reading tissue paper

i've been reading some underground polish publications from before 1989. they used to be called 'tissue paper' (pol. bibuła), because of the thin paper they were printed on. they also used very small print so that in order to read them one frequently needed to use a magnifying glass. all that, of course, in persuit of the smallest possible size, just in case one might need to hide/eat the illegal literature in his/her possession.

anyway. the one i wanted to share today is a 1982 interview with Leszek Kołakowski, a polish philosoper (you can read about him on wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leszek_Ko%C5%82akowski). here are a few exerpts from this small book titled "i don't believe in the victory of totalitarianism" which i find remarkably accurate and still - or perhaps even more - valid today.

"i think /.../ that it is impossible today to return to a purely liberal economy and that /.../ the western society has passed the point where one could hope for it to be rehabilitated by means of various market mechanisms; short- and long term social repercussions will always thwart such attempts. i just don't believe that perfect economic liberalism is a viable cure [at this point], i don't believe that any uncompromising solutions are possible, i don't believe it possible or desirable to do away with Welfare State - in a word, i think that this world will continue functioning in all these inconvenient, oppressive and amibiguous arrangements."

you might call kołakowski a socialist - you would be right, and i can't say i agree with everything he says - but you can't deny that Welfare State has become so deeply intertwined with our "western" societies, and has made such great groups of our societies dependent on it that attempts at getting rid of it or reforming it in any significant way would cause tremendous societal upheaval. it is sad, but nevertheless true. what can be done? wiser men have been struggling with this question...

"as far as the criticism of western societies is concerned, criticism referring to a gradual decay of the sense of responsibility, to a lack of willingness for self-defense - i think such criticism is legitimate in many ways. those societies - and especially the american society - have developed a hedonistic value system, which naturally threatens the existence of this civilisation and many of us are shocked by how much greediness dominates people's motivation, by the lack of a sense of responsibility for general issues, by the tendency to consider each individual perfect, but the society as a whole - evil /.../ in our day and age, the spoiled child ideology is present in this society more than ever before in history. yes, i do consider this dangerous."

"/.../ there is no liberty without a price; liberty will inevitably have socially unpleasant consequences. in a word, you can't opt for liberty and at the same time demand to be relieved of those negative consequences of liberty. they must be. we don't have a choice between a perfect world where freedom rings without pornography or dissimination of socially harmful ideas and a world in which we currently live. certain burdens and inconveniences of liberty must be borne."

these words were said over 30 years ago, in a completely different international theater...

a generation

i went to visit my mom at her country home last weekend. as we drove through the small town, where she came to pick me up from the coach station, i noticed an elderly couple walking hand in hand along the street. country people always look older than they really are, so i might be wrong, but they seemed to have been in their eighties.

as i looked at them, i wondered what they thought of the times in which they were living out their autumn years. i wondered what kinds of impressions the things they had seen and lived through made on their minds. if they were indeed in their eighties when i saw them, they would have been born in a free country. they were growing up without electricity or running water, traveling on dirt roads on foot or in a horse-pulled wagon. their youth passed unnoticed in the tumult of a horrible war, which was followed by post-war destitution and famine, then the poverty and terror of communism, accompanied by the slow entrance of modern conveniences. for decades all they knew were the joys and hardships of simple farmer's life until the sudden political and economic transformation of the early 1990s, paved roads, increasing automobile traffic, farming machinery, a flood of commercial goods and technology.

they will die in a free country - probably seemingly more prosperous than the one they were born in. i wondered, though, whether they could see the poverty of this prosperity, the emptiness of this abundance. i wondered how much the past burdened them and whether they were longing for it, or perhaps had learned to make the best of whatever circumstances they found themselves in. and had they even once heard of the abounding, fulfilling, forgiving love of God... i thought about the incredible resilience of man, about how much we can live through, and still go on. the generation of my grandparents. what a life.

there is a big difference between impossible and difficult

it's huge. it's the difference between impossible and possible. things that are difficult are not impossible; they are only difficult. like carrying by bike 3 tomato plants across a long bridge, sometimes uphill, and most of the time windward. or eating something you don't like. i mean, it's impossible to eat a rock, but is only difficult to eat cow tongue. 

it's about the same difference as there is between painful and hurtful, let alone deadly. a lot of things that are painful, are only that and nothing more. 

and you know what? in reasonable doses, both difficult and painful is good for you. 

