Talking of crucifixions and other strange coincidences, I've had the following comment on my blog, accompanied by a justified complaint that it could not be published by the sender who, incidentally, wishes to remain anonymous. Much as I tried to accommodate this request, I was unable to help other than by attaching it here...
"Da, nici o problema cu aceasta 'comedie a erorilor'. Imi este, fireste, drag Shakespeare, dar, mult, si Goldoni ; ))) . . . Citatul de mai sus era dintr-un articol de Norman Solomon. Si, desi s-ar putea sa te dezamagesc, nu sunt un activist inrolat in nici o miscare, deocamdata, dar recunosc ca ma gandesc totusi. Pentru moment sunt mai curand un fel de lup(a) singuratic : )))), preocupat de lumea in care traim si punand umarul modest pe ici-colo, iar in proces, clarificandu-mi propriile ganduri si filosofii. Si nu servesc nici vreo cauza ori agentie oculta, pleeease! Si tot gandindu-ma de unde s-o incep cu Alex Jones-ul asta -- tot ca un exercitiu de limpezire a ideilor -- ca sa pun degetul pe buba, de ce oare ma irita atata de-o vreme incoace?!, mi-am adus aminte de o scena dintr-un film de demuuuult al lui Tarkovski -- Andrei Rubliov. Preotul bisericii pe care Rubliov muncea s-o picteze, venise sa-i inspecteze progresul, si, uitandu-se la murii bisericii, popa insista ca vrea scene terifiante de iad, cu pucioasa, diavoli si foc vesnic, cu suflete suferind caznele iadului (la vremea respectiva, un context poate similar cumva zilelor noastre(?) se pare, criminalitatea, precaritatea vietii civile, despotismul, depravarea, orgiile colective, decadenta de toate felurile, influenta Bogumilismului care ameninta linia ortodoxa a bisericii, pare-mi-se, faceau ravagii). Si Rubliov ii raspunde -- evident si cu trimitere la epoca comunista in care se facea acest film -- ca el nu poate, nu vrea sa picteze orori, groaza, iadul, violenta, fiindca mesajul sau nu este unul al spaimei, al groazei. Mesajul sau era unul al sperantei, al luminii, al bunatatii, al iertarii, al mantuirii, al pacii, al vindecarii. Vointa de bine este sinergistica, stimuleaza colaborarea si cooperarea, transcende self-serving-ul individualim, marginit si parohial, si intelege ca nu exista o alta cale daca vrem sa supravietuim. Tertium non datur? De aceea, mentinerea groazei cu scop deliberat este diabolica. Nu exista nici o compatibilitate intre dorinta de restructurare/asanare/mantuire a lumii si frica. Si aici intra Alex Jones, si altii ca el. Un fel de Rett Butler, repede profitoriu la rasboiu'. Groaza naste monstri mai curand decat invers. In ciuda multor argumente valide, investigatii si 'date factuale irefutabile', Alex al nost' a facut cariera si avere pe spatele raspandirii groazei, isteriei, catastrofismului, servindu-i pe cei care aidoma lui au interese complexe in instilarea si mentinerea acestui nivel de alerta a populatiei. Nu spun ca nu ar fi destule motive legitime de ingrijorare in zilele noasre, chiar din contra. In fine, a nu mai adaug ca, la nevoie, pentru efect scenic garantat, nu se da in laturi de la manipularea, distorsionarea datelor prin 'taierea (din context) si montaj' dupa pofta inimii, ori, si mai simplu, prin omisiune. Poate esti la curent cu miscarea secesionista, tot mai activa in ultimul timp pe aici (si sub umbrela careia se adapostesc ideologii eclectice, uneori chiar opuse) care cu disperare ar vrea sa profite, cu orice pret, de pe urma crizei, despre care stim acum de la Naomi Klein, este terenul ideal al rasturnarnarilor de tot felul si al instaurarii profitorilor. Daca cetatenii acestei tari isi vor dori vreodata secesiunea, este corect s-o faca in deplina cunostinta de cauza si nu fiindca au fost manipulati, intoxicati, isterizati de o mana de diversionisti care au interese enorme in joc. Ei sunt printre cei cu tone de aur in Insulele Cayman, cu bunkere/orase subterane de supravietuire, de miliarde, s.a.m.d. De aceea te si intrebam daca stii ceva despre acest curent ideologic numit cica paleoconservatism. Si ca o ciudata coincidenta, numa' ce vad ca si nea' Tismaneanu il pomeneste pe blog-ul sau sub numele de conservatorism 'arhaic', treaba naibii!! Da' ma opresc aici ca uite si tu cat m-am intins. . . . : )) Voi continua in episodul urmator . . . : D))Totusi si o veste buna? Ghici cine vine la . . . Bucuresti? (nu la cina!)
