudi, ki niso bili prijatelji prejšnjega režima. Niso se mogli okoriščati z drobnimi privilegiji, s katerimi je prejšnji režim kupoval ljudi. Ker niso bili pri koritu, so bili tudi luzerji tranzicije. Več jih je iz podeželja kot iz mesta, več je revnih kot srednjega sloja, prej so manj kot bolj izobraženi. Nezadovoljni so, razočarani, terjajo popravo krivic. Nekateri nosijo v sebi veliko bolečino in dosti grenkobe. Te znamo nagovoriti.

Ampak jezik, s katerim jih nagovarjamo, prispeva proporcionalni delež tega, kar Drago Jančar v Viziji 20+20 označi kot »Drobnjakarski pragmatizem in provincialna prepirljivost« ki da »blokirata kreativni zanos, jemljeta veter iz jader vsakemu poskusu drznejše plovbe skozi sodobne ekonomske in kulturne tokove, v celotni družbi ustvarjata ozračje negibnosti in lenobnega samozadovoljstva

V SDS smo nezadovoljneži in nergači. Jamramo čez komuniste, bivše komuniste, tranzicijske bogataše in povzpetnike in sploh vse, ki so po krivici (kdo pa tudi po pravici) uspešnejši ali bogatejši od nas. Znamo kritizirati, interpelirati, blokirati, preiskovati, sklicevati izredne seje in referendume, vihteti kazalec in moralno dvigati obrvi ob aferah, od kokaina do bulmastifov. In še vsaka manjša zadeva nam pride prav, vsaj za na spletno stran ali pa tiskovno konferenco. Bolj ko vse to počnemo, bolj smo naši, bolj smo »ta pravi«.

Spomini na neko resetiranje – Žiga Turk, Čas-opis

***

But modernisers have two great faults. The first is to assume that what is modern is inevitable. Soviet Communism was modern once, and part of its power lay in its claim that it was inevitable. It wasn’t, and now it is dead.

The second is to equate modernity with virtue and so to treat its critics as moral inferiors. In Britain, the saga of same-sex marriage is a classic case. Parts of the Western world are heading in that direction: “therefore” it must be welcomed: “therefore” its opponents are bigots: “therefore” they should be virtually disqualified from public office.

All those “therefores” are wrong. A moderate conservative approach would try to balance the age-old, universal view that marriage is between a man and a woman with tolerance of homosexual relationships. This balance was achieved by civil partnerships, but violated by the way that Mr Cameron casually imposed gay marriage. His approach insulted settled beliefs, and therefore wounded him politically more than people like to state directly. In times of wrenching economic change, social conservatism (not to be confused with social authoritarianism) helps reassure people. Instead, we have had doctrinaire, finger-wagging modernism from a party that calls itself Conservative. And, broadly speaking, the better off and better educated have been lecturing the less fortunate. Again, a reason to edge towards Ukip.

Ukip’s Rochester win shows voters no longer trust the main parties – Charles Moore, Daily Telegraph

***

On a une gauche européenne sociale qui préfère parler de politiques publiques (policies) plutôt que de politique (politics). Ce discours-là ne peut pas battre la Manif pour tous. Beaucoup de gens sont heurtés par la société de la rentabilité dans laquelle on vit, une société du chiffre où on évalue les enfants dès 3 ans. Les conservateurs de la nouvelle génération proposent une vision du monde philosophiquement contre-révolutionnaire mais qui répond à ces aspirations-là, en rejetant le productivisme, le consumérisme, et l’économie inféodée à la finance. Ils trouvent écho dans la société. Mais il y a aussi une France qui ne supporte plus de vivre dans la société d’Eric Zemmour. Qui parle pour cette France-là? Qui s’insurge ? Être à gauche, ça ne consiste pas, comme le décrit la Manif pour tous, à être un libéral-libertaire fanatique de GPA et désireux de vendre des bébés sur Internet à des consommateurs américains. Il y a la place pour un mouvement républicain qui s’appuie sur les idéaux égalitaires. La République n’est pas qu’un bataillon de CRS filmé par BFM TV : au-delà du maintien de l’ordre, la République c’est aussi la générosité.

