A Bear - Poles Apart

October 20, 2019 / Congau

Doublespeak Catalonian

It’s extraordinary how cherished principles can change from one instant to the next. Without blinking the double speakers among us switch from one reality to its opposite, and we, the devoted listeners, are eager to believe them. What’s more, this is not happening in the apocalyptic world of 1984, but in our revived era of enlightenment.

Words change their meaning when transferred from one context to the next, from one area of conflict to another, between points of time. Sometimes the distance in time and space is so short that it takes a remarkably bad memory to be able to forget. We watch one exhibit and study it carefully. Then we turn our head to the next and have forgotten. Any resemblance between the two evaporates when the analytic sorcerers have made the spin.

Let’s make an experiment. Look at Western Europe. It’s a small continent. When eying the globe you hardly need to move your pupils to travel from north to south. Behold Scotland. It’s a small land and a part of an island. Some of those brave northerners wanted to split their island and make Scotland a state on his own. A plebiscite was held, hailed as a great exercise of democracy, and the voters decided to keep the isle intact. (A happy outcome, in my opinion.)

Now twitch your eye a trifle down the map and you will spot Spain. That peninsula also has its Scotland and it’s called Catalonia. There the stage seemed ready for another referendum and it took an army of spin doctors to explain why the two cases were different, but some of us still don’t get it. The Scots behaved civilized, they say, and cooperated in a democratic process, but the Catalonians were denied that process. The secessionists in Catalonia are a minority who are trying to force their will on the majority, they say. Very good, if that’s the case, give them their Scottish vote and their loss will silence them.

But we shouldn’t be surprised. We know that Madrid is scared and that Brussels talks in many tongues.

October 18, 2019 / Congau

Force and Fiction

Everywhere there is pressure. Heavy forces lean on us and orders us around. Do this and do that. There’s no repose.

But then we are also told: Do whatever you want. You are free to choose your life.

And what is more, these two opposite tunes seem to be coming from the same source: The grand anonymous Leviathan who is a blurry hybrid of government, bosses, teachers, media, friends and relatives. They all melt together in one cacophonic but unison voice known to you as The Authority. This monster keeps talking in words that have meaning at first but then instantly cancel themselves. It speaks in clichés.

How can we possibly believe something that always contradicts itself? We do because one part of the message is necessity and the other is flattery. What we must do is obvious. The duties we are given are expressed in a language that can’t be misunderstood. The language of punishment. We know what happens if we don’t comply.

But then the pill is sweetened. In between the barking orders enticing tunes are heard. Of course we want to listen and believe in what makes a lighter burden. It’s not quite as hard to be a slave when you are told you are free.

We are not really slaves. All the bossing around, the duties and expectations are only as real as we make them.

We are not really free. We can’t choose our life because we are already restricted by the present circumstances.

But the most important restriction is the limitation in ourselves. We can’t do just anything because we are not made for anything. However, this restriction is also our liberty. If you could find that narrow path that is truly yourself, you would be truly free. That would be the consolidation between those two contradictory forces, compulsion and freedom; the “I should” and “I want” would be identical.

October 17, 2019 / Congau

Compulsive Choice

If Russia became a democracy, it would not be Russia anymore. It would fade into a diluted version of Europe and a junior partner of America.

If China became a democracy, it would repeat its colonial past and sink back as a failed copy of the West.

India is a democracy and is steeped in bottomless poverty; a great culture tucked up in an insignificant corner of the world, with no power and no choice.

Russia and China are alternatives; something else that one might want to choose or stay away from. You may like them or hate them, but at least they are different. They offer a choice in the world, and somehow we thought that was a feature of democracy. In a global perspective the spread of democracy leads to less diversity, and isn’t that a shame?

Inside those undemocratic countries there is little choice, you object, and that’s undeniably correct, but the realistic choice we have in a democracy is also quite limited. True, we can vote for a range of parties and candidates formally covering the entire spectrum from right to left but most of them are ridiculously irrelevant. A choice that has close to zero chance of coming into being isn’t much of a choice.

Very well, the genuine alternatives of a democracy are very limited but of course there are more than none, and surely that’s enough to give it an advantage, isn’t it? my invisible objector continues. Yes, I may concede to that, but it comes at a price. As some alternatives are added, others are subtracted and what used to be reality is no longer possible.

Suppose the Russians really prefer the kind of system they’re having (there’s a good chance they really do). If the country opened up, that system would no longer be possible.

The tide of times is an inevitable force, and democracy, more than any other system, is inclined to bow to its impact. A one-party state tends to resist it and thereby it gives a choice by giving no choice.

October 16, 2019 / Congau

Uniform Diversity

Free competition doesn’t lead to diversity, that’s a quite common observation. Ironically, it’s the other way around. The suppliers of goods, from fashion to entertainment, direct their attention at what is already in demand instead of risking to open new markets. The new products, even if they are improvements, will be similar to what is already offered, which again adds to the concentration and reduces diversity. The great number of television channels which all show more or less the same type of programs, is a good illustration of this phenomenon.

