Tedenski izbor


Upam, da bo ob branju današnjega zapisa postalo jasno ne le, da je povsem zmotna teza o nezdružljivosti koncepta ekonomije delitve s tržnim gospodarstvom, ampak da v resnici šele v kombinaciji s tržnim sistemom ta koncept zares zacveti. In kot tak ponuja možnosti izjemnih razsežnosti.


Če se za konec spomnite na sestavine velike obogatitve, o kateri sem pisal prejšnjikrat (torej na motivacije, institucije in ideje), boste v sodobnem razmahu ekonomije delitve (in povezanega mikropodjetništva, ki nastaja še posebno pri aktivaciji pasivnega človeškega kapitala) na delu prepoznali vse tri elemente. Motivacije v obliki zaslužka (v nekaterih primerih pa pač le zadovoljstva, če je transakcija izvedena zastonj), neformalne institucije in nove oblike organiziranja, ki poenostavljajo in cenijo transakcije, ter ideje vse večjega števila ljudi, ki prepoznavamo in slavimo novi val souporabe kot vir delovnih mest, nove dodane vrednosti, okoljsko prijaznejše rabe sredstev in podobno. Seveda pa bitka za to etapo obogatitve človeštva še ni dobljena.

Ekonomija delitve: poslovni model za 21. stoletja – Rok Novak, Finance


Ideja politične accountability ni le heterogena, temveč tudi neskladna s socialističnim modelom vladanja, vsaj takšnim, kakršnega smo poznali v dvajsetem stoletju. Kajti katera oblast mora nenehno polagati račune? Katero oblast je treba nenehno nadzorovati, sumiti, katera oblast je vselej na pragu nelegitimnosti? Seveda, to je oblast, kot jo razume liberalna politična tradicija. Transparentna oblast, podvržena demokratičnemu nadzoru, oblast, ki mora nenehno odgovarjati tako strankarskemu članstvu kot tudi parlamentarni opoziciji, oblast, ki jo lahko v vsakem trenutku zamenja pretendentska vlada, je liberalna oblast. In zelo verjetno je, da ta oblast ni združljiva z gospodarskim in družbenim reformizmom, kot ga predlagajo mladi evropski socialisti. Projekti, kot so nacionalizacija in plansko gospodarstvo, zahtevajo, nasprotno, neproblematično vlado. Močna država, ki upravlja z velikimi državnimi korporacijami, država, ki načrtuje dolgotrajne socialne, gospodarske in infrastrukturne projekte, ne more biti osnovana na politiki, ki nenehno postavlja pod vprašaj samo razmerje vladanja. Bog najbolje ve, da je socializem dvomil o mnogo stvareh; a nikdar ni dvomil o vladanju.

Začetništvo in vrstništvo – Aljoša Kravanja, revija Razpotja

Continue reading


Tedenski izbor


Like Haidt, Girard observes that ideology becomes a source of tribal identity, but at its most extreme it becomes increasingly dependent not on the principles that it espouses but on the psychological kinetics of its adversarial relationship to its rivals. Positive philosophy gives way to the need to feed on rivalry as a source of meaning. This is why extremist ideologies tend to be built upon fabulist views of a possible future: the more spectacular the vision, the more unreachable the goal, the more immersive the cause.


In the penultimate chapter of The Righteous Mind, Haidt shares with the reader the disorienting moment when he realized conservatism wasn’t so backward and parochial after all:

»As a lifelong liberal, I had assumed that conservatism = orthodoxy = religion = faith = rejection of science. It followed, therefore that as an atheist and a scientist, I was obligated to be a liberal. But Muller asserted that modern conservatism is really about creating the best possible society, the one that brings about the greatest happiness given local circumstances«

Why Secular Liberalism Isn’t Liberal – Forfare Davis, The University Bookman

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


“I wouldn’t call myself a conservative, but neither would I own to liberal. I’ll take just plain old “Catholic,” thanks” – writes with the following thought experiment:

Imagine a gay male couple who have been together for 20 years. They live nearby. You know them well, having a friendly non-political neighborly relationship. You borrow the odd egg, watch each other’s pets when somebody is on vacation, maybe chat at the annual 4th of July party. You are an orthodox Christian who runs a bakery business. Now apply the following scenarios:

A) One of the gay guys has a birthday. His partner asks you to bake the cake. Would you?

B) One of the gay guys dies. His partner asks you to bake the cake for the reception after the funeral. Would you?

C) Marriage is suddenly legalized in your state. They marry and ask you to bake the cake. Would you?

Seems to me that if the answer is no, no, and no, then you ought to examine yourself for homophobia.

But if the answer is yes, yes and no – that’s my answer – then you are arguably simply being principled. I can say “yes” to A and B because I can honor their friendship and loyalty to each other, their faithful service to each other over years. However, I say “no” to C because marriage is not an institution that can be defined entirely in terms of affection, loyalty and service. Or even eros or heartfelt private romantic feelings. Marriage includes all those things, but it exists is a social institution because the fertility of male and female potentially creates uniquely public consequences (children).

