Archive for Februarie 25, 2010

Unplug the Signal: The Truth Will Not Be Televised

palinA flow of information is constantly streaming from the television set; a bombardment of words and pictures.  The speed at which this information is communicated makes it easy for the signal to take control, switching the viewer’s brain to stand-by as information is absorbed without analysis or question. Today the television’s constant signal shapes the conclusions of the masses and produces the collective norm.  The signal prescribes what is news and what is truth through the words of so-called experts and authorities, gelding the consciousness and independent thoughts of those subjected to it. Through television, the masses can be made to accept the most monstrous distortions of reality. The signal is a chill wind of continuous oppression over the minds of the masses. It controls the management of society and culture, creating uniformity across all subjects.

The fuel for this vehicle of mass deception is a technique known as perception management where an array of psychological techniques are used to alter the truth, leading the viewer to a desired conclusion. Some call this spin or propaganda while others know it as lying.  According to Joseph Goebbels, Propaganda Minister for Adolph Hitler, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it… It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Most of what can be found on the nightly news is nothing but advertisements selling more government and a false reality that benefits only those in control. Television is the dictator of information; newspaper and radio are the whisper campaign of the television’s message.

It is expected that Americans will consistently prescribe to the doctrine of the television. It is subtly communicated that one should stay within the collective and never challenge the message, for doing so may be considered an aggression towards culture. The message is, “Be a good consumer; always obey authority; you know nothing; listen only to experts; be content and never question or express new ideas.” This signal is being broadcast across millions of screens, indoctrinating the unconscious minds of those who choose this as their only reality. Self-censorship occurs when these individuals become so deeply indoctrinated that they are afraid to discuss any information outside the paradigm of television-created culture; they police their thoughts to ensure they won’t conflict with this culture. Sadly, many people’s reality today does not allow any outside information to process, instead it is written off as conspiracy or blatant lies. Our consciousness has been destroyed so much that fiction has become reality. An entire lifestyle of poisonous foods, pharmaceuticals, and fluoridated water are accepted as safe and sold to us at the cost of our health and well being.

Those of the establishment are using the incredibly powerful weapon of mass psychology as a method of controlling the minds of the masses and altering the behavior of individuals. Edward Bernays, a pioneer in the field of public relations in the 20th century, applied Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis to manipulate the masses by engineering consent. According to Bernays, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without them knowing it.” Advertisers and psychologists of the billion dollar culture creation industry manufacture trends through the proliferation of insecurities; and manipulating desires and emotions. These concepts are also employed to control how individuals think about politics, as well as the possibilities and limitations within society.  Those welding power within our streams of mass communication market their plans into each generation as individuals adopt specific ways of thinking and never suspect that all the major events and trends within their lifetime are actually planned by an elite few before they are even born. In our society today, culture is created from the top down. Virtually all forms of culture are created by the ruling class to build a false sense of reality, ensure social compliance, and control the future course of cultural evolution.

Predictive programming is a tool used by the establishment to acclimate the public to new ideas, trends, beliefs, and threats. It is used through television by including certain situations or ideas within the plots of many fictional shows, familiarizing the viewer with these concepts no matter what they may be watching.  When similar situations occur or like ideas are circulated in the world we think that these particular things are quite natural for we have unknowingly been made familiar with them through television. By viewing nearly any popular show on television, one can see the same propaganda that will be aired on the nightly news. Propaganda on a wide array of subjects has been interwoven into a great number of television shows. Just a few of these subjects include global warming, vaccinations, torture, terrorism, national security, the militarization of police, and the degradation of the family unit. Through predictive programming, television shapes culture and prevents individuals from asking questions.

Crisis’ are created on a daily basis and broadcast across the airwaves to keep individuals in a state of panic and fear. Whether it be the threat of a pandemic or terrorism, the constant state of crisis has created a form of mental illness as we are slowly acclimated into an age of crisis. By using Hegelian dialectic, the television promotes the problem, guides our reaction, and presents the solution. The problem of terrorism was exclaimed, a strong emotional response was evoked, and it was stated that our rights need be sacrificed in order to protect us from the threat. We’ve lost personal sovereignty under the guise of terrorism; we’re stopped and searched; we’re watched by cameras as we go about our lives; and we’re encouraged to spy on our neighbors.  We have been trained to accept the life of a prisoner.

America is in a state of enlightened despotism where most individuals live only to satisfy selfish inner desires and remain ignorant of the state of the world around them. In most public places one can find a television transmitting propaganda around the clock ensuring the masses remain focused on trivial matters. From birth we take the world as it’s presented on television.  We don’t question it and any serious criticism of TV is becoming psychologically impossible in society. Who would suspect getting born into a world where everything around you is a continuous lie? The youth of today are convinced that the experts and personalities on television are the authority of credible information while parents and older generations are foolish with dated ideas.  Children are conditioned to disconnect from what is truly important to their well being and instead focus on mindless trivia, sports, celebrity gossip, and buying an array of material things. They invest their psychological worth in fantasy characters on television while ignoring or even scorning individuals contributing to the betterment of humanity. They are discouraged from getting involved in their local community and often lack the ability to think independently or to resist corruption. As their children’s minds are molded by television, there is barely a murmur from the public.