Stiglitz la Bucuresti
"Cea de a 6-a editie a Forumului Financiar Central si Sud-Est European care va avea loc la Bucuresti in perioada 19-22 mai va reuni peste 250 de oameni de afaceri, reprezentanti ai sistemului bancar si politicieni. "Avand in vedere criza profunda pe care o traverseaza societatea romaneasca si internationala, cei prezenti la Forum vor incerca sa gaseasca solutii pentru problemele economice majore", se arata intr-un comunicat. La Forum va fi prezent si Joseph Stiglitz, fost prim vicepresedinte si economist sef al Bancii Mondiale, fost presedinte al Comitetului de Consilieri Economici in Administratia Clinton, consilierul economic al presedintelui Obama si laureat al Premiului Nobel. "Este un moment <
2 comments:
Mai fac o incercare de postare . . .
k
. . . si un extract dintr-un articol de Joseph Stiglitz, aparut azi, Monday 11 May 2009, in The Guardian care ne avertizeaza, relativ la Criza, ca we're not yet out of the woods but rather at a moment when the door can still swing either way, given the occurrence or movement of any number of factors . . . In Stigliz' own words, bottom line: " it's time for Plan B in bank restructuring and another dose of Keynesian medicine."
Green shoots? Don't speak too soon
In spite of some spring sprouts in the US economy, we should prepare for another dark winter
"The American government, too, is betting on muddling through: the Fed's measures and government guarantees mean that banks have access to low-cost funds, and lending rates are high. If nothing nasty happens - losses on mortgages, commercial real estate, business loans, and credit cards - the banks might just be able to make it through without another crisis. In a few years time, the banks will be recapitalised, and the economy will return to normal. This is the rosy scenario.
But experiences around the world suggest that this is a risky outlook. Even were banks healthy, the deleveraging process and the associated loss of wealth means that, more likely than not, the economy will be weak. And a weak economy means, more likely than not, more bank losses.
The problems are not limited to the US. Other countries (like Spain) have their own real estate crises. Eastern Europe has its problems, which are likely to impact western Europe's highly leveraged banks. In a globalised world, problems in one part of the system quickly reverberate elsewhere.
In earlier crises, as in east Asia a decade ago, recovery was quick, because the affected countries could export their way to renewed prosperity. But this is a synchronous global downturn. America and Europe can't export their way out of their doldrums.
Fixing the financial system is necessary, but not sufficient, for recovery. America's strategy for fixing its financial system is costly and unfair, for it is rewarding the people who caused the economic mess. But there is an alternative that essentially means playing by the rules of a normal market economy: a debt-for-equity swap.
With such a swap, confidence could be restored to the banking system, and lending could be reignited with little or no cost to the taxpayer. It's neither particularly complicated nor novel. Bondholders obviously don't like it - they would rather get a gift from the government. But there are far better uses of the public's money, including another round of stimulus.
Every downturn comes to an end. The question is how long and deep this downturn will be. In spite of some spring sprouts, we should prepare for another dark winter: it's time for Plan B in bank restructuring and another dose of Keynesian medicine."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/11/green-shoots-us-economy
kami*
Post a Comment