The left disputes my premise for saying no to C. Fine, let’s have that debate. People of goodwill can disagree.

But we are not even allowed to have that debate. My side’s case is dismissed by the liberal elite because they think people like me are haters.

Given that I want to say yes to situations A and B, I think it’s demonstrable that I’m not a hater or homophobe. I am not frightened of gay people and I do not hate them. I just do not think that what they are doing is marriage, and I think calling what they’re doing “marriage” will obscure what marriage is.

Cake and Cosmology – Rod Dreher, The American Conservative


The only clear biblical meta-narrative is about male and female. Sex is an area of Jewish law that Jesus explicitly makes stricter. What we now call the “traditional” view of sexuality was a then-radical idea separating the early church from Roman culture, and it’s remained basic in every branch of Christianity until very recently. Jettisoning it requires repudiating scripture, history and tradition (…)

I take a different view of what they could have known. But yes, the evidence that homosexuality isn’t chosen — along with basic humanity — should inspire repentance for cruelties visited on gay people by their churches. But at Christianity’s bedrock is the idea that we are all in the grip of an unchosen condition, an “original” problem that our wills alone cannot overcome. So homosexuality’s deep origin is not a trump card against Christian teaching.

Interview With a Christian – Ross Douthat, The New York Times


I was raised by a lesbian couple and had to build bridges to my estranged father in my late twenties. Much of the connection to my father and the benefits of growing up with him were irreparably lost by the time I was a grown man—but at least, I knew who my father was and where to find him. I could salvage my ancestry.

A new generation of children will not even have that consolation I had. Conceived in loveless fertility clinics, gestated in the wombs of women they will never meet, trafficked from poor biological families with the help of complicit governments, “adopted” through a social services system corrupted by money and political pressure, or torn from their birth parents by family court judges who are desperate to please the gay lobby, the new generation of children will be far worse off than I was.

When the debate over gay marriage has receded, when their gay guardians are dead and buried, when the world has moved on, these children will still never be able to recover their heritage.

After Indiana, Gay-Marriage Supporters Should Look in the Mirror – Robert Oscar Lopez, Ethika Politika

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


Someone please tell me if my progression here is inaccurate in any way:

1) Family owners of small-town Indiana pizzeria spend zero time or energy commenting on gay issues.

2) TV reporter from South Bend walks inside the pizzeria to ask the owners what they think of the controversial Religious Restoration Freedom Act. Owner Crystal O’Connor responds, “If a gay couple came in and wanted us to provide pizzas for their wedding, we would have to say no….We are a Christian establishment.” O’Connor also says—actually promises is the characterization here—that the establishment will continue to serve any gay or non-Christian person that walks through their door.

3) The Internet explodes with insults directed at the O’Connor family and its business, including a high school girls golf coach in Indiana who tweets “Who’s going to Walkerton, IN to burn down #memoriespizza w me?” Many of the enraged critics assert, inaccurately, that Memories Pizza discriminates against gay customers.

4) In the face of the backlash, the O’Connors close the pizzeria temporarily, and say they may never reopen, and in fact might leave the state. “I don’t know if we will reopen, or if we can, if it’s safe to reopen,” Crystal O’Connor tells The Blaze. “I’m just a little guy who had a little business that I probably don’t have anymore,” Kevin O’Connor tells the L.A. Times.

Rod Dreher titles his useful post on this grotesque affair “Into the Christian Closet,” and it’s apt considering the progression above. If only these non-activist restaurateurs had simply kept their views to themselves when asked by a reporter, April Fool’s would have been like any other day for them.

But as it stands, they’re now being trashed not just by social-justice mobs from afar, but by powerful politicians where they live and work. Democratic State Sen. Jim Arnold represents the O’Connors’s district.

Burn Her! – Matt Welch, Reason

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor



Ni problem idejna sorodnost nekaterih političnih strank in Cerkve. Taka sorodnost je dobrodošla. Tudi ni problem, če Cerkev kdaj nakaže, katera stranka ji je po krščanskih etičnih merilih in družbenem nauku bližja. Na tem mestu bi celo predlagal, da bi se kdaj kak organ pri SŠK, denimo Komisija za pravičnost in mir, oglasil z (pol)uradno (a nezavezujočo) oceno strankarskih programov jasno in glasno imenovavši stranke – pa naj „cerkvena učiteljica“ Ranka Ivelja še tako zavija z očmi. Bolje jasno povedana beseda nad pultom kot šepetajoča hipnoza volivca pod pultom.
Problem je, ko politično poškoduje eklezialno. Ko politika v cerkveno občestvo vnese svoje kriterije razločevanja, kdo je in kdo ni na pravi poti. Naj ponazorim s svežim primerom dveh duhovniških imen. Revija Reporter, 23. marec 2015: pišoči duhovnik Janez Turinek na strani 55, s strani Boštjana M. Turka komentirani duhovnik Milan Knep na strani 35. Turinekovim antikomunističnim erupcijam je dana cela Reporterjeva plahta, Knepovi dialogi z zakoncema Hribar so hudo okrcani. Turinek lahko zapiše, kar se mu zljubi, za Knepa je med vrsticami sugerirano, da ni primeren za odgovornega za katehezo v ljubljanski nadškofiji. Uredniško sporočilo revije je moč dešifrirati takole: militantni duhovniki (t,j, katoličani) à la Janez Turinek so okej, mostograditeljski duhovniki (t.j. katoličani) à la Milan Knep niso okej!
V času Udbe se je temu reklo diferenciacija klera (prim. isti Reporter, str. 19). Cilj diferenciacije? Nič drugega kot nadzor politike nad religijo.