Gaël Brustier: “La Manif pour tous est un combat pour l’hégémonie culturelle” – Mathilde Carton, Les In Rocks

 

***

Across the United States and Europe, sexual partnerships between persons of the same sex are being legally recognized as “marriages,” thus abolishing in law the principle of marriage as a conjugal union and reducing it to nothing other than sexual or romantic companionship or domestic partnership. The unavoidable message is a profoundly false and damaging one: that children do not need a mother and a father in a permanent complementary bond.

To insist on the truth that neither mothers nor fathers are expendable is not to dishonor anyone.

Marriage and the Black Family – Jacqueline C. Rivers, Public Discourse 

***

If your go-to image of a student is someone who’s free-spirited and open-minded, who loves having a pop at orthodoxies, then you urgently need to update your mind’s picture bank. Students are now pretty much the opposite of that. It’s hard to think of any other section of society that has undergone as epic a transformation as students have. From freewheelin’ to ban-happy, from askers of awkward questions to suppressors of offensive speech, in the space of a generation. My showdown with the debate-banning Stepfords at Oxford and the pre-crime promoters at Cambridge echoed other recent run-ins I’ve had with the intolerant students of the 21st century. I’ve been jeered at by students at the University of Cork for criticising gay marriage; cornered and branded a ‘denier’ by students at University College London for suggesting industrial development in Africa should take precedence over combating climate change; lambasted by students at Cambridge (again) for saying it’s bad to boycott Israeli goods. In each case, it wasn’t the fact the students disagreed with me that I found alarming — disagreement is great! — it was that they were so plainly shocked that I could have uttered such things, that I had failed to conform to what they assume to be right, that I had sought to contaminate their campuses and their fragile grey matter with offensive ideas.

Free speech is so last century. Today’s students want the ‘right to be comfortable’ – Brendan O’Neill, The Spectator

 

***

Pornography is an act of disgust, for by visually isolating the sexual organs for the sake of stimulus and libidinous pleasure, it places its viewer in contact with the genitalia considered as objects unto themselves. Once the desire for physical pleasure evoked by the visual stimulus of genitalia is satisfied, the genitalia lose their “erotic light” and reassume their status as organs with functions quite apart from that of sexual gratification. They become disgusting.

Thus the faces of pornography and pornographic advertising are usually sneers, and expressions of lust tend to mimic a barely suppressed nausea. Within the pornographic, Eros never smiles, never laughs, never plays — she is busy holding down and warding off disgust by the force of sexual arousal. The sin of pornography is not that it makes sex too free and casual, but that it makes it something serious — a suppression of disgust that is doomed, at the end of the day, to return to it. The tragedy of pornography is not that it makes men and women lust after each other, but that it makes them disgusted by the images of each other.

Are the Genitals Beautiful? – Marc Barnes, Bad Catholic

***

Molti dei triestini in platea non sono mai entrati nel teatro della Kulturni Dom, sono quelli che, come me, stanno seguendo la scena con un occhio ai sottotitoli. L’effetto è ancora più straniante perché non viene giustificato, lascia credere l’incredibile e, al tempo stesso, mostra l’occasione perduta: quindi avremmo potuto fare così? Parlarci? Dialogare? Trieste, una città in guerra è uno spettacolo concepito in occasione del centenario, ma di fatto, grazie all’intuizione del giovane regista Igor Pison, i due testi di Marko Sosič e Carlo Tolazzi sono stati manipolati e fusi in una pièce sul linguaggio. A Trieste la Grande Guerra è stata solo l’esordio di un conflitto che le due comunità autoctone hanno condotto e, potremmo dire, interpretato per tutto il Novecento. L’italianizzazione coatta degli sloveni, le foibe titine, la divisione in zona A e zona B, le manifestazioni contro il bilinguismo, e sempre l’ombra della cortina di ferro alle spalle del Carso e la possibilità che la paranoia si trasformi in odio personale; possibilità la cui soluzione ottimale è stata una surreale convivenza tra estranei.”

