Just art, nothing more, nothing less?
January 16, 2009
(11 votes, average: 4.45 out of 5)
Loading ...
Everyone is talking about Entropa, the artwork dominating the entrance of the Council building in Brussels since a few days ago. (Max Kaye also commented on it in my previous post). The interactive map of Europe plays with stereotypes of the 27 EU member states and had given rise to controversy even before its inauguration yesterday. I understand that Bulgaria is not happy about being depicted as a Turkish toilet and Slovakia is upset about having turned into a Hungarian sausage. Neither is Finland being a drunken man affected by alcohol to the extent that he is hallucinating about exotic animals a flattering portrait of a country. But I couldn’t help but smile when seeing some of the country constructions, hinting at a national trait that has been largely exaggerated, while wildly using the stereotypical images that neighbouring countries have of each other: Denmark built completely in Lego, France with a big banner across it reading “Grève” (Strike) and Spain completely covered in concrete. And the UK is nowhere to be seen…
According to the artist, David Černý from the Czech Republic, the artwork was an experiment to see “whether Europe has the ability to laugh at itself”. So can we do this? Can we manage not to take ourselves so seriously, and look at ourselves from a distance? Exaggeration with a hint of the absurd and the unexpected is, after all, the basis of humour. I welcome this kind of provocative depiction of Europe – it is new and refreshing and, above all, it generates a discussion across cultures and countries! Judging by this, Entropa is a success. After all, how many pieces of art in Brussels have triggered such a wide discussion throughout Europe?
Check out the different country images and explanations here!
Print This Post
Email This Post
RSS comments feed on this entry
January 16th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
“According to the artist, David Černý from the Czech Republic, the artwork was an experiment to see “whether Europe has the ability to laugh at itself”
EUrope is certainly laughable but, overall, I’d say we’re still laughing at each other…
January 16th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
I don’t know Ms. Wallstrom - this kind of seems a little insensitive. In America there’s a saying that goes “there’s no such thing as a positive stereotype.” Now I don’t know how I feel about that, but I don’t think displays like the one y’all have at the Council build bridges that help Europeans communicate. If something can justifiably alienate other people, why pursue it?
Put another way, do the (exaggerated) cultural stereotypes of the display help build a stronger Europe? Do they alienate more people than they engage? In my mind, Entropa may hurt more than help.
That being said, “Grève” made me laugh out loud too ^_^
January 16th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Dear Margot,
January 16th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
(I’m not sure why my hyperlinks are not working. Is it me or the new site?)
January 17th, 2009 at 12:04 am
“whether Europe has the ability to laugh at itself”
I didn’t see Europe.
January 17th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Margot said: “Judging by this, Entropa is a success. After all, how many pieces of art in Brussels have triggered such a wide discussion throughout Europe?”
But it’s mainly discussions of Entropa, its impertinence, etc., rather than anything about Europe as a union. The latter itself may be represented by that rigid, simple-form metal (?) construction of blue colour that mechanically links together grotesque Entropa’s countries, each one “unhappy in its own way”. Well, it’s a basically correct image, after all (even including the apparently missing monster’s head!), though being again a rather sad - too realistic! - humour (understandable as it’s Czech humour!). What’s optimistic about the whole image is that they had dared something unofficial and even “impolite”, the New Europe authorities, while it would be difficult to imagine anything but some politically correct and “nice” welcome actions from the still formally dominating “hardcore” EU brands. Getting too old, friends? So maybe it’s time to change the whole framework?! To something more human and less rigid, while some of us still have some energy, at least for a bad joke…
January 18th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
It is a perfect laugh, and your positive and relaxed attitude towards this piece of art and the discussions around it is very pleasing compared to some other reactions!
January 18th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Commissioner Wallstrom,
how about this for an art: your weddingring dropped by parachute. And by ‘your weddingring’ I mean how to do things originally in general. Despite the risk of getting your weddingband on your nextdoor neighbor’s doorstep. Affing exciting to get it back! “No, it’s mine,” and “No, it’s mine,” that sort of thing.
I like the Romanian piece. And the one of Spain. Lots of concreteness is general demand. And a dracula with lots of hidden male expression is always fascinating. So much different from a male dominant face of monogamy.
M.C.Taytelbaum.
January 18th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Well I think it`s disrepectful to the Krauts, Cloggies,Eggersheggerdras, Bubbles,Pork and Cheeses, Daygoes,etc to stereotype them like that.He should know that the Frogs dont have a sense of humour and the Romanians will try to nick it.
January 18th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Margot,
Hooray! Someone in the Commission (you) appears to have a sense of humour. Unfortunately you seem to be the only one as yet.
I found the initial Po faced official reaction far more true to type, but it seems that even the EU aparatchiks may realise how stupid they are beginning to look & hence the apparent volte face.
regards
geoff
January 19th, 2009 at 1:23 am
I think it’s a good piece of art. Art should provocate, challenge, make us think, ask our selves questions we didn’t dare to do before. IMHO, if I had worked on this piece, everybody would be a hell of a lot more upset
January 19th, 2009 at 2:45 am
Hello Margot,
January 19th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Entropa is a wonderful visual satire.
January 19th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Černý can say what he likes, and he will. But that’s the beauty of art — one can talk complete bollox about it and be taken seriously by ‘intellectuals’ just as long as what one says is reasonably articulate and contains a smattering big words.
But the plain fact here is that this work of ‘art’ is the Czechs sticking two fingers up to the EU. It’s a straight piss take. So it’s no wonder the europhiliac creeps are upset by it.
I give the Czechs douze points. Well done, boys. Stuff the EU and its sensibilities.
And Margot’s response here? Well, that’s just a piss weak attempt at damage limitation, nothing more. “Let’s pretend we don’t care. We have thick skins.” Right. Huh.
You don’t believe me? Well, the euroweenies are VERY sensitive about their supposed dignity. Remember the screaming-girlie reaction to the Lisbon-constitution/referendum chicken stunt in the so-called european parliament? A sense of humour? NO WAY. An overblown sense of their own self-importance more like.
Černý should have added a dog pissing on the ring of yellow stars as an accompanying piece.
January 19th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Joe,
Are you now banning all my comments now?
Anyway, here’s something to warm the cockles of your heart?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/globalbusiness/4285331/Help-Ireland-or-it-will-exit-euro-economist-warns.html
Quote:
Help Ireland or it will exit euro, economist warns
A leading Irish economist has called on Dublin to threaten withdrawal from the euro unless Europe’s big powers do more to rescue Ireland’s economy.
