Dear readers,
after a long break, here I am again. After watching one or two documentaries on You Tube about the G8 summit in Genoa in 2001, I have to say I am really happy of having taken that decision of leaving Italy forever a long time ago. A place where the citizen does not exist, where the state uses police forces, the media and money to control people and institutions, where most of the people accept the status quo anyway.
Those days in Genoa were terrible. Extreme violence, beatings, killings, insults, abuse of authority and many other crimes against simple individuals. Crimes that are usually committed in dictatorships, crimes that should never take place in any country in the world, but that were committed again in various situations in Italy, sometimes against single citizens, some other times against the masses, like in Naples, when people protested against the incinerators and rubbish dumps, or against the students who protested against the latest reforms on education. What makes things even worse is that all this comes from the police, from the people that should defend citizens against criminals, but in this case, who should defend people against the police?
One of the biggest problem is the complete lack of real and serious information. Many people don't have enough information to be able to take the right decisions, to have an objective opinion about what happens around them. The authorities take advantage of this to control people's opinions and actions, buy their votes, change laws for their own profit. In fact, the parliament is full of criminals, who only think about themselves and their parties.
Fortunately, I live now in a civilized country, where of course sometimes there is violence and of course crimes are committed, but it never comes from the government. I feel I can trust police forces here and I think I have all the information I need from the national and local media. Some politicians may be dishonest or corrupted, but at least I'm pretty sure that the ones in office are not criminals who have already been convicted.
Of course, there are also other personal reasons for my living here, but I think that the most important things in choosing the place one wants to live in are the respect of human rights and of the environment, honesty and respect in public life and good infrastructures for the people.
07 June 2009
11 February 2009
Network
Dear readers,
today I would like to talk about the tube. No, not the London Underground! "The tube" can also mean television, the TV set. TV is or has been the most important means of communication, one of the most common mass media, maybe the most powerful tool ever. Fortunately, with the Internet boom, TV has lost a lot of its influence and power, but I guess it is still the most common means of communication.
The following text is taken from the film Network, a film made in 1976 about the power of TV. While you follow the text, you can watch the extract here but I suggest you watch the entire film. You can find it here: Google Video: Network. The film is fiction, of course but just change a few names and sentences in the text and it will perfectly fit the Italian context. Here is the text:
Edward George Ruddy died today!! Edward George Ruddy was the chairman of the board of the Union Broadcasting Systems and he died at 11 o'clock this morning of a heart condition, and woe is us, we’re in a lot of trouble!!!
So... a rich little man with white hair died. What has that got to do with the price of rice, right? And why is that woe to us? Because you people and 62 million of other Americans are listening to me right now. Because less than three per cent of you people read books. Because less than 15 per cent of you read newspapers. Because the only truth you know is what you get over this tube. Right now, there is a whole and entire generation that never knew anything that didn’t come out of this tube.
This tube is the gospel! The ultimate revelation! This tube can make or break presidents, popes, prime ministers. This tube is the most awesome goddamn force in the whole godless world and woe is us if it ever falls into the hands of the wrong people and that’s why woe is us that Edward George Ruddy died.
Because this company is now in the hands of CCA, the Communication Corporation of America. There’s a new chairman of the board, a man called Frank Hackett, sitting in Mr Ruddy’s office on the 20th floor, and when the 12th largest company in the worid controls the most awesome goddamn propaganda force in the whole godless world, who knows what shit will be peddled for truth on this network.
So you listen to me. Listen to me. Television is not the truth. Television’s a goddamned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a travelling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business.
So if you want the truth, go to God. Go to your gurus. Go to yourselves. Because that’s the only place you’re ever going to find any real truth. But, man, you’re never gonna get any truth from us. We’ll tell you anything you wanna hear. We lie like hell. We’ll tell you that Kojak always gets the killer, and that nobody ever gets cancer in Archie Bunker’s house and however much trouble the hero is in, don’t worry, look at your watch, at the end of the hour he’s going to win.
We’ll tell you any shit you want to hear. We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true. But you people sit there, day after day, night after night, all ages, colours, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here, you’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube, you even think like the tube. This is mass madness, you maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing! We are the illusion!
So turn off your television sets. Turn them off now. Turn them off right now! Turn them off and leave them off. Turn them off right in the middle of the sentence I’m speaking to you now. Turn them off.
today I would like to talk about the tube. No, not the London Underground! "The tube" can also mean television, the TV set. TV is or has been the most important means of communication, one of the most common mass media, maybe the most powerful tool ever. Fortunately, with the Internet boom, TV has lost a lot of its influence and power, but I guess it is still the most common means of communication.
The following text is taken from the film Network, a film made in 1976 about the power of TV. While you follow the text, you can watch the extract here but I suggest you watch the entire film. You can find it here: Google Video: Network. The film is fiction, of course but just change a few names and sentences in the text and it will perfectly fit the Italian context. Here is the text:
Edward George Ruddy died today!! Edward George Ruddy was the chairman of the board of the Union Broadcasting Systems and he died at 11 o'clock this morning of a heart condition, and woe is us, we’re in a lot of trouble!!!
So... a rich little man with white hair died. What has that got to do with the price of rice, right? And why is that woe to us? Because you people and 62 million of other Americans are listening to me right now. Because less than three per cent of you people read books. Because less than 15 per cent of you read newspapers. Because the only truth you know is what you get over this tube. Right now, there is a whole and entire generation that never knew anything that didn’t come out of this tube.
This tube is the gospel! The ultimate revelation! This tube can make or break presidents, popes, prime ministers. This tube is the most awesome goddamn force in the whole godless world and woe is us if it ever falls into the hands of the wrong people and that’s why woe is us that Edward George Ruddy died.
Because this company is now in the hands of CCA, the Communication Corporation of America. There’s a new chairman of the board, a man called Frank Hackett, sitting in Mr Ruddy’s office on the 20th floor, and when the 12th largest company in the worid controls the most awesome goddamn propaganda force in the whole godless world, who knows what shit will be peddled for truth on this network.
So you listen to me. Listen to me. Television is not the truth. Television’s a goddamned amusement park. Television is a circus, a carnival, a travelling troupe of acrobats, storytellers, dancers, singers, jugglers, sideshow freaks, lion tamers and football players. We’re in the boredom-killing business.
So if you want the truth, go to God. Go to your gurus. Go to yourselves. Because that’s the only place you’re ever going to find any real truth. But, man, you’re never gonna get any truth from us. We’ll tell you anything you wanna hear. We lie like hell. We’ll tell you that Kojak always gets the killer, and that nobody ever gets cancer in Archie Bunker’s house and however much trouble the hero is in, don’t worry, look at your watch, at the end of the hour he’s going to win.
We’ll tell you any shit you want to hear. We deal in illusions, man. None of it is true. But you people sit there, day after day, night after night, all ages, colours, creeds. We’re all you know. You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here, you’re beginning to think that the tube is reality and that your own lives are unreal. You do whatever the tube tells you. You dress like the tube, you eat like the tube, you raise your children like the tube, you even think like the tube. This is mass madness, you maniacs. In God’s name, you people are the real thing! We are the illusion!
So turn off your television sets. Turn them off now. Turn them off right now! Turn them off and leave them off. Turn them off right in the middle of the sentence I’m speaking to you now. Turn them off.
10 February 2009
Die Wahrheit
Hallo zusammen,
ich habe gerade einen Zeitungsartikel gelesen, der die Wahrheit sagt. Natürlich, nicht in der italienischen Presse. Das würde fast ein Wunder sein. Nein, diesen Artikel habe ich in der Webseite des staatlichen öffentlichen deutschen Fernsehens, ARD tagesschau.de. Der Journalist Stefan Troendle schreibt einen Kommentar über Berlusconi. Die meisten Artikeln über Berlusconi sind normaleweise entweder nur ein Bericht ohne Kommentare (oft auch nicht der Wahrheit entsprechend) oder witzige Sprüche, lustige Bemerkungen usw. Sehr selten kann man ernste Kommentare oder richtige Zeitungsartikeln lesen, die die Wahrheit sagen. Lesen wir mal:
Fall Englaro zeigt Berlusconis Gefährlichkeit
Von Stefan Troendle, ARD-Hörfunkstudio Rom
Auch wenn man manchmal daran zweifeln mag: Italien ist ein Rechtsstaat. Und in Italien ist gestern Recht geschehen. Die 38 Jahre alte Komapatientin Eluana Englaro ist gestorben, vier Tage nachdem künstliche Ernährung und Flüssigkeitszufuhr abgestellt wurden. Grundlage für diese Form von passiver Sterbehilfe war ein Urteil des obersten italienischen Berufungsgerichtes.
Was allerdings irritiert, ist das absolut unrechtsstaatliche Verhalten des italienischen Regierungschefs Silvio Berlusconi, der monatelang Zeit hatte, ein Gesetz zur Patientenverfügung auf den Weg zu bringen. Aktiv wurde Silvio Berlusconi nämlich erst am letzten Freitag, als er urplötzlich von der Dringlichkeit des Falles Eluana Englaro überrumpelt wurde. Dann musste plötzlich ein Eildekret her, das Staatspräsident Giorgio Napolitano aufgrund dessen Verfassungswidrigkeit nicht unterschreiben konnte.
Problem mit der Gewaltenteilung
Dass es sich hierbei um eine Intrige handelt, wird noch deutlicher, wenn man die Titelseite der Berlusconi-Zeitung "Il Giornale" liest. Die erscheint heute mit der großen Schlagzeile "Sie haben sie umgebracht" - und kritisiert offen den Staatspräsidenten. "Er hätte es verhindern können, herzlichen Glückwunsch Napolitano" heißt es zynisch.