Trieste, città in guerra. Dialogo sul palco tra italiani e sloveni – Mauro Covacich, Corriere della Sera

***

Naj se torej omejim le na nekaj vtisov, kot so se mi porajali ob nedeljskem spremljanju njegove posvetitve v stolnici sv. Nikolaja. Njena najopaznejša značilnost je bila, da so razen v vznesenih obrednih obrazcih skoraj scela umanjkale velike besede. Kako drugače kot pred slabima dvema desetletjema, ko smo bili še mladi petelinčki in smo za velike praznike namesto nevpadljive pridige patra Zoreta na Tromostovju poslušali med oboki iste stolnice, v kateri so ga sedaj posvetili, rafale težkih misli in izjav ter imeli o vsaki izmed njih občutek, da izraža ravno tisto, kar nas trenutno najbolj žuli. Šele čez veliko časa smo se zbudili v bridkem spoznanju, da ni zaradi velikih besed Cerkev iz neke pravljične, v mitične višave povzdignjene preteklosti nič bliže, da pa ji zaradi od besed vse drugačnih dejanj pod nogami spodmika sedanjost.

Nič takega se ni dogajalo v nedeljo. Nabito polna stolnica, zaradi katere sem si sicer čestital, ker sem se zadnji hip odločil zgolj za spremljanje slovesnosti po televiziji, me je skupaj z na prvi pogled nenavadno kombinacijo dvornega baročnega ambienta, baročnih latinskih mašnih napevov in lesene pastirske palice novega nadškofa spomnila predvsem na genialnega Dominika Smoleta. In na zaključek njegove resda kisle pokristjanjevalne drame Krst pri Savici. Tudi za zbrano ljudstvo v Nikolajevi stolnici bi lahko kot za njegove Slovence, ki na koncu napolnijo oder, rekli: Vsak zase stoji težko in trdo, kakor da bi pognal korenine. Če kaj, kaže njih drža pač to, da so tukaj.  Da, namesto vzvišenih fraz je bil v ospredju ta molčeči, preprosti, a v plašč prostora z žlahtnim izročilom oblečeni (še) biti tukaj.

Biti tukaj – Aleš Maver, Časnik

***

Naš kulturni model je v marsičem posnetek tistega iz petdesetih, šestdesetih let 20. stoletja. A odtlej se je ogromno spremenilo, vzniknile so, denimo, nevladne organizacije, ki ne delujejo za zasebno zabavo, saj krepko spreminjajo javni prostor in je tudi njihov obstoj pravzaprav v javnem interesu – pri čemer je tistih 0,5 odstotka dohodnine, s katerimi jih državljani lahko podpremo, za njihovo delovanje odločno premalo. Kosovel je poudaril še, da je v Sloveniji težko govoriti o trgu za kulturo, še zlasti pri vseh zadevah, ki imajo opravka s slovenskim jezikom (knjige ni mogoče prepustiti trgu). A kako iznajti sistem, da bodo uporabniki lahko nagradili tiste izdelke, dogodke, ki so zanje relevantni? Vprašati se moramo, kaj je v javnem interesu, kaj je dovolj dobro, da dobi javna sredstva, je razmišljal Kosovel. Presenetil ga je podatek, da je kar 90 odstotkov vseh sredstev iz razpisov ministrstva za kulturo šlo v Ljubljano. »Razumel bi, če bi bila ta številka 70, toda 90 odstotkov!« je vzkliknil. Kakovost in relevantnost kulturnih dogodkov in vsega, kar se odvija s podporo javnih sredstev, bi morali po njegovem mnenju ocenjevati tudi ljudje, ne le neke strokovne komisije na ministrstvu.

Prispevki k spremembi slovenskega kulturnega modela – Pogledi

***

The Russian state has always done everything it could to conflate love of country with love of government, arguing that one is indistinguishable from the other.

This is why Russians who love their homeland but question their government are once again being cast as ‘enemies,’ ‘traitors,’ and ‘fifth columnists.’ They are hounded and threatened in both public and private. This is why independent media in Russia is not just in a precarious position anymore but has been almost declared anathema. The simple calculation made says that Russia equals the Kremlin. As it permeates most aspects of public life, the state is declared to be the face and soul of the Russian nation.

(…)

And because the Kremlin’s strategic thinking is more short-term than long-term, casting the government as the soul of the nation has become a kind of band-aid solution to this multitude of problems. Sure, things may be hard, the message goes, but the government is the glue that’s holding everything together —criticising us is like criticising the ground beneath your feet. People fall for this argument because they don’t feel they have a choice. The problem of autocracy is that it is like a perpetually collapsing house of cards. It leaves the people living under it few alternatives apart from propping it up, or being buried underneath it.