“This is war: countries have to defend themselves,” said David McWilliams, a former official at the Irish central bank.
“It is essential that we go to Europe and say we have a serious problem. We say, either we default or we pull out of Europe,” he told RTE radio.
“If Ireland continues hurtling down this road, which is close to default, the whole of Europe will be badly affected. The credibility of the euro will be badly affected. Then Spain might default, Italy and Greece,” he said.
Mr McWilliams, a former UBS director and now prominent broadcaster, has broken the ultimate taboo by evoking threats to precipitate an EMU crisis, which would risk a chain reaction across the eurozone’s southern belt, where yield spreads on state bonds are already flashing warning signals. The comments reflect growing bitterness in Dublin over the way the country has been treated after voting against the EU’s Lisbon Treaty.
“If we have a single currency there are obligations and responsibilities on both sides. The idea that Germany and France can just hang us out to dry, as has been the talk in the last couple of days should not be taken lying down,” he said.
January 19th, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Entropa is just YAWM (Yet Another Waste of Money).
January 19th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
getting popularity for the sake of popularity should be something from the realm of celebrities, not of institutions that are trying to achieve credibility and trust. therefore, I just don’t buy the argument that it is success, because it created noise. this argument seems rather shallow.
playing with popular stereotypes is not really what the author is doing as some incredibly strong stereotypes are very much absent, e.g. why Italy is not related to mafia or Danmark as porn or why not Germany as facsist; obviously political correctness is not an issue and it would have been much better fitting the dark joke on other countries. and there are many countries about which neither the locals, nor their neighbours can understand the meaning of the ‘joke’, e.g. Hungary and a line of others. therefore, this stereotype is either rather private for the author or he simply ran out of ideas.
I guess that if it is ok to laugh at stereotypes even if they are offending to the others, it should also be ok to laugh about stereotypes about any different groups. shall we also start with the jokes about Roma, Jews, black people, women, you name it? and if anyone is not laughing, we can say ‘you are not cool, you can’t laugh at yourself’.
I really don’t like the message of this piece and I like even less this mass effort to look so ‘cool’ by laughing at others, because laughing at the expense of others is what really happens.
January 19th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
In any other context, this EU commissioner, and many people like her would have retorted about ‘racism’, or nationalism. Had that picture or artwork been painted in a different way, there would have been words spoken.
The leftism/socialism/ so called social democratic movement rampant across europe and the media are in the absolute vanguard of jumping on anything that can even simply be jumped on to further their own ends, especially anything that extends their tenticles of meddling.
Therefore, I find it amusing, yet sad that to further their own ends, they use this artwork. Not because they did, but simply had someone else done it, they would have had abuse. Because its the EU itself and its friends, its all ok.
Have you made a public apology to Mr Tillack commissioner?
January 20th, 2009 at 12:28 am
January 20th, 2009 at 1:29 am
Actually it is the EU class laughing about insults on the member states. This shows the flaws of the artist’s concept.
Why not laugh about the Council, or get an Entropa for each Directorate of the Commission? How about Commission jokes?
January 20th, 2009 at 1:57 am
Margot, if anyone claims not to like the artwork you can just ask them to reconsider their opinion until they get it right.
By the way, the new site is cr*p. It doesn’t work smoothly and quickly.
January 20th, 2009 at 4:18 am
Entropa - Great art it is not; but a good laugh it is - and I appreciate that in art. If it helps us laugh a little at ourselves - and smile at others too, we may learn not to take urselves so seriously, to appreciate each others foibles and get on with each other and perhaps might stop us from spouting pages of red email invective too!
January 20th, 2009 at 5:35 am
I like to consider that Entropa has a positive effect in the sense that it makes obvious how long is still the way before everyone in Europe gets over all stereotypes. This way everyone in Brussels will remember how important their work is and how ardous is the task of making a strong union out of all these states that during nearly all their history have been fighting and laughing at each other.
The sentences by Havel displayed on the piece representing the Czech Republic are a good evidence of what we all expect from this huge team of people deciding what the Union should become. These sentences should not be understood as an insult, but as a source of inspiration
January 20th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Dear Margot,
January 20th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Hi Max - actually it will be me on the panel instead of Christian. Looking forward to it.
January 20th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
HUMANITARIAN PLEA
It is a good idea to avoid reds of all sorts.
In particular, please avoid using the colour for the purposes of merely differentiating or highlighting text. Apparently it has a weird emotive effect on some people. So, unless you intend deliberately to upset those delicate petals, don’t use it.
January 20th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Then double-damn that I can’t attend!
January 21st, 2009 at 1:44 pm
EU Communications Policy: Biased Propaganda?
is a bit communication wise like
Commissioner Charlie McCreevy: Resign?
Commissioner Jan Figel: Sold out to Microsoft?
or
Entropa: An overpriced piece of crap or art?
You only find that “communication” in Parliament. And it demonstrates what Communication policy of the EU does not deliver, a pluralistic discourse. Parliament institutionalises opposition while in the Commission there is no “opposition” but a unified opinion. That makes the whole communication of the EU Commission so fascist, regardless what is tried to improve things.
I would advocate for introducing “dissenting opinions” to Commission reports as we have it with the high courts. Or internally enforce a counter-opinion requirement.
I would recommend to give the people of Europe a detailed referendum where they can select among different models and components for the Europe of the future. It just makes no sense to have a unified draft of an EU Constitution to say yes or no to. It is better to ask citizens what constitution we want for Europe.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Never mind Max, we`ll hold an event here, Margot ,a MEP and others said they would attend.
January 21st, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Well said, Karsten, January 21st, 2009, at 1:44 pm
I have often thought it may be a good idea to gag and blindfold all politicians in order to only allow them to hear. The EU especially seem to have lost the ability to hear, especially when it comes to the word NO. I’m sure the evolution process as regards the relationship between the EU and the proletariat would have baffled Darwin. Or maybe not.
The invitation to attend ‘EU communication policy: biased propaganda’, has turned up in my inbox. I thought it an attempt at humour at first. I’m afraid I wouldn’t be able to make it anyway, I’m working; I’m determined to work more than the 48 hours dictated to me by the evil empire, its my ambition to at least reach 60 hours a week. A small and futile victory I’ll grant you, but every little victory brings pleasure.
As for Entropa, it is no better or worse than other pieces that are funded by our taxes.
Although I do like the bit where the UK sails off to explore the world and trade freely with all of those other colourful and vibrant cultures.
