Arquivo para a ‘Information Science’ Categoria
Political economy and morals
18
Jan
The confrontation of these ideas will be present in most of the texts that intend to analyze the world
social conjuncture, the decline of the great nations and empires, the return of nationalism and socialism at the beginning of the last century and their main theses are, as explained by Slavoj Zizek: the political economy and the Party of Order (Zizek, 2012, pg. 28), which was the beginning of the polarization that is now worldwide and went beyond patriotic limits.
His whole discussion is between the “doxa” (only to understand that of the ortho-doxa) of the Marxist Frederic Jameson (Valences of the Dialetic) and the neo-Marxists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri (Multitude) for whom the evolution of work called immaterial (Marx’s nomenclature for intellectual work) or symbolic work (nomenclature for linguists and semioticians) and which is at bottom what Kant and later Hegel called “subjective”, which is trapped in objective x subjective dualism, even if transcendence is incorrectly used for the subjective, there is nothing supernatural in any of them.
What Marx differs from Zizek points out: “the ‘objective’ determinations of social reality are at the same time ‘subjective’ determinations of thought (determinations of the subjects trapped in this reality) and, at this point of indistinction (where the limits of our thought, their impasses and contradictions, are at the same time the antagonisms of objective social reality itself)…” (Zizek, p. 10), to summarize and make it clearer, in Marx’s view it is the “mode of production”, that is, the way in which material goods are produced that determines subjectivity, thus unites them, but eliminates any “transcendence”.
The important analysis of the precedence of political economy over any morality, which is submitted to it as explained above, makes this field the object of moral and also political relativism, where the ends come to justify the means, even if morally unjust, it matters little, but the analysis that a large part of intellectual subjectivity has become public (I prefer transcendence that is not or even immaterial work, because the fruit in the last instance is always a physical product, even if it is a book or a text), so for this reason the Hardt’s and Negri’s analysis make sense, even if they are all somehow linked to the subjective of Hegel or Kant, and are ultimately footnotes to Plato and Aristotle, as several philosophers have said.
After reviewing several Marxist concepts, such as added value (I remember that in Portugal it is common to use it as a synonym for adding value to products), he sentences the difficulties of communism in our time, such as the reforms in China by Deng Xiao Ping: “ introduce capitalism without the bourgeoisie (as the new ruling class); now, however, Chinese leaders are painfully discovering that capitalism without a stable hierarchy … breeds permanent instability” (Zizek, 2012, p. 21), this was said long before the real estate giant Evergrande went bankrupt, and was taken over by the state. Chinese contracting this crisis.
The author skips the so-called “Cultural Industry” discovered by the Frankfurtian Marxists in contact with the American marketing machine, but does not fail to note the cultural war in post-socialist countries, when he asks himself whether the economy continues to be the great reference for the analysis political and social, in the case of Eastern European countries: “in which the tension between pseudofolk and rock in the field of popular music functioned as a displacement of tension between the conservative nationalist right and the liberal left” (Zizek, p. 33 ), however, the idea “that the cultural struggle is not a secondary phenomenon…” (idem) is folded.
Although he recognizes, quoting Thomas Frank, that there is a “gap between economic interests and moral questions” (p. 36), he treats the theme with irony and outside the cultural question, of which it is an inseparable part.
ZIZEK, Slavoj. (2012). O ano que pensamos perigosamente (The year we dream dangerously). Trans. Rogerio Bettoni. Brazil, São Paulo: Boitempo.
The reduction of transcendence to subjectivity
17
Jan
The idea of an absolutizing and unique thought has pursued humanity since classical
antiquity, the One will appear in almost all texts, but an almost hidden concept coming from Socrates (clearly through “All philosophy is just a footnote to Plato and Aristotle” phrase by Alfred Whitehead, in fact one could extend it to Socrates, in fact Dalrymple himself does not include Aristotle (see p. 67).