Berlusconi hat ein Problem mit der Gewaltenteilung in seinem Land, das ist klar zu erkennen. Er schreckt weder vor einem Angriff auf das Staatsoberhaupt zurück, noch respektiert er Urteile des höchsten Berufungsgerichtes, wenn ihm diese nicht in den Kram passen. Er kommandiert das Parlament, das auf seine Anweisung nach Belieben Gesetze einbringt und wieder zurückzieht, wie im Fall Englaro geschehen. Und noch etwas wird deutlich: Der Regierungschef kontrolliert fast das komplette Fernsehen und viele Zeitungen und er nutzt diese Macht schamlos aus. Niemand spricht über seinen Interessenkonflikt, den er - obwohl versprochen - nie gelöst hat.
Berlusconi regiert das Land nach Gutsherrenart. Er verhält sich wie ein Vespa-Fahrer mitten im römischem Verkehrschaos: rote Ampeln ignorieren, bei Stau einfach über den Bürgersteig fahren, und im Zweifel sind sowieso immer die anderen schuld. Dieser Mann, der außer Scherzen über US-Präsident Barack Obamas Hautfarbe auch gerne mal in aller Öffentlichkeit KZ-Witze erzählt (zuletzt geschehen am 17. Januar, ohne dass die italienischen Medien darüber berichtet hätten), ist nicht nur unmöglich. Er ist vor allem gefährlich. Gefährlich für die Demokratie, gefährlich für das Ansehen des Landes. Er hat nicht die Interessen Italiens im Blick, sondern nur seine eigenen.
Höfliches Übersehen ist die falsche Strategie
Silvio Berlusconi wird im Ausland gerne als "nicht ernst zu nehmender Spinner" unterschätzt, der nur durch regelmäßige Ausfälle auf sich aufmerksam macht. Ich glaube, das ist ein großer Fehler. Friede, Freude, Eierkuchen und das höfliche Übersehen des einen oder anderen Fauxpas sind genau die falsche diplomatische Strategie. Diesen Mann muss man ernst nehmen, man muss ihm genau auf die Finger schauen, man muss ihn kritisieren. Nicht zu vergessen: Italien hat dieses Jahr die G8-Präsidentschaft inne.
Was besonders schmerzt: In Sachen Eluana wurde Berlusconis Kurs von der katholischen Kirche unterstützt, wenn nicht sogar angeschoben. Natürlich kämpft die Kirche gegen jede Form von Sterbehilfe - das ist ihr gutes Recht. Dass sie dazu aber auch Allianzen mit Berlusconi eingeht, anstatt diesen offen für seine gefährliche Politik zu kritisieren, ist sehr schade.
Beim deutsch-italienischen Gipfel in Triest hat sich Italiens Ministerpräsident hinter einer Säule versteckt und fröhlich "Kuckuck" gerufen, als die Bundeskanzlerin vorbeikam. Leider haben viele Italiener immer noch nicht begriffen, was für einen Vogel sie da eigentlich gewählt haben.
Quelle:
● Fall Englaro zeigt Berlusconis Gefährlichkeit von Stefan Troendle für Tagesschau.de, 10. Februar 2008
ich habe gerade einen Zeitungsartikel gelesen, der die Wahrheit sagt. Natürlich, nicht in der italienischen Presse. Das würde fast ein Wunder sein. Nein, diesen Artikel habe ich in der Webseite des staatlichen öffentlichen deutschen Fernsehens, ARD tagesschau.de. Der Journalist Stefan Troendle schreibt einen Kommentar über Berlusconi. Die meisten Artikeln über Berlusconi sind normaleweise entweder nur ein Bericht ohne Kommentare (oft auch nicht der Wahrheit entsprechend) oder witzige Sprüche, lustige Bemerkungen usw. Sehr selten kann man ernste Kommentare oder richtige Zeitungsartikeln lesen, die die Wahrheit sagen. Lesen wir mal:
Fall Englaro zeigt Berlusconis Gefährlichkeit
Von Stefan Troendle, ARD-Hörfunkstudio Rom
Auch wenn man manchmal daran zweifeln mag: Italien ist ein Rechtsstaat. Und in Italien ist gestern Recht geschehen. Die 38 Jahre alte Komapatientin Eluana Englaro ist gestorben, vier Tage nachdem künstliche Ernährung und Flüssigkeitszufuhr abgestellt wurden. Grundlage für diese Form von passiver Sterbehilfe war ein Urteil des obersten italienischen Berufungsgerichtes.
Was allerdings irritiert, ist das absolut unrechtsstaatliche Verhalten des italienischen Regierungschefs Silvio Berlusconi, der monatelang Zeit hatte, ein Gesetz zur Patientenverfügung auf den Weg zu bringen. Aktiv wurde Silvio Berlusconi nämlich erst am letzten Freitag, als er urplötzlich von der Dringlichkeit des Falles Eluana Englaro überrumpelt wurde. Dann musste plötzlich ein Eildekret her, das Staatspräsident Giorgio Napolitano aufgrund dessen Verfassungswidrigkeit nicht unterschreiben konnte.
Problem mit der Gewaltenteilung
Dass es sich hierbei um eine Intrige handelt, wird noch deutlicher, wenn man die Titelseite der Berlusconi-Zeitung "Il Giornale" liest. Die erscheint heute mit der großen Schlagzeile "Sie haben sie umgebracht" - und kritisiert offen den Staatspräsidenten. "Er hätte es verhindern können, herzlichen Glückwunsch Napolitano" heißt es zynisch.
Berlusconi hat ein Problem mit der Gewaltenteilung in seinem Land, das ist klar zu erkennen. Er schreckt weder vor einem Angriff auf das Staatsoberhaupt zurück, noch respektiert er Urteile des höchsten Berufungsgerichtes, wenn ihm diese nicht in den Kram passen. Er kommandiert das Parlament, das auf seine Anweisung nach Belieben Gesetze einbringt und wieder zurückzieht, wie im Fall Englaro geschehen. Und noch etwas wird deutlich: Der Regierungschef kontrolliert fast das komplette Fernsehen und viele Zeitungen und er nutzt diese Macht schamlos aus. Niemand spricht über seinen Interessenkonflikt, den er - obwohl versprochen - nie gelöst hat.
Berlusconi regiert das Land nach Gutsherrenart. Er verhält sich wie ein Vespa-Fahrer mitten im römischem Verkehrschaos: rote Ampeln ignorieren, bei Stau einfach über den Bürgersteig fahren, und im Zweifel sind sowieso immer die anderen schuld. Dieser Mann, der außer Scherzen über US-Präsident Barack Obamas Hautfarbe auch gerne mal in aller Öffentlichkeit KZ-Witze erzählt (zuletzt geschehen am 17. Januar, ohne dass die italienischen Medien darüber berichtet hätten), ist nicht nur unmöglich. Er ist vor allem gefährlich. Gefährlich für die Demokratie, gefährlich für das Ansehen des Landes. Er hat nicht die Interessen Italiens im Blick, sondern nur seine eigenen.
Höfliches Übersehen ist die falsche Strategie
Silvio Berlusconi wird im Ausland gerne als "nicht ernst zu nehmender Spinner" unterschätzt, der nur durch regelmäßige Ausfälle auf sich aufmerksam macht. Ich glaube, das ist ein großer Fehler. Friede, Freude, Eierkuchen und das höfliche Übersehen des einen oder anderen Fauxpas sind genau die falsche diplomatische Strategie. Diesen Mann muss man ernst nehmen, man muss ihm genau auf die Finger schauen, man muss ihn kritisieren. Nicht zu vergessen: Italien hat dieses Jahr die G8-Präsidentschaft inne.
Was besonders schmerzt: In Sachen Eluana wurde Berlusconis Kurs von der katholischen Kirche unterstützt, wenn nicht sogar angeschoben. Natürlich kämpft die Kirche gegen jede Form von Sterbehilfe - das ist ihr gutes Recht. Dass sie dazu aber auch Allianzen mit Berlusconi eingeht, anstatt diesen offen für seine gefährliche Politik zu kritisieren, ist sehr schade.
Beim deutsch-italienischen Gipfel in Triest hat sich Italiens Ministerpräsident hinter einer Säule versteckt und fröhlich "Kuckuck" gerufen, als die Bundeskanzlerin vorbeikam. Leider haben viele Italiener immer noch nicht begriffen, was für einen Vogel sie da eigentlich gewählt haben.
Quelle:
● Fall Englaro zeigt Berlusconis Gefährlichkeit von Stefan Troendle für Tagesschau.de, 10. Februar 200809 February 2009
Democracy
Dear readers,
what is democracy? Being a language teacher, I believe in the conservation of the original meaning of words. The word "democracy" comes from the Greek and means exactly "government of the people" (demos = people; kratos = rule, strength). Actually, that is a bit too general. What does it really mean? Well, basically, it is a system where the people have the power to choose, to take decisions and govern. Taken literally, this system does not exist, it is just theory. In practice, it is totally different. What we have had in the world in everyday life since world war II can hardly be defined as "democracy", in any part of the world. I would like to show you what democracy really is. The following are the main principles of democracy. I took them and translated them directly from the website Officina Democrazia which is an appeal to all Italian citizens who believe in these principles. My previous post contains the same text in Italian but I felt I needed to translate it for the ones who do not speak Italian, as these are maybe the most important principles we should fight for. Here they are:
A - The sovereignty belongs to the people, who should be able to exercise it in a direct and appropriate way. The popular sovereignty can be delegated, provided the right of the people to the change or removal of the delegation. In particular, the legislators must not legislate on themselves, their powers, the ways they can be elected, the relations between their power and other powers, without going through the consent, directly expressed, of the will of the people.
B - Decisions taken under the will of the people, directly expressed, may be amended only by the will of the people.
C- All citizens should be encouraged and enabled to responsibly and effectively control the actions of the delegates.
D - Indifference and isolation must be fought by encouraging participation in all forms of aggregation and association. They are precious means in our society, because through them the people experience social life and democracy. All initiatives for the logistic and material support of all forms of association are therefore supported, provided they respect the universal human rights.
E- The powers of the state control organs in civil and economic life must be consolidated and made effective.
