Uite zinu’, muezinu’

De mai bine de-o luna se discuta in Elvetia pe marginea minaretelor. Pe acelasi model initiat odata cu slobozirea romanilor & bulgarilor in UE, elvetienii au fost invitati acum sa-si dea cu parerea privitor la autorizarea de constructie a minaretelor pe teritoriul tarisoarei lor. Daca in cazul liberei circulatii a cetatenilor votul a fost pozitiv, cind vine vorba de inaltarea turlelor semetite s-a votat apasatNU. Iar in Elvetia vointa poporului e lege. Respect!

– unul din posterele care au impinzit orasele in ultima vreme –


3 thoughts on “Uite zinu’, muezinu’

  1. To me the ban on minarets was not a shock, it is perfectly in synch with the public and private perception of Swiss people. What a lot of media are not reporting on today, and what I personally find more disappointing, is that for the third time in 40 years the Swiss voted rejected a proposal to ban weapon exports.

    To me this is a shocking display of hypocrisy, for a country that claims to love peace and neutrality and hosts organisations such as the UN and Red Cross which are committed to improving the lives of people around the world (well, at least publicly) to publicly defend the right of Swiss arms manufacturers to export weapons which are used in wars around the world (including Iraq, Afpak and Somalia).

    I see the message far more clearly in this decision (68% against ban) – that the majority of people continue to choose profits over lives. A sad day indeed, but not due to the narrow minded hype being spouted by the mainstream media, but because once again hypocrisy and arrogance have won the day.

  2. What you’re highlighting here mr. P is the very essence of the Swiss society: self-centered, protectionist – as we have debated on our recent chat. Now, apart from their decision on not allowing the erection of ‘pointed buildings’, sustaining the weapons export it’s merely a commercial approach. The two polls came in the same time and opposing the “Islamic affair” to the weapons commerce is always a sensitive topic which inevitably draws out remarks like “hypocrisy”. – not that it’d be far from the truth –

    The Swiss themselves got very much accustomed to the ‘oasis-like’ status of their country and almost each and every action threatening their long-inherited and self-sustained amity is ill-perceived. To me – what matters most, in this particular case is the people’s right to veto a political decision; and this, as a democratic principle is highly regarded (I’m only talking here from a personal perspective).

    In conclusion – they may be hypocrites, they may be self-sufficient, they may behave selfishly, but that’s how they’ve managed to build and maintain their standards of living. I know it sounds like I’m defending them but my point is targeting more the idea of self-preservation and self esteem. From there onwards we can debate as much as you’d like 🙂

  3. As discussed “”I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” (Voltaire it was).

    However I do caution anyone of placing too much faith in the principle of direct democracy alone. Since Athenian times political philosophers such as Aristotle have pointed out the limitations of direct rule, especially as the size of the polity increases. For example, the tools of direct democracy (e.g. referenda) are an effective means to make legitimate decisions outside the usual state apparatus – something that the traditional decision making groups are well aware of and tend to seek to exploit. My point is that while the ideal of direct democracy is a noble one, in practice we should be wary of equating direct democracy with decisions of the people.

    In my point of view there is also a far greater danger to people’s best interest, and that is the people themselves. As we can see in these decision, individuals and societies tend to make poor decisions, whether as a society through direct decision making, or as individuals in decision making positions, I believe the fact that western society in particular has come as far as it has is due more to a stroke of good luck than to skill and wisdom on our ancestors part. Certainly, there are always the exceptions, but the general trend I see is toward another drastic, negative restructuring of society.

    Hence my friend, while I don’t disagree with your statement that “that’s how they’ve managed to build and maintain their standards of living”, I don’t believe it has been or continues to be built on a principle of sustainability, and I believe that the price others have had to pay for that success has been and continues to be so great, that to present ourselves as an ethical society in any shape, way or form is nothing other than hypocrisy and simply fortifies the false beliefs held by the majority of people.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s