Here’s the thing: Having been advertised to our whole lives, we millennials have highly sensitive BS meters, and we’re not easily impressed with consumerism or performances.

In fact, I would argue that church-as-performance is just one more thing driving us away from the church, and evangelicalism in particular.

Many of us, myself included, are finding ourselves increasingly drawn to high church traditions Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, the Episcopal Church, etc. precisely because the ancient forms of liturgy seem so unpretentious, so unconcerned with being “cool,” and we find that refreshingly authentic.

What millennials really want from the church is not a change in style but a change in substance.

We want an end to the culture wars. We want a truce between science and faith. We want to be known for what we stand for, not what we are against.

We want to ask questions that don’t have predetermined answers.

We want churches that emphasize an allegiance to the kingdom of God over an allegiance to a single political party or a single nation.

Why Millenials are Leaving the Church – Rachel Held Evans, CNN blogs

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor



Odločili so se, da za pomorjenimi izbrišejo vsako sled. Poznamo dokumente zveznega in republiškega nivoja, ki govorijo o tem, da grobovi nikakor ne smejo obstajati. Ljudje in grobovi morajo izginiti iz spomina javnosti. To je trajalo do demokratičnih sprememb v Sloveniji leta 1990, do določene mere pa celo še danes. Seveda se je v Sloveniji o njih nekaj govorilo, zlasti ko je bil leta 1975 objavljen intervju Borisa Pahorja z Edvardom Kocbekom v reviji Zaliv, pa esej Spomenke Hribar Krivda in greh leta 1983 ter zlasti po spravni slovesnosti v Kočevskem rogu leta 1990. Letos bo od te slovesnosti minilo 25 let, ko smo Slovenci mislili, da bomo to travmatično točko slovenske zgodovine lahko zaključili, da bomo pokopali mrtve in označili njihove grobove, a se to na žalost ni zgodilo. Če lahko razumem, da je to skrivanje v času socializma trajalo 45 let, pa težko razumem, da je že 25 let, odkar imamo demokratično ureditev, a imamo le malo pokazati glede označevanja grobov in pokopa žrtev. Njihovi svojci zdaj z bolečino v srcu zapuščajo ta svet, saj so upali, da bodo v novi slovenski državi izvedeli, kje ležijo njihovi domači in kje jim lahko prižgejo svečo.

Huda jama je bila prehuda, po državi še vedno stotine neoznačenih grobišč – Mitja Ferenc za MMC RTV Slovenija


Nekaj je hudo narobe z družbo, ki ne želi pokopati svojih mrtvih, jim postaviti spominske centre in državna obeležja, kaj šele, da bi preganjala odgovorne za njihovo smrt. Vsi, ki so kdaj umrli oziroma bili pokončani na slovenskem ozemlju, sodijo v kolektivni spomin in podzavest slovenskega naroda. Morda je v avtokratski družbi razumljivo, da želi takratna totalitarna stran še dandanes preko svojih naravnih in ideoloških potomcev počistiti s prav vsakim, ki drugače misli, zagotovo pa slednje ni sprejemljivo v demokratični in pravni družbi, ki kaj da na učinkovito varovanje človekovih pravic in temeljnih svoboščin. Ko se spominjamo obletnice osvoboditve nekdanjih nacističnih koncentracijskih taborišč in tam storjenega genocida in hudodelstev zoper človečnost je prav, da če pometamo pred tujim pragom, končno pometemo tudi domačega, saj trava ni nič bolj zelena na slovenskih tleh, kvečjemu bolj krvava in prežeta s človeškimi kostmi in izgubljenimi dušami.

Slovenska trava ni nič bolj zelena – Jernej Letnar Černič. Časnik

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


Nemtsov had been preparing for an anti-Kremlin march scheduled for this Sunday. Hours before he was killed, he did a radio interview urging people to attend the march, and connecting the country’s economic woes to Putin’s policy in Ukraine. “The most important reason for the crisis is aggression, which led to sanctions and, in turn, isolation,” he said. Nemtsov understood that he, along with everyone else involved in anti-Putin politics, was being pushed to the fringes, having less of a voice and a foothold in Russian society than ever before. “Three years ago, we were an opposition. Now we are no more than dissidents,” he told the Financial Times earlier this week.

Then why was he killed? Without knowing who gave the orders, it’s possible to understand that the current political environment allowed for this to happen.