F - Free and independent information must be pursued and defended. The governing bodies of public media shall be appointed by popular election rather than through party nomination. The private monopolies should be prevented in all fields and particularly in the media.
G - The highest transparency in political life and in the sources of funding of political parties, associations, movements, and the media must be achieved.
H - Easy access to knowledge and the freedom of the Internet should be preserved and promoted.
I - The "collective good" must be pursued. The "collective good" is what corresponds to the greatest welfare of the community in respect of the environment in which that community lives.
L - The choice of candidates in elections is up to the citizens and not to parties or other organizations. The representatives should be and feel responsible only to the citizens.
M - No citizen can be a candidate if in a state of conflict of interests, or subject to prosecution for offenses affecting the collective or public interests or convicted for such crimes.
N - A constant attention and openness to new proposals, to criticisms, to competence and merit must be guaranteed within the political organizations in public institutions with attention to the rotation of office and setting limits to reeligibility and to the duration and overlapping of mandates
O - We must constantly look for consent and be ready to share, through the constant confrontation of wills and ideas while respecting the views of minorities, with the absolute commitment by all to pursue the common good and to see the vote as extrema ratio.
P - All fundamental human rights must be protected and respected.
Q - All of these objectives should be pursued only by peaceful and non-violent means.
what is democracy? Being a language teacher, I believe in the conservation of the original meaning of words. The word "democracy" comes from the Greek and means exactly "government of the people" (demos = people; kratos = rule, strength). Actually, that is a bit too general. What does it really mean? Well, basically, it is a system where the people have the power to choose, to take decisions and govern. Taken literally, this system does not exist, it is just theory. In practice, it is totally different. What we have had in the world in everyday life since world war II can hardly be defined as "democracy", in any part of the world. I would like to show you what democracy really is. The following are the main principles of democracy. I took them and translated them directly from the website Officina Democrazia which is an appeal to all Italian citizens who believe in these principles. My previous post contains the same text in Italian but I felt I needed to translate it for the ones who do not speak Italian, as these are maybe the most important principles we should fight for. Here they are:
A - The sovereignty belongs to the people, who should be able to exercise it in a direct and appropriate way. The popular sovereignty can be delegated, provided the right of the people to the change or removal of the delegation. In particular, the legislators must not legislate on themselves, their powers, the ways they can be elected, the relations between their power and other powers, without going through the consent, directly expressed, of the will of the people.
B - Decisions taken under the will of the people, directly expressed, may be amended only by the will of the people.
C- All citizens should be encouraged and enabled to responsibly and effectively control the actions of the delegates.
D - Indifference and isolation must be fought by encouraging participation in all forms of aggregation and association. They are precious means in our society, because through them the people experience social life and democracy. All initiatives for the logistic and material support of all forms of association are therefore supported, provided they respect the universal human rights.
E- The powers of the state control organs in civil and economic life must be consolidated and made effective.
F - Free and independent information must be pursued and defended. The governing bodies of public media shall be appointed by popular election rather than through party nomination. The private monopolies should be prevented in all fields and particularly in the media.
G - The highest transparency in political life and in the sources of funding of political parties, associations, movements, and the media must be achieved.
H - Easy access to knowledge and the freedom of the Internet should be preserved and promoted.
I - The "collective good" must be pursued. The "collective good" is what corresponds to the greatest welfare of the community in respect of the environment in which that community lives.
L - The choice of candidates in elections is up to the citizens and not to parties or other organizations. The representatives should be and feel responsible only to the citizens.
M - No citizen can be a candidate if in a state of conflict of interests, or subject to prosecution for offenses affecting the collective or public interests or convicted for such crimes.
N - A constant attention and openness to new proposals, to criticisms, to competence and merit must be guaranteed within the political organizations in public institutions with attention to the rotation of office and setting limits to reeligibility and to the duration and overlapping of mandates
O - We must constantly look for consent and be ready to share, through the constant confrontation of wills and ideas while respecting the views of minorities, with the absolute commitment by all to pursue the common good and to see the vote as extrema ratio.
P - All fundamental human rights must be protected and respected.
Q - All of these objectives should be pursued only by peaceful and non-violent means.
Officina democrazia
Cari lettori,
volevo informarvi su qualcosa che ritengo sia molto importante: sono venuto a sapere dell'esistenza di un appello per la difesa e lo sviluppo della democrazia sul sito Officina Democrazia con l'intento di riunire tutti i cittadini che condividono lo scopo di salvare e difendere la democrazia. Qui vi riporto i punti principali. Vi pregerei di leggerli attentamente e di andare sul sito per ulteriori informazioni e, se siete d'accordo con i punti e gli intenti dell'appello, per apporre poi la vostra "firma". Ecco i principi fondamentali:
PRINCIPI FONDAMENTALI:
A - La sovranità appartiene al popolo che deve poterla esercitare in modo diretto, per quanto possibile ed opportuno. La sovranità popolare può anche essere delegata, fermo restando il diritto del popolo di modifica o revocabilità della delega. In particolare va impedito che il legislatore possa legiferare su se stesso, sui suoi poteri, sulle forme della sua eleggibilità, sulle relazioni tra il suo potere ed altri poteri, senza passare attraverso il consenso, direttamente espresso, della volontà popolare.
B - Decisioni prese in virtù della volontà popolare, direttamente espressa, possono essere modificate solo dalla volontà popolare.
C- Tutti i cittadini devono essere incoraggiati e messi in condizione di svolgere responsabilmente ed efficacemente la funzione di controllo dell’operato dei delegati.
D - Vanno combattuti l`indifferenza e l`isolamento tramite l`incoraggiamento alla partecipazione ad ogni forma di aggregazione e di associazione. Esse, infatti, rappresentano una ricchezza per la società, in quanto per il loro tramite le persone fanno esperienza concreta di vita sociale e di democrazia. Vanno, pertanto, promosse tutte quelle iniziative volte al sostegno logistico e materiale di tutte le forme associative, purché non in contrasto con il principio del "massimo bene aggregato" e dei diritti universali dell`uomo.
E- Vanno potenziati e resi efficaci tramite poteri effettivi tutti gli organi di controllo dello stato, della vita civile ed economica.
F - Va perseguita e difesa l'informazione libera e indipendente. Gli organi dirigenti dei mezzi di informazione pubblici vanno designati mediante elezione popolare e non attraverso nomina partitica. I monopoli privati vanno impediti in tutti i campi ed in particolar modo in quello della informazione.
G - Va conseguita la massima trasparenza nella vita politica e nelle fonti di finanziamento dei partiti, delle associazioni, dei movimenti, e dei mezzi di informazione.
H - Va favorita la facilità di accesso al sapere, va conservata e favorita la libertà di internet.
I - Va perseguito il "bene collettivo" e va affermato che esso non è il « vantaggio del partito », del « gruppo » o del « movimento » e tanto meno quello personale. Il "bene collettivo" è quello che corrisponde al maggior benessere della comunità in rispetto dell'ambiente in cui quella comunità vive.
L - La scelta dei candidati alle elezioni, spetta ai cittadini e non ai partiti od ad altre organizzazioni. I rappresentanti devono essere e sentirsi responsabili soltanto verso i cittadini.
M - Non devono poter essere candidati cittadini in stato di "conflitto d'interesse", oppure soggetti a procedimenti penali per reati lesivi degli interessi pubblici e collettivi o condannati per questi reati.
N - Va garantita all'interno delle organizzazioni politiche nelle istituzioni pubbliche, una costante apertura ed attenzione a nuove proposte, alle critiche, al ricambio dei ruoli, al limite temporale dei mandati, al limite alla ripetibilità degli stessi, alla loro non sovrapponibilità, e l'attenzione alla competenza ed al merito.
O - Occorre costantemente mirare al consenso ed alla condivisione, mediante il costante confronto di volontà e di idee nel rispetto delle opinioni delle minoranze, con l'irrinunciabile impegno da parte di tutti a perseguire il bene comune e ad intendere il voto come extrema-ratio.
P - Vanno difesi i diritti fondamentali dell'uomo.
Q - Tutti questi obiettivi vanno perseguiti con soli mezzi pacifici e non violenti.
volevo informarvi su qualcosa che ritengo sia molto importante: sono venuto a sapere dell'esistenza di un appello per la difesa e lo sviluppo della democrazia sul sito Officina Democrazia con l'intento di riunire tutti i cittadini che condividono lo scopo di salvare e difendere la democrazia. Qui vi riporto i punti principali. Vi pregerei di leggerli attentamente e di andare sul sito per ulteriori informazioni e, se siete d'accordo con i punti e gli intenti dell'appello, per apporre poi la vostra "firma". Ecco i principi fondamentali:
PRINCIPI FONDAMENTALI:
A - La sovranità appartiene al popolo che deve poterla esercitare in modo diretto, per quanto possibile ed opportuno. La sovranità popolare può anche essere delegata, fermo restando il diritto del popolo di modifica o revocabilità della delega. In particolare va impedito che il legislatore possa legiferare su se stesso, sui suoi poteri, sulle forme della sua eleggibilità, sulle relazioni tra il suo potere ed altri poteri, senza passare attraverso il consenso, direttamente espresso, della volontà popolare.
B - Decisioni prese in virtù della volontà popolare, direttamente espressa, possono essere modificate solo dalla volontà popolare.
C- Tutti i cittadini devono essere incoraggiati e messi in condizione di svolgere responsabilmente ed efficacemente la funzione di controllo dell’operato dei delegati.
D - Vanno combattuti l`indifferenza e l`isolamento tramite l`incoraggiamento alla partecipazione ad ogni forma di aggregazione e di associazione. Esse, infatti, rappresentano una ricchezza per la società, in quanto per il loro tramite le persone fanno esperienza concreta di vita sociale e di democrazia. Vanno, pertanto, promosse tutte quelle iniziative volte al sostegno logistico e materiale di tutte le forme associative, purché non in contrasto con il principio del "massimo bene aggregato" e dei diritti universali dell`uomo.