Perhaps it doesn’t matter much that we all tend toward the same style of clothing, but it may be more disturbing that the same is happening in the cultural and political realm. Globalization is the result of free global competition, brought about by vastly improved communication, and means that one particular culture has the competitive advantage and keeps winning and expanding. This culture is by no means qualitatively better any more than one piece of clothing is objectively preferable, but whatever is already spreading keeps spreading unless it hits a barrier.

Political competition likewise seems to be a good way to secure that a people gets the government that is suitable for its unique circumstances. But what we see is again the opposite. The spread of political competition, that is democracy, leads to uniform standards and paradoxically less choice. If a different political system is desirable, it will not do to put it up for a general vote. In an election only alternatives that are perceived as realistic have the chance to win, and realism for most people means whatever is close to what is already existing and what is dominating the view. The dominant Western system will therefore have the upper hand when a country becomes a democracy and that again reduces the diversity that is essential for democratic choice.

More choice leads to less choice. Democratic competition works against political diversity.

October 15, 2019 / Congau

Self-Identification

What makes us what we are? We are many things – anyone could make a long list and include any number of trivial details that presumably would add up to form an integrated person. Anything from favorite breakfast to shoe size could be mentioned and we might leave it to the person himself to decide what he finds more relevant. We are expected to respect this exercise of self-identification. Who are we to tell how others feel about themselves?

But are we really doing people a favor by accepting every claim they may make about their own identity? Of course, it is a sensitive issue for them and it might be wise to react with respect to whatever they choose to tell us, but we should be allowed to privately doubt their account of themselves and we certainly shouldn’t obligated to defend everything they say in the name of tolerance. They may be plain wrong.

What is more, people change their self-perception. As new trends and movements swipe their world, their image of themselves tend to be adjusted. If we assume that they are always right about themselves, we will reach the odd conclusion that they physically change when their ideas are changed.

Perception of ethnicity is an example of this. Surveys typically ask people what ethnicity they belong to or identify with, but the answers you get to that question could only have a psychological value. It hardly says anything about any physical reality. Sometimes we seem to observe an increase or decrease in an ethnic group that only reflects that it is now more or less acceptable or fashionable to belong to the group in question.

We should of course be very careful to dismiss people’s self-identification offhand, but some healthy skepticism is certainly called for when what we are searching for is something real and not just perceived.

October 14, 2019 / Congau

Syrian Shambles

There are only seven armies left in Syria now (or thirteen or fourteen, depending on how you count), so when Chief Trump pulls his forces out, it makes a slight difference. The erratic commander makes a golden mess of everything he touches, so of course it is a pity for him that he leaves this ideal playing field, but then again, the Syrian scramble is quite capable of not taking care of itself without him.

The field is more open to the Russians and the Turks to enjoy themselves. That may be bad news for American geostrategy, but for Syria it may be just as well.

From our eagle perspective in the safe western distant, who can truly distinguish good from bad? Well, the IS hardly calls for much sympathy, (although our view of them is probably far too simplified) but other than that there can be no obvious superior villains in this game of villainy.

The perverted history of mankind and its basic instincts are again being played out in the historic land of ancient Assyria. Power and position, little people who get caught up in local strife and big powers from outside who eagerly want to pick up the spoils. It is hard to construct moral principles that would justify the action on either side.

Everyone is always right from the narrow perspective of the pond where he is floating, which means he is almost always wrong from the view of the big sea. Sure the Kurds deserve their own land, clearly the Alawites need to protect their minority rights, obviously the Arab Sunnis majority (including the IS) don’t want to be reduced to servitude in their own land, naturally the Turks are worried about the Kurds, no wonder Russia and the US see the global risks and opportunities latent in the struggle.

Everyone is right, and that’s why they are all wrong. Now there’s one faulty player less. Pulling out is well done for someone who doesn’t know what he’s doing.

October 13, 2019 / Congau

Freedom Bought for Free

Nothing really matters. Not here. Not where we are all so free. We live and let live in perfect tolerance and indifference.

The old creeds are gone. Medieval darkness is replaced by the light of infidelity. Ideological oppression is replaced by pragmatic nihilism. Nothing is left to hold on to. Our freedom has nothing to grasp.

They used to believe. Wars of religion were fought on the European continent and curtains of iron divided the minds. It mattered what one believed and it was important to stand firm. Whoever has something to die for, has something to live for.

But believers are coming. The fanatics, we call them. They are pouring in from the despotic parts of the world abusing our freedom with their unrestrained devotion. Don’t they understand that tolerance excludes passion? We accept anyone who accepts everything; anyone who is dull enough to be careless; anyone who is tepid like us.

Diversity is wonderful, we think. We decorate our façade with flashing colors; sounds from seducing sirens fill the air with meaningless enticements. There is so much of it; the choices are endless, but it’s all the same for it’s all supply and no demand. We approve of everything for we commit to nothing. It can be bought and sold again for a profit or thrown away for a better deal. We are so tolerant!