However, in addition to the problem of translation, few know Greek, and every translation is a betrayal, because we know that language is the expression of Being, and even for science we know that there is no formal truth and we have already posted using Darlymple’s texts , that there are two forms of relativism: the abstract and the empirical, so just to enter a new text, we depend on thought, although abstract dichotomies are also found in it, such as that of formal logic that is valid for mathematics and empirical logic that is valid for science of nature in general and with certain restrictions for social ones as well.
This way we can enter the text of Slavoj Zizek on “The year we think dangerously”, he is talking about 2011 both in the various occupation movements (in Europe in Wall Street) and in the Arab spring, which afterwards the absolutizing thoughts tried to reduce to misunderstandings and ironies, but there was something new and uncomfortable in those movements, and this introduces what Zizek thinks.
And without a doubt a reading more to the left than Dalrymple, but what is interesting is both the search for new paths, the fact that we return to Byzantine socialism and pre-colonial neoliberalism indicates that we are going in circles, and some thinkers look for the new in the midst to populism and polarization.
Zizek’s first important clarification to avoid footnote readings is a quote he makes from Hegel: “if reality does not correspond to the concept, worse for reality” (Zizek, 2012, p. 10), to say that all left-wing thought with Hegelian affiliation, and this includes the orthodox Marxists, are more attached to the theory of thinking, and although they wish to be heirs only to Aristotle who would be more “realistic”, there is also in Plato the idea of the sensible world separated from the world of ideas, but Careful, the eidos of antiquity has little or nothing to do with Kantian idealism, in a word eidos in Greek is image.
The divergence between Plato and Aristotle is in the representation of the real: in Plato the extromission (the image projected into us and which converges to the intelligible world) while in Aristotle coffee the intrusion, where the idea comes from the “world of contingent phenomena” and that emit copies of themselves into our interior, and are interpreted by an innate or acquired knowledge.
Differing from this original conception of Kantian principles, he points out his divergence with Frederic Jameson, and states that in Marx’s thought both the objective and subjective dimensions, not admitting the objective dimensions as ideological, “a description devoid of any subjective involvement” ( pg. 10), but both are not subject to any form of transcendence, what Zizek discusses with Kant and about what he considers “the public space of ‘world civil society’ designates the paradox of universal singularity, of a singular subject who, in a kind of short-[circuit, he bypasses the mediation of the particular and participates directly in the Universal” (pg 11), just as Kant and Hegel do not break away from the objectivity/subjectivity dichotomy to reach a truly universal transcendence.
The absence of an ascesis that reduces man to the merely human, or to use an “too human” philosophical expression, a book by Nietzsche that abandons transcendence, to try later to find it again in the eastern philosophy of Zarathustra, a path taken by many previous contemporary philosophers to the new types of transcendence that we have already mentioned from Theodore Dalrymple.
The analysis of 2011 and its revolts are important for the analysis that he makes of Hard and Negri “Crowd” and the analysis that he makes of the utopias of 2011 are important, if not the only ones, of dreams postponed, since the Prague spring, the revolts of Paris, the movements of the hippies and opposition to the Vietnam War in 1968, if the political consequences were not what was expected, they moved the cultural world for years, and we believe they can also move the scarce political ideas and universal theories about peace between peoples, with the springs of 2011, there is a lack of models of real emancipation, and realism has to do with ideas (eidos) and they are not just “practical” options because they themselves have their theoretical ideals, although rarely examined, Zizek does.
The return to the Greek Eidos, which are what we produce as images, whether from the inside to the outside (extromission) or from the outside to the inside (intromission), is important to review the ideas of our time, where did it get lost or perhaps find the treasure wanted.
ZIZEK, Slavoj (2012). O ano que sonhamos perigosamente (The Year We Dreamed Dangerously), trans. Rogerio Bettoni. Brazil, São Paulo: Boitempo.
Transcendence and reality
13
Jan
Of the seven chapters of “why are we like this” in Theodore Dalrymple’s book,
I started with the second in the previous post, because in my view, different from the time the book was written, this theme is more central than that of freedom in connection with religion, which is for him the first topic.
