Antropologiske betraktninger om pelshvaldrift

Month: February 2017

Denialists on the rampage

First, the definitions: A denialist is somebody who plays hymns full blast when the rain keeps pouring down and flood waters rise around his house, or somebody who goes looking for his favourite fishing rod when told his son has raped somebody’s daughter, or somebody who shoots asylum seeking immigrants huddling together at a reception centre because he, not they, flunked out of school.

A denialist calls those of us who have the gall to use – from time to time – the ugly word “sustainable”: conspiracy theorists. He calls us arrogant – and by golly, he may very well be right. Denialists and everything-will-be-just-fine-ists believe that as long as they are investing and being invested in, no questions need be asked. Just turn up the volume, bring in the cake, send up the balloons, and hallelujah, the day is made, who cares about the morrow.

Meanwhile, thousands, nay, hundreds of thousands – millions! – of people across the globe open their eyes every morning to look out upon a parched field with a few blades of yellow grass, or the corrugated iron or flapping canvas of a cramped refugee camp. And the stench! I have trouble forcing myself to imagine the stench of a refugee camp.

At the moment I am listening to a sonata by Schubert. A thing of beauty. I am never hungry, never cold, never lacking. Or rather, almost never lacking. One thing, only, is missing from my life: Confidence. Confidence in the sincere and concerted will of politicians – mine and yours, the business sector – mine and yours, the media – mine and yours, voters – here and there, to make the entire – I repeat entire – world a better place for all, starting with those who lack everything, including those who manage hanging by their teeth, including even those, who, like myself, lack nothing but confidence in people who have power.

There is little hope in sight. The world’s most powerful man has understood, at least, one thing: Unless conditions improve in the poor part of the world there will be hell to pay. I doubt Mr Trump would care unless he feared for himself and maybe his family. Since it is unlikely that fleeing to Mars will be feasible within his lifetime, he is taking his typically decisive steps: Multiplying the arms budget. He seems to be saying “We will beat the shit out of them!” I’m sure he means it.

Mr Trump has reason to fear, without doubt.

It is true that UNDP figures indicate that the total number of destitute people has decreased globally. Vaccination programmes have made headway against fatal disease, and education is somewhat more available than previously, even in poor countries.

However, growing parts of the world are becoming uninhabitable due to climate change, a tendency that will grow exponentially over the next years. And with globalisation – television, internet, etc. –resentment among the have-nots is growing. Yes, it is true that Mr Trump has reason to fear. So do we all.

Mr Trump’s solution, on the other hand, is no more a solution than it was in Vietnam. There is little you can do to beat people whose lives are so miserable that death is preferable.

Cyber…

Some time last week my two most recent posts were highjacked by a hactivist. In other words, this site was subjected to a cyberattack. Let me add, for the record: The message was clear and it was not Russian.

I am reinserting, herewith, the two posts that were destroyed.

Sharks and hyenas

What do you tell your children when they ask you about the “North Atlantic Treaty Organization” or the “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership”?

Maybe your children are still only toddlers. One day, however, you may have to explain to them not only the meaning of NATO and TTIP, but how you used your democratic rights to support or to not support your country’s adherence to one or the other. One day, the “democratic” world’s parents will have to explain to their children how a “redneck” who refers to international agreements as “dumb” became the world’s most powerful man. I am not sure future generations will be impressed by the replies:

  • (about NATO) “Well you see, first the communists and then the terrorists … “
  • (about TTIP) “We were all sort of one big family, so trading mainly with each other seemed natural.”
  • (about the world’s most powerful man) “We respected democracy.”

Are we, the parents – we who were once children and who now have children who will someday be parents – are we responsible for the acts of NATO, the consequences of TTIP, the stunningly irresponsible acts of the current US president? If we are not, who is?

Yesterday, there were at least 300 thousand demonstrators on the streets of Romania’s towns furiously protesting against corruption. Their votes had not been worth much, but their anger on the streets may just possibly have some effect. After all, in 1258, the English king’s angry subjects managed to restrict his power, forcing him to accept the Provisions of Oxford. True enough, rebellions have most commonly been brutally repressed, but some of them have yielded improvements for posterity.

Can we consider the election of Trump a rebellion of sorts, the result of the disenchantment of impoverished segments of the US population? Not all his voters were traditional “rednecks”, after all. Did not many of them have reason to feel betrayed, forgotten and neglected? Was their vote not a demonstration of resentment? As far as rebellions go, however, I’d say the consequences for posterity of this one seem bleak.