sidewalks

it wasn't until i started to bike in the city that i realized that people rarely walk straight, predictable lines. they are more likely to zigzag, waddle, wander about, and hardly ever take the trouble to look around. or pay attention to sounds, for that matter. you'd think my warning bell was big - and loud! - enough to draw anyone's attention, but no. people are totally oblivious. it really is safer to ride on the street with all the crazy cars than it is to ride the sidewalks...

i love meeting people who have been through enough to know that life's too short to keep kindness to yourself. Today i was told by a sweet elderly lady (to whom i was a total stranger) that i had the eyes of a child. then she told a nurse how pretty she thought her eyelashes were. she said she had been looking at people's eyes since she was diagnosed with glaucoma. she just started noticing people's eyes and was fascinated by them. obviously, she was also of the opinion that people should hear kind words. 

some people withdraw when life hits them, others love it more every time.

i want to be the second kind when i grow up.

lambs

the plan for today's lesson was to make a lamb. i mean, Easter is coming, it is quite obvious that we'd be making a lamb. so we ended up with a whole flock. and a sheepdog. dog designed and made by the girls, complete with red tongue, floppy ears, 3D hat, and an attendance list (with pencil) to keep track of the sheep. 

lamb pyramid

noone will convince me that working with kids isn't therapeutic :o)

obamacare

i am fully aware that this post might shock some of my friends. but don't worry, i have not become a liberal. i'm just trying to make sense of what i see. i found out about something and i've got some questions. not many. so, make yourself comfortable, take a deep breath, and make sure you have a refreshing drink handy.


i used to think that obamacare was an introduction of the sort of government (i.e. mandatory federal tax) funded social healthcare system we here in eastern europe long to get rid of and don't seem to be able to. now let me make something clear. in this system, employees only get 55% of what their employers spend on them. the remaining 45% goes to their health insurance and retirement plan (so if your employer can afford spending, say, $24,000/year on you, you'd only see $13,200 of it (minus income tax) - the other $10,800 goes to your healthcare and retirement.) this is mandatory and goes to the government. if you are self-employed, there is a flat health tax, currently in the equivalent of more-less $300/month, which you must pay, whether you make any money or not. this health insurance covers basic healthcare plus most specialist and a lot of hospital care, but not all of it. you have a very limited choice of quality, since most good doctors, especially dentists and other specialists, choose private practice where they can charge much more than they'd get paid by the government, and which offers much better working environment. so if you want to see a good doctor who really knows what he or she is doing, or an expert therapist, you have to pay cash. this is not covered by your government health insurance and you don't get a refund. you can sign a contract with a private clinic or get private health coverage, but neither relieves you from being "health taxed" by the government. this "socialist" system gives almost everyone (including those registered as unemployed, but not those working on commission contracts!) access to poor healthcare. good healthcare is available to those who still have enough left after their "health tax", i.e. the above-average income crowd.


so this is what i thought obamacare mandated. everyone to get under government health insurance. that would be putting her on the fast track to doom. i know some of you'll probably say she's already there, but trust me, she's still got a way to go. anyway. what i found out, just recently, is that the mandate is to get under ANY insurance. private or government. the argument for it being that the people who choose not to get insurance end up needing medical attention sooner or later, and when they do, you're not gonna just let them die, right? and somebody has to pay for the healthcare they receive? so who pays for it? because they sure don't. so who? the clinics and hospitals who accept them? the state budget? the federal budget? hey, in that case why get insurance at all when somebody else'll pay for me in the end if i don't? the way i see it - and correct me if i'm wrong - this bill, among other things, forces everyone to take responsibility for their own medical bills. what's unrepublican about that? i mean, i can see how it'd scare the conservative mind to be told by the government to do anything at all. but maybe forcing people to be responsible isn't so bad? after all, it isn't very republican to burden public budget with irresponsible people's medical bills. this needs to be solved, either way. if you don't like it, do you have another solution? are there any alternative ideas from the conservative side, or contest alone? 


i know there is much more to this bill, but this is what i understand as the main controversy. please do correct me if i'm wrong. also, i hope someone out there can tell me that the GOP isn't just blocking everything the dems come up with, but that there are alternative ideas and actual debate. the u.s. constitution would never have been written if everyone just kept contesting each other's input...


oh, and here are a few helpful figures, some of them a bit disturbing: 
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/27/us-usa-court-healthcare-idUSBRE82P03K20120327


i totally forgot to write about auntie. i'll try to remember to do it soon. hopefully, i still remember what i wanted to say...