Speaking of freedom, he begins by discussing the motto “it is forbidden to forbid” and the idea that religion limits human freedom, and that life without religious transcendence (he claims that most Europeans do), is all that one has, but the fact “ is that most people fear not only the prospect of death (which philosophers believe is not entirely irrational), but also the emptiness of death itself” (Dalrymple, p. 89), but in an earlier paragraph he makes a statement important: “For better or worse, God is dead in Europe, and I don’t see much chance of a return, except in the wake of a calamity.” (pg. 89), far from an apocalyptic narrative, in the process of growth, there is something rotten as the author says and we said in the first post on the subject.
The order of the day is to enjoy life to the fullest, and this even breaks many norms of rational coexistence among humans, the cause of the environment draws a lot of attention, hunger and misery a little, but what stands out is what is characteristic of this discourse: individualism, but a theme not touched on by the author, the focus on objects and not on subjects is a consequence of the dualism of objectivity x subjectivity.
When speaking of a pagan transcendence, the one that goes in search of “saviors of the human race” (pg 92), of the transcendence of small causes; “nationalism, animal rights or feminism” (p. 93) mentions the reappearance of Scottish nationalism stimulated by the film Braveheart, but it is present in almost all over the world, now in Latin America and, in particular, in Brazil and , there is also the transcendence of anti-nationalism, such as the European project and who knows in the near future, that of Latin America, and makes an important sentence, we are “the necessity and immutability of the nation-state” (p. 97).
He analyzes the artificiality of African nation-states, which disregarded ethnic aggregations under a single nation (pp. 100-101), but without mentioning the serious problem of colonialism.
Although he cited the funerary saying of the Church of England (I’ve heard it from English atheists or from other religions), death is part of life, but his own discussion of transcendence is within the limits of Kantism (subjectivity x objectivity): “I don’t It concerns us here to discuss whether this perspective is philosophically justifiable: if God exists, and if He does, if He is interested in our actions and more concerned with our well-being than He would be with the actions and well-being of an ant, for example” (p. 85), which reveals an agnosticism that hints at religion, but without asceticism or at least religious sincerity.
Although it discusses secularization as a sub-item, pointing the Church itself to blame for the repudiation it suffers, with cases of “pedophilia”, “hypocrisy” and many other sins, which we all know is not specific to a religious, political or national category , is present in all of humanity, and in the same percentages, and if in fact a good part opts for obscurantism and anti-progress, he cites the case of Ireland, the English and colonial oppression in these countries whose religions still find public and breath. ]
In addition to the root in Western thought of isolation between subjects and objects, which are united by a “transcendence” of knowledge, making the very act of knowing a transcendence, they do not admit what is today discussed by countless philosophers, thinkers and scientists: there is something beyond the scientific and human finality of life, since life and the universe continue to infinity and regardless of human will, even if man chooses the end of his race and civilization, for “sincere” political or social reasons, which is a contradiction with the desire for a full life and happiness. There are many reasons for different types of religiosity, but for Christians nothing is more significant than what John proclaimed after the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River (Jn 1:34): “I have seen and testify: This is the Son of God. ”, and thus we do not speak only of a transcendent and distant God, but of his presence in life and in human history, in an objective and historical way, even if one wants to deny this historical fact.
Dalrymple, Theodore (2016). A nova síndrome de Vicky: porque os intelectuais europeus se rendem ao barbarismo. Transl. Maurício G. Righi. Brazil, São Paulo: É realizações, original english 2010.
The causes of peace
12
Jan
This is the subtitle of chapter 7 “Why are we like this (2)?” of Theodore
Dalrymple’s book that we analyzed this week, topic 1 which deals in particular with transcendence, we left it for the last analysis, although the book does not end there, although this title goes to “Why are we like this (7)?” and then talks consequences, but I think we should first think about why we think that way and where did our culture go, which is the author’s essential purpose expressed in other books of his authorship.
The aspect of the causes of contemporary relativism was already discussed in the previous topic: empirical and abstract, but without overcoming in depth the dichotomy about logical (abstract) truth and scientific empiricism (valid in laboratories for specific cases) which also already has its questions both in philosophy and in science itself, see the anachronistic case of the virus, it cannot be prevented because mutations cannot be controlled and nature also reveals its strength in negative aspects, we hope that the positive thing is to rebalance the disastrous human action.