“If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.” - Winston S. Churchill
“Set the Mainsail” – “Helm, Come to Course”. Whoopee !!!
January 21st, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Commissioner Wallstrom,
I am surprised that you haven’t said anything yet on the new president of the United States of America. He is your good friend, isn’t he? Or is my comment too premature, e.g. the night is still young?
M.C.Taytelbaum.
January 21st, 2009 at 9:19 pm
That’s not art, that’s junk. JUNK I say.
I hope no taxpayers money was wasted on that.
At least Obama’s elected, and accountable too! Neither of which Margot, Barroso and the rest of the politburo can claim.
Also, Obama is popular and wanted, whereas the EU is widely despised (except by career politicians and the ‘progressive’ university educated crowd, who all love the idea of rule by decree without popular interference). I for one can honestly claim that over 90% of people I know are opposed to the EU and political integration.
I suspect it’s 60-70% of the country at large. But a political conspiracy denied us a referendum (democracy hater Barroso and co bullied and threatened our government and demanded the referendum be cancelled, this I have heard from insiders).
January 21st, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Looks like the Bulgarian ‘element’ of Entropa has been covered up in a burka.
January 21st, 2009 at 10:43 pm
No but you didn’t understand anything, really, big masters! Černý means “black” in Slavic languages. So the sad Black Man (look also at his image during the opening ceremony!) brings you some deep but easily decoded message and you show your complete inability to read it, while talking and talking about Europe, how it should be, etc. C’est la misère et la fin du monde! Entropa is nothing but your true - ugly - faces you see in the mirror of Brussels bureaucratic “aquariums”! Not strong enough to make you move and think and change your empty life?! But what can be strong enough then?!
And all those British EU critics (always British!), devoted subjects of Her Majesty… But as follows from their very “radical” (according to them!) change plans for EU according to Open Europe vision (hello, Max Kaye!), it should be but a more “liberal” (i.e. more British!) version of the same bureaucracy that should ideally move, of course, in the direction of its British prototype, what else? It’s true that today’s EU structure and operation are disappointing and outdated, but if there can be something worse than this, we have the British pseudo-imperial pseudo-monarchic system for that! Not a single initiative in the country without the leading role of all those hereditary (or even arbitrarily “designated” by monarchy) “lords”, “sirs” and “ladies” and all their pompous, vain and false “knighthood”! And all of it is superposed over a “usual”, but actually one of the worst bureaucratic systems of the world! And you dare to impose those “high standards” to Europe as a “radical reform” in the direction of progress?! Come on, guys, why not to start with a much smaller scale of your own “empire of evil” and first make that one act in a more “flexible” and “liberal” way, without the dominating clans of predetermined, organised “big masters” of everything, from politics to science! Maybe you could even try the well-known solution of republican way, the real one?! And if the devoted servants of Her Majesty want to follow the Churchill’s advice (as cited by BG above) and opt for the “open sea” to avoid Europe, there should be no problem except that in real life they immediately meet yet another, American empire in the so-called “open sea” and still get the same (or even bloodier) limitations… The true freedom of creative development is elsewhere, in “other dimensions”, and maybe it’s just the right moment to start understanding it, especially when dishonest profits from dirty money stolen by very “noble” oligarchy from the suffering world may be desperately falling anyway…
A radical reform of this obsolete Netropa Europe is certainly needed, but certainly not just to replace one monster by another, yet more cynical one! Power to the creative people of Europe, not to self-interested dealers of whatever origin! And it has nothing to do with those endless “constitutional” manipulations, Karsten (“It is better to ask citizens what constitution we want for Europe.”). Yeah, “ask citizens”, so there will be several hundred million propositions (or more, for separate items), after which our favourite bureaucrats (assisted by British lords, to be sure!) will thoroughly choose the “optimal”, always bureaucratic framework, and European life will become better, much better! Very promising, this “advanced” European youth, super-educated by the monster to be changed! But isn’t it basically what they are already doing, Karsten, with the well-known result you seem to denounce? You can’t mean that it’s merely a question of the “right choice” of the people who can properly decide on the “good” version of averaged, over-simplified bureaucratic limitations (alias “Constitution”) on the already dead European creation, can you?!
Yeah, such subjects, such governors, as usually… But real changes are still needed, because the current system is increasingly and catastrophically inefficient and corrupt, even if everybody subjectively “accepts” on the background of always considerable over-production. Things will change anyway, dramatically. But the direction and result of change may depend critically on creative citizen efforts and efficient use of considerable EU budget. At the evident epoch of change - always greater in Europe than anywhere else - the best use of European budget cannot even be different from a very serious analysis and realisation of necessary, consistently specified version of change. Just art, of course, what else?
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:10 am
I would like to see a Sculpture showing the foolishness of Europa not working full-time towards Total Energy Independence, perhaps a European Citizen or Family with a gasoline hose or gas pipe up their noses ?
To think that we and all the elected officials are not working full time to make the great EU Continent free from Imported Oil and Gas is sadly amazing and cruel !
To think that not even the EU Military and Commercial Aviation is manufacturing synthetic jet fuels by now is unthinkable!
The Energy Independence of Europa means thousands of new jobs, it should be Job Number One, instead is a gossip and cocktail talk piece ! maybe “some” Europeans were born to work and serve always for others, right? what a criminal shame !
January 22nd, 2009 at 6:07 pm
Entropa is impressive, both in its provocations and its setting right inside the Council building. I’ll have to go back to see it again to figure out all the mischief.
But the best thing is the discussion it generates and yes, to see if there really is a common European ability to laugh about ourselves. Got to thank the Czechs for giving us this chance.
January 23rd, 2009 at 11:41 am
Next time, I would ask an artist to make a cartoon, depicting the bigger EU countries as their neighbours’ toilets or as various minorities’ ghettos. It’s no secret for any European that Sweden, France, Germany, UK, Spain has a major problem with their minorities and as regards this they are very defensive.
Let’s not provoke each other at this stage; this would be an issue for the next generations and their generations.
January 23rd, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Can Europe laugh at itself?
I hope so. Better to join in and laugh at yourself, than solely have others laughing at you.
:-)
And it would be nice to have a reputation of a joyful and open Europe. If we laugh together, hopefully we will not start wars against eachother.
If it takes an art-piece to make us realise this, I’m all for it. More art!
January 23rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I would laugh indeed, if the Czechs haven’t so glaringly avoided making fun of themselves and British. Otherwise it’s just a politically motivated provocation meaning to bring dismay into the rest of the community still wishing to join forces. I knew the Czech presidency will be a disaster with people counting the seconds till the mad captain falls drunken under the wheel before having enough time to lead the ship on the rocks.