Kremlinophobia, russophobia, and other states of paranoia – Natalia Antonova, Open Democracy

Tedenski izbor

The-young-student-Ozias-Leduc

Can you guess which books the wannabe jihadists Yusuf Sarwar and Mohammed Ahmed ordered online from Amazon before they set out from Birmingham to fight in Syria last May? A copy of Milestones by the Egyptian Islamist Sayyid Qutb? No. How about Messages to the World: the Statements of Osama Bin Laden? Guess again. Wait, The Anarchist Cookbook, right? Wrong.

Sarwar and Ahmed, both of whom pleaded guilty to terrorism offences last month, purchased Islam for Dummies and The Koran for Dummies. You could not ask for better evidence to bolster the argument that the 1,400-year-old Islamic faith has little to do with the modern jihadist movement. The swivel-eyed young men who take sadistic pleasure in bombings and beheadings may try to justify their violence with recourse to religious rhetoric think the killers of Lee Rigby screaming “Allahu Akbar” at their trial; think of Islamic State beheading the photojournalist James Foley as part of its “holy war”but religious fervour isn’t what motivates most of them.

This Is What Wannabe Jihadists Order on Amazon Before Leaving for Syria – Mehdi Hasan, The New Republic

 ***

If Mr Valls wanted to send a message with his new government, Mr Macron is it. Mr Montebourg, who was ousted the previous day, had a knack of irking foreign investors, once telling Mittal, a steel company, that it was “not welcome” in France. Mr Macron, by contrast, spent much time privately picking up the pieces, arguing to investors that France was in fact open for business. Of Mr Hollande’s election-campaign promise in 2012 to set a sky-high top income-tax rate of 75%, Mr Macron once said scathingly, “it’s Cuba without the sun!”.

By itself, of course, Mr Macron’s appointment will not make it any easier for Mr Valls to press ahead with the politically daunting job of sorting out France’s squeezed public finances and trying to revive the stagnant economy. Nor will it put an end to the debate, led by Mr Montebourg and other fellow anti-austerity Socialist deputies outside government, over the pace of fiscal consolidation. But it does at least suggest that the Valls government is serious about pursuing a more business-friendly approach, and about starting to bring the largely unreconstructed left into line with the rest of Europe’s social democrats.

No more Cuban-style policies? – Charlemagne, The Economist

***

Hearing students cite Marcuse while decrying bourgeois society, Novak thought it a good idea to bring Marcuse to campus for a day of discussion and lecturing. But the admiring conversation he expected to witness didn’t occur. Instead, Novak recounts in his 2013 memoir Writing from Left to Right,

After mingling with the students, he was affronted and disgusted. At his lecture he set aside his prepared notes and instead described the severe Prussian discipline of his own education: the classics he had to master; the languages he had to learn by exercises and constant tests. His theme was that no one had any standing on which to rebel against the past—or dare to call himself a revolutionary—who had not registered the tradition of the West. (p. 107)

We can imagine how the students felt hearing this denunciation, but what could they say? Here was a prophet of youth rebellion endorsing utterly disreputable ideas—classics, discipline, mastery, tradition, the West—and telling students fully convinced of their own supremacy that they had nostanding to overturn anything.

The Enemies, and Friends, of the Humanities – Mark Bauerlein, First Things

***

Dear Dr. Dawkins,

Earlier this week, on Twitter, you drew attention to a troubling fact unknown to most people. You pointed out that in the United States and Europe, most children conceived with Down syndrome are aborted.

/…/

You’ve traditionally held a position of moral neutrality regarding abortion. You’ve asserted that killing animals, with the capacity to experience pain, fear, and suffering, is of greater moral significance than killing fetuses: nascently human, you assert, but without the kind of sentience that gives them moral significance. You’ve suggested that no carnivore can reasonably hold a position in opposition to abortion. You’re not alone in that position, it’s become de rigueur among most contemporary analytic ethicists.

disagree with your position. I’ve long ago concluded that the fetus, the embryo, and in fact, the zygote are human beings—undeveloped, certainly, but possessing the dignity and the rights of sentient adults.

Despite my disagreement, I recognize that you’ve tried to apply your viewpoint with consistency across a variety of ethical situations.

Until this week. This week, you moved from presenting abortion as a morally neutral act to asserting that the abortion of some people—genetically disabled people—is a moral good. A moral imperative, in fact.