The author’s approach is interesting, but it is restricted to the European sphere, there is no analysis neither in this author nor in other Europeans there is no analysis of the colonial dispute, also in the leftmost analysis of Slavoj Žižek (I will write without the accents in the Z because for non-Slavs this is too extravagant), because in my view they all focus on state power and its palliative solutions. The peace analysis starts from the idea that the last two wars were basically caused by the conflict between Germany and France (there was the previous Franco-Prussian war, see the map), and the European Union could be a “cause of peace” since a greater harmony in Europe could destroy the reasons for the first two wars. big conflicts.
It was thought then that no one believes that “France would attack Germany, not the other way around. The resulting conclusion would be the following: without this vast European apparatus of containment, the Hun [name given to Germans during the wars] would revert to its old form” (Dalrymple, p. 111). The scenario at the time of the book seemed stable, and although it is plausible to think that greater “unity” between nations means less war, there was no thought of the possibility of England leaving the Union (Brexit, started in a plebiscite in 2017 and finalized in 2020), nor a more recent Soviet turnaround from Russia.
So the causes of peace, as we have already defended this thesis in other posts, almost always result from bad peace agreements, not just truces, but what promises a stable future, because that was how the bad agreement between Germany and France after the first World War, resulted in the Second, although the trigger was the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand, heir to the already fragile Austro-Hungarian Empire and see that this region can be a trigger again once Bosnia and Serbia wave to the Russian government, and the second war ends with bad deals between NATO and the soviet empire.
The entry of countries from the east to the European Union should be distinct from joining NATO’s military force, this for example is the case with Turkey, although the threat of leaving the community remains.
However, the author points out the Achilles heel of the European Union, a “pension fund” for tired politicians who want to maintain their clientelism: “after having been defeated or losing the willingness to go through the rigors of the electoral process” (p 117).
In comparison with the Soviet state, the author says that it is possible to identify the subject fed by the EU from a kilometer and a half away: “it is a type of subject that has developed that typical countenance of the former members of the Soviet Politburo”, a tendency of the current states the left or the right, within a reasonable proposal that is a greater union between nations, which should differ from states where the appetites of its members are satisfied by those who best know how to manage their appetites, and this does not lead to a true new co-governance and true management of the public good.
So the cause of peace that would apparently come (in 2010) from a greater integration of countries, nations continue in their cultural differences, unfortunately it did not come true, the model of Pax Eterna is bankrupt.
Dalrymple, Theodore (2016). A nova síndrome de Vicky: porque os intelectuais europeus se rendem ao barbarismo. Transl. Maurício G. Righi. Brazil, São Paulo: É realizações, original english 2010.
Demographic concerns or cultural crisis
11
Jan
Chapter 2 of Dalrymple’s book analyzes the demographic question in Europe,
the Europeans of origin are aging, while Africans and Muslims who have more children grow and also the question of religious and cultural background appears, late rates of 2004 (the book is from 2010 in the original) data are, of average growth:’
“Ireland (1.99), France (1.90), Norway (1.91), Sweden (1.75), United Kingdom (1.74), Netherlands (1.73), Germany (1.37), Italy (1.33), Spain (1.32), Greece (1.29)” (DALRYMPLE, 2016, p. 28)”, considering that each couple should have two children to replace the population, not positive growth but negative.
After doing an analysis on economic power and population growth, citing as examples Singapore and Hong Kong successful economies with small populations, Denmark to cite a European example and then compares with Great Britain that colonized them, and Nigeria with a large population and low development rates despite oil, but economic analysis is not its forte.
Then he analyzes the Muslim question, which is growing throughout Europe, but at the same time becoming secularized, although there are small groups of radical groups, which is no different in this respect from Christians, see the case of Ireland, just for example, after a long analysis of the woman question, from fundamentalism he finally lands on the philosophical question and the role of relativism.
However, it will focus on logicians, and in a certain nostalgia for the period of Descartes’ Reason, since this specific type of rationalism is already practically outdated and already in Kant, long before our period of certain new philosophical scarcity (let’s explore Sloterdijk and Zizek), had already written the “Critica da Razão Pure”, his golden work.