Assassination in Moscow – Joshua Jaffa, The New Yorker

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


Everybody who is on the Internet is subject to insult, trolling, hating and cruelty. Most of these online assaults are dominance plays. They are attempts by the insulter to assert his or her own superior status through displays of gratuitous cruelty toward a target.


Clearly, the best way to respond is to step out of the game.


Historically, we reserve special admiration for those who can quiet the self even in the heat of conflict. Abraham Lincoln was caught in the middle of a horrific civil war. It would have been natural for him to live with his instincts aflame — filled with indignation toward those who started the war, enmity toward those who killed his men and who would end up killing him. But his second inaugural is a masterpiece of rising above the natural urge toward animosity and instead adopting an elevated stance.

Conflict and Ego – David Brooks, The New York Times


Tehnologija nam je omogočila, da stojimo sredi dvorane zrcal in povsod vidimo samo sebe. V resnici pa nas internetni algoritmi delajo osamljene in nevarne, ker večajo naš narcisizem s tem, da odstranijo ves svet, ki ni kot mi. Okrepijo lastnosti, ki jih imamo. In ker se v osami in anonimnosti interneta prej pokažejo slabe lastnosti, okrepijo njih.

Drugačno mnenje je šok. V svetu, ki je ves kot jaz, nenadoma zagledamo košček nejaza in srd je strahoten, treba ga je odstraniti, takoj! Grožnje in trolanje postajajo norma. Sodobna komunikacija ni več pogovor, marveč je postala eksorcizem.

Dvorana zrcal – Miha Mazzini, Siol.net


There’s much to the view of Punxsutawney as purgatory: Connors goes to his own version of hell, but since he’s not evil it turns out to be purgatory, from which he is released by shedding his selfishness and committing to acts of love.


Ultimately, the story is one of redemption, so it should surprise no one that it speaks to those in search of the same. But there is also a secular, even conservative, point to be made here. Connors’s metamorphosis contradicts almost everything postmodernity teaches. He doesn’t find paradise or liberation by becoming more “authentic,” by acting on his whims and urges and listening to his inner voices. That behavior is soul-killing. He does exactly the opposite: He learns to appreciate the crowd, the community, even the bourgeois hicks and their values. He determines to make himself better by reading poetry and the classics and by learning to sculpt ice and make music, and most of all by shedding his ironic detachment from the world.

A Movie for All Time. Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow, Growdhog Day Scores – Jonah Goldberg, National Review


For conservatism is about national identity. It is only in the context of a first-person plural that the questions – economic questions included – make sense, or open themselves to democratic argument.

Such was the idea that Edmund Burke tried to spell out 200 years ago. (…) Political wisdom, Burke argued, is not contained in a single head. It does not reside in the plans and schemes of the political class, and can never be reduced to a system. It resides in the social organism as a whole, in the myriad small compromises, in the local negotiations and trusts, through which people adjust to the presence of their neighbours and co-operate in safeguarding what they share. People must be free to associate, to form “little platoons”, to dispose of their labour, their property and their affections, according to their own desires and needs.

But no freedom is absolute, and all must be qualified for the common good. Until subject to a rule of law, freedom is merely “the dust and powder of individuality”. But a rule of law requires a shared allegiance, by which people entrust their collective destiny to sovereign institutions that can speak and decide in their name. This shared allegiance is not, as Rousseau and others argued, a contract among the living. It is a partnership between the living, the unborn and the dead


In other matters, too, it is not the economic cost that concerns the conservative voter but the nation and our attachment to it. Not understanding this, the government has embarked on a politically disastrous environmental programme. For two centuries the English countryside has been an icon of national identity and the loved reminder of our island home. Yet the government is bent on littering the hills with wind turbines and the valleys with high speed railways. Conservative voters tend to believe that the “climate change” agenda has been foisted upon us by an unaccountable lobby of politicised intellectuals. But the government has yet to agree with them, and meanwhile is prepared to sacrifice the landscape if that helps to keep the lobbyists quiet.

Identity, family, marriage: our core conservative values have been betrayed – Roger Scruton, The Guardian


I write because I am one of many children with gay parents who believe we should protect marriage. I believe you were right when, during the Proposition 8 deliberations, you said “the voice of those children [of same-sex parents] is important.” I’d like to explain why I think redefining marriage would actually serve to strip these children of their most fundamental rights.


The definition of marriage should have nothing to do with lessening emotional suffering within the homosexual community. If the Supreme Court were able to make rulings to affect feelings, racism would have ended fifty years ago. Nor is this issue primarily about the florist, the baker, or the candlestick-maker, though the very real impact on those private citizens is well-publicized. The Supreme Court has no business involving itself in romance or interpersonal relationships. I hope very much that your ruling in June will be devoid of any such consideration.