E- Vanno potenziati e resi efficaci tramite poteri effettivi tutti gli organi di controllo dello stato, della vita civile ed economica.
F - Va perseguita e difesa l'informazione libera e indipendente. Gli organi dirigenti dei mezzi di informazione pubblici vanno designati mediante elezione popolare e non attraverso nomina partitica. I monopoli privati vanno impediti in tutti i campi ed in particolar modo in quello della informazione.
G - Va conseguita la massima trasparenza nella vita politica e nelle fonti di finanziamento dei partiti, delle associazioni, dei movimenti, e dei mezzi di informazione.
H - Va favorita la facilità di accesso al sapere, va conservata e favorita la libertà di internet.
I - Va perseguito il "bene collettivo" e va affermato che esso non è il « vantaggio del partito », del « gruppo » o del « movimento » e tanto meno quello personale. Il "bene collettivo" è quello che corrisponde al maggior benessere della comunità in rispetto dell'ambiente in cui quella comunità vive.
L - La scelta dei candidati alle elezioni, spetta ai cittadini e non ai partiti od ad altre organizzazioni. I rappresentanti devono essere e sentirsi responsabili soltanto verso i cittadini.
M - Non devono poter essere candidati cittadini in stato di "conflitto d'interesse", oppure soggetti a procedimenti penali per reati lesivi degli interessi pubblici e collettivi o condannati per questi reati.
N - Va garantita all'interno delle organizzazioni politiche nelle istituzioni pubbliche, una costante apertura ed attenzione a nuove proposte, alle critiche, al ricambio dei ruoli, al limite temporale dei mandati, al limite alla ripetibilità degli stessi, alla loro non sovrapponibilità, e l'attenzione alla competenza ed al merito.
O - Occorre costantemente mirare al consenso ed alla condivisione, mediante il costante confronto di volontà e di idee nel rispetto delle opinioni delle minoranze, con l'irrinunciabile impegno da parte di tutti a perseguire il bene comune e ad intendere il voto come extrema-ratio.
P - Vanno difesi i diritti fondamentali dell'uomo.
Q - Tutti questi obiettivi vanno perseguiti con soli mezzi pacifici e non violenti.
12 December 2008
Energie rinnovabili nella provincia di Macerata
Cari lettori,
torno a scrivere in italiano in quanto l'articolo che riporto riguarda Macerata: chi vuole installare impianti per l'uso di energie rinnovabili, potrà ricevere degli incentivi dalla provincia di Macerata e coprire circa un terzo della spesa. Trovo che questa sia una grande notizia in quanto si dà la possibilità a privati cittadini di usare risorse non inquinanti e naturali come il sole o il vento per produrre energia. Ovviamente, bisogna poi vedere se questo progetto funziona, ma per quanto riguarda le energie rinnovabili, sono molto fiducioso. Ecco l'articolo:
MACERATA - Arrivano nuovi incentivi da parte della Provincia di Macerata per lo sviluppo e la diffusione delle energie rinnovabili. E’ in pubblicazione in questi giorni, infatti, un nuovo bando che prevede l’assegnazione di contributi per complessivi 400mila euro a privati (famiglie, associazioni senza scopo di lucro, liberi professionisti) che in edifici di loro proprietà installano impianti fotovoltaici, impianti solari termici, pompe di calore.
Le domande di contributo debbono essere presentate entro il 31 dicembre al settore Ambiente tenendo conto di quanto specificato nell’avviso pubblico consultabile anche sul sito internet della provincia di Macerata alla voce “bandi”.
“Con questo nuovo intervento, che qualifica l’azione della Provincia nel campo energetico", sottolinea il presidente della Provincia, Giulio Silenzi, "sale a circa 1 milione e mezzo di euro negli ultimi tre anni l’impegno dell’amministrazione provinciale. Lo consideriamo un investimento importante per l’energia pulita che porta benefici in termini di risparmio sulla bolletta energetica di famiglie e piccole imprese, ma anche utilità sul piano ambientale”.
Il contributo previsto è di circa un terzo della spesa (35%) con dei massimali che sono stati così determinati: 2.000 euro per il solare termico; 8.000 euro per impianti fotovoltaici e per pompe di calore del tipo geotermico; 3.000 euro per pompe di calore del tipo aria-acqua.
Il bando prevede la possibilità di chiedere finanziamenti, fino a 10.000 euro, anche per impianti “micro-eolici” (potenza non superiore a 20 kw e altezza inferiore a 20 metri). Oltre che per nuovi impianti si può beneficiare del contributo anche per impianti realizzati dopo il 1 gennaio 2008.
Tratto da:
● Macerata: incentivi a chi installa impianti termici su Gomarche.it, 11 Dicembre 2008
torno a scrivere in italiano in quanto l'articolo che riporto riguarda Macerata: chi vuole installare impianti per l'uso di energie rinnovabili, potrà ricevere degli incentivi dalla provincia di Macerata e coprire circa un terzo della spesa. Trovo che questa sia una grande notizia in quanto si dà la possibilità a privati cittadini di usare risorse non inquinanti e naturali come il sole o il vento per produrre energia. Ovviamente, bisogna poi vedere se questo progetto funziona, ma per quanto riguarda le energie rinnovabili, sono molto fiducioso. Ecco l'articolo:
MACERATA - Arrivano nuovi incentivi da parte della Provincia di Macerata per lo sviluppo e la diffusione delle energie rinnovabili. E’ in pubblicazione in questi giorni, infatti, un nuovo bando che prevede l’assegnazione di contributi per complessivi 400mila euro a privati (famiglie, associazioni senza scopo di lucro, liberi professionisti) che in edifici di loro proprietà installano impianti fotovoltaici, impianti solari termici, pompe di calore.
Le domande di contributo debbono essere presentate entro il 31 dicembre al settore Ambiente tenendo conto di quanto specificato nell’avviso pubblico consultabile anche sul sito internet della provincia di Macerata alla voce “bandi”.
“Con questo nuovo intervento, che qualifica l’azione della Provincia nel campo energetico", sottolinea il presidente della Provincia, Giulio Silenzi, "sale a circa 1 milione e mezzo di euro negli ultimi tre anni l’impegno dell’amministrazione provinciale. Lo consideriamo un investimento importante per l’energia pulita che porta benefici in termini di risparmio sulla bolletta energetica di famiglie e piccole imprese, ma anche utilità sul piano ambientale”.
Il contributo previsto è di circa un terzo della spesa (35%) con dei massimali che sono stati così determinati: 2.000 euro per il solare termico; 8.000 euro per impianti fotovoltaici e per pompe di calore del tipo geotermico; 3.000 euro per pompe di calore del tipo aria-acqua.
Il bando prevede la possibilità di chiedere finanziamenti, fino a 10.000 euro, anche per impianti “micro-eolici” (potenza non superiore a 20 kw e altezza inferiore a 20 metri). Oltre che per nuovi impianti si può beneficiare del contributo anche per impianti realizzati dopo il 1 gennaio 2008.
Tratto da:
● Macerata: incentivi a chi installa impianti termici su Gomarche.it, 11 Dicembre 200808 December 2008
Some good news: German academy offers green energy knowledge to 14 countries
Dear readers,
as you may have noticed, it's sometimes very hard to find good news in newspapers and online. Most articles are about crime, financial crisis, corruption, gossip and so on. Now and again, I find an article giving good news. From now on, I'll try to publish here some good news that I find online.
The following article is about a series of seminars and conferences about renewable energy technologies that will take place in Germany. The German Renewables Academy is going to share a lot of knowledge with engineers from all over the world, especially from developing countries. I believe this is very good news, because I think it is very important to share our knowledge with these countries and help them develop their own projects and improve life standards.
Germany is sharing its renewable energy and energy efficiency expertise with developing countries in Africa, Asia and South America. The German Renewables Academy said this week that it has invited engineers and key players from 14 countries to learn the lessons gleaned from its own booming green energy industry.
More than 800 applications have already been received by the academy, which will be hosting one-week introductory and advanced seminars at its Berlin training centre from this month until June 2009. Follow-up training will be provided throughout 2009 via online courses and one-to-one consultations.
"The program is aimed at participants who can apply the acquired knowledge in the best possible way in their careers," said Berthold Breid, founder and chief executive of the academy. It is hoped the seminars will allow participants to share details of green energy projects in their own countries.
The scheme is part of the academy's Transfer Renewable Energy and Efficiency (TREE) scholarship, which is part-funded by the German government. The TREE website says its objective is to "facilitate the transfer of know-how in renewable energies, energy efficiency and climate protection, for decision makers, high potentials and engineers from developing and emerging countries".
Thanks partly to heavy investment in its solar and wind power industries, Germany has become a key player in green technology, vying with the US for the crown of global cleantech hub.
Fedex recently revealed plans for a solar-powered hub in Germany, and earlier this year German industry sealed one of the biggest ever wind power supply deals when energy giant E.ON agreed to buy 500 wind turbines from engineering conglomerate Siemens.
Source:
● Germany academy offers green energy knowledge to 14 countries by Adam Vaughan for BusinessGreen.com, Monday 8th December 2008
as you may have noticed, it's sometimes very hard to find good news in newspapers and online. Most articles are about crime, financial crisis, corruption, gossip and so on. Now and again, I find an article giving good news. From now on, I'll try to publish here some good news that I find online.
The following article is about a series of seminars and conferences about renewable energy technologies that will take place in Germany. The German Renewables Academy is going to share a lot of knowledge with engineers from all over the world, especially from developing countries. I believe this is very good news, because I think it is very important to share our knowledge with these countries and help them develop their own projects and improve life standards.
Germany is sharing its renewable energy and energy efficiency expertise with developing countries in Africa, Asia and South America. The German Renewables Academy said this week that it has invited engineers and key players from 14 countries to learn the lessons gleaned from its own booming green energy industry.
More than 800 applications have already been received by the academy, which will be hosting one-week introductory and advanced seminars at its Berlin training centre from this month until June 2009. Follow-up training will be provided throughout 2009 via online courses and one-to-one consultations.