In my country, and probably in most others, people applying for senior executive posts are put through rigorous personality tests. They have to prove their mettle, demonstrating advanced skills and eminent suitability for the job. Not so for the president of the United States, where the voters have no say about NATO and TTIP, but they do get to decide who gets the top job.

I cannot tell you whether I would prefer to be torn to pieces by a shark or by a pack of hyenas. I have no experience of being torn apart and I’m sure I shall do all in my power to keep things that way. But I know for a fact that the US has invaded very many countries, and that the CIA has engaged in innumerable invasive, clandestine and anti-democratic operations all over the world over the past 50 years, operations the country’s own citizens don’t seem to want to know about. In many countries all over the world, there is therefore much seething hatred against the USA.

Hence, for any country, a military and / or trade alliance with the USA is a very serious liability. To put it more succinctly: Iran is far less of a threat to world peace than the USA which, under its current leadership, is even a threat unto itself.

Each country needs to consider its defences, to be sure. Self defence is indeed vital and includes avoiding entering into or sustaining alliances with bellicose expansionist states (even if they are lucrative to powerful segments of the population).

So how about reconsidering our options?

Takk, Ketil Bjørnstad, takk!

Verden som var min var faktisk også min, i hvert fall noe av den. De ytre hendelsene, flyene som datt ned eller ble kapret, Francos død, de fryktelige latinamerikanske diktaturene, Palestina, som jo var et stygt åpent sår den gang som nå, Maos død, fiskerigrensen, Alta-vassdraget, Jimmy Carter, oljen, … alt det delte vi alle.

Men musikken var også min. Den hadde jeg nå for det meste glemt, men jeg har ligget og lest de vel 1000 sidene med ikke minst Ketil Bjørnstads egen musikk på øret. AKPs kulturtyranni gjaldt også for meg, slik det rammet alle som ikke nøyde seg med svensketoppen, samtidig som AKP også bidro stort til en veldig kulturell frodighet.

Ketil Bjørnstad har brakt meg tilbake til noe jeg selv knapt kan huske, mitt liv. Jeg oppdager at jeg har vært så travelt opptatt av å leve at jeg ikke har giddet legge levd liv på minne. Ketil Bjørnstad bringer mye tilbake til meg, samtidig som han minner meg om tanker og observasjoner som også jeg har gjort.

Det er ikke lett å være både menneskekjær og annerledes, å være både innenfor og utenfor, eller rettere sagt hverken det ene eller det andre.

Med fare for å fornærme ham, ville jeg ha ønsket ham velkommen til pelshvalenes rekker, om det ikke var for at pelshvalsamfunnet eksisterte lenge før meg, uavhengig av meg, og vil fortsette å eksistere så lenge det finnes folk på jorda.

Ketil Bjørnstad understreker flere ganger at han ville for mye. Både musikk, poesi og prosa. Han ville tilhøre både sin egen og forgangen tid. Han ville ha trygghet og frihet, havn og det villet havet, urban kultur og isolasjon. Var det for mye forlangt? Innen bokas siste punktum, har det sneket seg inn en mørk undertone: en dyster forsmak på neste bind? Jeget, Ketil Bjørnstad, stikker fingeren i halsen og spyr på nyttårsaften til det neste tiåret.

Jeg tror han vil mye med denne boka, kanskje for mye. Mens jeg leste, kom jeg stadig på “Jag vil tacka livet” av Violeta Para, som jo begikk selvmord, slik Radka Toneff skulle gjøre i 1982. Hans bok er en takk til dem han husker med varme. Siden han ikke har til hensikt å utlevere dem, minner takksigelsene mest om takkekort til bryllupsgjester. Utallige figurer passerer revy som pappfigurer. Men som leser ser jeg dette nettopp som et uttrykk for hans autentisitet: Han skriver om tiden, om seg selv, og han kan ikke la være å si “Takk!”

Dette er derfor ikke – teknisk sett – hans beste bokkomposisjon. Man dras gjennom mer eller mindre interessante hendelser i kronologisk rekkefølge. Men man leser videre, ikke minst fordi – der man minst venter det – slår den store forfatteren her og der gjennom med en aldeles nydelig liten perle begravd i historien.

Jeg vil til slutt understreke at den som skriver Verden som var min på en så ukunstlet måte er intet mindre enn forfatteren av Jæger, noe av det beste som noen gang er skrevet på norsk, slik jeg ser det. Det var komposisjonsteknisk bombe, det!

© 2024 Pelshval

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