For over half a century, our society has lived under this signal of mental programming and conditioning. The message is clear: don’t be a leader, don’t engage in critical thinking, and don’t care about the people in your life. Until individuals become aware of the current information war, our standard of living and our liberties will continue to be degraded and we will continue to lose communities and meaningful relationships between people. Currently, pockets of resistance are beginning to spring up everywhere as some unplug the signal and regain control of their own thoughts. Informed individuals are canceling their cable and satellite subscriptions and instead spending time with their families and children while participating in meaningful experiences. They are seeking alternative news sources. They are reading about those who weld incredible influence over culture like Edward Bernays, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Charles Galton Darwin, Plato, Bertrand Russell, and Aldous Huxley. However, it is a continuous battle to educate the masses for the television remains our greatest threat to individual sovereignty and the largest obstacle to becoming a truly informed individual. Fortunately, unplugging from the signal is easy. The television can simply be turned off. Through doing so, you may realize nearly our entire world is now a hoax; things once known as truth are fake. We have been trained like dogs to be obedient to our television; our master has had our minds on a tight leash. Let us never forget the truth will not be televised.

Nathan Janes
sursa: Pupaganda

Ronald Reagan - “The Evil Empire”

[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio.]

Moderator: Ladies and Gentlemen: The President of the United States, Ronald Reagan.

President Reagan: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

And, Reverend Clergy all, Senator Hawkins, distinguished members of the Florida congressional delegation, and all of you: I can’t tell you how you have warmed my heart with your welcome. I’m delighted to be here today.

Those of you in the National Association of Evangelicals are known for your spiritual and humanitarian work. And I would be especially remiss if I didn’t discharge right now one personal debt of gratitude. Thank you for your prayers. Nancy and I have felt their presence many times in many ways. And believe me, for us they’ve made all the difference.

The other day in the East Room of the White House at a meeting there, someone asked me whether I was aware of all the people out there who were praying for the President. And I had to say, “Yes, I am. I’ve felt it. I believe in intercessionary prayer.” But I couldn’t help but say to that questioner after he’d asked the question that — or at least say to them that if sometimes when he was praying he got a busy signal, it was just me in there ahead of him. I think I understand how Abraham Lincoln felt when he said, “I have been driven many times to my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.” From the joy and the good feeling of this conference, I go to a political reception. Now, I don’t know why, but that bit of scheduling reminds me of a story which I’ll share with you.

An evangelical minister and a politician arrived at Heaven’s gate one day together. And St. Peter, after doing all the necessary formalities, took them in hand to show them where their quarters would be. And he took them to a small, single room with a bed, a chair, and a table and said this was for the clergyman. And the politician was a little worried about what might be in store for him. And he couldn’t believe it then when St. Peter stopped in front of a beautiful mansion with lovely grounds, many servants, and told him that these would be his quarters.

And he couldn’t help but ask, he said, “But wait, how — there’s something wrong — how do I get this mansion while that good and holy man only gets a single room?” And St. Peter said, “You have to understand how things are up here. We’ve got thousands and thousands of clergy. You’re the first politician who ever made it.”

But I don’t want to contribute to a stereotype. So I tell you there are a great many God-fearing, dedicated, noble men and women in public life, present company included. And yes, we need your help to keep us ever-mindful of the ideas and the principles that brought us into the public arena in the first place. The basis of those ideals and principles is a commitment to freedom and personal liberty that, itself is grounded in the much deeper realization that freedom prospers only where the blessings of God are avidly sought and humbly accepted.

The American experiment in democracy rests on this insight. Its discovery was the great triumph of our Founding Fathers, voiced by William Penn when he said: “If we will not be governed by God, we must be governed by tyrants.” Explaining the inalienable rights of men, Jefferson said, “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time.” And it was George Washington who said that “of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.”

And finally, that shrewdest of all observers of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville, put it eloquently after he had gone on a search for the secret of America’s greatness and genius — and he said: “Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the greatness and the genius of America. America is good. And if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

Well, I’m pleased to be here today with you who are keeping America great by keeping her good. Only through your work and prayers and those of millions of others can we hope to survive this perilous century and keep alive this experiment in liberty, this last, best hope of man.

I want you to know that this administration is motivated by a political philosophy that sees the greatness of America in you, her people, and in your families, churches, neighborhoods, communities: the institutions that foster and nourish values like concern for others and respect for the rule of law under God.