"The program is aimed at participants who can apply the acquired knowledge in the best possible way in their careers," said Berthold Breid, founder and chief executive of the academy. It is hoped the seminars will allow participants to share details of green energy projects in their own countries.
The scheme is part of the academy's Transfer Renewable Energy and Efficiency (TREE) scholarship, which is part-funded by the German government. The TREE website says its objective is to "facilitate the transfer of know-how in renewable energies, energy efficiency and climate protection, for decision makers, high potentials and engineers from developing and emerging countries".
Thanks partly to heavy investment in its solar and wind power industries, Germany has become a key player in green technology, vying with the US for the crown of global cleantech hub.
Fedex recently revealed plans for a solar-powered hub in Germany, and earlier this year German industry sealed one of the biggest ever wind power supply deals when energy giant E.ON agreed to buy 500 wind turbines from engineering conglomerate Siemens.
Source:
● Germany academy offers green energy knowledge to 14 countries by Adam Vaughan for BusinessGreen.com, Monday 8th December 2008
05 December 2008
Let's make this a better world... why the world won't change...
Dear readers,
everybody would like to change the world. All of us would like to live in a better society than the one we live in, all people would love to have peace on earth, food and water for everyone and so on. Why is that impossible? How a great bluesman once used to sing, "everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die". In other words, everybody wants to change the world, but nobody wants to change. In fact, the most common human fault is selfishness.
I think the world will change only after millions of people forget their own needs, wishes and problems to inform and help others. Only changing ourselves will enable us to change the world, and anyway that would take hundreds of years.
However, there are many people in the world who already do this: they forget their own needs to think about other people. I believe most of them do it on a fulltime basis, but there are also many who do it during their free time. The most important principle is, as Michael Jackson said, "...if you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and then make the change...".
I also had joined a group of people who fight for a better world, but I left it when I realized that most of it was just talk and frustration. When it was time to come together and speak about what could be done and how, share ideas and information, organize events and actions, the usual three or four actually showed up and all turned to dust.
Why is all this so difficult, if not impossible? Because in our society now we have too much for ourselves, too many possibilities, too many rights, too many freedoms, basically, too much of everything. We don't appreciate life anymore, we always want more, we want to have the best performance with the least effort. Of course, many people are not like that, but most of the people who have the power to change things are so, especially politicians and business people. After all, even the ancient Greeks told us that politics is corruption, but as Sting said, "history will teach us nothing".
What should we change in the world anyway? Basically, everything. First of all, introduce renewable energy sources as the only options for the future and stop destroying our environment but even the fear of a climate catastrophe does not stop politicians and tycoons to finance and build monsters like coal power stations and incinerators. Secondly, design and make products that have a very long life cycle and buy and consume local products. Then, reorganize the school system, social services, judicial system and most important, think more about the future. Many other things should be changed but I think nothing will ever change, at least not in the next few centuries. Obama? Maybe a starting point, maybe not.
However, hope is the last to die and of course, the show must go on.
everybody would like to change the world. All of us would like to live in a better society than the one we live in, all people would love to have peace on earth, food and water for everyone and so on. Why is that impossible? How a great bluesman once used to sing, "everybody wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die". In other words, everybody wants to change the world, but nobody wants to change. In fact, the most common human fault is selfishness.
I think the world will change only after millions of people forget their own needs, wishes and problems to inform and help others. Only changing ourselves will enable us to change the world, and anyway that would take hundreds of years.
However, there are many people in the world who already do this: they forget their own needs to think about other people. I believe most of them do it on a fulltime basis, but there are also many who do it during their free time. The most important principle is, as Michael Jackson said, "...if you wanna make the world a better place, take a look at yourself and then make the change...".
I also had joined a group of people who fight for a better world, but I left it when I realized that most of it was just talk and frustration. When it was time to come together and speak about what could be done and how, share ideas and information, organize events and actions, the usual three or four actually showed up and all turned to dust.
Why is all this so difficult, if not impossible? Because in our society now we have too much for ourselves, too many possibilities, too many rights, too many freedoms, basically, too much of everything. We don't appreciate life anymore, we always want more, we want to have the best performance with the least effort. Of course, many people are not like that, but most of the people who have the power to change things are so, especially politicians and business people. After all, even the ancient Greeks told us that politics is corruption, but as Sting said, "history will teach us nothing".
What should we change in the world anyway? Basically, everything. First of all, introduce renewable energy sources as the only options for the future and stop destroying our environment but even the fear of a climate catastrophe does not stop politicians and tycoons to finance and build monsters like coal power stations and incinerators. Secondly, design and make products that have a very long life cycle and buy and consume local products. Then, reorganize the school system, social services, judicial system and most important, think more about the future. Many other things should be changed but I think nothing will ever change, at least not in the next few centuries. Obama? Maybe a starting point, maybe not.
However, hope is the last to die and of course, the show must go on.
09 November 2008
Another victim of the Italian judicial system
Dear readers,
here it goes again. Another victim of the system. This is the testimony of a mother who has lost her son. I've watched the video and read the text of the interview, yet I still cannot believe it. A young man with no criminal record, arrested, locked up in a maximum-security prison without anyone being allowed to speak with him or contact him in any way. He died three days later. According to official sources, he committed suicide. I cannot believe that such things can happen in a country that claims to be democratic. The truth is, this is not a democratic country. Here's Ornella Gemini's report:
"My son was arrested in Cattolica on 19 June 2008. Since that day I was never again able to see him nor speak with him. He was arrested and when I was eventually allowed to see him, what I saw was an experience that I don’t wish on any mother! My son was arrested for an alleged offence and he was in protective custody. The word custody says it all! They should have given my son back to me standing on his own two feet, just as he was when they took him away. Instead, from the moment of his arrest, everything became more complicated and nothing was ever the same again. I was told that he had been arrested and taken to the Rimini prison, and that he was only transferred to the Sollicciano (FI) Prison the following day because they needed him there to be questioned by the magistrates. The first statement is false: my son was never in Rimini. My son was arrested and his first stopover in jail was in Sollicciano at 19h 45. He was arrested in Cattolica, having been called by the mother of the owner of the firm for which he worked because her son had been arrested the night before. She had asked him to go and see the attorney in order to find out what was happening.
My son, the one who was acting in total good faith, the one who made no attempt to escape, but went directly to this attorney in Cattolica, was arrested the moment he came downstairs and went through the door. From that moment on, he was allowed no further contact with his family. In the prison admission report from the Sollicciano prison, we see that he told them that he had an attorney and that he had telephoned his family, but I received no such telephone call from Sollicciano. It is also stated that his mother should be contacted in case of need or any other eventuality. In other words, me. Why then was I not contacted? I only found out about the events on the following day. I was told that he had been transferred. All good and well, and thus began the telephone calls putting pressure on me in an attempt to get me to change attorney. I tried to find out the name of the company’s attorney in order to find out what was going on because, at that moment, my entire world was collapsing around me! Everything was escaping me. So I telephoned the company’s attorney, a certain Mr. Marcolini, who was the person that had originally told me that Niki had been arrested, however, not even he knew anything. We had to wait for the police interrogation in order to find out precisely what my son was being accused of. I wanted to move to San Marino because I live in Avezzano, but the attorney told me: “No Madam, you won’t be allowed to see him or speak to him in any event because he has been placed in solitary confinement for three days”. Therefore, we would only be able to find out precisely what he had been charged with on Monday morning, once he had been questioned. Meanwhile, pressure was being put on me to change attorney, but I refused, asking “Why?” By that Sunday I couldn’t stand it any longer. I went to the attorney’s office, spoke with him and I mentioned the fact that perhaps a telegram should be sent to Niki, suggesting that he change attorney. Marcolini told me not to worry about it because when a prisoner is in solitary confinement, he is not even able to receive telegrams. Why, instead, was another telegram delivered to him? A telegram that I only got to see a few days ago (November 2008 - Ed). It stated that: “You must appoint attorney so and so..” Must! It was an order. Well, during those three days my son changed his attorney, appointing the one whose name appeared in the telegram. Meanwhile, Marcolini had been recused.During the course of the interrogation, this new attorney came down and told me that, at that time, Niki should exercise his right to say nothing, just as the others had done but, instead, he was talking. The attorneys I had brought along left at this point, while I stood around waiting outside. After a while I saw the armoured Police van moving in to pick up my son and I ran toward the vehicle. All I wanted was to see my son. We understood each other perfectly and a single glance would have been enough. I wanted to say to him: “Don’t worry Niki, I’m here”. However, those officers in the police van pushed me away with needless violence. They told me: “Go away, otherwise we’ll arrest you too, you must remain at least twenty metres away from the police van”. Then I saw my son exit the building, he turned towards me and they proceeded to turn his head the other way. Who had they arrested? A 26-year old young man with no criminal record! He had never before been in trouble with the law. Never! This was the first time ever! What would have been so bad about allowing him to look at me? This was the last glance we ever exchanged. I then waited for this new attorney, a woman, and I asked her: “What did Niki say? What happened?” She answered me as follows: “Niki wanted to talk, stating that he wanted to collaborate because he wanted to get out of there. So I