January 25th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
<!– @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } –>
Hello there, Andrei Kirilyuk
Sorry about the lateness of my reply; I am committed to maintaining my 60 hour working week in defiance of any EU dictat.
I recognised my “ugly face” amongst your comments; I’ll have to live with it I guess.
Andrei Kirilyuk says:
Karsten (“It is better to ask citizens what constitution we want for Europe.”). Yeah, “ask citizens”, so there will be several hundred million propositions (or more, for separate items), after which our favourite bureaucrats (assisted by British lords, to be sure!)
If a proposed model of government can not meet all of the requirements, is it not correct to drop that model completely? The EU can never achieve ALL of the democratic aspirations of ALL the people of ALL the different countries that go to make up the EU. Ask a thousand different questions and you will receive a thousand different answers. You can not forcefully integrate people who don’t want to be integrated. To do otherwise is to deny democratic freedom.
On the subject of meaningful art, well I have my ‘vision’.
I see a line of windmills that completely surround the coastline of Britain. And nailed to the blades of each windmill are the bodies of the aged and poor who have died of the cold.
Outside of each farmhouse the hanging bodies of farmers and in each harbour the upturned hulls of fishing boats, and on each keel the charred remains of the once-proud fishermen.
And in the sea off the coast of Britain I see a super-yacht carrying the EU commission. The men and women are eating the finest foods and drinking the finest wines; they are buying and selling carbon credits. They are also enjoying the spectacle of the last British Christians having their heads removed by the warriors of another religion who have been sent by the EU to destroy the British people and its beliefs.
Save me from ‘Visionaries’, Andrei Kirilyuk. The Golden Haired and Blue Eyed ones with their burnished faces turned to the sun and facing to some distant and unconquered horizon.
As flawed as it seems to some, I’ll stick with what I have. And please don’t lump me together with those of the ‘Open Europe’ sort, I have no wish to inflict my way of life on you and the rest of the EU, I just want to get out of this contemptible club.
January 25th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Hej på dig
Hoppas att ingen betalat för skiten! Man får visst kalla allt för konst, konstigt tycker jag.
vänligen, Eva-Marie
January 26th, 2009 at 10:40 am
Dear Margot, Thank you for sharing with us your thoughts and I am glad you feel favorable towards the “Art” of Mr. Cerny. Unfortunately, I do not share your enthusiasm.
Had Finland been depicted as a Swedish Toilet (and we know their history…
I hope you don’t mind I bring it up right now), they would have been a lot more upset than they are now, with their “shameful” drinking habits satire. There are many nations that drink more than the Finns…
If Italy was depicted as a Sicilian countryside full of graves / crosses (from the criminal syndicate killings), they would be a lot more upset than from the current football players pumping footballs by humping them (I wouldn’t let my daughter see this). I won’t even say anything about Germany.
What about the Czech themselves? Maybe they could be depicted as the Russian Army’s toilet in 1968. Again, we do know the history. My parents were visiting in Praha during that time, and let me tell you, that memory oughta hurt…
Well, well, well… you all know Bulgaria’s history. So once again, what exactly is it so artistic, how is it funny exactly? Is there nothing else, really, that Europe can see as funny in Bulgaria, that the “artist” decided to bring back the topic of the Ottoman Empire?
I wonder very often nowadays. Who the heck elects people like you guys up there in the government? If you are in such a position, you should study some culturology and you should be a lot more sensitive to certain historical realities. Our continent is small, but it is full of history of tension and many of the nations who coexist “peacefully” today are not really that friendly towards each other. Let things heal, it takes time. A long time.
Let’s see what your next steps will be, up there in the high echelons of European “Power” (and “wisdom”).
January 26th, 2009 at 10:52 am
One more thought. How about one day you big hard-headed politicians order some artwork that allows Europeans to laugh TOGETHER. Not at each other. Wouldn’t it be a much sweeter deal for everyone?
Best regards- from a person who was born inside the Toilet of Europe (yup- that is my home country, my beloved mother land).
PS. my parents always taught me to love and respect the rest of the European nations. Right now, I feel my parents failed me with their education. Unless I see empathy from my European snooty “brothers”, I will never feel any love for any of the other nations there. Is this the goal of this “art”? To ensure that we’ll never feel integrated? Then it has succeeded in its purpose. You must be feeling really good, and really proud… Go ahead, keep it at its current “strategic”location at the European Parliament.
January 26th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
has art not the sense of reflecting the society or of giving the society some idea to have a critical reflection?
I want to know what you are thinking and feeling being at brussels. This art debat bring me in touch with the brussels everyday multiculteral reality that is only there (now renewd with all the new arrived countries)!
Though I wish there would be more art like this and artists would even start to settle down next to your door reflecting Brussels also without the request of the czech goverment/presidency. We EU citizen need brussels culture knowledge and not PR.
tHOUGH WHAT A GOOD START FOR EU 2009 if we start now once with free culture and less propaganda !!! Yes I’m for more FREE art from Brussels…artists I’m waiting for more stuff of you!!!
groetjes Anja from Amsterdam
January 27th, 2009 at 3:49 am
Anja, thanks for sharing your intelligent thoughts. I have an idea: why don’t we ask Mr. Cerny to depict Holland / the Netherlands as a SPANISH TOILET? You remember how Holland felt when the Spaniards were “visiting” your country, a few centuries ago? Cool stuff!
Come oon, people. Wake up. You guys really don’t get it?
January 27th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
Dear, Mr. Mehandjiysky, so this is a goed point: i’m not dutch i’m a german European leaving here in the netherlands for years and i would depict Holland as a toilet where you have to pay at least 5 Euros per use and you are by signs asked not to talk about politics being there and the toiletcleaner is wearing an obama outfit. The modern dutch people dont have anything with the spanaards what i now. with a german toilet you would have have more success…
and sure i see you feel offended by that art but there are many things you can feel offended and i feel more offended by not intellegent propaganda who tries always tp make a secret of our differences in culture and historical experience and not allow free thinking. I prefer art from which i at least can be sure who is accountable for this.
I’m not being at brussels feel offended by the fact not to know how the lisbon treatry is changed recently in details…
And by the way, leaving in another country i have to live nowadays with the fact that people tell me offending stereotypes about my country and nobody is making any comment … and the only thing that helps, is making jokes about it, so dear europeans at brussels wake up , this is the normal experience of millions of emigrated europeans and they have to leave with every day….
