A friend keeps telling me that my kind of verse is much more emotion than meaning, and I guess he is perfectly right. In order to save myself from ridicule, I have found an explanation that proudly allows me to keep my conduct - which is a necessity anyway.
In Paul Auster's wiki biography it says "(...) we enter the world through words. We observe the world through our senses but the world we sense is structured (i.e. mediated) in our mind through language. Thus our subconscious is also structured as a language. This leaves us with a sense of anomaly. We can only perceive the world through language, but we have the feeling of something missing. This is the sense of being outside language. The world can only be constructed through language but it always leaves something uncovered, something that cannot be told or be thought of, it can only be sensed."
Well, there we are. My answer is emotion. Poured out in words. And there is no need to understand them. Feel them. Despite the anomaly.
Monday, April 4. 2011
They still do it
About twenty years ago, when I was still forced to be concerned about religion, I was told by students of protestant theology that, as far as Jesus of Nazareth was concerned, there was no longer talk of him being the son of God. The religious scientists had gained new insight that Jesus was the enunciator of the one and only God of Israel, and that he was to bear witness to God before the peoples of the world.
Well, the theologist and scholars of faith must have locked themselves up those last twenty years. Because since then, I have been waiting that this special insight might reach the faithful people on the street, in their schools and churches and in their houses. What about responsiblity, and what about development? Not to mention education. They say, the Enlightenment failed. I guess I agree.
(C) 2011
Well, the theologist and scholars of faith must have locked themselves up those last twenty years. Because since then, I have been waiting that this special insight might reach the faithful people on the street, in their schools and churches and in their houses. What about responsiblity, and what about development? Not to mention education. They say, the Enlightenment failed. I guess I agree.
(C) 2011
Sunday, December 5. 2010
The Ignorant Approach
In Germany, even though the country and its people are historically polluted by narcissism and crimes again humanity, the majority of the population is hostile toward Muslims. Deep-rooted like a prejudice is one of the basic arguments - if you can call it an argument - being used in many discussions: The Muslim migrants have refused to integrate themselves into German society.
Well done, if you ask me! Because, not so very long ago, another religious group suffering from rejection, prejudice and hate by the Germans did not hesitate to assimilate even beyond hyper-Germanness, and still there was no end to hate; it just found another name, Antisemitism. In fact, assimilation had its part in the development of this new hate, going from religious Anti-Judaism, i.e. Christian hate against the Jews, to political Antisemitism, which is nothing but racism.
Of course, there are differences. For starters, most of the German Jews were actually Jewish Germans, they were born and brought up in this country, they were educated with the German language as their mother tongue, and with German national values. Many Muslims living in Germany nowadays are migrants and their families have not been here since the medieval centuries. You see?
The German Jews did not do themselves a favour being more German than most of the Germans. It made them even more suspicious to many Germans that some Jews were prepared to give up their habits and ways, and, often enough, even their religion, so easily and eagerly in order to be accepted.
And if you look into it, total assimilation means nothing else but a complete change of identity. Because, how can you be a Muslim, if you do not live as a Muslim? You cannot. You would have to stick to the Five Pillars of Islam being the foundation of Muslim life: faith, daily prayers, almsgiving, fasting and the Mecca pilgrimage; almost in the same manner as a godly Jew would never ask another Jew whether he was Jewish, or had a Jewish mother, he would ask: Do you keep Shabbat?
Tradition or not, habits or not, faith or not, those who are not willing to accept a stranger in their midst, will always find a way to reject him anyway. The only way to get along is to value diversity instead of egalitarianism. And to embrace each other with respect and tolerance on any side. To postulate integration as a solution is an ignorant approach.
© 2010
Well done, if you ask me! Because, not so very long ago, another religious group suffering from rejection, prejudice and hate by the Germans did not hesitate to assimilate even beyond hyper-Germanness, and still there was no end to hate; it just found another name, Antisemitism. In fact, assimilation had its part in the development of this new hate, going from religious Anti-Judaism, i.e. Christian hate against the Jews, to political Antisemitism, which is nothing but racism.
Of course, there are differences. For starters, most of the German Jews were actually Jewish Germans, they were born and brought up in this country, they were educated with the German language as their mother tongue, and with German national values. Many Muslims living in Germany nowadays are migrants and their families have not been here since the medieval centuries. You see?
The German Jews did not do themselves a favour being more German than most of the Germans. It made them even more suspicious to many Germans that some Jews were prepared to give up their habits and ways, and, often enough, even their religion, so easily and eagerly in order to be accepted.