Now, I don’t have to tell you that this puts us in opposition to, or at least out of step with, a — a prevailing attitude of many who have turned to a modern-day secularism, discarding the tried and time-tested values upon which our very civilization is based. No matter how well intentioned, their value system is radically different from that of most Americans. And while they proclaim that they’re freeing us from superstitions of the past, they’ve taken upon themselves the job of superintending us by government rule and regulation. Sometimes their voices are louder than ours, but they are not yet a majority.

An example of that vocal superiority is evident in a controversy now going on in Washington. And since I’m involved I’ve been waiting to hear from the parents of young America. How far are they willing to go in giving to government their prerogatives as parents?

Let me state the case as briefly and simply as I can. An organization of citizens, sincerely motivated, deeply concerned about the increase in illegitimate births and abortions involving girls well below the age of consent, some time ago established a nationwide network of clinics to offer help to these girls and, hopefully, alleviate this situation. Now, again, let me say, I do not fault their intent. However, in their well-intentioned effort, these clinics decided to provide advice and birth control drugs and devices to underage girls without the knowledge of their parents.

For some years now, the federal government has helped with funds to subsidize these clinics. In providing for this, the Congress decreed that every effort would be made to maximize parental participation. Nevertheless, the drugs and devices are prescribed without getting parental consent or giving notification after they’ve done so. Girls termed “sexually active” — and that has replaced the word “promiscuous” — are given this help in order to prevent illegitimate birth or abortion.

Well, we have ordered clinics receiving federal funds to notify the parents such help has been given. One of the nation’s leading newspapers has created the term “squeal rule” in editorializing against us for doing this, and we’re being criticized for violating the privacy of young people. A judge has recently granted an injunction against an enforcement of our rule. I’ve watched TV panel shows discuss this issue, seen columnists pontificating on our error, but no one seems to mention morality as playing a part in the subject of sex.

Is all of Judeo-Christian tradition wrong? Are we to believe that something so sacred can be looked upon as a purely physical thing with no potential for emotional and psychological harm? And isn’t it the parents’ right to give counsel and advice to keep their children from making mistakes that may affect their entire lives?

Many of us in government would like to know what parents think about this intrusion in their family by government. We’re going to fight in the courts. The right of parents and the rights of family take precedence over those of Washington-based bureaucrats and social engineers.

But the fight against parental notification is really only one example of many attempts to water down traditional values and even abrogate the original terms of American democracy. Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. When our Founding Fathers passed the First Amendment, they sought to protect churches from government interference. They never intended to construct a wall of hostility between government and the concept of religious belief itself.

The evidence of this permeates our history and our government. The Declaration of Independence mentions the Supreme Being no less than four times. “In God We Trust” is engraved on our coinage. The Supreme Court opens its proceedings with a religious invocation. And the members of Congress open their sessions with a prayer. I just happen to believe the schoolchildren of the United States are entitled to the same privileges as Supreme Court justices and congressmen.

Last year, I sent the Congress a constitutional amendment to restore prayer to public schools. Already this session, there’s growing bipartisan support for the amendment, and I am calling on the Congress to act speedily to pass it and to let our children pray.

Perhaps some of you read recently about the Lubbock school case, where a judge actually ruled that it was unconstitutional for a school district to give equal treatment to religious and nonreligious student groups, even when the group meetings were being held during the students’ own time. The First Amendment never intended to require government to discriminate against religious speech.

Senators Denton and Hatfield have proposed legislation in the Congress on the whole question of prohibiting discrimination against religious forms of student speech. Such legislation could go far to restore freedom of religious speech for public school students. And I hope the Congress considers these bills quickly. And with your help, I think it’s possible we could also get the constitutional amendment through the Congress this year.

More than a decade ago, a Supreme Court decision literally wiped off the books of fifty states statutes protecting the rights of unborn children. Abortion on demand now takes the lives of up to one and a half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this tragedy will someday pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest until it does. Unless and until it can be proven that the unborn child is not a living entity, then its right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness must be protected.

You may remember that when abortion on demand began, many, and indeed, I’m sure many of you, warned that the practice would lead to a decline in respect for human life, that the philosophical premises used to justify abortion on demand would ultimately be used to justify other attacks on the sacredness of human life — infanticide or mercy killing. Tragically enough, those warnings proved all too true. Only last year a court permitted the death by starvation of a handicapped infant.

I have directed the Health and Human Services Department to make clear to every health care facility in the United States that the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects all handicapped persons against discrimination based on handicaps, including infants. And we have taken the further step of requiring that each and every recipient of federal funds who provides health care services to infants must post and keep posted in a conspicuous place a notice stating that “discriminatory failure to feed and care for handicapped infants in this facility is prohibited by federal law.” It also lists a twenty-four-hour; toll-free number so that nurses and others may report violations in time to save the infant’s life.

In addition, recent legislation introduced by — in the Congress by Representative Henry Hyde of Illinois not only increases restrictions on publicly financed abortions, it also addresses this whole problem of infanticide. I urge the Congress to begin hearings and to adopt legislation that will protect the right of life to all children, including the disabled or handicapped.