So dear artists, where are the other toilets of all our neighbours, start with a german one or?
January 27th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
I do not think that making fun of other people’s countries is at all funny. Sweden, for instance, is not a toilet. As a Cathoilc, I object to Italyu being shown as some priests raising the flag of Peace. Peace Sunday was some two weeks ago now. I cannot see my own country, UK. Is this because it is somehow unworthy? And why oh why is greve written all over the map of France when French people do not even have gravy? Mocking Spain for its downturn and depression is not at all funny. the painter should be taken out and shot.
January 27th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
Well, Mr. Mehandjiysky, Anja may be right in her last assumption: if the still dominating EU political correctness (is it really your preference?) and “propaganda” were abandoned in favour of omnipresent critical attitude, in all forms and kinds of humour with respect to everybody, then your small “offence” would be quickly forgotten.
Why don’t you have an idea that one may permit oneself those “dangerous” caricatures just because the entities involved are all considered as ours, rather than only “theirs”, foreign ones, maybe for the first time in this otherwise rather artificial “union”? One can easily laugh at one’s close friends and family, but would avoid it with less familiar persons.
It’s a “satiric” kind of humour, which is always a hard, formally “offensive” one: far from anything “for fun”. Its function is different: to attract attention to real problems, but which remain unsolved for a too long time and especially are hidden behind various hypocritical “nice” pictures emphasising “our successes”. Your interpretation of the Entropean “Bulgaria” may well be wrong: there is no any really “Turkish” trade mark on those toilets. To me it looks rather as a hint on persisting relative misery of Bulgarian life and other related problems barely hidden by external “neon lights”. And if one looks e.g. on Bulgarian GDP per capita values and compare with the “core” EU levels (let alone Brussels level of income!), there is indeed something to worry about, not only for Bulgaria, but for thus “unified” Europe. Would you prefer to hide the problem and continue to suffer from it instead of its open, though maybe “embarrassing” exposition, but accelerating its solution? It’s not bad to be “touchy”, but not with those burning practical problems: they should just be solved, as quickly as possible.
OK, you want a “terrible revenge” e.g. with respect to Netherlands? No need to evoke historical past (contrary to you, they don’t care about it). Let’s just very politely ask our charming artist Anja, living in Amsterdam (a-ha…), what their famous Dutch “freedom” has actually brought about beyond open drug use and flourishing prostitution?! We’ve seen the real results of those Amsterdam “liberties”: just rubbish! Smoking a little yourself, Anja? We know those “free artists” from Amsterdam
…
Revenged, Mr. Mehandjiysky? Get it, for Bulgaria!
Well, and why not? Doesn’t it make a necessary part of any country’s internal structure and national integrity, those “very bad” jokes and caricatures about various constituent features? Being humanly incorrect but friendly, living and creative, rather than bureacratically “polite” and divided, isn’t it better as a truly promising European style? You are talking about painful conflict experience of the past that can only be “healed” by long-term “forgetting”… In any case, Bulgaria may have relatively little hard memories from European side… And in any case, Europe doesn’t simply have time for it: a strong, but creative and direct (rather than today’s indirect and limiting) interaction is needed right now and common problems are not missing… Hey, if economics keeps going that way, they’ll soon be forced to accept Bulgarian experience everywhere else
…
January 27th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
Yes, we have to change until it’s too late. Our planet is getting sick and no one believes it.
January 27th, 2009 at 9:12 pm
There is no problem, BG, to agree about today’s official EU flaws and absence of perspective. But that’s also why it’s not enough: another, provably efficient (and sustainable) way of European interaction should be specified. Your strange British isolation (“I’ll stick with what I have”) constitutes but another, equally disappointing extreme. (They are really self-sufficient out there, while Her Majesty and pubs remain intact
!) It’s a fact that there is both “cultural” (or rather “intellectual”) proximity between European nations/citizens and intense, certainly only growing practical exchange and mutually interesting interaction of all sorts (more permanent than outside links). Doesn’t matter how actively personally you may participate in it. Your country (and thus you) does profit from e.g. tourism and uncountable relations with the continent (recall e.g. the ongoing British “invasion” of the continent for permanent living, especially during retirement).
But it’s true that today’s largely imposed (although formerly looking more “natural”) way of indirect interaction cannot be efficient any more: the self-designated “intermediators” and various related “lobbies” and “communities” take all, with no relation to real results. The worst is that thus organised “interaction” shows intrinsic tendency for its own limitation: without real creativity, there is an interest to limit the “circle of adherents” and simply share the fixed-size “common pie”. But being left only with respective national structures doesn’t solve the problem either: it’s the same, indirect interaction way and hardly numerous national structures can interact more efficiently. We rather need a direct, result-based and free/creative interaction system between individuals “governed” and “controlled” by its own component dynamics (a bit like production-based free-market interactions). To give another, even more “burning” example, there seems to be too much of indirect interaction mediated by financial institutions also in the main economical framework, everywhere, which may even be the basic origin of today’s heavy crisis… Those flourishing (but then crashing!) intermediators and suffering added-value producers, on all scales and in all activities… Vexing! But isn’t it rather everybody to be blamed for too easy, explicit or implicit compliance (and complacence) with respect to those apparently “convenient” arrangements (until they “suddenly” appear to be very inconvenient!)?
So this is something to think about and be ready to realise: direct, explicitly creative European interaction. One just cannot avoid it, BG, the only alternative being decadent indirect modes (both “national” and “international”) but which cannot be sustainable, in principle. I’m not sure that this blog host may imply that kind of necessary European change (e.g. in the next blog post), but one cannot “circumvent” natural development laws (contrary to people!), by any efforts… And as a small part of that direct interaction appeal, it seems strange to me that interaction on this blog, contrary to many other ones, almost always occurs through “commissioner Wallström”. No problem, of course, to address the Commissioner, but why direct interaction between Europeans is so scarce here? You don’t hope to really influence EU decisions in that way, do you? By contrast, one could easily influence each other’s attitudes, ideas and eventually actions. Or else we shall have only what we have, alas, by default: stagnating Entropa instead of progressing Europe.
January 28th, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Wally,
EMPLOY A BLOODY PROOFREADER! Your use of the English language (namely in ’since a few days ago’) is simply unconscionable.
January 28th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
dear ms Wallström,
could you please start an action that normal not only highpaid or higheducated people can participate at this blog and that there is enough tollerance openess or moderation? or dit i not get point, wally…
Normal people from globaleurop have no time and money and maybe skills for proofreading! and we can not laugh about it….Is this an high elite club or a free possibility also for people who don’t use english regularly to chair opinions in the proximity of responsable decisionmakers?