An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins – J. D. Flynn, First Things

***

Ni ogrožena samo otrokova neodvisnost. Spremembe v strukturi prostega časa in odnosov v družini , ki na podoben način potekajo v večini razvitih držav, lahko po mnenju nekaterih strokovnjakov ogrozijo tudi zdravje otrok. Ameriški psiholog dr. Peter Gray z univerze Boston College trend upadanja količine proste igre povezuje s hkratnim trendom naraščanja psihopatologije med otroci – povečane pojavnosti depresije, anksioznosti in narcisoidnosti. Kot opaža, so intristične dejavnosti (tiste, ki nas veselijo in si jih izberemo prostovoljno) začele upadati na račun ekstrističnih ciljev (tistih, ki nam jih narekujejo od zunaj). »V šoli si otroci prizadevajo za čim boljše ocene in pohvale, v organiziranih športih si prizadevajo za pohvale in pokale. Vse temeljijo na presoji drugih. V prosti igri pa otroci počno, kar hočejo, učenje in duševni razvoj sta stranska produkta, ne pa zavestno postavljena cilja aktivnosti.« Ta premik k potrebi po zadovoljevanju zunanjih pričakovanj je po Grayevem mnenju idealen recept za povečanje depresije in anksioznosti. Če temu dodamo še upadanje občutka samostojnosti, nadzora nad svojim življenjem, ki je povezan s povečanim nadzorom staršev, je recept še prepričljivejši.

Ni časa za igro – Staš Zgonik, Mladina

***

5. Marriage must be color-blind, but it cannot be gender-blind. The melanin content of two people’s skin has nothing to do with their capacity to unite in the bond of marriage as a comprehensive union naturally ordered to procreation. The sexual difference between a man and a woman, however, is central to what marriage is. Men and women regardless of their race can unite in marriage, and children regardless of their race deserve moms and dads. To acknowledge such facts requires an understanding of what marriage is.

/…/

While Americans are free to live as they choose, no one should demand that government coerce others into celebrating their relationships.Whatever one believes about marriage and however government defines it, there is no compelling state interest in forcing every citizen to treat a same-sex relationship as a marriage when this would violate their religious or other conscientious beliefs.

7 Reasons Why the Current Marriage Debate Is Nothing Like the Debate on Interracial Marriage – Ryan T. Anderson, The Daily Signal

***

Joj, kako me je o stanju slovenskih političnih medijev, se pravi, medijev, ki pomagajo razmišljati o človeku in družbi, poučil letošnji žled! Četrtek v žlednem tednu (6. februar): Demokracija ima na naslovnici udbovca Janeza Zemljariča. Slučajno se slišiva s prijateljem J. C., ki profesionalno dela v visoki politiki. Rečem mu, da sem razočaran, da Demokracija ni zmogla na naslovnico dati žleda. Da pa bom počakal še dan, da vidim, če ga bo na svojo naslovnico dala Mladina. Z J. C. sva bila prepričana, da ga tudi Mladina ne bo dala. In res. Mladina (7. februar) je izšla, verjetno že tisočič, s popačenim obrazom Janeza Janše na naslovnici. Če ni Janše, Mladina nima družbene teorije.

To je bil slovenski žledni teden, ki se zgodi na vsakih sto let. To je bil teden, ko so gasilci, prizadeti vaščani, drugi prostovoljci in razne službe dali najboljše od sebe ter pravzaprav razkazali solidarnostni in demokratični potencial slovenskega naroda. In glej: eminentni politični tisk, ki naj bi imel nos za „demokracijo od spodaj“, je ostal v svojih fiksacijah, v svojem negativizmu. Ubožci – sem dejal – še ko vsi trpimo, oni demonizirajo drug drugega. In bil jezen.