And if you look into it, total assimilation means nothing else but a complete change of identity. Because, how can you be a Muslim, if you do not live as a Muslim? You cannot. You would have to stick to the Five Pillars of Islam being the foundation of Muslim life: faith, daily prayers, almsgiving, fasting and the Mecca pilgrimage; almost in the same manner as a godly Jew would never ask another Jew whether he was Jewish, or had a Jewish mother, he would ask: Do you keep Shabbat?
Tradition or not, habits or not, faith or not, those who are not willing to accept a stranger in their midst, will always find a way to reject him anyway. The only way to get along is to value diversity instead of egalitarianism. And to embrace each other with respect and tolerance on any side. To postulate integration as a solution is an ignorant approach.
© 2010
Sunday, November 21. 2010
Worry, Be Happy!
You might as well believe that, nowadays, information is available, just about everywhere, and about nearly everything. Unfortunately this does not include that people are actually informed. Or, worse, wish to be informed.
For instance, our rights; people might know about their rights, or they might not. And if they actually are informed, they might as well fight, if their rights are denied, or they might not. Well, I would rather have people not being informed, because they will have a chance to become aware of their rights. But what about those who say: I am aware of what could be. But reality is a different matter.
Is that true? Do some rights only exist written on paper, and reality is a different matter? What about us? Is it not us who stand for this reality? Are we not the ones that put written rights to practice? The more questions are asked the less answer we get, but always more and more questions; and even this is common knowledge.
If you ask me, it is our personal responsibility - of each and every one of us - that we make work what has been given to us, or even won for us in a struggle, our rights. If we do not take this responsibility seriously, we are putting back any fight for any right. And we should be denied all of them.
Yes, this might sound harsh, but most of us, the majority, we claim to have democracy as our highest and most valuable political aim. Democracy, though, asks for people, for us, to be involved. No democracy can function, if it has only people that continuously say:
Oh, I'm not sure.
Yeah, might be.
I don't know about this, now.
Well, yeah, if you say so.
I haven't made my mind up, yet.
This may be so, but -
This is not my responsibility.
Oh, please, leave me out of this.
I might need to think about it.
I have no idea.
So, next time, when you have discussion about peoples' rights, even if your own rights are not concerned, you should cautiously regard yourself. Are you actively democratic in the literary sense of this term? Do you rule as part of your own people by taking your and the rights others seriously?
If not, go home, and claim nothing for yourself, not now and not in the future. You are a danger to democracy, because you are political fast food. The next dictator in line will have you for breakfast. Go home and stay there, until you will have learned to stand up and become a valid member of your society. We already have enough political free loaders in this world.
For instance, our rights; people might know about their rights, or they might not. And if they actually are informed, they might as well fight, if their rights are denied, or they might not. Well, I would rather have people not being informed, because they will have a chance to become aware of their rights. But what about those who say: I am aware of what could be. But reality is a different matter.
Is that true? Do some rights only exist written on paper, and reality is a different matter? What about us? Is it not us who stand for this reality? Are we not the ones that put written rights to practice? The more questions are asked the less answer we get, but always more and more questions; and even this is common knowledge.
If you ask me, it is our personal responsibility - of each and every one of us - that we make work what has been given to us, or even won for us in a struggle, our rights. If we do not take this responsibility seriously, we are putting back any fight for any right. And we should be denied all of them.
Yes, this might sound harsh, but most of us, the majority, we claim to have democracy as our highest and most valuable political aim. Democracy, though, asks for people, for us, to be involved. No democracy can function, if it has only people that continuously say:
Oh, I'm not sure.
Yeah, might be.
I don't know about this, now.
Well, yeah, if you say so.
I haven't made my mind up, yet.
This may be so, but -
This is not my responsibility.
Oh, please, leave me out of this.
I might need to think about it.
I have no idea.
So, next time, when you have discussion about peoples' rights, even if your own rights are not concerned, you should cautiously regard yourself. Are you actively democratic in the literary sense of this term? Do you rule as part of your own people by taking your and the rights others seriously?
If not, go home, and claim nothing for yourself, not now and not in the future. You are a danger to democracy, because you are political fast food. The next dictator in line will have you for breakfast. Go home and stay there, until you will have learned to stand up and become a valid member of your society. We already have enough political free loaders in this world.
« previous page
(Page 4 of 16, totaling 61 entries)
next page »
