Οι παλιοί θα θυμούνται την κωμωδία «Μάθε παιδί μου γράμματα». Γυρισμένη το 1981, αναφερόταν σε ένα χωριό στην μετεμφυλιακή Ελλάδα, όπου το κατεστημένο της Δεξιάς προσωποποιημένο από τον δεξιό γυμνασιάρχη, αποκρύπτει και αρνείται να τιμήσει έναν αριστερό αγωνιστή της αντιστάσης με αποτέλεσμα την αντίδραση της τοπικής κοινωνίας.
Η τανία ήτανε σημάδι της δυναμικά ανερχόμενης αριστεράς που στο περιθώριο τότε, διεκδικούσε από την κατεστημένη ιντελιγκέντσια το δικαίωμα στην ιστορική αλήθεια. Τα επόμενα χρόνια ως γνωστόν οι ισορροπίες ανατράπηκαν σφόδρα, τώρα τα μήντια και ο ακαδημαϊκος χώρος αριστεροκρατούνται και το νέο κατεστημένο της τελευταίας 25ετίας αποκρύπτει, λοιδωρεί, διαστρέφει και (κυριολεκτικά) τρομοκρατεί κατά το δοκούν.
Τελευταίο κρούσμα το βιβλίο ιστορίας. Η ιστορία προκάλεσε πολλά debates στην Ελλάδα που δυστυχώς δεν παρακολούθησα. Αυτό όμως που είδα ήταν το απόκομμα σελίδας με την περιγραφή της καταστροφης της Σμύρνης σαν ένα «συνωστισμό» των ελλήνων που υποχωρούσαν. Η αλήθεια βέβαια είναι τελείως διαφορετική
Καταλαβαίνω το πόσο τραυματισμένη είναι η προηγούμενη γενιά από τον καταπιεστικό και εν πολλοίς γελοίο εθνικισμό του παρελθόντος (αυτή είναι η γενιά που πολλές φορές αντέταξε στην εθνικιστική προπαγάνδα το Σολώμειο «εθνικό είναι οτι είναι αληθινό»). Καταλαβαίνω επίσης ότι ίσως να υπάρχουν καλές προθέσεις πίσω από την προσπάθεια απεθνικοποιήσης, ένα μέλλον χωρίς εθνικές διαφορές κλπ.
Όμως την ίδια στιγμή κάθε μεγάλη εταιρία προσπαθεί με τεράστιο κόστος να αναπτύξει την δική της διακριτή κουλτούρα (holy grail του σύγχρονου management) που θα κάνει τους υπαλλήλους της περισσότερο πιστούς και απόδοτικους. Το μεγαλύτερο success story χώρας του προηγούμενου αιώνα ήταν το Ισραήλ γιατί κατάφερε να δημιουργήσει έναν πατριωτισμό/εθνικισμό που ενέπνευσε εκατομύρια ανθρώπους. Και εδώ, σε μια χώρα με μία από τις πιο ένδοξες ιστορίες, το κατεστημένο της προσπαθεί να αποβάλλει αυτήν την winning culture... Eίναι σαν η Goldman Sachs, η τράπεζα φαινόμενο με την διάσημη «κουλτούρα επιτυχίας» της, να αποφασίσει να αλλάξει το ονομά της, να απαρνηθεί τις επίτυχιες της και να δηλώσει ότι δεν αναγνωρίζει κάποια ανωτερότητα της σε σχέση με τις άλλες τράπεζες. Absolutely stupid...
Θέλοντας ή μη κύριοι, εδώ είμαστε όλοι μόνιμοι συνάδελφοι και μέτοχοι στην μεγάλη επιχείρηση ΕΛΛΑΣ Α.Ε. που κύριο asset της είναι η «the-underdog-that-wins» κουλτούρα και το γεμάτο επιτεύγματα παρελθόν της. Θα τα σβήσουμε έτσι; Είναι ο μηδενισμός της εθνικής συνείδησης τόσο σημαντικός σαν σκοπός που να επιτρέπει τον ακρωτηριασμό της ιστορίας;
Η τελευταία σκηνή του «Μάθε παιδί μου γράμματα», είναι στο τοπικό δικαστήριο. Εκεί ο δεξιός γυμνασιάρχης αρχίζει την κατάθεση του με ψέμματα για την ιστορία του χωριού. Ξαφνικά, ο μέχρι τότε άβουλος Νίκος Καλογερόπουλος, πετάγεται και κράζει τον πατέρα του: «Την αλήθεια ρε, την αλήθεια»
25 April 2007
09 April 2007
"The God Delusion", an atheist re-awakening
I just read Richard Dawkins' latest, "The God Delusion". Can't resist some comments:
In the first part, it is really fun to watch Dawkins easily blowing away ALL theistic arguments. For devoted atheists (like myself) that needed no further convincing, it is interesting to read some ideas coming from evolutionary biology, like the emergence and interplay of memes.