Čakajoč na repo iz ušes- Branko Cestnik, Časnik

***

Če zdaj to situacijo vseeno na hitro prenesemo v politični prostor in pogledamo rezultate letošnjih volitev, bomo ugotovili, da bi se pomladna politika iz tega medgeneracijskega razkoraka in prekinitve stika lahko kaj naučila. Tudi v pomladni politični drži namreč mladi nimajo pravih sogovornikov in nič ne pomaga, če se zgražamo, kako na drugi stani mlade nekakšni navidezni sogovorniki in šarlatani vedno zavedejo. Pravi sogovornik mladih je nekdo, ki se približa njihovemu doživljanju, kar sploh ni enostavno, in jih poskuša razumeti in sprejeti, kar je še težje. Tak sogovornik ni žrtev, zato ni zagrenjen in se ne posmehuje zgroženo niti najbolj čudnim idejam, ker so samo ideje. Stoji na svojih nogah, svoje potrebe rešuje drugod, ali pa jih začasno odloži ali skrije, vsekakor pa od mladih nič ne zahteva, se jim ne dobrika in jih ne krivi za njihovo kratkovidnost in obrnjenost vase. Ker vsega tega v našem političnem prostoru ni, me ne čudi, da so nekateri mladi volivci pripravljeni podpreti celo tako absurdno idejo, kot je ideja demokratičnega socializma. Če so bili pred leti zadovoljni samo s stranko mladih, je kriza očitno prinesla zaostritev retorike in, zanimivo, naslonitev na neke čudaške politične zglede pri starejši generaciji. Kot bi se povezali dedki in vnuki, in sicer dedki, ki so zamudili svoj čas, ter vnuki, ki jim nihče ne pokaže, kako vstopiti v tok časa.

Zakaj (travmatične) zgodbe dedkov vnukov ne zanimajo? – Tomaž Erzar, Časnik

***

Še nekaj za tiste, ki berete italijansko:

Nessuno dei quattro grandi paesi che adottano l’euro è davvero a posto, nessuno può alzare il ditino o indossare l’aureola del santo. Ma chi è in grado di convincerli a seguire la retta via? È questo il dilemma che Draghi ha posto indirettamente, ma con chiarezza. E si è scontrato contro un muro, perché nessuno oggi ha il potere di farlo, certo non la Ue che è ridotta sempre più a un club di nazioni chiassose e litigiose, ma nemmeno la Bce che pure è l’unica istituzione federale dotata di veri strumenti d’intervento. I cambiamenti principali finora sono stati compiuti sotto la pressione degli eventi, davanti a rischi drammatici come la crisi bancaria del 2008, il crack della Grecia nel 2010 o il collasso dell’euro nel 2012. E sono comunque rimasti cambiamenti a metà, accettati di mal grado dalla Germania che pure vanta il proprio europeismo federalista.

Draghi ha chiesto un’ulteriore cessione di sovranità e vuole un patto per le riforme da accompagnare al patto fiscale. Se si vuole dare all’euro una intelaiatura più solida è un passaggio inevitabile. Ma oggi non c’è consenso né tra i paesi del sud né in quelli del nord Europa. Dunque, la politica economica europea è in un cul de sac. La Bce alla fine sarà costretta a fare come la Fed se arriverà davvero una nuova tempesta finanziaria. Ma senza dietro un paracadute politico, nessuno può garantire che sia davvero efficace. Draghi lo sa e lo ha detto. Anche la sua diventerà una predica inutile?

Mario Draghi e l’Europa irriformabile – Stefano Cingolani, Linkiesta

***

Za konec pa še zgodba, ki daje dober vpogled na način, kako se dela kadrovska politika v Sloveniji – ali drugače, na poniglavost, s katero je odhajajoča vlada v vse pore družbenega življenja skušala nastaviti svoje mediokritetne kadre. Bo v prihodnje kaj boljše? Gotovo ne, če bomo še naprej skomigali z rameni in s tem dopuščali tako prakso.

The Judicial Council of the Republic of Slovenia prepared a ranking of candidates and proposed to President of Slovenia to send the names of three highest-ranking candidates to the Parliament, which has to vote on the list of three candidates in order to be sent to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. However, Mr Pahor, the incumbent President of Republic of Slovenia, last week refused to send the list of three high ranking candidates to the Parliament and requested that the Ministry of Justice repeats the call for applications. It is not entirely clear why Mr Pahor rejected the list approved by the Judicial Council, but it appears that the merits of the candidates did not impress him. Surprisingly, the Ministry of Justice at this point does not plan to repeat the call for application.  It seems we are witnessing situation so often seen in the Central and Eastern European countries where the merits of the candidates play only side role in the nomination process and where the nomination of the candidates to the European Court of Human Rights comes down to brutal power politics.

Problem-Ridden Nomination Process for Judge on behalf of Slovenia at the European Court of Human Rights – Esohap