Now, I’m sure that you must get discouraged at times, but there you’ve done better than you know, perhaps. There’s a great spiritual awakening in America, a renewal of the traditional values that have been the bedrock of America’s goodness and greatness.

One recent survey by a Washington-based research council concluded that Americans were far more religious than the people of other nations; 95 percent of those surveyed expressed a belief in God and a huge majority believed the Ten Commandments had real meaning in their lives. And another study has found that an overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of adultery, teenage sex, pornography, abortion, and hard drugs. And this same study showed a deep reverence for the importance of family ties and religious belief.

I think the items that we’ve discussed here today must be a key part of the nation’s political agenda. For the first time the Congress is openly and seriously debating and dealing with the prayer and abortion issues and that’s enormous progress right there. I repeat: America is in the midst of a spiritual awakening and a moral renewal. And with your biblical keynote, I say today, “Yes, let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream.”

Now, obviously, much of this new political and social consensus I’ve talked about is based on a positive view of American history, one that takes pride in our country’s accomplishments and record. But we must never forget that no government schemes are going to perfect man. We know that living in this world means dealing with what philosophers would call the phenomenology of evil or, as theologians would put it, the doctrine of sin.

There is sin and evil in the world, and we’re enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might. Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country.

I know that you’ve been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment given us is clear and simple: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”

But whatever sad episodes exist in our past, any objective observer must hold a positive view of American history, a history that has been the story of hopes fulfilled and dreams made into reality. Especially in this century, America has kept alight the torch of freedom, but not just for ourselves but for millions of others around the world.

And this brings me to my final point today. During my first press conference as president, in answer to a direct question, I pointed out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas — that’s their name for religion — or ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.

Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates a historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.

This doesn’t mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial gain and which now proposes 50 percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom. We will never abandon our belief in God. And we will never stop searching for a genuine peace. But we can assure none of these things America stands for through the so-called nuclear freeze solutions proposed by some.

The truth is that a freeze now would be a very dangerous fraud, for that is merely the illusion of peace. The reality is that we must find peace through strength.

I would agree to a freeze if only we could freeze the Soviets’ global desires. A freeze at current levels of weapons would remove any incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously in Geneva and virtually end our chances to achieve the major arms reductions which we have proposed. Instead, they would achieve their objectives through the freeze.

A freeze would reward the Soviet Union for its enormous and unparalleled military buildup. It would prevent the essential and long overdue modernization of United States and allied defenses and would leave our aging forces increasingly vulnerable. And an honest freeze would require extensive prior negotiations on the systems and numbers to be limited and on the measures to ensure effective verification and compliance. And the kind of a freeze that has been suggested would be virtually impossible to verify. Such a major effort would divert us completely from our current negotiations on achieving substantial reductions.

A number of years ago, I heard a young father, a very prominent young man in the entertainment world, addressing a tremendous gathering in California. It was during the time of the cold war, and communism and our own way of life were very much on people’s minds. And he was speaking to that subject. And suddenly, though, I heard him saying, “I love my little girls more than anything.” And I said to myself, “Oh, no, don’t. You can’t — don’t say that.” But I had underestimated him. He went on: “I would rather see my little girls die now; still believing in God, than have them grow up under communism and one day die no longer believing in God.”

There were thousands of young people in that audience. They came to their feet with shouts of joy. They had instantly recognized the profound truth in what he had said, with regard to the physical and the soul and what was truly important.

Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness. Pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the State, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.

It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable Screw Tape Letters, wrote: “The greatest evil is not done now in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered; moved, seconded, carried and minuted in clear, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.”

Well, because these quiet men do not raise their voices, because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, they’re always making “their final territorial demand,” some would have us accept them at their word and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches that simpleminded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.

So, I urge you to speak out against those who would place the United States in a position of military and moral inferiority. You know, I’ve always believed that old Screw Tape reserved his best efforts for those of you in the Church. So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride –the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.

I ask you to resist the attempts of those who would have you withhold your support for our efforts, this administration’s efforts, to keep America strong and free, while we negotiate real and verifiable reductions in the world’s nuclear arsenals and one day, with God’s help, their total elimination.

While America’s military strength is important, let me add here that I’ve always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith.

Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western world exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism’s attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second-oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, “Ye shall be as gods.”

The Western world can answer this challenge, he wrote, “but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism’s faith in Man.”

I believe we shall rise to the challenge. I believe that communism is another sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last — last pages even now are being written. I believe this because the source of our strength in the quest for human freedom is not material, but spiritual. And because it knows no limitation, it must terrify and ultimately triumph over those who would enslave their fellow man. For in the words of Isaiah: “He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might He increased strength. But they that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary. “

Yes, change your world. One of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Paine, said, “We have it within our power to begin the world over again.” We can do it, doing together what no one church could do by itself.