let him talk. I asked him to explain to me precisely what was going on”. She then said: “Madam, I need to examine the case since I was only appointed the other day …”. That was precisely what the company attorneys that I had spoken to told me would happen. Clearly she could not have known this … I also had some clothes to take to the prison because Niki had taken nothing with him. I again appealed to the lady attorney saying: “try to see whether I can speak to him even just for a moment and even with you present, I don’t care how. I also have some clothes for him”. The attorney tried her best, however, I found out that 48-hours notice had to be given even for the clothes to be accepted in a super-prison. My question is WHY? Why was my son taken to a super-prison? First offence, no previous criminal record. There is no way that my son would have committed suicide in any event, but even less so without leaving me something in writing. Nothing makes any sense here! If this was such a major investigation, precisely what role did the telephone service providers play in this matter? Why were they never mentioned? They are mentioned in the arrest warrant. In addition to the Internet sites, a job that my son was very good at, he had also been involved in the deals with the telephone service providers. But how come their names were never even mentioned in the newspapers? And why was no application submitted for a rogatory to be held in San Marino? In other words, I go into a thief’s house, I arrest the thief but I don’t bother to look for the loot. Does this seem right to you? The rogatory was necessary in order to seize the computers that could perhaps help to explain precisely what was actually going on. Why did this not happen? Twenty days after my son’s death, I sent my husband and my brother-in-law to talk to the owner of the apartment in San Marino where my son had been living. It turned out that the apartment had been totally cleared out. Not even a single one of my son’s socks was left behind. I was not even able to lay my hands on something that smelled of my son. So, who was it that was so keen to clear out that apartment? Perhaps the seventeen other people arrested, whose situation could have been aggravated? Or perhaps someone who was afraid that they could land up in jail because of the information stored on those computers? They disappeared with everything! Everything! I didn’t even get back the keys to my own house. How am I supposed to defend him? How am I supposed to try to make head or tail of what happened when I have nothing left? What am I supposed to do? Please help me, I can’t do it alone! The person that sent the telegram and the person that burgled the apartment, do we know who they were working for? It costs very little to arrange these things. What I want to know is who gave the order to get my son to change attorney. Who gave the order to have the apartment cleared. I want to know who is behind it all! We cannot keep hiding behind monsters speaking of names. Are there any existing recordings of tapped telephone conversations? When a telephone call goes from one number to another, it means that there are two people speaking on the line. If you and I talk to each other, then why am I the only one that gets arrested? Nevertheless, by mid July these excellent suspects were still at work, doing precisely what they had done before. My son, instead, has been lying under two metres of soil since 24 June. The Solliciano prison medical officer, Doctor Franco Corleone, stated in an interview with La Repubblica that he had spoken with the prison governor who, in turn, had told him that just after the exercise period – and here it is important to understand the timing because the exercise period lasts from nine-thirty to ten-thirty – when my son had just made use of the opportunity to grab a breath of fresh air, he had then, according to the official verdict of suicide, gone back to the bathroom and hung himself. In that same interview, Franco Corleone added that: “You know, Niki had already shown signs of psychological collapse when he changed attorneys”. Dear Doctor Corleone, that was no sign of psychological collapse. He was ordered to change attorney. He would not have done so of his own accord. What did Doctor Franco Corleone say to the prison governor? Why did the autopsy show that death had occurred at 10, while the “118” emergency services were only called out at 11:15. Does that mean that you could have saved him? Could he have been saved? Believe me, absolutely nothing tallies! The prison gave me the archived records, but I ask myself, how can you archive something when nothing tallies? Just the day before his death, my son had asked to be placed in a cell with other Italian inmates, preferably non-violent ones. What does this tell you? Did he want to stay alive or not? In my opinion he did, otherwise he would have said “Put me with whomever you wish”. I know precisely what he would have done had he really wanted to commit suicide. The statements made by Niki’s two cellmates also don’t tally. One apparently asked the other: “Where is Niki?” and the other apparently answered: “He went out for some exercise”. In the other cellmate’s deposition, in response to the same question, he answers: “Niki went to the bathroom to wash his clothes”. I have to ask myself precisely where Niki actually was? Furthermore, there is also another statement from one of the prison warders, in which he states that: “Niki spoke to me. He appeared to be quite relaxed. He asked me “When are they going to question me again?” according to the warder, this questioning session took place at 10. The exact time that my son apparently died. I have to ask myself when exactly did this warder talk to my son? And where, because it is not specified? I appeal to all you journalists out there. Don’t concern yourselves with the idiotic news reports that we hear on a daily basis on the television, rather act like serious journalists. Stick your heads into these prisons. Reading through the “Prison Information” booklet, I discovered that all sorts of things can and do happen during the exercise period, since all of the cells are open and inmates have access to cells other than their own. My son was supposedly in custody. Who was looking after him? "
Ornella Gemini
Source:
● Niki is no longer with us by Ornella Gemini for Beppe Grillo's Blog, 9th November 2008
here it goes again. Another victim of the system. This is the testimony of a mother who has lost her son. I've watched the video and read the text of the interview, yet I still cannot believe it. A young man with no criminal record, arrested, locked up in a maximum-security prison without anyone being allowed to speak with him or contact him in any way. He died three days later. According to official sources, he committed suicide. I cannot believe that such things can happen in a country that claims to be democratic. The truth is, this is not a democratic country. Here's Ornella Gemini's report:
"My son was arrested in Cattolica on 19 June 2008. Since that day I was never again able to see him nor speak with him. He was arrested and when I was eventually allowed to see him, what I saw was an experience that I don’t wish on any mother! My son was arrested for an alleged offence and he was in protective custody. The word custody says it all! They should have given my son back to me standing on his own two feet, just as he was when they took him away. Instead, from the moment of his arrest, everything became more complicated and nothing was ever the same again. I was told that he had been arrested and taken to the Rimini prison, and that he was only transferred to the Sollicciano (FI) Prison the following day because they needed him there to be questioned by the magistrates. The first statement is false: my son was never in Rimini. My son was arrested and his first stopover in jail was in Sollicciano at 19h 45. He was arrested in Cattolica, having been called by the mother of the owner of the firm for which he worked because her son had been arrested the night before. She had asked him to go and see the attorney in order to find out what was happening.
My son, the one who was acting in total good faith, the one who made no attempt to escape, but went directly to this attorney in Cattolica, was arrested the moment he came downstairs and went through the door. From that moment on, he was allowed no further contact with his family. In the prison admission report from the Sollicciano prison, we see that he told them that he had an attorney and that he had telephoned his family, but I received no such telephone call from Sollicciano. It is also stated that his mother should be contacted in case of need or any other eventuality. In other words, me. Why then was I not contacted? I only found out about the events on the following day. I was told that he had been transferred. All good and well, and thus began the telephone calls putting pressure on me in an attempt to get me to change attorney. I tried to find out the name of the company’s attorney in order to find out what was going on because, at that moment, my entire world was collapsing around me! Everything was escaping me. So I telephoned the company’s attorney, a certain Mr. Marcolini, who was the person that had originally told me that Niki had been arrested, however, not even he knew anything. We had to wait for the police interrogation in order to find out precisely what my son was being accused of. I wanted to move to San Marino because I live in Avezzano, but the attorney told me: “No Madam, you won’t be allowed to see him or speak to him in any event because he has been placed in solitary confinement for three days”. Therefore, we would only be able to find out precisely what he had been charged with on Monday morning, once he had been questioned. Meanwhile, pressure was being put on me to change attorney, but I refused, asking “Why?” By that Sunday I couldn’t stand it any longer. I went to the attorney’s office, spoke with him and I mentioned the fact that perhaps a telegram should be sent to Niki, suggesting that he change attorney. Marcolini told me not to worry about it because when a prisoner is in solitary confinement, he is not even able to receive telegrams. Why, instead, was another telegram delivered to him? A telegram that I only got to see a few days ago (November 2008 - Ed). It stated that: “You must appoint attorney so and so..” Must! It was an order. Well, during those three days my son changed his attorney, appointing the one whose name appeared in the telegram. Meanwhile, Marcolini had been recused.During the course of the interrogation, this new attorney came down and told me that, at that time, Niki should exercise his right to say nothing, just as the others had done but, instead, he was talking. The attorneys I had brought along left at this point, while I stood around waiting outside. After a while I saw the armoured Police van moving in to pick up my son and I ran toward the vehicle. All I wanted was to see my son. We understood each other perfectly and a single glance would have been enough. I wanted to say to him: “Don’t worry Niki, I’m here”. However, those officers in the police van pushed me away with needless violence. They told me: “Go away, otherwise we’ll arrest you too, you must remain at least twenty metres away from the police van”. Then I saw my son exit the building, he turned towards me and they proceeded to turn his head the other way. Who had they arrested? A 26-year old young man with no criminal record! He had never before been in trouble with the law. Never! This was the first time ever! What would have been so bad about allowing him to look at me? This was the last glance we ever exchanged. I then waited for this new attorney, a woman, and I asked her: “What did Niki say? What happened?” She answered me as follows: “Niki wanted to talk, stating that he wanted to collaborate because he wanted to get out of there. So I let him talk. I asked him to explain to me precisely what was going on”. She then said: “Madam, I need to examine the case since I was only appointed the other day …”. That was precisely what the company attorneys that I had spoken to told me would happen. Clearly she could not have known this … I also had some clothes to take to the prison because Niki had taken nothing with him. I again appealed to the lady attorney saying: “try to see whether I can speak to him even just for a moment and even with you present, I don’t care how. I also have some clothes for him”. The attorney tried her best, however, I