Sorry this is now for me very offending and for everybody not living at brussels….Wally, You should be happy that multilingual people accept english and we do not use our best language in which i can make much better jokes than here in english.
Coming back to my beginning point I want an artpeace where is not missing any funny also sterotype toiletidea about what is Brussels and not only all the countries!!
groetjes tschuess und saluti
anja
January 28th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Easy, Anja, so far as there is no unjustified censorship in moderation, everything should be permitted in opinions: appeals to limitation of liberty make a part of liberty. And then, there is certainly a practical difference between “ordinary” contributions and posts signed by the Commissioner: resources and skills applied are not the same… (You understood, of course, that “Wally” above is addressed by Anonymous to the Commissioner and her post…) And then, Anja, concerning stereotypes, me, for example, I am rather high-educated, very low-paid and still … considering myself as basically “normal”
.
What actually constitutes a problem in this communication is too big delays in moderation, so that actually one often cannot answer to an opinion the same day, while the next post may already be appearing, etc.: blogs is a very rapid exchange mode, where everything becomes “old” practically during the day of publication. Crazy, but one should find an efficient way to deal with it because all the future of Europe is at stake!
January 28th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Andrei Kirilyuk,
My ’strange British isolation’ seems to be a British trait. We like to stand on our own two feet and be independent, you know, our ‘Stiff Upper Lip’. As for the ’integration’, we are having too many immigrants forced onto the people of Britain. This is adding to crime, homelessness, joblessness, and a lack of social cohesion. If Britain were South Africa there would be much nashing of teeth and hand-wringing. Because it’s ‘just Britain’ no one gives a toss.
We especially don’t like freewheeling ‘artists’ wasting our money on EU-sponsored homogenous crap. To see these clowns disappearing up their own backsides over this piece of rubbish is just ridiculous.
It is allright laughing at ourselves but who is laughing when the poor have to choose between heating and eating. I personally am sick of this self-indulgence. I always thought that art came from the soul, not from the taxpayer.
Also, Andrei Kirilyuk, the EU is stagnating. The organization reminds me of a group of centuries-old vampires. (A quite appropriate description I would suggest)
January 29th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
You’re mixing up problems of different origins, BG, as they seem to be unified in your “national” point of view. I can understand that, but let’s acknowledge that immigration you’re talking about is closer to “individual” problem of any separate European country (it exists in many of them, independently), while EU problems are those between European countries. But I certainly can understand the resulting gloomy general outlook, where all these “new-time” difficulties are effectively unified indeed by their destructive action somehow opposed to “good old days”, where problems were maybe not softer but more “natural” and visibly solvable: there was perceivable progress (with the resulting subjective feeling of happiness), practically realised human values and related hopes for ever better future. In vain: the epoch of general progress appears now to be limited in time, at least within the existing, unitary kind of social structures (all of them, from the hardest dictatorship to the most liberal democracy), and as no living system can remain at a fixed level for a long time, the decaying progress is replaced now by the omnipresent and deep degradation, in all aspects of life. The situation is basically the same in all European/“developed” countries, even those with less “stiff upper lip” (those who can understand French can have a look at an ongoing discussion on the popular blog by Jacques Attali for very similar conclusions by francophone communities; there is even English translation of the last posts, but not comments).
Yes, my poor friend, we have a strange chance to live in a technically comfortable, but humanly destructive time, where “heaven for all” seemed to be quite possible practically, for the first time in history, but was then unexpectedly replaced by something opposite, very disappointing destruction patterns, as if those too quickly arriving “pleasures” and “liberties” have made people massively stupid (even more than before), forgetting their “higher” values and purposes in favour of low-level instincts and possessions and sticking to their own species extinction. Disappearing disgracefully in that way at one step from paradise looks more than disappointing indeed, especially for those few who, like you, tend to see these sad results more clearly, behind the external “façades”, usual show-business masquerade and ideological smoke-screens, still very efficient, alas, in their roles for the majority of “true Britons” and other nations.
What to do in face of such dramatic failure, for those who “don’t agree” to take it easy or leave it to “elites” (showing but their own, record-breaking decadence)? Well, certainly not to close in a gloomy criticism of “their” world destroying “our” good old country and life style. The same destruction happens everywhere and involves much more of “native” dwellers than any “incomers” or “international structures”. Simply “denouncing” it as you and other “true Britons” do here (and I guess elsewhere), while putting the blame on too easily designated external “monsters” (“vampires”) is (a) practically inefficient (will change nothing) and (b) actually missing the target because “vampires”, however “repulsive” they might look, are but “symptoms” of the disease (that’s why repulsing!), often “suffering” themselves (although in their own, still “luxurious” way!) with respect to much better days everybody had before (monsters including). Do you think those at least “provocative” Entropa pictures are self-permitted (and even ordered) because the “monster” really likes them?
Instead of it, the evident constructive proposition would be to interact between those who see the problem (better irrespective of nationality, especially in Europe) and try to find practical ways of problem solution, which do not promise to be “quick and global” but can well be radical (i.e. really solving it, though maybe locally at first) and promising (leading to that another, much better life). You may be exaggerating the size/strength of monsters: they are only big shadows of your/our, alas real inability to propose essentially different, realistic and efficient ways of e.g. European interaction/organisation (for particular problem solution), far beyond the old “national” ways, which are equally “monstrous” and evidently not more efficient than the current “industrial” and “bureaucratic” unification. Practically everything that can be found here and elsewhere is reduced to non-constructive - and frankly, banal - criticism of obvious EU framework inefficiency (or “propaganda”, which is but a universal self-preservation way: do you expect them or any “national” inefficient structures to condemn and close themselves?!), or else propositions of its “(radical) reform” in detail, without changing the interaction way by (their) “intermediation”. And there is practically no interest to any other proposition of a real change towards another, efficient and sustainable, necessarily direct interaction ways. Is it an EC problem, then? Far from it. We have a problem, friends, and the problem is you
. An ever deeper understanding of and motivation for the necessary change is needed and … it’s always absent, on the background of relatively “replete” material existence: the invariable killer of all previous civilisations.