Dear Justice Kennedy: An Open Letter from a Child of a Loving Gay Parent – Katy Faust, Public Discourse

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


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

Kako kazino kapitalizem hrani Mladino – Kizo, Portal Plus


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

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

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

Continue reading

Naj Alah govori po naše


Ime ji je bilo Hadiša. Čečenka. Spoznali sva se na nadaljevalnem tečaju nemščine, ki ga lokalne oblasti v zvezni deželi, kjer sem živela, prirejajo za mlade tuje diplomante, ki bi radi poučevali v nemških srednjih šolah. Veliko sva se pogovarjali, saj sva obe živeli v zanemarjenih predmestnih četrtih in nisva imeli časa, da bi se vrnili domov na kosilo. Pa tudi zato, ker je bila ona učiteljica verske vzgoje brez učencev, mene pa zanimajo vprašanja, ki se tičejo vere nasploh.

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor



There are also the religious traditions, ones that meld with awe and wonder to make the holiday both beautiful and holy. Advent, brimming over with both theology and beauty, helps us refocus on the meaning beyond the temporal. It takes the material and makes it transcendent. It turns the simple—candles, words, songs, prayers—into timeless moments. Christmas hymns, sweet and haunting, transform our normal cadences of worship into something new, yet incredibly old: they transform our patterns of praise into timely yet timeless reverence. These are the most important traditions of the Christmas season.

Considering Tradition – Gracy Olmstead, The American Conservative


Država za normalno delovanje potrebuje sposobne in profesionalne uradnike ter državnike. Pri nas se zdi, da prevladujejo apartčiki, birokrati in ne ravno bleščeči politiki.

Aparatčik se odlikuje po preprosti veri in zvestobi sistemu. To je vera, ki najbolje uspeva v odsotnosti razsodnosti in razuma: res je tisto, kar reče šef, toliko bolj, če enako govori tudi Šef. Šef z veliko in oni z malo začetnico seveda dobro vesta, da zvestoba ni zastonj, zato poskrbita za svojega vernika. Državni aparat v socializmu je deloval po tem načelu in glede na slovenski model demokratizacije (smo za spremembo, ampak tako, da se razen imena ne bo nič spremenilo) ne more presenečati, da javni sektor povečini še vedno deluje po tem načelu.

Lubi Slouenci – Peter Lah, Planet Siol


Vse skupaj je tako absurdno, da nam kot argumente nasprotniki privatizacije navajajo že to, da se oni slabo počutijo, ker na Brniku zdaj pristanejo na nemškem letališču, kot je pred dnevi potožila Violeta Tomič. Pa čakajte malo, bi mar morali sodržavljani gospe plačati letališče, da bo njej prihranjen nek iracionalen občutek?! A takšna je ta družba enakih in enakopravnih, da so preference tistih pri koritu vsiljene vsem? No, saj v resnici to ne preseneča – gre za sestavni del družbenopolitičnega sistema, ki ga gospa zagovarja. Tudi njen strankarski kolega Luka Mesec razkriva podobne tendence, ko vzklika, da je državno lastništvo v podjetjih še zadnji vzvod [centralnoplanske politike], ki ga imajo. In odgovarjam mu: saj! Natanko zato je privatizacija nujna.

Za boljše leto 2015 – Rok Novak, Finance


The depravity and barbarism of a movement such as the Islamic State can obscure the disturbing reality: namely, that the politicisation of culture, and its intolerant consequences, is gaining strength across the world. It has certainly contributed to the hardening of the rivalry between the West and Russia.


The problem with international cultural crusades is not the actual values – many of the sentiments promoted by Western institutions are worthy and enlightened ones. No, the problem is that such crusades assume that Western states possess the moral authority to question, undermine and change the laws and values of communities throughout the world. When diplomacy and geopolitics become entwined with the attempt to affirm the moral superiority of a way of life, the outcome is always unpredictable.

The real danger with the globalisation of the Culture Wars is that it threatens to confuse diplomatic problems with existential questions that touch on a people’s way of life.

The Year the Culture Wars Went Global – Frank Furedi, Spiked


Nobene težave nimam z uvrščanjem ljudi na levo, na desno in na sredino. Nekateri so konservativni, drugi progresivni, nekateri so etatisti, drugi liberalci. Razlike morajo biti, razlike so dobre, razlike delajo polemike zanimive, v polemikah se brusijo ideje.

Ne sprejemam pa ločevanja duhov, tega, da med nami gradijo čedalje višji zid. Za ta zid si želim, da leta 2015 pade. To ni tisti naš domači berlinski zid iz leta 1945, o katerem prava desnica trdi, da ga vzdržuje udbomafija. To je zid, ki ga gradijo skupaj in ki preprečuje, da bi se razumno pogovarjali o tem, kako našo državo spet spraviti v gibanje.