God bless you and thank you very much.

sursa: americanrhetoric.com

Care este singura metoda de iesire din criza?

Majoritatea economistilor sunt de acord ca masurile de stimuli financiari, nemaintalnite in timp de pace, era neaparat necesar pentru scoaterea din recesiune atat a tarilor dezvoltate, cat si a celor emergente, crezand ca si strategia de exit va fi simpla.

Insa acest lucru nu este posibil, neexistand metode usoare de a renunta la pachetele de stimuli, fara efecte negative importante, crede analistul Martin Wolf.

Trebuie luat in considerare faptul ca sectorul privat cheltuie, in prezent, mult mai putin decat castiga. Astfel, potrivit Organizatiei pentru Cooperare si Dezvoltare Economica (OCDE), in sase tari dintre statele membre - Olanda, Elvetia, Suedia, Japonia, Marea Britanie si Irlanda - sectorul privat va avea un surplus ce va reprezenta 10% din produsul intern brut, in acest an.

De asemenea, in alte 13 tari, surplusul se va situa intre 5 si 10% din PIB, Statele Unite avand 7,3%, iar zona euro 6,7%. Per total, tarile OCDE vor avea un surplus de 7,4% din PIB.

Nu in ultimul rand, deficitele bugetare au crescut ametitor in ultimii ani, iar, daca guvernele ar fi incercat sa le mentina sub control in timpul recesiunii, criza ar fi devenit cel putin la fel de grava precum cea din anii 1930.

Prin urmare, ce strategie de exit am putea adopta, se intreaba Martin Wolf, intr-un comentariu pentru Financial Times.

O mare parte din raspuns se afla in faptul ca dezvoltarea economica din ultimii 30 de ani s-a bazat pe asa-numitele “baloane”. La baza lor s-a aflat creditarea masiva, un balon care s-a spart in 2008. Acesta este motivul din cauza caruia cheltuielile mediului privat au implodat, iar deficitele fiscale au explodat.

Potrivit lui William White, fost economist sef la Bank for International Settlements, bancile centrale au mentinut ratele dobanzii de politica monetara la un nivel scazut pentru prea mult timp, rezultand intr-o explozie a creditelor, dar si a deficitelor.

Pe langa credite, a exista un balon al imobiliarelor si al bursei, un dezechilibru al bilanturilor din sectorul financiar si o expunere prea mare la risc.

Desi nu numai politicile fiscale au fost de vina pentru recesiune, ele au avut un rol foarte important. Indiferent, acest lucru trebuia sa aiba un sfarsit, care s-a manifestat sub forma recesiunii.

Dupa implozie, au ramas doar doua alternative: succesul sau esecul. Prin succes se intelege reluarea creditarii in tarile cu venituri mari. Astfel, sectorul privat va reinncepe sa cheltuie, iar deficitele fiscale se vor miscora.

Pe de alta parte, esecul ar insemna sa nu existe cheltuieli, iar deficitele fiscale ar fi din ce in ce mai mari, pentru o perioada de timp mai lunga decat ne-am putea imagina.

Pentru a scapa de problema datoriilor, fara a intra in colaps, ar trebui fie majorate investitiile publice, fie o crestere a cererii din partea tarilor emergente.

Acest lucru ar presupune regandirea intregului sistem. In tari precum Marea Britanie si Statele Unite, ar exista un deficit fiscal pentru o perioada indelungata, dar si investitii masive. De asemenea, tarile bogate ar fi nevoite sa investeasca pe pietele emergente.

Din pacate, nimeni nu este pregatit pentru o astfel de strategie, crede analistul, toata lumea sperand ca lucrurile vor reveni la “normalul” de dinainte de criza. Dar acest lucru nu mai este posibil si nici nu ar trebui sa se intample.

Cu exceptia Chinei, care are nevoie doar de consum mai mare, restul tarilor ar trebui sa investeasca masiv, atat in mediul privat, cat si cel public. Astfel, s-ar evita cresterea economica bazata pe credite, care s-a dovedit a fi nesustenabila.

Tratatul dispretului fata de cetatean

Guvernul a gasit reteta miraculoasa a iesirii Romaniei din criza asta blestemata. Reducerea cheltuielilor publice. Cu orice pret. Austeritatea a devenit de la inceputul anului cuvantul de ordine al unei Puteri ce se indeparteaza in fiecare zi de nevoile populatiei. Nu mai exista niciun dram de responsabilitate, de decenta, de intelegere a realitatii in care traim. Jugul fiscalitatii inchide firmele una dupa alta. Numarul somerilor creste vertiginos. Pensiile si alocatiile au devenit bataia de joc a guvernantilor. Acolo, la Palatul Victoria, se testeaza rezistenta romanilor. Dar daca am taia alocatiile copiilor din familiile instarite? Daca am impozita toate pensiile, nu numai pe cele speciale? Voci razlete se aud din interiorul Guvernului. Nu exista o consultare prealabila cu colegii din executiv, nu ia nimeni in calcul faptul ca, poate, la auzul acestor ineptii, inimile multor pensionari incep sa bata mai repede. Cui foloseste, domnilor guvernanti, aceasta bataie de joc continua la adresa parintilor, copiilor si bunicilor nostri? Cine va da dreptul sa calcati in picioare ultimul strop de demnitate al unei largi plaje de categorii sociale?

