Comments
start page
(Original) German version!
- Greek crisis, Mai 15th, 2011
- Military reform, Mai 18, 2011
- Update crisis in Greece, Mai 28, 2011
- Tempelhof at Sundayg, Oktober 15, 2011
- Time of Anger, Oktober 17, 2011
- Hellas! June 17, 2012
- Theory of War, February 03, 2013
- Men and The Jungle, February 03, 2013
- Majority Rule Decision, February 03, 2013
- The Man as a Hermit Crab - the debate about the doctorates, February 10, 2013
- Parallel worlds, September 22, 2013
- Holiness, October 26, 2014
- The people (Ganz am Rande), March 06, 2016
- Transcendent Hellenic, January 14/21, 2017
My comment on the greek affair: Let the Greeks have their own currency AND support the country THEN in every respect.
Simply said: I am against any injustice, prerogatives, especially in military. If you love your country, you should serve - if in military or any other kind of duty service, a limited time of course. Military service for everyman (and woman) is a more honest decision to maintain consciousness about, that war could come - to this place. To have a international fire brigade create it as a separate unit, please.
Halfheartedness in the European mamooth decision finding concerning the Greek crisis. Greek be aware of your futute!
Airport Tempelhof is now not in non-operating state and now it is ... a beautiful place in the midst of Berlin, a pasture, where the sky is high, where you could almost forget, that around you are the ugly, concrete buildings rising high and the pitted streets of Berlin (ok I am LITTLE bit exaggerating)..
A vote for national parliaments, against centralism without checks and balances.
Greeks on the continent and on the islands made their choice: Throw away your old bad habits!
Thinking about War, this is the title of a book by B. Heusel. Reading the 19th century authors is horrible, how could people write such nonsense? The conclusions seem to be incredible instable in terms of politics and all of these authors seem to be a little bit offended.
I have a lot of pity with the pymeans in cameroon. If I could only talk to them, I would recommend, that they should rather fight than surrender. This means, they should gather together, organize themselves, and should giving up their way of life - temporarily, which could be months or years. Until the mission is accomplished: To save THEIR forests!
The review by Hedwig Richter (German Newspaper FAZ, January 15 2013) on Egon Flaig´s "Die Mehrheitsentscheidung" (2013): I disagree with the reviewer. I think she did not catch the point. This is not about believing or not, what he is talking about, and complaining that he does not write enough about equality. It IS about equality. Mr Flaig shows, that his case is logical and true, surprisingly! Surprisingly, because so a very very limited number of societies grasped this entirely. The truth is not easily to be accepted. This is not about your private life, but about, what you owe society, but no, this is about your private live, because you you get, what society owes you and you get it!. How this? Just decide by majority. Why or how, you may ask? Well, read the book!
So I think, personal titles should be a more private distinction. This is a little about good or bad manners, about decency. But it is not decent to remain silent, where foolery and insolence are predominant. It is an abusement and unfairness to agree in that, that he should be preferred for any kind of job, who is just having a special kind of academic degree and nothing else. Taking this for granted is pure vanity and flattery and a true wise man would retract himself from this mistake as fast as possible; at least he would think about it, and would raise some concerns.
Leadership and being an expert are two very different cases. Many Germans do not grasp this distinction, I am afraid. I would arguing almost the contrary is the case: If you have a doctorate, you are an expert in analyzing and arguing, but not in managament decision, where you need to have an eye on very much things all at once, keep cool in any circumstances and the ability to back down, when it would be otherwise a waste of time. But may be it is the quest for the perfect man, or the Faustian quest, which will not stop the ambitious man to become a modern equivalent to this indeed very pitiful person. It would be better to remember some ancient myth, e.g. Icarus or the overambitious Agamemnon. Many other examples could be found in history, but does anybody care about THIS today?
So, while a true scholar would not care about being called a hermit crab, a true manager would certainly. But some hermit crabs like to have some very-well paid vacancy and cooperate, if society does not care about, who is doing the job. Disaster may be waiting...