Ločitev duhov 2015? Ne, hvala – Žiga Turk, Planet Siol

Tedenski izbor


Če nič od tega ne bo razkritega, pričakujemo vsaj en pošten medijski umor Bojana Petana. Saj veste, Dnevnik je v tej panogi v samem svetovnem vrhu. Dajte jim Dalajlamo pa kak teden dni časa in iz njega bodo naredili mešanico Al Capona, Radovana Karadžića ter Bernarda Madoffa. Njihova prepričljivost, angažiranost in posvečenost medijskim umorom je tako iskrena in silna, da jim je za to res potrebno dati posebno priznanje. Nobena novica za Dnevnik ni tako pozitivna, da iz nje ne bi mogli narediti negativnega spina in nobena informacija ni tako kredibilna, da je ne bi mogli popolnoma relativizirati. Zato vas, sužnje Petana, najlepše prosim, da raztrgate svoje okove in temu trpečemu narodu omogočite vsaj en pošten (čeprav ojdipovski) resničnostni šov letos, in sicer “Dnevnik uniči svojega gospodarja”.

Končno! Vukovićeva in Ranka bosta v Dnevniku raztrgali lastnika Petana! – Kizo, Portal Plus


By running on a single issue, anticorruption candidates often avoid taking positions on the long list of problems their countries face: stagnant economies, a need for foreign investment, a lackluster civil service. And getting things done often requires knowing how to deal with the people and practices of a corrupt system.

In Slovenia, for instance, Cerar has already faced two serious obstacles in his fight to eliminate corruption. First, many of his nominees to high positions in his new government come from the political establishment he campaigned against. This raises serious doubts about the credibility of Cerar’s electoral promises. Second, a majority of legal institutions continue to do a poor job of upholding the rule of law. The Slovenian judiciary, for example, remains among the least trusted institutions in Slovenia. In a recent high-profile case, the Ljubljana county court sentenced Janez Jansa, the leader of the main opposition party, to two years in prison for accepting bribes in a public procurement case. According to a former justice of the country’s constitutional court, the case was based on insufficient, largely circumstantial evidence. But with the backing of Cerar’s own party, Jansa was also stripped of his seat in parliament, underscoring the political nature of the prosecution and suggesting that Cerar might not be as independent as voters believed him to be.

Put simply, eliminating corruption is difficult, if not nearly impossible—especially from the outside. Yet eastern Europeans hope for deliverance. In Romania, Slovenia, and Ukraine, a silent majority has rejected right-wing nationalists in favor of unassuming, pro-European reformers. Liberal-minded parties throughout eastern Europe should take note and seek renewal themselves, drawing to their ranks antiestablishment outsiders with moral backbone.

 The Eastern European Spring. Voters Tilt Toward Pro-EU, Anti-Corruption Candidates – Mitchell A. Orenstein, Bojan Bugarič, Foreign Affairs

Continue reading

Geopolitika velesilaka ali kaj Rusijo legitimira kot globalno silo

V zadnjem času, predvsem od ukrajinske krize sem, Ruska federacija ne skriva več svoje ambicije, da bi – kot pravijo – ponovno postala pomemben globalen center moči. Tako kot njen predsednik na fotografijah v ruskih Janah in Lady-jih, tako tudi njegova država nerada izgubi trenutka, da ne bi kazala svojih mišic celotnemu svetu.

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is

Seveda bi se to moralo vsakemu povprečnemu umnemu prebivalcu naše zemlje zdeti zelo infantilno in žal tudi nevarno. Vendar ne. Mnogim posameznikom in skupinam širom našega globa, od ZDA pa vse do male državice na razporku med Balkanom in Mediteranom, se zdi takšen razvoj dogodkov povsem upravičen. Svet naj bi bil sestavljen na več pomembnih vplivnih sfer – tem pravijo velesile – okoli katerih naj bi gravitirale preostale države. Temu pojavu pravijo geopolitika.

Zdaj, jaz iskreno tega izrazoslovja ne razumem – sem pač fantič iz province provincialne države. Razumem seveda, kaj pomeni vpliv, kaj pomeni moč, kaj ugled, kaj slava. Ni mi pa povsem jasno, zakaj nekim državam to kar tako pripada. Ker države namreč niso kot monarhi, ki se kar rodijo z legitimno oblastjo, morajo to, da se imajo za velesilo, nekako upravičiti. V naslednjih vrsticah bom tako poskušal premisliti, zakaj bi lahko Rusija bila do te oznake upravičena in pripoznana tako od bližnjih, ki naj bi gravitirale v njeni interesni sferi, kot od drugih velesil in držav, ki živijo gravitirajoč na druga gravitacijska polja.

