blair clinton

I lost a neighbour in NATO bombing of Serbia. She was a nice lady. She used to give me candies.. I was 6 years old, but I’ll never forget her, or the day we lost her. She was a good person. And this world needs good persons, and NOT rich people, who will destroy your country, turn you against each other, for geopolitical interests… for money.

We are all humans, and not a single country on this world, or nation, should be demonized because of politicians, or by them.  

theguardian.com
Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems
Financial meltdown, environmental disaster and even the rise of Donald Trump – neoliberalism has played its part in them all. Why has the left failed to come up with an alternative?
By George Monbiot

Imagine if the people of the Soviet Union had never heard of communism. The ideology that dominates our lives has, for most of us, no name. Mention it in conversation and you’ll be rewarded with a shrug. Even if your listeners have heard the term before, they will struggle to define it. Neoliberalism: do you know what it is?

Its anonymity is both a symptom and cause of its power. It has played a major role in a remarkable variety of crises: the financial meltdown of 2007‑8, the offshoring of wealth and power, of which the Panama Papers offer us merely a glimpse, the slow collapse of public health and education, resurgent child poverty, the epidemic of loneliness, the collapse of ecosystems, the rise of Donald Trump. But we respond to these crises as if they emerge in isolation, apparently unaware that they have all been either catalysed or exacerbated by the same coherent philosophy; a philosophy that has – or had – a name. What greater power can there be than to operate namelessly?

“Inequality is recast as virtuous. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve.”

So pervasive has neoliberalism become that we seldom even recognise it as an ideology. We appear to accept the proposition that this utopian, millenarian faith describes a neutral force; a kind of biological law, like Darwin’s theory of evolution. But the philosophy arose as a conscious attempt to reshape human life and shift the locus of power.

(Continue Reading)

Is it just me or could it be that there is a certain phenomenon emerging?

So I’m watching stuff and following people who often represent more conservative opinions. I don’t support everything they say, often I think that they’re leaning into the other direction too much but I think they make lots of valid points. Which I feel somewhat sets me aside in the Hillary fancorner and makes some question my credibility.
Now if I move around the conservative realm and talk to people, chances are they are a 100% against Hillary and expressing that in quite a rude, often aggressive way. So I end up defending her a lot, thus losing credibility “on the other side” and people question why I’m even there.

Now I wonder - could it be that we’re steering towards things mixing up more so that discerning between the different spectrums becomes more difficult? Because I would welcome that a lot, it would hopefully mean that at some point we can focus on our mutual humanness again instead of putting everybody in matching categories. I’m of the conviction that we can only solve our current crisis if we work together as humans and not jump at each other’s throats constantly over being left and right and gay and trans and straight and rich and poor and black and white.

So maybe the fact that Blaire White is trans and more or less conservative at the same time is such a forerunner, the fact that Milo Yiannopoulos is a gay points into the same direction and Ben Shapiro being Jewish as well.
We have the leader of the leftist party here in Germany who is on quite a different stance on the refugee issue than her comrades and getting hate for that, even “Nazi” calls.
I’m sorry but this kind of thinking is ridiculous.

Now don’t tell me how bad most of the people I mentioned are, I never said I don’t find them controversial, I never said I support how they behave in certain respects. And please - the leading figures on both sides deserve to be called out on their questionable convictions.

BUT my point is that maybe this mixing of interests and beliefs is a good thing because it points into a new direction and it most obviously makes each “side” question the honesty of their proclaimed values and convictions.
The future won’t be division.