found out that 48-hours notice had to be given even for the clothes to be accepted in a super-prison. My question is WHY? Why was my son taken to a super-prison? First offence, no previous criminal record. There is no way that my son would have committed suicide in any event, but even less so without leaving me something in writing. Nothing makes any sense here! If this was such a major investigation, precisely what role did the telephone service providers play in this matter? Why were they never mentioned? They are mentioned in the arrest warrant. In addition to the Internet sites, a job that my son was very good at, he had also been involved in the deals with the telephone service providers. But how come their names were never even mentioned in the newspapers? And why was no application submitted for a rogatory to be held in San Marino? In other words, I go into a thief’s house, I arrest the thief but I don’t bother to look for the loot. Does this seem right to you? The rogatory was necessary in order to seize the computers that could perhaps help to explain precisely what was actually going on. Why did this not happen? Twenty days after my son’s death, I sent my husband and my brother-in-law to talk to the owner of the apartment in San Marino where my son had been living. It turned out that the apartment had been totally cleared out. Not even a single one of my son’s socks was left behind. I was not even able to lay my hands on something that smelled of my son. So, who was it that was so keen to clear out that apartment? Perhaps the seventeen other people arrested, whose situation could have been aggravated? Or perhaps someone who was afraid that they could land up in jail because of the information stored on those computers? They disappeared with everything! Everything! I didn’t even get back the keys to my own house. How am I supposed to defend him? How am I supposed to try to make head or tail of what happened when I have nothing left? What am I supposed to do? Please help me, I can’t do it alone! The person that sent the telegram and the person that burgled the apartment, do we know who they were working for? It costs very little to arrange these things. What I want to know is who gave the order to get my son to change attorney. Who gave the order to have the apartment cleared. I want to know who is behind it all! We cannot keep hiding behind monsters speaking of names. Are there any existing recordings of tapped telephone conversations? When a telephone call goes from one number to another, it means that there are two people speaking on the line. If you and I talk to each other, then why am I the only one that gets arrested? Nevertheless, by mid July these excellent suspects were still at work, doing precisely what they had done before. My son, instead, has been lying under two metres of soil since 24 June. The Solliciano prison medical officer, Doctor Franco Corleone, stated in an interview with La Repubblica that he had spoken with the prison governor who, in turn, had told him that just after the exercise period – and here it is important to understand the timing because the exercise period lasts from nine-thirty to ten-thirty – when my son had just made use of the opportunity to grab a breath of fresh air, he had then, according to the official verdict of suicide, gone back to the bathroom and hung himself. In that same interview, Franco Corleone added that: “You know, Niki had already shown signs of psychological collapse when he changed attorneys”. Dear Doctor Corleone, that was no sign of psychological collapse. He was ordered to change attorney. He would not have done so of his own accord. What did Doctor Franco Corleone say to the prison governor? Why did the autopsy show that death had occurred at 10, while the “118” emergency services were only called out at 11:15. Does that mean that you could have saved him? Could he have been saved? Believe me, absolutely nothing tallies! The prison gave me the archived records, but I ask myself, how can you archive something when nothing tallies? Just the day before his death, my son had asked to be placed in a cell with other Italian inmates, preferably non-violent ones. What does this tell you? Did he want to stay alive or not? In my opinion he did, otherwise he would have said “Put me with whomever you wish”. I know precisely what he would have done had he really wanted to commit suicide. The statements made by Niki’s two cellmates also don’t tally. One apparently asked the other: “Where is Niki?” and the other apparently answered: “He went out for some exercise”. In the other cellmate’s deposition, in response to the same question, he answers: “Niki went to the bathroom to wash his clothes”. I have to ask myself precisely where Niki actually was? Furthermore, there is also another statement from one of the prison warders, in which he states that: “Niki spoke to me. He appeared to be quite relaxed. He asked me “When are they going to question me again?” according to the warder, this questioning session took place at 10. The exact time that my son apparently died. I have to ask myself when exactly did this warder talk to my son? And where, because it is not specified? I appeal to all you journalists out there. Don’t concern yourselves with the idiotic news reports that we hear on a daily basis on the television, rather act like serious journalists. Stick your heads into these prisons. Reading through the “Prison Information” booklet, I discovered that all sorts of things can and do happen during the exercise period, since all of the cells are open and inmates have access to cells other than their own. My son was supposedly in custody. Who was looking after him? "
Ornella Gemini
Source:
● Niki is no longer with us by Ornella Gemini for Beppe Grillo's Blog, 9th November 200823 October 2008
Cittadini non si nasce, si diventa
Cari lettori,
ecco il primo articolo in italiano! Come si diventa cittadini? Lo si è dalla nascita, lo si diventa automaticamente quando si fa la carta d'identità, lo si impara? Chi ce lo insegna? Cittadini non si nasce, si diventa: questo è il titolo di un articolo sul sito del giornale 'La Stampa' scritto da Michael Walzer, filosofo della politica americano, in cui lui parla dei tre principali requisiti da inserire nel curriculum di tutte le scuole in ogni paese affinché gli studenti possano diventare buoni cittadini in un stato democratico.
Michael Walzer, filosofo della politica americano, inaugura oggi a Asti il Master in Civic Education con la Lezione magistrale «Sull’educazione del cittadino» di cui pubblichiamo un’ampia sintesi. Frutto della collaborazione tra il James Madison Program dell’Università di Princeton e Ethica, il Master è diretto da Maurizio Viroli. Ha lo scopo di diffondere la coscienza civica, la cui nozione, in Italia e in Europa, sembra agli organizzatori assai critica. Il Master intende anche promuovere la conoscenza dei valori e della cultura americani.
Immaginate un paese moderno, come il mio e come il vostro, che sia diviso in materia culturale, religiosa, ideologica ed economica. Che tipo di educazione civica dovrebbero fornire le scuole statali e le università di questo paese? Voglio concentrarmi qui solo su questioni concernenti l’educazione politica. Che cosa devono sapere gli studenti che voteranno alle «nostre» elezioni, dove il riferimento del pronome è semplicemente l’insieme dei cittadini adulti?
Ci sono, credo, tre requisiti curriculari di importanza critica, che valgono tanto per le scuole pubbliche quanto per quelle religiose.
Il primo requisito probabilmente può essere meglio soddisfatto al livello delle scuole superiori, perché implica qualcosa di simile a quanto si usava chiamare «educazione civica». Gli studenti hanno bisogno di imparare una scienza politica pratica della democrazia; hanno bisogno di un corso dove si studino il funzionamento quotidiano dei ministeri di governo, delle assemblee rappresentative, delle corti, dei partiti, dei movimenti sociali e così via. Questa è la parte meno controversa dell’educazione democratica. Ciò nonostante, v’è un importante lavoro educativo da fare qui: insegnare agli studenti a pensare se stessi come futuri partecipanti nell’attività politica, non meramente come spettatori bene informati. E siccome lo spettacolo è spesso tutt’altro che edificante e invitante, gli insegnanti devono evidenziare come il sistema democratico non sia mai chiuso, il suo carattere non sia mai deciso una volta per tutte. Nonostante tutte le rigidezze burocratiche, ci sono sempre delle opportunità per persone con idee nuove o diverse. Gli studenti dovrebbero essere incoraggiati a sperimentare le dottrine politiche, e si dovrebbe insegnare loro come discuterle davanti ai loro pari e all’interno di specifici ambiti istituzionali.
Secondo, gli studenti hanno bisogno di studiare la storia delle istituzioni e delle pratiche democratiche dall’antica Grecia in avanti, e parallelamente devono imparare e misurarsi con la preferenza di vari gruppi religiosi per forme di governo non democratiche. Forse insegnanti in scuole con molti studenti cattolici, ebrei o musulmani cercheranno modi per naturalizzare la democrazia all’interno di tradizioni che sono state nei fatti ostili ad essa, ma io sarei per favorire un confronto onesto con le forme di governo - di re o preti o saggi religiosi - preferite dalla religione. Dopo tutto, la democrazia è una cultura della critica e del dissenso. Ci sono vari modi per aiutare gli studenti a sentirsi a casa propria in una società democratica, e la pretesa che tutti ci abbiamo da sempre vissuto non è necessariamente la migliore. Certamente non è il modo più onesto, e i giovani generalmente riconoscono e rifuggono la disonestà. Ciò detto, non penso che sia sbagliato raccontare la storia cattolica, ebrea o musulmana in una versione che metta in rilievo i possibili punti di accesso ad un’intesa democratica. Ma si deve anche raccontare la storia greca e soffermarsi sui momenti genuinamente formativi nella storia della democrazia.
Il terzo requisito è a mio parere il più importante: un corso sulla filosofia o la teoria politica della forma di governo democratica, dove si rivedano criticamente tutti gli argomenti standard. Ciò ovviamente dovrebbe includere discussioni sugli ordinamenti costituzionali, ma il fulcro dovrebbe essere sulle pratiche e le attitudini che costituiscono una cultura politica democratica: l’eguaglianza dei cittadini (così degli uomini come delle donne), la loro libertà di parola e associazione, il diritto all’opposizione, la tolleranza per il dissenso, l’esigenza (alle volte) di compromessi, uno scetticismo rispetto all’autorità e così di seguito. Queste, naturalmente, sono le pratiche e le attitudini in una democrazia liberale, ma in questo caso l’aggettivo non qualifica bensì semplicemente rinforza il sostantivo; dubito che una democrazia illiberale possa mantenere a lungo l’eguaglianza, l’inclusione, e il diritto all’opposizione che sono caratteristiche necessarie della politica democratica. Il modo migliore di insegnare queste pratiche e attitudini è esemplificarle in classe: così, i testi teorici nei quali la democrazia è stata spiegata e difesa (o criticata) dovrebbero essere studiati democraticamente, con una discussione libera, una ricerca aperta a qualsiasi interpretazione, un’idea del carattere sempre incompiuto del progetto democratico. Gli argomenti non dovrebbero mai essere ridotti ad un catechismo, in special modo non ai fini dell’esame finale.
Sebbene le nostre scuole e università pubbliche non possano insegnare teologia cristiana (tranne che, diciamo, in un corso sulla filosofia della religione), esse possono insegnare teoria democratica liberale. Costituzionalmente si tratta di un’attività permessa. Ma a me sembra un’attività politicamente e moralmente necessaria, perché gli studenti stanno per diventare cittadini attivi, e presto prenderanno decisioni di importanza capitale che determineranno la qualità, e forse anche la sicurezza fisica, della nostra vita comune. L’educazione di ciascun giovane incide su ogni altro giovane. Stante il processo decisionale democratico, i figli di genitori religiosi, i figli di politici settari, contribuiranno a decidere il destino dei miei figli e dei vostri. Non ci sono esenzioni possibili, a meno che una comunità religiosa non opti per sottrarsi del tutto dalla condizione di cittadinanza e adotti lo status di stranieri residenti. Forse dovremmo permetterlo, ma non vedo ragione per permettere a futuri cittadini di evitare o sfuggire un’educazione alla cittadinanza. La posta in gioco è troppo alta.