However, the initial analysis of relativism is good, the author wrote: “there are two origins of relativism: abstract and empirical” (p. 67), the author makes a reverse criticism since empiricism is a consequence of rationalism, dreams of returns to its purity (Return, Descartes, we need you, a subitem), and in the field of abstractionism it does not criticize logicism, among its citations are Alfred N. Whitehead (from Principia Mathematica, written together with Bertrand Russerl, another logician also present in your quotes.
However, he writes at the outset, a sentence by Whitehead according to which all Western philosophy is nothing but footnotes to Plato’s philosophy, but this is also valid for logicism, another truth also said also said
by Whitehead is “there are no whole truths: all truths are half truths”, however, logicism is based on the binary False and True.
If empiricism did not fully respond to pure rationalism, neither did abstractionism, and it can be said that pure abstractionism is exactly the logicist, since neologicism, for example by Kurt Gödel, admits its logical contradiction, expressed in its paradox that every axiomatic system (formal logic) is either complete or consistent, it cannot be both at the same time.
However, there are profound things in his analysis of rationalism, for example, when quoting Thomas Khun and stating that science had “epistemological” feet of clay, Kuhn appealed to the fact “to those intellectuals who felt vaguely guilty for not understanding anything about science …. , but on a deeper level he appealed to those intellectuals who deprecated the West in general, and Europe in particular, as the originator of science”…. And so: “The more meticulous the self-deprecation, the more generous, open and progressive a person would be” (p. 71) and this is even among those who idolize science.
So it is not the author’s conclusion, but ours, he tries to rebuild this moral field with “dissemination of doubt”, “the multiculturalism of everyday life” and the “choice of the greater good”, and whose apex is a love of freedom (yes it is important, but it has no moral asceticism in it), citing Shelley’s empirio-anarchism by Walter Bagehot in Estimations in Criticism: “the love of liberty is peculiarly natural to the mere impulsive mind [such as his]. He bristles at the idea of a law; enjoys imagining that he doesn’t need it [….] The government seems absurd to him – a demon…” (Dalrymple, 2016, p. 81).
It is a youthful criticism of the state, and does not enter into the discussion of a strong, mediating or minimal state, but it is right to say at the end of chapter 5: this was exceptional in Shelley’s time (passage from the 16th century to the 17th century ) in which the thoughts of our time seem to be trapped (according to Dalrymple, almost a norm).
Dalrymple, Theodore (2016). A nova síndrome de Vicky: porque os intelectuais europeus se rendem ao barbarismo. Transl. Maurício G. Righi. Brazil, São Paulo: É realizações, original english 2010.
Reflections for 2023
27
Dec
I always make a proposal for some readings at the end of the year, sometimes
I abandon some and always attach others, due to the duty of the teaching profession and the emergence of new facts, as was the case of the pandemic in 2020 and the war in Ukraine in the last year.
Among others, four books already ordered, which I intend to read in the year 2023 are: “The new Vicky syndrome: why European intellectuals surrender to barbarism” by Theodore Dalrymple (pseudonym of British physician, psychiatrist and essayist Anthony Daniels, 72). years), although 2016 had several successes of the conjuncture, the second book is by Slavov Zizek: “The year we dream dangerously” (2012), the third is about technology, many bizarre things are written about technology and its advances, since we quote Jean Michel Ganascia: “The Myth of the singularity”, now we want to reread Artificial Intelligence from the author of the area but on basic things and on the dilemmas of AI: “Artificial intelligence: a very brief introduction”, basic but knowledgeable of the subject, a deeper reading requires study and specialization in the area.
A book of a spiritual nature could not be missing from the list, the book by Anselm Grum, who is a 77-year-old German Benedictine monk, and many of his books have had an impact on different situations, and now he wants to respond to anxiety, depression and hopelessness that affects a large part of pandemic humanity.
From Dalrymple we already posted about the book “Our culture or what we made of it” where the cultural analysis precedes the economic one and converges with the social one, about Slavov Zikek we had some quotations and we already have some reflections on his updated vision of socialism, but whose aspect of violence is not discarded.