In the meanwhile, we are still communicating through the “monster’s” facilities, whereas today we could very easily have many free interaction possibilities elsewhere (their popularity depends only on their content). So again, where’s the problem? I generally follow, for example, internal British “measures” around national science, to increase its popularity, etc. Oh, dear, just another “vampire” (with all those lords’ clumsy interventions, so komisch!), even more obvious than its “better dressed” international cousin. Maybe you don’t know that, but its mainly national “professionals” in science (for example), rather than responsible “bureaucrats from Brussels”, that almost totally determine the inefficient, selfish, practically fraudulent operation mode of EU research programmes. It’s the former that make decisions and get unmerited profits from fruitless “activities”, while the latter only “sign the contract” and “survey the procedure”, but are not practically able to change the situation essentially. Just governors that you merit, so to say. Within an effectively Soviet system, unfortunately (obtaining now its new life under full “democracy”, surprise, surprise)…
Let’s try to be interactive and constructive, then, here and elsewhere, and try to find practical progress possibilities. And once we do, monsters will make a queue to join us, you’ll see…
January 30th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Thank You Andrei Kirilyuk
We must agree to disagree. I have in a previous post accepted that Britain is not perfect. The problems that we do have are for the British to sort out. That is democracy. I don’t buy into this New World Order rubbish.
February 1st, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Andrej:
I mean, it is a matter of power techniques and that we really need to find ways to reduce the democratic deficit.
a) elite agrees on change consensus and defends results. A referendum has to affirm their unitary decision or is felt as a failure. Citizens don’t like that, find the flaws, kill the arrogant process. YES - NO
b) We have components. A social democratic model, a fascist model, a liberal model etc. Citizens are asked what Europe they want. More power for the Council or more power for parliament? A, B, C This create constructive and emotional debates about what model for Europe.
February 2nd, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Karsten said: “We have components. A social democratic model, a fascist model, a liberal model etc. Citizens are asked what Europe they want. More power for the Council or more power for parliament? A, B, C This create constructive and emotional debates about what model for Europe.”
But as BG, among others, tries to explain here, a problem in principle unsolvable within such activity arises each time British, for example, tend towards the choice A, while Dutch or Germans to the choice B or C. It is then incorrect to average out the diversity of choices by fixing as a “European” choice the one by the majority of EU citizens (from all countries), as one should do within conventional democracy. Giving any preference to this or that choice is equally inefficient and destructive.
What BG in his turn fails to acknowledge is that the same becomes true also at each “national” level, where every citizen’s (personal) choice is equally important (becomes increasingly irreplaceable) and their destructive (progress-blocking) “averaging” into a “national” choice is not viable any more. At the same time one may have growing number of close choices for people from different EU countries. One may discuss why “democratic averaging” was apparently (but always only relatively) successful during a previous period (rather short for modern democracy), but it won’t change the fact becoming alarmingly evident: that the period of successful “usual” democracy (even if it’s not additionally “corrupt”) is finished now, everywhere and at any scale. Needless to say, the same is true for all other “isms”, both more and less “liberal” or “democratic”. The situation specified in that way may look “too difficult” and therefore instinctively “rejected”, but one should not forget that a good solution always exists and even if it may be essentially different from the now dominating ones, it doesn’t need to be “dangerous”, especially taking into account the evident (and increasingly deep) decadence resulting from existing solutions (they appear thus to be truly dangerous!).
February 4th, 2009 at 8:53 am
So Andrei Kirilyuk, would I be able to vote in this new order?
Would I be able to vote on local issues?
Would I be able to stop large industries inflicting themselves onto my environment?
Would I be able to fight for British jobs for British workers?
Would I have to have my fingerprints and DNA kept on a database?
Would I have to submit myself for 42 day detention without trial?
Would I have to carry an identity card in what I see as my country?
Who would choose these leaders?
What if they turn out to be people we don’t like?
If we don’t like them, how do we remove them?
What if they don’t want to be removed?
If I disagree with this new order how will I be made to agree?
What if the method to make me agree does not work?
You remind me of a well known BBC program, Doctor Who, complete with Cybermen.
“This one is not compatible - Delete, Delete, Delete”.
February 4th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
BG said: “So Andrei Kirilyuk, would I be able to vote in this new order? Would I be able to vote on local issues?”
It seems evident that you and other “persistent” EU opponents, here and elsewhere, have now more than enough of any “voting” leaving typically half of voters (and often even the majority of real or potential voters) in a state of frustration because they clearly see that their so-called “freedom” to influence the decision as the proclaimed unique “subject of power” ends up in a decision they rather hate, often together with the majority of other voters. Voting is yours, but power to take decisions isn’t, while it’s only the latter that matters. Call it “democracy”…
The implied question seems to be rather “will I be able to influence real decisions?”. While your practical ability to influence decisions by voting is an illusion, in the “new order” I would defend you would be able not only to influence but directly elaborate provably optimal practical decisions, in close, constructive interaction with all other interested citizens. The result is not only the best possible decision, but also essential progress of all the process participants (rather than only “leaders”), which may eventually be even more important than the best choice of a particular decision itself. In fact, it’s a unified development process, including both “human” and “material” components in their inseparable unity. Do we need anything else for our “common” life organisation at a time when everything becomes so closely related to everything else, as a matter of fact? By contrast, today’s unitary “democracy” definitely ends up in fundamental, irreducible stagnation and frustrating ruptures (the one between the “people” and “its” power being only the most obvious among many other ones), with no real winners, including political leaders themselves (being considered as “politician” is rather not a compliment or subject of envy today, is it?).
“Would I be able to stop large industries inflicting themselves onto my environment? Would I be able to fight for British jobs for British workers? Would I have to have my fingerprints and DNA kept on a database? Would I have to submit myself for 42 day detention without trial? Would I have to carry an identity card in what I see as my country?”
It is an incomplete list of singular artefacts of today’s unitary voting democracy, where voters, even in “developed” countries (let’s omit the unbelievable horrors of “under-developed” ones), are forced to support the evident degradation of their own life as the “best” possible choice! One can understand the resulting frustration, the more and more often summarised as a pathetic “am I living in my own, democratic country or … where?!” If it’s like that in one’s own, “national” country, then what to say about “our” Europe?! In which sense can it ever be “ours” within the current organisation mode? Is it just because you’re living and freely moving there and can still profit from a generally comfortable (but quickly degrading) life style? But any person with enough money can have it (all “passports” including!), and more than you do, if he/she has more money…
In a new order I would defend, such truly idiotic, self-made, but catastrophically accumulating problems (today’s system artefacts) simply wouldn’t appear (the existing ones will immediately disappear) and true choices you will be dealing with will be related to real, complex problem solution, with your direct participation (according to your motivation and efficiency) but certainly without you really becoming anything like today’s “politicians”.