Dispretul guvernarii se regaseste la tot pasul. In drama pensionarilor, profesorilor, functionarilor publici, minerilor, ceferistilor, angajatilor din sistemul privat. Destine umane sunt strivite in lupte politice absurde, ce nu servesc decat orgoliilor si intereselor liderilor. Povara neajunsurilor duce la situatii dramatice. Tineri si batrani renunta la viata, scufundati in probleme pe care le considera fara rezolvare. Nu cred ca vreunul dintre guvernantii actuali - in frunte cu Boc, Berceanu, Udrea, Videanu sau Blaga - a incercat vreo clipa sa se puna in locul unui parinte, proaspat disponibilizat, care nu are ce pune pe masa copiilor sai. Acolo, in lumea Puterii, a celor influenti care se amagesc ca au dreptul de a decide cu o singura semnatura soarta a zeci de mii de oameni, criza se vede in alt mod. Totul se reduce la cifre statistice, la obligatia “prostimii” de a mai strange inca o data si inca o data cureaua.

Ei nu vor renunta niciodata, de bunavoie, la privilegii, imunitate, la statutul de demnitar. Vor continua sa rezolve criza prin discursuri demagogice, tinand strans de haturile guvernarii. Sedintele de guvern au devenit locul in care se afiseaza ceasuri de zeci de mii de euro si genti de firma. Pe de alta parte, cand averea personala sau a familiei depaseste cu mult posibilitatile unui bugetar ca tine, chiar cu salariu de ministru sau parlamentar, incepi sa te temi. De pierderea Puterii, a privilegiilor, de faptul ca fara imunitate poti fi somat sa dai explicatii. Pe care, din pacate, nu le ai. Asa ca te prinzi in continuare in hora murdara a compromisurilor politice. Joci la doua capete. Incerci sa te pliezi in functie de conjunctura. Notiunea de clasa politica a fost aruncata in derizoriu de politicienii ultimilor 20 de ani. Compromisa iremediabil, clasa politica ar trebui sa se recunoasca invinsa. In fata propriilor obsesii de marire. De altfel, alesii nu inceteaza sa scrie, in fiecare zi, inca un rand si inca unul la tratatul dispretului fata de cetatean…

Iulian Badea
sursa: cronicaromana.ro

Evoluţie spre nicăieri….

Experţii şi oamenii de ştiinţă ai zilelor noastre încearcă în mod tot mai disperat, să găsească răspunsurile lumii: din ce s-a format specia umană, spre ce vom evolua şi mai ales ce fel de concept reprezentăm? Răspunsurile vin bineînţeles de la aceiaşi inşi, care reuşesc astfel să ridice confuzia umanităţii la limite. De fiecare dată când desluşesc un răspuns plauzibil, care să ne explice enigmele existenţei noastre, aceiaşi experţi dau iarăşi totul peste cap şi născocesc o nouă sumedenie de întrebări fără răspuns şi alte teorii de neînţeles.

Cu toate că adesea dăm crezare acestor teorii excentrice şi ne imaginăm cum de este posibil să fi fost formaţi din lut sau să provenim din cimpanzei, iată că totuşi trăim o viaţă reală – sau poate nu – în care ne lăsăm ghidaţi de „minunăţiile“ create tot de noi, simpli muritori.
Ultima tendinţă în ceea ce priveşte evoluţia omului sau chiar soarta lui este „teoria anului 2012“, care ne explică rar şi cu litere de o şchioapă că peste vreo doi ani de zile ne vom transforma, cu tot cu lumea în care trăim în altceva….Întrebarea este: în ce ne-am mai putea transforma? De nenumărate milenii suntem la fel, cu excepţia faptului că omul şi-a mai schimbat coafura, a învăţat ce e igiena, a inventat câte ceva (spre exemplu cum să distrugă natura şi cum să îşi folosească tot mai puţin forţa fizică pentru a supravieţui), şi-a mai mobilizat creierul şi a inventat chestii revoluţionare, iar acum iată că tot minunatul om spune că în anul 2012 îşi va schimba AND-ul şi numaidecât lumea.

La fel ca şi acum sute de mii de ani, necesităţile noastre sunt aceleaşi – avem nevoie de aer, hrană, adăpost, reproducere şi uneori de afecţiune. Diferenţa este că acum avem nevoie şi de ce nu avem nevoie: foarte multă bogăţie materială, care bineînţeles nu se va transforma cu noi cînd vom muri, în nimic.