In Zizek’s view, the overcoming of the social state or the welfare state, the state today is the administration of a permanent social crisis, and in this book still to be read, the releases and readings allowed online that I could read, he reveals the appreciation of intellectuals (I would say especially of the current editorial groups and their narratives) for the catastrophe, and I would say in disagreement with Zizek that he is also in this process, only due to the aspect of the use of violence expressed in several of his books, the indicated however shows the renewing aspect and true change that these movements of the 2011 were marked, but they were consumed by the current culture.
Although he has this ideological disagreement with Zizek, his analysis of 2011 should be quite interesting, remember the Arab Spring, the occupation movements like “Occupy Wall Street”, in Tahrir Square, in London and in Athens, there were strong movements, there were dark dreams, and certainly an event that Zizek does not remember, but it is important: the Fukushima catastrophe, the nuclear problem, was on March 11, 2011.
AI have much literature with little foundation ventures into the area, where the biggest problem is neither mystification nor ethical problems, but knowledge of the basic elements and future possibilities of the area, specialist Margaret A. Boden who researches in the area and understands the doubts on the subject, makes a very brief introduction capable of elucidating lay people already confused by the obscure and critical literature on the issue.
Perhaps there is a lack of frazilian, Latin or African literature, a book that I have seen and I have not formed an opinion is: “Guimarães Rosa: Dimensions of the narrative” catches my attention, I am not aware of the authors Maria Célia Leonel and Edna Maria F. dos Santos, I’m going to research, the synopsis looks interesting when approaching authors like Gèrard Genette and Ernest Cassirer, among others.
Between what is said and what is said
13
Dec
In a strong time of narratives, what is said has
nothing or little to do with the actual attitudes of men, it applies to politics, culture and religion, so not everyone who wants to help the most humble of actually do, not everyone who claims to be religious is actually connected to the values and divine message, whether of any religion or Christian denomination.
There are very simple things to be identified: a good tree bears good fruit, correct words should indicate an upright life, but the philosophical or theological discourse is often confused and in this case it is necessary to be guided by attitudes that are also simple to observe and that say a lot. : there is no arrogance of temporal power of any kind, from a head of department to governments and constituted authorities, past and recent history is full of these examples.
The reason why we live in a time when truths are not welcome, is more than the construction of narratives and they do not lack human creativity, it is mainly because it is difficult to say that things are going wrong, despite everyone feeling bad. being, there is no lack of false prophets making unrealizable promises, self-help consolations and even those who prescribe happiness like a medicine leaflet.
The civilizing malaise detected by Freud (book from the 1930s) more than just psychological aspects spoke of instinctual impulses (we made some posts about this) and the inadequate outlet for them.
Of course this goes to politics, and from politics to social aspects: economy, health, education and the increasingly serious environmental problem, but the depth of this crisis requires another analysis: war.
As we said a little while ago, the arrogance of the constituted authorities and the rabid collective adhesion, I am not talking about any specific current, but almost all, stimulates hatred and violence, and the path and outlet of this current is none other than the sea of human violence: war.
The positive message in this regard is to do what is a problem, and often not even proclaim it, but to set an example of what is fair and sensible, says popular wisdom: example leads.
Ukrainian War and Pandemic´s Brazil
12
Dec
The war in Ukraine continues in increasingly
dramatic situations due to the cold and the Russian strategy of undermining the country’s energy sources, which is a war crime since it hits the entire civilian population and not just the military. , while Ukraine looks to attack military bases now on Russian soil via suicide drones.
The bases attacked were in Engels, in the province of Saratov and Diaguilevo, near Ryazan, only 240 km from Moscow, showing that it has weapons to reach targets on Russian soil.
Russia has an attack in Crimea, while it intensifies defense in the strategic region of Dombass, territory claimed by the Tusso government, the bases for negotiation practically do not exist, since this region is disputed by two countries and there is no possible agreement in this regard.
