Nume:
Parola:
Utilizator nou »      Parola uitata »
Memoreaza datele de autentificare?

EDITORIAL

Taking an extraordinary PR effort, some characters announced last week that they would leave the commentator's position to get in the field. It is about young, educated people, endowed with both positive intentions and ambition to reach high. They are counting on the fact that they will at least be one-eyed in the county of the blind.

In my attempt to understand the reasons, the mind, the temper and the projects fetching these people in the field, I think that the most simplistic way to explain this decision is the difference between the number of books they read and the number of books the others didn't read. I am thinking about how they will tell people about Fermant's Little Theorem, the need for reading, the errors of logics in Whitehead’s philosophical system and the big power games. All the Romanians, even those living in the remotest villages, will take interest in the debate on the theories of Milton Friedman, John Maynard Keynes, Friedrich Hayek or even Karl Marx. The electoral campaign may be a true debate on ideas, concepts, projects. As they harbor a lot of daring ideas, these people are hopeful that ancient democracy will be back and that they can reinvent Socrates.

Maybe instead of fake gypsy music concerts we shall get electoral campaigns with Bach and Bartholdy providing the music. Maybe the electors will have a bliss when listening to Angela Gheorghiu sing or to the wonderful atonal music. The highly-educated orange or even rose archers, almost radical in their devotion are people who gained notoriety in universities and by more or less visible lobby. It is a notoriety they are overestimating. In history, they equate an attempt to truly change a typology, to replace the greedy upstarted cheating on the public budget by people with a career built in no relation to party complicity, occult liaisons or membership fee.

I don’t think they fail to see the true state of things. I can't suspect they are so naïve that not for a second are they wondering how much is an electoral campaign and how much is to be on the like of people to whom the belly is more important than the library. I can't believe they are so naive not to wonder how much and where from will be spent, from which hidden corners of the history of business in Romania after 1989 will there emerge the ball point pens, the lighters, the posters, the music players and so on. I am convinced they are not at al naïve. Maybe the have got to reconcile Machiavelli’s principle that morals is separated from politics with that famous saying that it is the goal, no the means that matter. If so, they will have to prove us they are better than their opponents.

But are they really? Is it them, not others, who in their fight are using them for pawns to tests thing on, just like in the black Africa during the Cold War? Aren't these just some battled between the old political sides, battles fought by means of soldiers on loan? Aren’t there the same post-revolutionary godfathers behind this attempt to make a change? Isn't there a fight between the oil groups and those born from the post-Communist aluminium?

If this is so and I can't exactly be otherwise, it is important that these people should prove fair and really independent in the future. The most important is that they should not turn into submissive soldiers who pursue unclear interests. It is important they should become what they can become: a new kind of politician.

The risks are great. Many a time victory means complicity and compromise taking its revenge by restraining freedom, that is by setting conditions and asking for obedience. If these people too join and get to obey the clientele-based system of political and economic interests, another chance will be missed.