The swiss newspaper NZZ recently (19th September) published a detailed analysis by Dirk Meyer, an economist at Helmut-Schmidt-University Hamburg about parallel currencies in the Euro Monetary Union. It is a concise description of what has to be done to achieve, what would be in my opinion the best solution of the Greek crisis. Unfortunately - as the text does not include any section about the political relevance of this viewpoint - I conclude this is just another theory. Why? Do the Greeks not suffering enough? Does nobody believe, what Mr Meyer is telling us? Yes, you have to be a committed fighter to do a step like this: Introducing a local currency, while maintaining some Euro accounts. Does this not mean the frightful thing "Exit from the Eurozone"? Yes, you have to be both a seasoned economist and a tough politician to go for this solution. As it seems, such men or women are not easily found at the European leadership seats. Mr Samaras, try to think hard about it, may be you find some followers in France or England to help you soon. Or you risk to be kicked off from the desk, where you are currently sitting!
As time passes on, second world war academics are more and more tempted to elaborate on academic work already done. But is this of any help? The truth should be: The only mental sources which should be in their mind: - the question they want to face, and the questions which come into mind after researching their first questions. - the sources, which are to be read I admit is not easily done, may be they just want to hide the most important information themselves, but there is no other choice. And only then may be to read conclusions of others. So may be the academic does research about the same question another academic has already tried to answer and he comes to the same solution. Is his work worthless? I think no. In the middle ages there was the custom that many witnesses set their personal seal on a document. One could ask: Why not just one? It is to strengthen the worth of the document, of course. An the same is true in academics. May be the way, how historians conclude certains statement should be well documented and published like sometimes manifesto are published today and signed by others. But this should be transparent.
So this is a long introduction for the short sentence I just want to say: I have a desire to make saintly people become humans again. Why this? Just the holiness is a step to let people shut up. And not only this, but to let people stop thinking first about this person except as a holiness, and second about the certain question behind it. Which becomes clear, considering, that a holy person is a saint, because he has given an ideal answer to a special question. Ok, this is my view.
Democracy should be kind of a fluidum, a jellyfish mastering the undulations or a catamaran floating on the currents. I came to one definition, which helps me to understand the strange behaviours of people around me, not my colleagues, but some people, who like to be or are appointed to be masters. I suspect, that power is the strange thing, or somehow the reason behind, why people behave ultimately irrational. But power is necessary to get things done.What does democracy, or better the idea of it, help here? Organizations need to be hierarchical or not? But if democracy is indeed a universal principle, it is worth some effort, to think more about it, about the reason, why it is so powerful. How does democracy succeed in managing power? This could only be a short introduction to the German version text. Short: To shield democracy and society from the disastrocities of crazy power mismanagement, only awareness helps, and only careful education could remedies it. The reason, why power management becomes inefficient at least, is not understanding the nature of power and how to control it given the humane nature. In one sentence: Share it between all the people, and yield it only a short time to persons, who have internalized, that the power of power is managed the best way this way.
I write this article in English, as it makes for me a difference writing in another language. Especially the English language helps me to really think of talking to another person, which might have a different opinion, but also willing to discuss some strange things. The reason might be just kind off a mental association, I don´t know.
I today just considered, how my viewpoints changed in the last years. I think, I became less naive (hopefully), but unavoidably more sarcastic. To reconsider it again, I just loosed faith. Having a classical and Christian education it may seem that all the efforts in becoming kind of a obedient follower was inefficient and having a stoic or philosophical background was entirely devoured by reality. Thinking again this is not true, if I imagine the person behind the sentences mentioned in the bible (NT) and the time, when this person lived. Especially one sentence "to love his enemies", seems to be inherently kind of a bold truth. The statement seems to be flawless and of the outmost truth in "this area". But what kind of area? This is not about physicist´s natural laws, and not necessarily a doubtless religious "law" "only", but this is about human happiness - or desaster. And as it´s not about religious truth - this is really a much more difficult area - there is still a quite lot of truth in this sentence (as an example). It´s a real human or classical statement, just like from a extraordinary Greek philosopher.
© Georg Kallidis gkallidis dot gmx dot de