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor


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

Zdrav način razdolževanja, ki bi omogočil hitrejšo gospodarsko rast, bi bilo pridobivanje novega kapitala v podjetja. Tudi primerjalni podatki z drugimi državami območja evra kažejo, da slovenska podjetja ne odstopajo po višini zadolženosti, ampak po prenizkem kapitalu. Vendar večina podjetij nima lastnikov, ki bi ga lahko zagotovili. Lani so vsa podjetja skupaj dobila le 295 milijonov novega lastniškega kapitala.Najboljši mogoči ukrep za razdolževanje in zagon gospodarstva bi bila zato hitra odprodaja deležev, ki jih imajo v rokah različni tranzicijski lastniki vključno z državo (ta je lastnica 23 odstotkov vsega kapitala slovenskih podjetij in bank ). Čeprav kupci ne bodo pravljični princi na belem konju, je to ena od redkih možnosti, ki jih sploh imamo, da podjetja pridejo do lastnikov, ki bi lahko izboljšali upravljanje in zagotovili dodatni kapital.
“Putin’s actions should be easy to comprehend,” writes Mearshimer. Ukraine is a “huge expanse of flat land that Napoleonic France, imperial Germany, and Nazi Germany all crossed to strike at Russia itself.” Since Ukraine serves as a “buffer state of enormous strategic importance to Russia … no Russian leader would tolerate a military alliance that was Moscow’s mortal enemy until recently moving into Ukraine.” By the same token, no “Russian leader [would] stand idly by while the West helped install a government there that was determined to integrate Ukraine into the West.” After all, “great powers are always sensitive to potential threats near their home territory.”
The argument is marred by two fatal flaws. First, by invoking past invasions, Mearshimer goes beyond the analytical framework of realism, which assumes that “objective” threats would be recognized as such by any rational observer, and invokes Russian historical memory, ideology, and political culture—or perceptions. Once perceptions enter the picture, we leave the realm of realism’s logical rigor and introduce factors that contradict the objectivity and rationality assumption of realism and implode Mearshimer’s theoretical framework. After all, the power of realism resides in its claim that all rational observers, regardless of nationality, would assess national interests and power relations in approximately the same way. If they do not, because values, norms, ideas, and the like get in the way, then realism amounts to the banal observation that power somehow matters in our assessments of international relations. Who could disagree?

Upoštevajoč tvit pomembnega pristaša SDS Tomaža Štiha, katerega mnenje v tej stranki veliko šteje, je opcija tudi, da vojska izvede državni udar (ne vem, kakšen bi bil drug evfemizem za to, da vojska prevzame nadzor, saj takšne institucionalne zanke nimamo kodirane v ustavi). To je sicer malo težje izvesti, ampak očitno se te dni razmišlja tudi o tem, zato poglejmo, kako smiselno je priporočilo Tomaža Štiha.

Prvič, kot so že ostali tviteraši opozorili Štiha, bo težko vojska z Vebrovim načelnikom generalštaba izvajala državni udar v imenu Janše in Štiha. Drugič, če obvelja Štihova kontra-informacija iz tvita, da častniki ne sprejemajo Ostermana, potem se mora zgoditi ali najprej udar znotraj vojske in šele potem tanki zapeljejo na ulice in zavzamejo RTV, parlament, zgradbo vlade in predsedništva države ali pa samostojno častniki, ki ne sprejemajo Ostermana, udarijo v prej omenjene institucije in prevzamejo nadzor, kar pa, priznajte, je malo težje izvedljiv scenarij.

Tretjič, in to podpornikom ideje državnega udara ne bo všeč, takšne vrste institucionalnih sprememb zadnjih nekaj let nekako niso zelo popularne v mednarodni javnosti, posebno če bo najprej potrebno obračunati z Ostermanom in šele potem izvesti državni udar. Bodimo kar realni, ideja je absurdno bedasta in ni je sile v katerikoli državi EU, ki bi te dni lahko izvedla kaj takega in preživela.

Bralcem se opravičujem, ker analiziram tako trapasto idejo, kot je državni udar v imenu Janše, ampak take ideje so pač dane v javni prostor in to s strani ljudi, katerih mnenje v SDS šteje in so zaradi tega legitimirane. So pa tudi precej iskrene, saj če prikimamo Štihu k njegovi tezi, da je vse pore slovenskih institucij prevzela komunistična klika, potem se lahko Štih za demokracijo bori samo s pomočjo nasilja.

Končni paradoks: stranka SDS je izdala Janšo! – Kizo, Portal Plus


Bodimo iskreni, če ni dokaza, da ima Iskra agendo zrušiti ustavni red Republike Slovenije, potem imamo opravka z otroci, ki se igrajo vojno, ne pa z ekstremisti, ki izvajajo mobilizacije in vojaška urjenja. To nas napelje na tretjo točko, razkrinkanje ciljev Iskre. V prilogi k članku boste našli odstopno izjavo nekdanjega predsednika Iskre Klemna Kneza, v njej boste prebrali, da je končni cilj te grupacije:

“Vzpostaviti moramo politični subjekt – ki bo revolucionaren – kar pomeni samo to, da bo svojo moč črpal iz ulice in ne argumentov znotraj postavljenih okvirjev – kajti argumenti so in vedno bodo stvar politikantskega in ideološkega obračanja zadev na glavo. Naš boj je boj za oblast in tega nikoli in nikdar ne smemo pozabiti – oblast celotnega delovnega ljudstva…”

Menim, da je nedvoumno, kaj je želel Knez v svoji odstopni izjavi povedati in kakšna je politika ter cilj Iskre: prevlada ulice nad argumenti, ravno obratno, kot je kodirano v naši ustavi, kjer je parlamentarna argumentacija edini mehanizem za oblikovanje, delovanje in vzpostavljanje institucij. Prevlada ulice nad argumenti (kakršenkoli že je dominantni mehanizem argumentacije) je evfemizem za nasilno revolucijo. In kot pravi Knez, njihov boj je boj za oblast.