A special mention is needed here to "the ultimate boeing 747", a fresh and very beautiful argument in my opinion. It reverses the old theistic argument: "this world is so complex that there must be a creator-God behind it" to: "a hypothetical God would be so sophisticated and complex that it would be impossible to exist without the existence of a previous cause; by definition God could be the only primary cause, hence God cannot exist"
In the second part Dawkins is entering rather unfamiliar territories like political philosophy and the result is less academically vigorous and mostly based on anecdotal evidence. Admittedly several of his arguments are weak here -like his view that the moral zeitgeist will continue becoming more and more liberal or his mistaken implied view that the belief in the sanctity of life is related with religiosity.
In any case, with this book Richard Dawkins establishes himself as the Peter Singer of our generation. This time is not about speciesism, but about religious supremacy, the view that specific systems of beliefs with gross irrational assumptions like religions are superior to other non-holy ones, and they should be immune to any criticism just because of their arbitrarily given religious status. Succesful or not in its cause, "the God Delusion" certainly signals a welcome re-emergence of atheistic activism.
In the first part, it is really fun to watch Dawkins easily blowing away ALL theistic arguments. For devoted atheists (like myself) that needed no further convincing, it is interesting to read some ideas coming from evolutionary biology, like the emergence and interplay of memes.
A special mention is needed here to "the ultimate boeing 747", a fresh and very beautiful argument in my opinion. It reverses the old theistic argument: "this world is so complex that there must be a creator-God behind it" to: "a hypothetical God would be so sophisticated and complex that it would be impossible to exist without the existence of a previous cause; by definition God could be the only primary cause, hence God cannot exist"
In the second part Dawkins is entering rather unfamiliar territories like political philosophy and the result is less academically vigorous and mostly based on anecdotal evidence. Admittedly several of his arguments are weak here -like his view that the moral zeitgeist will continue becoming more and more liberal or his mistaken implied view that the belief in the sanctity of life is related with religiosity.
In any case, with this book Richard Dawkins establishes himself as the Peter Singer of our generation. This time is not about speciesism, but about religious supremacy, the view that specific systems of beliefs with gross irrational assumptions like religions are superior to other non-holy ones, and they should be immune to any criticism just because of their arbitrarily given religious status. Succesful or not in its cause, "the God Delusion" certainly signals a welcome re-emergence of atheistic activism.
10 February 2007
"What global warming? It's all a conspiracy"
It is really disappointing to see Andreas Andrianopoulos, a leading greek liberal intellectual, to fully adopt the WSJ and other global warming deniers' arguments that actually there is no global warming and it is all a conspiracy of the leftist media (that means basically all of the media apart from FOX), Greenpeace and the anti-capitalist movement. But even if there is a threatening global warming, we learn from Adnrianopoulos, well, let's be cynical about it, evolution doesn't necessarily need humans.
I am not going to discuss the ubiquitous evidence that the EXISTING global warming IS indeed caused by human activity. I used to doubt in the past, but the recent years all the evidence from all independent agencies agree on the facts. And as Keynes said: "When facts change, I change my mind. What do you do Sir?"
What I really find more interesting is to observe how intelligent and usually independent minded people can get so blinded by their biases. Currently, some liberal thinkers feel that if you are pro-market you should be automatically a global-warming denier and consequently pro-pollution (given that pollution is a byproduct of economic growth). It is ironic to notice that in this line of thought they agree 100% with their intellectual rival, Greenpeace.
But they are both wrong. They forget that it was the market and the private sector that has provided environmental friendly solutions by developing all these new clean technologies: recycling, alternative energy etc. And currently, private equity funds and banks invest trillions in alternatives. It seems that the market will save humanity again -but only if we are all aware of the situation and boost the necessary demand for clean energies.
The environment is too important to leave it to the leftist/Greenpeace loonies. I, for one, am not willing to hand them victory in such a defining issue.
I am not going to discuss the ubiquitous evidence that the EXISTING global warming IS indeed caused by human activity. I used to doubt in the past, but the recent years all the evidence from all independent agencies agree on the facts. And as Keynes said: "When facts change, I change my mind. What do you do Sir?"
What I really find more interesting is to observe how intelligent and usually independent minded people can get so blinded by their biases. Currently, some liberal thinkers feel that if you are pro-market you should be automatically a global-warming denier and consequently pro-pollution (given that pollution is a byproduct of economic growth). It is ironic to notice that in this line of thought they agree 100% with their intellectual rival, Greenpeace.
But they are both wrong. They forget that it was the market and the private sector that has provided environmental friendly solutions by developing all these new clean technologies: recycling, alternative energy etc. And currently, private equity funds and banks invest trillions in alternatives. It seems that the market will save humanity again -but only if we are all aware of the situation and boost the necessary demand for clean energies.
The environment is too important to leave it to the leftist/Greenpeace loonies. I, for one, am not willing to hand them victory in such a defining issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
