Politics around the world

[CTG]

Everyone should tolerate deviant behaviour because you and everyone else should be free to do what you want.

I'm also one from "everyone" and I want to have a calm and silent life. Shall I really be the one to suffer from their stupid lifestyle?

From a bit different aspect:

I guess you agree with the "live and let live" principle. As long as something does not harm this balance, smaller deviations can be tolerated.

But what do you do and think when something crosses this border, when something is disturbing your life, limits you or simply keeps you in fear? Why do you think it's okay that a loud little group embitters the majority's life? It mustn't be an ethnic group in this case. If you live in a house with 20 flats and 20 families, 19 from them are silent and law-abiding, while a single one does not care of the others (loud, dangerous, or simply does not follow the hygenic rules), is it really the best solution to tolerate? That's not me who doesn't let him leave - rather the opposite.

On the other hand, people who follow the rules deserve more rights. And normal lifestyle should enjoy priority over deviants. I don't care if they behave like that, but they should do it elsewhere - where it is tolerated (in their home country maybe).
Oh wait, gypsies have no country at all. They were driven out even from India...

[CTG]

Btw BJ, have you heard about the "cable thiefs" caught by Danish police a few weeks ago? They were immigrant gypsies from Hungary.

It's a very often crime in Hungary: some gangs are specialized for stealing the electric cables and rails of railway, and selling it as scrap metal. No wonder, the kings of gypsies (called "vajda", something like the godfather in maffia) are usually the owners of scrap metal sites. It becomes very dangerous when they steal cables from railway/road safety equipments - you can hear about a few fatal accidents per year caused by damaged and out-of-order traffic lights (due to theft)...

[zaqrack]

As for me, deviants should not be tolerated. Normal people have the right to leave a normal life.

(And yes, I would not spill a teardrop if one day they disappear in a mass grave. Fúckin' racist, yes. But if the price of peace is the extinction of your enemies... well... let it be...)

You are pretty deviant yourself. Yet others tolerate you - similar to most people here on the forum.

[CTG]

As for me, deviants should not be tolerated. Normal people have the right to leave a normal life.

(And yes, I would not spill a teardrop if one day they disappear in a mass grave. Fúckin' racist, yes. But if the price of peace is the extinction of your enemies... well... let it be...)

You are pretty deviant yourself. Yet others tolerate you - similar to most people here on the forum.

I'm talking about REAL LIFE. When I'm offline, my image is still the "clever good guy, being polite to anyone", favourite of grannies and hopeless teenage chicks.

[alanrotoi]

OK

Now, getting back to REAL LIFE and politics:

Thanks BJ for the summary! That point of view (more or less) is growing up in EU, isn't it?
It's a crisis symptom. When the life gets harder (corruption, economy, etc, etc) the first guilty found is always a minority or foreign. It's the easy way. "The other" is a psychology thematic study.

[BonzaiJoe]

Everyone should tolerate deviant behaviour because you and everyone else should be free to do what you want.

I'm also one from "everyone" and I want to have a calm and silent life. Shall I really be the one to suffer from their stupid lifestyle?

From a bit different aspect:

I guess you agree with the "live and let live" principle. As long as something does not harm this balance, smaller deviations can be tolerated.

But what do you do and think when something crosses this border, when something is disturbing your life, limits you or simply keeps you in fear? Why do you think it's okay that a loud little group embitters the majority's life? It mustn't be an ethnic group in this case. If you live in a house with 20 flats and 20 families, 19 from them are silent and law-abiding, while a single one does not care of the others (loud, dangerous, or simply does not follow the hygenic rules), is it really the best solution to tolerate? That's not me who doesn't let him leave - rather the opposite.

On the other hand, people who follow the rules deserve more rights. And normal lifestyle should enjoy priority over deviants. I don't care if they behave like that, but they should do it elsewhere - where it is tolerated (in their home country maybe).
Oh wait, gypsies have no country at all. They were driven out even from India...

Well, knowing these opinions, I think it's a sort of poetic justice if you get bothered a lot by the Roma because you really deserve it. But in principle, the behaviour you describe is not a case of deviance to me, but disrespect. If someone is very loud or soils other people's property or damages common property, that's not "live and let live". A building should have some house rules and it's important that different areas have different lifestyles so the loud people can live and the quiet ones can too.

People like you are way more bothered by this kind of thing because you've built up an enormous racist mental construct. It also bothers me if some immigrant guys steal my bike, but it doesn't bother me anymore than if a white guy did it. It just means I lost my bike. There's nothing else to it.

There's not much I can say to you if you want your enemies in a mass grave. I think we can all get that feeling sometimes, but to have it as a conscious opinion... well... it's because of you that we had two world wars, and if everyone else was as hateful as you, we'd have a third one in a matter of weeks. So it's a lucky break for me and for you and for everyone else that other people have opened up some more room in their hearts.

[BonzaiJoe]

OK

Now, getting back to REAL LIFE and politics:

Thanks BJ for the summary! That point of view (more or less) is growing up in EU, isn't it?
It's a crisis symptom. When the life gets harder (corruption, economy, etc, etc) the first guilty found is always a minority or foreign. It's the easy way. "The other" is a psychology thematic study.

I agree. It's not the first time in history this happens. Apart from Hungary, the scariest country in the EU is the United Kingdom. UK and Hungary are the new fascist front of Europe.
I wish there was more focus on the relationship between psychology and politics. Does anthropology deal with that a lot? It's a very important factor and it's almost, well, collectively suppressed :-)

[alanrotoi]

What do you think about Tsipras (Greece) and "Podemos" (Spain)?