Bineînţeles, este de luat în considerare că de-a lungul mileniilor omul şi-a chinuit creierul spre a ajunge la mai mult şi chiar a reuşit, dar există o oarecare enigmă la mijloc. Dacă am evoluat atât de mult, dacă viaţa omului a devenit atât de modernă ca în prezent, atunci de ce spiritul omului, aş spune, a devenit atât de superficial? Ne hrănim spiritul cu tot felul de concepte negative, care sunt adevăratele distrugătoare sau schimbătoare ale omenirii. Omul a descoperit tehnologia, arta, sportul sau studiile din dorinţa de a crea moduri de încântare a spiritului, dar nu a inventat prostituţia, terorismul sau bolile din aceeaşi dorinţă.

Natura umană reprezintă îmbinare de bine şi mai puţin bine, dar oare partea de 80% a creierului nostru, care nu este folosită, ce ascunde? Lucruri negative sau pozitive? Răspunsul acestei întrebări se află probabil tot la experţii în ale omenirii, care mai mult ca sigur ar spune că partea accea misterioasă a creierului uman va face lumea în care trăim, un Rai pe Pământ. Părerea mea este alta – se pare, după cum se prezintă oamenii din jurul nostru, că partea aceea nu ne va aduce fericirea mult căutată, sau mai bine zis, nu pe cea spirituală. Inventarea de noi tehnologii va fi un adevărat fleac – maşini, avioane, super aparaturi cu care vom colinda prin infinitul Cosmos vor fi floare la ureche. Concomitent cu acestea va creşte şi superficialitatea şi prostia omului. Criminalitatea şi violenţa vor atinge cote tot mai mari iar competiţia interumană va fi una de-a dreptul materială, lipsită de valori reale.

Se poate sesiza cu ochiul liber că omul nu mai dă doi bani pe competenţele şi valorile semenilor lui, ba chiar îşi canalizează existenţa pe lucruri lipsite de sens şi valoare, dar pline de egoism, în condiţiile în care inteligenţa noastră este în evoluţie. Dar oare, nu puţina spiritualitate trează a „omului modern“ crează haosul de astăzi? Majoritatea oamenilor sunt la fel, trăiesc aproximativ în aceeaşi lume, dar speranţa omenirii creşte în momentul în care unii semeni de-ai noştri crează „revoluţii“ şi noutăţi. Trăind într-o lume care nu ne satisface în profunzimea naturii noastre, inventăm şi descoperim refugii care mai de care mai excentrice, spre exemplu, drogurile, alcoolul sau arta modernă în diversele ei forme.

În afară de acestea, căutând disperat printre exponatele fără de sensibilitate din jurul său, omul a început de curînd aă îşi mai preţuiască semenii, fapt destul de rar totuşi. Nevoia de a fi mai bun decât toţi ceilalţi nu a pălit, însă defularea spiritelor noastre se mai întâmplă din când în când – unii îşi mai iubesc apropiaţii, foarte puţini mai se gândesc şi la semenii suferinzi, dar toţi – absolut toţi privesc la tragediile prezentate de mass-media, cu o oarecare mulţumire în priviri. Îi condamnăm pe cei care greşesc dar nu ne condamnăm pe noi, care prin simplul fapt că urmărim pasiv aceste evenimente negative, le alimentăm continuitatea.

Câteva suflete rătăcite îşi permit, din când în când să iasă din comun şi trezesc celorlalţi sentimente de milă sau rareori admiraţie, în fond falsă. Vorbele exprimă trăiri pozitive dar oare gândurile exprimă aceleaşi tipuri de trăiri? Pictori de geniu, muzicieni valoroşi, scriitori inovativi, sportivi de performanţă sau pur şi simplu oameni de bine există şi astăzi, dar prea puţin ne interesează de ei pentru că mai mult îndrăgim violenţa şi necazul altora.
De câte ori nu vedem programe în care scandalurile şi ura sunt la ordinea zilei? De câte ori vedem campanii pozitive, dedicate semenilor noştri sau programe dedicate celor deosebiţi? În fiecare clipă a vieţii noastre…dar asupra cărora ne oprim? Asupra primelor desigur, pentru că avem nevoie să îi judecăm pe alţii, pe când faptele noastre lasă de dorit.

Acţiunile noastre care nu dau satisfacţie spirituală nici nouă înşine, nici celor din jur, nu vor duce la o adevărată evoluţie, dar mai există speranţe. Se pare că, de curând oamenii puternici ai lumii au dat „lege“ scrisă şi nescrisă că trebuie să luptăm din greu pentru salvarea lumii noastre dragi, după ce am reuşit să o distrugem. Mii de manifestanţi de prin toată lumea s-au adunat grămadă la Copenhaga să strige cât pot ei de tare că trebuie să salvăm lumea. Da, trebuie salvată dar va fi foarte greu pentru că reconstruirea unui lucru distrus este o mare dificultate. Din prostia-i caracteristică, omul „a dat foc“ la tot petrolul, cărbunele, gazul şi lemnul din lume, iar cu „fumul şi cenuşa“ lor nu a făcut altceva decât să distrugă întreaga natură şi pe el însuşi.