There will be not enough of British workers for good British jobs (partially because some British workers will find an interesting work abroad), but this can’t be a problem as you will have full possibility to directly decide, for each particular case of interest, whether to accept foreign workers for otherwise available (free) British jobs. It sounds fantastically only with respect to the current, naturally stagnating developed (old) Unitary System, but is absolutely natural for the free-interaction, self-developing Harmonic System. The list of quite real but artificially blocked creative and prosperity-bringing jobs in Great Britain and elsewhere would be long, but nothing can be changed within the present system: it’s self-interested (pseudo) “elites” will typically stop any attempt as a threat to their selfish interests. The creative, fair-competition enterprise of previous times - always announced on the label - has been practically totally replaced by the actually dominating, decadent Soviet-style hierarchy, on both public and private activity sectors. In reality, it’s Western democracies that seem to follow the sad destiny of the Soviet regime, instead of the expected opposite evolution. Those always proclaimed, previously real but now non-existent, everywhere violated “(moral) values”, replaced by omnipresent hypocrisy and open lies supposed to somehow “preserve” the system … déjà vu, just before the crash! Time to wake up and get rid of misleading illusions!
“Who would choose these leaders? What if they turn out to be people we don’t like? If we don’t like them, how do we remove them? What if they don’t want to be removed?”
Canonical unitary voting is naturally inefficient together with the canonical unitary power and its “leaders” (who always impose their solutions on others, at any level of any most “developed” but unitary “democracy”). Unitary power becomes fundamentally inefficient as such, in any version, in today’s intense-interaction, “globalised” world (it has been otherwise before, in all previous epochs). Who is responsible for today’s severe “economical” crisis, where are those “economists”? Certainly not among “political leaders” and “decision-makers” whose real “profession” is just to be there and serve as a necessary cover/decoration “on top” of the system, which actually functions “spontaneously” (and the more and more self-destructively). Even if you “don’t like them” and can “remove” them by voting (too late!), what can you actually change except replace one team of professional liars by another, only externally “opposed” and equally irresponsible one? Thinking about genuine, essential progress, all that pseudo-democratic bordello can only be replaced by a distributed interaction process (which is already there, by the way) whose (always informal) “leaders” will emerge (and be changed in real time) only according to the evident efficiency of their proposed, personally “signed” solutions always passing by further intense and real discussion/elaboration by all interested participants. It’s the power of reason, not of persons, and it’s the inevitable next step of civilisation development different from its already dangerously progressing killer degradation (and possible restart from a “new barbarism” whose emerging signs are even too noticeable already, within a still externally “gorgeous” but internally dead system). And where there is no fixed, canonical power, there is no problem with related “personal ambitions”, rotation, etc. And of course, one can have ultimately diverse, creatively coexisting solutions whenever desirable, within that kind of permanently creative “power”. The resulting economy on “politics” alone can make us flourish!
“If I disagree with this new order how will I be made to agree? What if the method to make me agree does not work?”
Do you really disagree to join our best in the world company (including your preferred partner) going to the nice new pub to have the best imaginable time for free?! Sorry for you then, but if we can do anything to change your mind, just ask… Well, exaggerating, but actually “joining” the kind of new order I would defend is much better than any imaginable usual “pleasures” of unitary life. So I guess everybody would have much of compassionate attention and help for rare “dissidents” (with their full ability to remain in any reasonable opposition), but any “antagonism” will be excluded in principle. It’s very different from only formally “guaranteed” but “strangely” realised “rights” of the unitary, industrial liberalism: people are very different, while formal “rights” are grotesquely standard, etc. Who can be really happy (not “prosperous” or “satisfied” but truly happy!) in today’s formally the more and more rich Western Europe? Only some old enough people, maybe rarely, but they still can… A society with a totally unhappy and increasingly dissatisfied, strangely suicidal youth that doesn’t even know any more what it means, real happiness, shouldn’t it be already quite “alarming”? And it’s not an exaggeration, unfortunately…
However, the “truly difficult” question does exist, I can pose it myself: who will actually realise (participate in) this “new order”, can one find enough of suitable people among really available ones, yet before it will be too late to save anything and anybody from the final fall? What can I say, let’s hope that real life can still be much more surprising than any fantastic show… In any case, the quite real pressure of real-life events and development on Europeans (and others) today is close to being strong enough for initiation of those “more interesting” changes (without any other positive perspective - and that is increasingly obvious too). But then maybe this grotesque show-business world is simply doomed, without any alternative, there’s no way to prove the contrary… You’ll be always stressing how much you dislike this unfairly imposed foreign “monster”, and the monster’s High Commissioner will be always stressing that the true origin of all problems is the missing proportion of female governors… (women like women and dislike men around them, see where we are?
) And it will go on and on, this never-ending story… Looks strange, this perspective too, doesn’t it? That’s what I call time of change when everything looks strange and practically impossible!
February 7th, 2009 at 10:49 am
Andrei Kirilyuk, you still have not explained to me how this new order would work.
Who makes decisions?
Who has the final say?
If you want to deprive me and my countrymen/women of their nationhood tell me what you are going to put in its place.
An EU Commission? A EU Parliament? They are just another form of partially elected power.
So, give me your version of how things should be. Just keep it simple please.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:47 pm
I have described some basic ideas, BG, but now if you really want all the details, that’s a trillion euro question, that happiness for everybody! So if I have the stuff, do you have the money?
I actually mean that there is no sense to develop all the details when the main problem seems to be the absence of necessary, practically specified motivation for even a smaller change. Who will realise all that, even if I tell you how? There’s a time for everything, a time for idle talk and a time for practical change realisation. It’s certainly not bad to discuss freely this and that, but after a certain point a question inevitably appears: are we talking about real problems to be solved now or is it just one more intellectual amusement without consequences? What is a big common point between the British Government and European Commission and all other today’s “governing institutions” (including even their “non-government” breed) is that only they can act (though within a very narrow, artificially limited framework), while all others can only talk. This is precisely what should be changed because such order is absolutely inefficient any more, anywhere. And this feature includes the process of change itself: if we know what to do and why, then we should have a real possibility to directly initiate it, rather than only “discuss” (giving rise to another over-simplified imitation by the self-interested priests of the outdated system). I hope that’s simple enough. There is the evident practical need for change and quite sufficient starting ideas about what it should be. What should be added is a practical motivation/framework of interested and suitably supported participants, as further details should be specified in direct, creative interaction, being a part of the emerging real change.