[BonzaiJoe]

I hope they have a lot of success. I don't totally agree with them but I think Europe badly needs counterbalance from the left.  The banking regime has gone too far. If they have a lot of success, the compromise between them and the currently right-leaning Northern European nations could be something very productive. I fear that they'll fail because they are two small drops in an ocean of big business, right-wing politicians and bureaucrats, and then this will stand as a testament of the left being unfit to govern.

But to be honest, I don't know much about the particular movements. I'm talking from a general knowledge about Europe and about politics. I think the best thing is that the advent of Golden Dawn in Greece has stopped. The people is reacting by voting Syriza instead. Hope instead of hate.

[BonzaiJoe]

Rotoi and other South Americans: What do you think of Evo Morales, Rafael Correa and José Mujica?

[Akoss Poo a.k.a. Zorromeister]

WSM 2015 should include a trip to a gypsy populated Hungarian suburb of a town / village for the rich Western liberal pipsqueaks...

[CTG]

WSM 2015 should include a trip to a gypsy populated Hungarian suburb of a town / village for the rich Western liberal pipsqueaks...

I have a cloudy memory about something with WSM 2006 or 2008, gypsy homeless people and Bonzai Joe. Probably I told BJ not to contact with them, because they must be dirty and ill. I was drunk for sure.

[alanrotoi]

Mostly I agree with them. They are very popular in their countries but they lack of influence out of there (Correa has or had).

I respect Correa. He has a lot of diplomas and careers and masters etc. His education is enviable. He studied also in Belgium and USA for example earning honors. He's economist (he reached a public office as adviser in Economic Ministry). I mean he knows this game and its rules perfectly. Also he's too smart (damn too smart) and an expert in oratory. He's a great leader and helped a lot his country to lowering the poverty rate. His opposition isn't politic but economic. His oppositors are strong rich economic groups/media owners (just like FOX-Obama or O Globo-Dilma o or Clarin-Kirchner). I said one time I hope he was Argentine.

That's what I admire about him but of course he's a human being and a politician so I don't like the following:

- 1st of all and most important: Ecuador is still using Dollar as local currency (implanted by previous governments about 15 years ago). That's a big fail because it should be a momentary help to make a credible local currency again.

- Another flaw is that these "not so USA minioins" governments appeared in South America (Correa, Evo, Kirchner, Lula-Dilma, Chavez, Bachelet, Huamala, Lugo, Mujica) = (Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Chile, Peru and Paraguay and Uruguay) emerged more or less at the same time. It is great because finally after 200 years we started to have a feeling of continental unity "La Patria Grande". BUT, the ancient power groups wants their privileged status again (they are still rich and powerful but of course they are also human beings and they want it all). Instead of it these new "not so USA friendly" leaders ONLY have popular support (also not traditional economic groups I guess. You can't do anything without money.) Then they have no other candidates but themselves. (except Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina but Nestor Kirchner died so they are headless).

So they only found they way staying in the chair the most they can. I don't like that. Evo cheated on Bolivia. Legally he didn't but I didn't like his move. He was democratic elected. Then he changed the Constitution so he can be re-elected but as it's a new Constitution his first mandate doesn't count. This is his third consecutive mandate but two with the new Constitution. About Correa he didn't do it but it's the same situation of "only one face".

Another thing I don't like about Correa is he let Chevron and other big oil groups to destroy and contaminate their forests. Now he fired them from Ecuador and he made an international trial but it's too late. (but hey! business are business!)

About Pepe Mujica I like what he says about philosophy, society and world order. He also did a great job in Uruguay and they are truly happy.  Here in Buenos Aires is a big Uruguayan community and I only heard good words for him. Anyway Uruguay depends a lot of Brazil and mostly Argentina economy so they hate/like/need us at the same time.

They must leave their chairs I don't like "Methuselah" Governments. The power must be balanced also if I agree in most of things with them.

I have a question about these new politics in South America and I would like to know your opinion. Look at this:

I repeat I agree with most of their politics but these new politic caste leaders are suspiciously from minorities: oppressed ethnic (Evo and Humala are native american), women (Cristina Kirchner, Dilma Russef, Michelle Bachelet) and active hard fighters against military-civic dictatorships of last decades of XX century impulsed by USA Operation Condor (the Kirchner and Mujica... edit:I forgot Dilma here!) .

I mean we have a soft continental unity because the constant foreign influence but anyway we have similar history facts: Independence at the same time (15-20 years mostly), wars between us powered by UK, XX century dictatorships, back to democracy, neoliberalism indebtedness and now this. There are more facts that I don't remember right now but if you see from this point of view it seems another maneuver from a distant power.

[CTG]

The main impression of last evening's Putin-Orbán press conference: the good old Vladimir is magnitudinally smarter and more charismatic person than our own "Viktator". Somehow I felt his speech was a lot more informative than Orbán's, mentioning several certain national/business sector co-operations between Russia and Hungary. Orbán touched only some very general aspects (mainly bullshit), but did not forget to insult the opposition parties by mentioning an old contract signed by MSZP leaders (in 1996).

[BonzaiJoe]

They should have invited Cameron and Lukashenko and had a party of the four most annoying state leaders in Europe. Of course is only since Silvio Berlusconi was ousted.