Soluţia este să ne luăm toţi de mână, să ne folosim minţile şi să refacem planeta, înainte să rămânem cu maşinării ultra moderne şi fără aer de respirat. Câţi dintre oameni vor face acest lucru este destul de greu de apreciat, însă cert este că rezultatul acţiunilor noastre necugetate se răsfrâng grav asupra noastră şi majoritatea specimenelor umane nu prea realizează aceste lucruri, ba chiar dau vina pe altceva, cel mai adesea Dumnezeu, spunând „asta este voia lui Dumnezeu“, fiind uşor de-a dreptul să nu îţi asumi propriile acte.
Alarmant este faptul că nu ne dă nimeni certitudinea că vom reuşi să refacem ceea ce am distrus, nici măcar marii experţi, care se declară sceptici cu privire la noile idei.

Totuşi, primii paşi ai evoluţiei noastre, după simpla-mi părere ar fi să încetăm a fi inutili comunităţii în care trăim. Inutili nu înseamnă că nu muncim, sau că nu creăm ceva, ci pasivitatea care o manifestăm faţă de realităţile fiinţei umane. Decât să privim intens captaţi de nimic, la falsele valori ce apar pe la televizor, mai bine ne-am deschide ochii, minţile şi sufletele la suferinţele şi necesităţile oamenilor de lângă noi. În cazul în care pragmatismul şi altruismul lipsesc cu desăvârşire în identitatea noastră, atunci mai bine ne canalizăm existenţa pe lucruri care să nu dăuneze nici oamenilor, nici lumii.
Materialul este indispensabil dar totuşi nu atât de important – poate fi îmbinat cu spiritualitatea şi astfel omul poate evolua armonios. Măsurarea propriilor acţiuni este cheia omenirii, dar care deocamdată nu este posedată de foarte mulţi dintre noi.
Unele negativităţi ar trebui să dispară definitiv din habitatul nostru însă fără de ele nu am putea cântări corect lucrurile, aşa că sunt necesare într-o oarecare măsură. Important este ca omul acestor vremuri să realizeze limitele pe care singur şi natura i le impune, astfel încât să poată transforma negativ în pozitiv, lucru aproape imposibil momentan.

În simpla noastră ţărişoară, cu oameni la fel de simpli în gândire se petrec lucruri destul de stranii – tinerii au învăţat ce este emanciparea şi creativitatea, o atmosferă cu iz de evoluţie. Oameni care fac umbră pământului există la fiecare pas, dar printre ei există (şi mă bucură nespus acest lucru), români valoroşi, care pun bază pe esenţa reală a lucrurilor lumeşti, dar pe aceştia nu îi vom vedea prea des la televizor, pentru că nu au loc de mulţimea de bogătani hoţi lipsiţi de onestitate şi de prostimea tinerească bolnavă de vedetism.

De apreciat este că există aceşti oameni, în contextul în care societatea încă mai încurajează evoluţia falsă spre cocalari şi pitzipoance. Oamenii aceştia – „ciudaţii“ societăţii realizează minusurile sau plusurile fiinţei umane şi mai scriu o carte (adevărată), crează o muzică „hrănitoare“ de mesaje, pictează o sumbră trăire, întâmplare sau dau o mână de hrană unui copil orfan sau unui bătrân fără puteri.
Evoluţia omului nu va consta în tehnologii nemaivăzute, ci în puterea unora dintre noi de a ne uni cu cei diferiţi de noi. Nu toţi oamenii au puterea sau conştiinţa de a fi raţionali şi deschişi la „durerile“ lumii, dar ceilalţi care au aceste puteri au obligaţia morală de a reconstrui umanitatea, deci omenirea. Faptul că nu putem deţine controlul total asupra evenimentelor este un lucru evident, dar minţile noastre şi mai ales spiritul pot munci laolaltă pentru a îndrepta măcar câteva din multele deficite cu care ne confruntăm în fiecare clipă a existenţei noastre.

Spre ce ne îndreptăm nu putem ştii pentru că întreaga omenire decide, dar individualitatea poate controla oarecum acest proces. Viaţa unui om este mult prea limitată pentru a întoarce lumea cu susul în jos, dar munca fiecăruia dintre noi va determina schimbarea viitoarelor generaţii, poate spre bine. Refuzând superficialitatea, încurajăm evoluţia omului în sine, astfel că dintr-o evoluţie spre nicăieri, vom putea trasa liniile pentru o evoluţie spre ceva.