V tem kontekstu postane jasno, da Iskrin tabor, ki je bil izveden v nedrjih Univerze, ni bil rekreativnega namena, ampak je imel za svoj namen urjenje sile nad močjo argumentiranja in taisti tabor ni služil motiviranju študentarije pred jesenskimi izpitnimi roki, ampak team-buildingu obstoječih in mobilizaciji novih sil. Ste še vedno skeptični? Potem preberite nadaljevanje Knezovega pisanja:

“… Pot do tja je mukotrpna – saj se ne borimo za ljubljanski študenteraj, niti za slovenski delavski razred – temveč za svetovni prevrat obstoječih družbenih razmerij – socialno revolucijo – in s tem socialistično Republiko.”

Hočete ekstremiste? – Kizo, Portal Plus


Nothing is too gross when promoting racial hysteria in an election year. Veteran Democrat Congressman Charlie Rangel from Harlem declared that Republicans “don’t disagree — they hate!” According to Rangel, “Some of them believe that slavery isn’t over and that they won the Civil War!”

Republicans did win the Civil War. That’s why there is no more slavery. It was a Republican president who issued the Emancipation Proclamation. It was a Republican-controlled Congress that voted for the 13th Amendment, outlawing slavery.

In the 1960s, a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voted for the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. If we are going to talk about history, let’s at least get the facts right.

Only an utter ignorance of history, in this era of dumbed-down education, could allow demagogues like Rangel to get away with the absurdities that abound in election year politics.

Voter Fraud and Voter I.D. – Thomas Sowell, The New American


Lena Dunham has been declared the voice of her generation not because she has anything to say but because she never stops talking. Or so it seems to me, a member of that generation. However awkward, unnecessary, or ill-informed a thought of hers may be, the twenty-eight-year-old seems ready to give voice to it. Her film, television series, and book—all to varying degrees autobiographical—seek deliverance in disclosure. Dunham has shown us everything.

In turn, she has been praised for demonstrating “courage,” “honesty,” “awareness,” and a dozen other euphemistic antonyms for reticence. (…)

Intimacy demands spaces of silence, and Dunham has built a career by violating those silences. She has attacked discretion and in the process attacked intimacy itself.

A Word for Discretion – Matthew Schmitz, First Things


Since I cannot now receive the Eucharist, it is through spiritual communion that I am kept spiritually fed by the Lord. This act of willing reception is not, as some may think, second-class communion. Far from it. To believe so is to diminish one of the ways Christ feeds his people, as Hans Urs von Balthasar warns in his book, Prayer:

For spiritual communion is by no means merely an act of longing for the reception of the Lord under the sacramental signs; much deeper, and more properly, it is the act of prayer of a living and understanding faith, by which it enters into living communication and communion with Christ, the eternal and living Truth.

Balthasar wants to impress upon the reader the objective reality of spiritual communion. It is not the absence of something but the presence of him. I don’t get to pine or indulge in self-pity during the distribution of the Eucharist. And God forbid I should become angry with my priest or the Church for not giving me Communion. As Archbishop Charles J. Chaput put it during the 2014 Erasmus lecture, “none of us are welcome on our own terms, in the Church we’re welcome on Jesus’ terms. That’s what it means to be a Christian, you submit yourself to Jesus and His teaching. You don’t recreate your own body of spirituality.”

My Plea: I’m a divorced and remarried mother. Please don’t change the Church practice – Luma Simms, First Things


Za konec pa še tekst, ki smo ga po krivici spregledali v oktobru: kolumna Narod si bo PR pisal sam izpod peresa našega priljubljenega levičarskega kolumnista Mihe Blažiča – N’Toka.

Ideja, da smo Slovenci homogena celota in da nas povezuje neka pradavna zarukanost, je privlačna iz več razlogov. Kdo ne bi rad verjel, da ga obdajajo sami idioti, ki ovirajo njegov uspeh? Če bi se rodili v katerikoli drugi državi, bi gotovo prepoznali našo genialnost, tukaj v Butalah pa, eh … kaj bi vam govoril. Slovenci imamo zaradi zaplankanega okolja pač zvezane roke. Če so našim babicam župniki povedali, da živijo v tej dolini solz zaradi izvirnega greha, smo mi dobili zgodbo o narodnem značaju. Tako pred začetkom vsakega delovnega dne moja generacija zmoli: »Verujem v Enega Slovenca, zarukanega, koruptivnega lenuha, ki poveličuje nesposobnost in kaznuje talent. Verujem v Balkansko mentaliteto, v prirojeno nepoštenost, v slovensko uravnilovko. Za hlapce rojeni, za hlapce vzgojeni, ustvarjeni za hlapčevanje. Amen.« In beseda je meso postala.