Everything is tolerated except intolerance. Passion cannot be tolerated for passion believes in truth and truth excludes falsity. Truth is one and falsity is many.

Free society has given up on truth. Since everything is equally false, there is no reason to be picky, and tolerance is born.

We can afford to grant freedom because we don’t believe. But what is freedom if not freedom to believe? Freedom is given to those who don’t need it.

October 12, 2019 / Congau

The Democratic Expert

In principle no one knows better than any other, so if you have a health problem you might as well consult your plumber.

Wait, I doubt that you would do that. You would probably rather trust a medical expert.

But if you had a political problem, who would you trust?

Well, you might suspect where this is going. If there are experts of medicine there must be political experts also and if you let your doctor decide what is best for your body, you should also let politicians decide what is best for your society… No, I wasn’t quite going to say that, for although there is some truth to the argument, there are some obvious flaws in it.

Political scientists, ideologists, economists and sociologists, the whole lot of political experts, greatly disagree among themselves, whereas doctors are in relative agreement. It’s just not as easy to prove objectively what might be the remedy for social ills.

So how are we to determine who should decide? We could toss a coin; that might be one possibility. Another random option could be to ask a crowd of ignoramuses; people like yourself.

That’s right, there’s no need to flatter yourself. The principle must remain: some are experts and some are not, and just because it’s difficult to spot the genuine sage in the realm of politics, it doesn’t mean he’s non-existent.

The merit of modern democracy is not that it has turned the people into experts; that is a blunt lie that our superiors love to tell us. It is that an acceptable method is found for choosing the ruler. Since we love to believe in the flattering lie about our own expertise we keep quiet and accept.

It is indeed good to avoid the stressful social upheaval that comes with violent fight for power. For that we might as well pretend to ask the plumber before he returns to his pipes.

October 11, 2019 / Congau

The Logic of Hatred

The nation is our self-enlargement. We are pitifully small individuals who can’t assert ourselves in this world of competition and strife. We want to be seen but are invisible and the nation is our substitute.

It is frequently said that the nation satisfies our need to belong being our extended family supplying warmth and love. But if that was essential, why not extend it even more and include the whole mankind in our embrace? No, we couldn’t do that because there would be no one left to assert ourselves against.

The essence of a nation is not inclusion but exclusion. To be better, stronger, bigger, more beautiful, more admirable, a comparison is needed; something to measure against.

There are two ways to excel: we get better or they get worse. One way is as efficient as the other. If we belittle the others, we will grow ourselves, and the more we detest them the smaller they seem. Hatred is not an unfortunate outgrowth of nationalism, it’s a natural consequence.

Mainstream society laments the outbursts of bigotry and division, and rightly so, but the source of it is found within itself. Nationalism or patriotism is the ideology of our time, standing strong when more complicated systems have failed. It’s encouraged and supported from the government and down and from the grassroots and up, so how can we blame those who stretch it too far?

Patriotism is the love of one’s extended self and the consequent exclusion of what is beyond. If my country comes first, the others must come last. If we are to win, they must lose. So let’s make them lose. Let’s ridicule them, let’s trample on them, let’s hate them. Feel how we grow, feel how you grow. Feel how you become something when they become nothing. It feels so good.

October 10, 2019 / Congau

The Purpose of Everything

All things have a purpose. Everything is made for something. Some say there is complete freedom everywhere and that anything can be used for anything, but I don’t use my phone for hammering nails, nor do I think I should, nor does this lack of freedom bother me.

Contrary to what those existentialists tell me, I can’t do just anything. I can’t drive a garbage truck. Yes, you can, they say. You are perfectly capable of it, it’s not difficult, it’s just your choice. Yes, yes, yes, I can, sure I can, but I can’t. I am not made for it just like my phone is not made for hammering nails (even if it can be used for that).

I know the objection. The inventor of the phone had a motive when inventing it. Since he was a person, he was capable of having a conscious objective with what he made. Nature, however, has no human maker, and unless you presuppose a God, no one had an original intention with it. That’s right, and what’s more, even if we put God into the scheme, we wouldn’t know His plans anyway.

Still, I would argue that we can find the purpose of a thing without looking into the head of an imagined designer. Who knows what secret intentions that phone creator may have envisioned? Maybe he was crazy and indeed wanted it used on nails. Would that change anything?

No, a purpose can be found inside a thing itself, maybe not in a literal sense, but for all practical purposes. Look at an object; what can it be used for? Look at yourself; what may be your calling?

Everyone has a nature, a personality, and some occupations are more fitting to it than others.

Find yourself; know thyself; find your purpose.

← Older

Newer →

	Quý on Fate
	Congau on Conscience
	Migelli Bin Origen on Conscience
	Congau on The Danger of Philosophy
	Author_Joanne_Reed on The Danger of Philosophy