Russia reiterates that it will not be the first to use chemical weapons, and that it knows the risk of this use, a war of unstoppable humanitarian populations, but both sides have weapons for this, and the very bases that are attacked by Ukraine aim to destroy possible bases of these weapons.
In the middle of winter the martyrdom of the Ukrainian people continues and the calls for peace go unheeded.
Covid 19, although whiter, continues with worrying rates, since it shows no signs of a truce, in Brazil the number of deaths and the moving average of known cases continues to grow slowly.
In the country there seems to be a paralysis of strategy, recommendations for preventive measures and incentives for vaccination, but without responses from society as a whole, or from effective control policies.
What did they do with the culture?
06
Dec
Theodore Dalrymple, is the pseudonym of the English psychoanalyst
Anthony Daniels, who worked in English prisons with highly dangerous criminals, and saw in them not only aspects of poverty and exclusion, but also the development of a culture of tolerance for acts of arrogance, theft and immoralities.
In a book of 26 essays he describes how the cultural media spread this culture (picture inside).
He wrote in one of his works: “For the sentimentalist, there is no criminal, but only an environment that did not give him what he owed”, and so those who said aloud that they suffered a lot in trivial situations of life, that many people go through and this does not mean that they fall into delinquency, of course this does not mean that re-education is not necessary, but preventive education is better than medicine.
It is not an exclusive sector of society, or just an ideological issue as many authors point out, but a matter of cultural influence, especially radio, television and cinema, when everyone starts to justify violence, hatred and cruelty , I remember phrases from the movie Joker that were repeated in a cult tone, for example, “cold, sarcastic and heartless. That’s what I became and I thank society”, the question is which society he chooses: efficiency or solidarity.
I don’t want to give popularity or play the role of the cultural industry that I condemn, and it is the true producer of strange values and without a humanistic perspective, as the psychoanalyst points out in his books, values penetrate society through the selective publishing culture that is highly permissive in values and customs.
True solidarity does not just condemn, there are cases where condemnation is necessary to repress violence and hatred, but education, gives dignity and rebuilds people who have succumbed to a society of efficiency and arrogance, I remember here another successful book, which I read up to the tenth page: “The Subtle art of turning on the f**k” (in English the word also starts with f), yes it is true that there is in the book a cry against perfectionism and the culture of the extremely efficient in photos and texts in the “ media” of social networks, but it is important to remember that the author is American and there this is a general culture and not just in the media.
If last week we posted about the “paths” and the “paths”, we now want to emphasize the micro-culture, the day-to-day with more empathy, more respect and less hate, and if possible more polite.
There is no way to find ways of solidarity and peace in society if the vast majority chose to fight with weapons equal to those that the haters fight.
DARLRYMPLE, Theodore (2O07) Our Culture, What’s Left of It: The Mandarins and the Masses,
The War in Eastern Europe and Covid
05
Dec
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz spoke with President Putin
for the first time since September, last Friday (12/02), for more than an hour, but made little progress.
The German leader tried to find a diplomatic path to the war, suggesting a withdrawal of Russian troops from the disputed regions of Ukraine, using the words “as soon as possible”, which indicates a possible escalation in the near future.
The shipment of long-range weapons to Ukraine suggests that an attack on Russian territory is possible, which would represent a new escalation in the war.
Kremlin diplomats conceded to German pressure, and Putin’s response to Schols was: “reconsider your approaches to the context of Ukrainian events” and drew attention to the “destructive line of Western states, including Germany” and therefore rejected the diplomatic negotiation proposals.
Dmitry Peskov, spokesman for the Kremlin, told journalists earlier that Putin was open to negotiations aimed at “securing Russian interests”, but it is clear that Moscow is not willing to accept the conditions imposed by the US: “what President Biden said in fact ? He said that negotiations are only possible after Putin leaves Ukraine”, and this hypothesis does not exist for Russia.
War continues to worry humanity and its escalation could lead to a conflict of catastrophic proportions.
Another problem that affects humanity is Covid 19, whose numbers have risen again, although less than the peak of the Pandemic, in Brazil 86 deaths have been recorded in the last week and a moving average of 26 thousand cases.