Pensate alla cittadinanza come a un incarico politico: senza dubbio, i futuri incaricati dovrebbero imparare qualcosa sulle responsabilità che l’incarico comporta. O meglio, coloro che occupano l’incarico adesso dovrebbero insegnare alla generazione successiva ciò che credono di aver imparato a proposito di quelle responsabilità. Questo perché la riproduzione di una politica democratica non è mai cosa certa. Dobbiamo dimostrare ai nostri ragazzi che veramente crediamo nei valori che rendono possibile la democrazia. Ciò significa innanzitutto che dobbiamo vivere alla luce di quei valori; significa altresì che non dovremmo avere paura di insistere sul loro studio. Per ragioni molto sensate, la cittadinanza, diversamente dalla professione medica o legale, non richiede una licenza; gli studenti non necessitano di una promozione in politica democratica. Ma certamente dovrebbero seguire il corso.
Tratto da:
● Cittadini non si nasce, si diventa di Michael Walzer su La Stampa, 23 Ottobre 2008
ecco il primo articolo in italiano! Come si diventa cittadini? Lo si è dalla nascita, lo si diventa automaticamente quando si fa la carta d'identità, lo si impara? Chi ce lo insegna? Cittadini non si nasce, si diventa: questo è il titolo di un articolo sul sito del giornale 'La Stampa' scritto da Michael Walzer, filosofo della politica americano, in cui lui parla dei tre principali requisiti da inserire nel curriculum di tutte le scuole in ogni paese affinché gli studenti possano diventare buoni cittadini in un stato democratico.
Michael Walzer, filosofo della politica americano, inaugura oggi a Asti il Master in Civic Education con la Lezione magistrale «Sull’educazione del cittadino» di cui pubblichiamo un’ampia sintesi. Frutto della collaborazione tra il James Madison Program dell’Università di Princeton e Ethica, il Master è diretto da Maurizio Viroli. Ha lo scopo di diffondere la coscienza civica, la cui nozione, in Italia e in Europa, sembra agli organizzatori assai critica. Il Master intende anche promuovere la conoscenza dei valori e della cultura americani.
Immaginate un paese moderno, come il mio e come il vostro, che sia diviso in materia culturale, religiosa, ideologica ed economica. Che tipo di educazione civica dovrebbero fornire le scuole statali e le università di questo paese? Voglio concentrarmi qui solo su questioni concernenti l’educazione politica. Che cosa devono sapere gli studenti che voteranno alle «nostre» elezioni, dove il riferimento del pronome è semplicemente l’insieme dei cittadini adulti?
Ci sono, credo, tre requisiti curriculari di importanza critica, che valgono tanto per le scuole pubbliche quanto per quelle religiose.
Il primo requisito probabilmente può essere meglio soddisfatto al livello delle scuole superiori, perché implica qualcosa di simile a quanto si usava chiamare «educazione civica». Gli studenti hanno bisogno di imparare una scienza politica pratica della democrazia; hanno bisogno di un corso dove si studino il funzionamento quotidiano dei ministeri di governo, delle assemblee rappresentative, delle corti, dei partiti, dei movimenti sociali e così via. Questa è la parte meno controversa dell’educazione democratica. Ciò nonostante, v’è un importante lavoro educativo da fare qui: insegnare agli studenti a pensare se stessi come futuri partecipanti nell’attività politica, non meramente come spettatori bene informati. E siccome lo spettacolo è spesso tutt’altro che edificante e invitante, gli insegnanti devono evidenziare come il sistema democratico non sia mai chiuso, il suo carattere non sia mai deciso una volta per tutte. Nonostante tutte le rigidezze burocratiche, ci sono sempre delle opportunità per persone con idee nuove o diverse. Gli studenti dovrebbero essere incoraggiati a sperimentare le dottrine politiche, e si dovrebbe insegnare loro come discuterle davanti ai loro pari e all’interno di specifici ambiti istituzionali.
Secondo, gli studenti hanno bisogno di studiare la storia delle istituzioni e delle pratiche democratiche dall’antica Grecia in avanti, e parallelamente devono imparare e misurarsi con la preferenza di vari gruppi religiosi per forme di governo non democratiche. Forse insegnanti in scuole con molti studenti cattolici, ebrei o musulmani cercheranno modi per naturalizzare la democrazia all’interno di tradizioni che sono state nei fatti ostili ad essa, ma io sarei per favorire un confronto onesto con le forme di governo - di re o preti o saggi religiosi - preferite dalla religione. Dopo tutto, la democrazia è una cultura della critica e del dissenso. Ci sono vari modi per aiutare gli studenti a sentirsi a casa propria in una società democratica, e la pretesa che tutti ci abbiamo da sempre vissuto non è necessariamente la migliore. Certamente non è il modo più onesto, e i giovani generalmente riconoscono e rifuggono la disonestà. Ciò detto, non penso che sia sbagliato raccontare la storia cattolica, ebrea o musulmana in una versione che metta in rilievo i possibili punti di accesso ad un’intesa democratica. Ma si deve anche raccontare la storia greca e soffermarsi sui momenti genuinamente formativi nella storia della democrazia.
Il terzo requisito è a mio parere il più importante: un corso sulla filosofia o la teoria politica della forma di governo democratica, dove si rivedano criticamente tutti gli argomenti standard. Ciò ovviamente dovrebbe includere discussioni sugli ordinamenti costituzionali, ma il fulcro dovrebbe essere sulle pratiche e le attitudini che costituiscono una cultura politica democratica: l’eguaglianza dei cittadini (così degli uomini come delle donne), la loro libertà di parola e associazione, il diritto all’opposizione, la tolleranza per il dissenso, l’esigenza (alle volte) di compromessi, uno scetticismo rispetto all’autorità e così di seguito. Queste, naturalmente, sono le pratiche e le attitudini in una democrazia liberale, ma in questo caso l’aggettivo non qualifica bensì semplicemente rinforza il sostantivo; dubito che una democrazia illiberale possa mantenere a lungo l’eguaglianza, l’inclusione, e il diritto all’opposizione che sono caratteristiche necessarie della politica democratica. Il modo migliore di insegnare queste pratiche e attitudini è esemplificarle in classe: così, i testi teorici nei quali la democrazia è stata spiegata e difesa (o criticata) dovrebbero essere studiati democraticamente, con una discussione libera, una ricerca aperta a qualsiasi interpretazione, un’idea del carattere sempre incompiuto del progetto democratico. Gli argomenti non dovrebbero mai essere ridotti ad un catechismo, in special modo non ai fini dell’esame finale.
Sebbene le nostre scuole e università pubbliche non possano insegnare teologia cristiana (tranne che, diciamo, in un corso sulla filosofia della religione), esse possono insegnare teoria democratica liberale. Costituzionalmente si tratta di un’attività permessa. Ma a me sembra un’attività politicamente e moralmente necessaria, perché gli studenti stanno per diventare cittadini attivi, e presto prenderanno decisioni di importanza capitale che determineranno la qualità, e forse anche la sicurezza fisica, della nostra vita comune. L’educazione di ciascun giovane incide su ogni altro giovane. Stante il processo decisionale democratico, i figli di genitori religiosi, i figli di politici settari, contribuiranno a decidere il destino dei miei figli e dei vostri. Non ci sono esenzioni possibili, a meno che una comunità religiosa non opti per sottrarsi del tutto dalla condizione di cittadinanza e adotti lo status di stranieri residenti. Forse dovremmo permetterlo, ma non vedo ragione per permettere a futuri cittadini di evitare o sfuggire un’educazione alla cittadinanza. La posta in gioco è troppo alta.
Pensate alla cittadinanza come a un incarico politico: senza dubbio, i futuri incaricati dovrebbero imparare qualcosa sulle responsabilità che l’incarico comporta. O meglio, coloro che occupano l’incarico adesso dovrebbero insegnare alla generazione successiva ciò che credono di aver imparato a proposito di quelle responsabilità. Questo perché la riproduzione di una politica democratica non è mai cosa certa. Dobbiamo dimostrare ai nostri ragazzi che veramente crediamo nei valori che rendono possibile la democrazia. Ciò significa innanzitutto che dobbiamo vivere alla luce di quei valori; significa altresì che non dovremmo avere paura di insistere sul loro studio. Per ragioni molto sensate, la cittadinanza, diversamente dalla professione medica o legale, non richiede una licenza; gli studenti non necessitano di una promozione in politica democratica. Ma certamente dovrebbero seguire il corso.
Tratto da:
● Cittadini non si nasce, si diventa di Michael Walzer su La Stampa, 23 Ottobre 200821 October 2008
The story of stuff
Dear readers,
I'd like to recommend a website: The story of stuff. Here you can listen to a presentation about material economy: how we produce stuff, where it comes from, how we deal with it and where it goes after we throw it away. It's very interesting because it reveals what really happens along the way. The speaker, Annie Leonard, goes through the main stages: extraction, production, distribution, consumption and disposal. From one phase to the other, she adds all the information that we need to have, all the things that nobody talks about, she adds the truth. Here are some facts that she mentions in the presentation:
• In the past three decades, one-third of the planet’s natural resources base have been consumed.
• In the United States, we have less than 4% of our original forests left.
• Forty percent of waterways in the US have become undrinkable.
• The U.S.has 5% of the world’s population but consumes 30% of the world’s resources and creates 30% of the world’s waste.
• If everybody consumed at U.S. rates, we would need 3 to 5 planets.
• There are over 100,000 synthetic chemicals in commerce today.
• Only a handful of synthetic chemicals have even been tested for human health impacts and NONE have been tested for synergistic health impacts.
• In the U.S., industry admits to releasing over 4 billion pounds of toxic chemicals a year.
• The average U.S. person now consumes twice as much as they did 50 years ago.
• We each see more advertisements in one year than a people 50 years ago saw in a lifetime.
• In the U.S. our national happiness peaked sometime in the 1950s.
• In the U.S., we spend 3–4 times as many hours shopping as our counterparts in Europe do.
• Average U.S. house size has doubled since the 1970s.
• Each person in the United States makes 4 1/2 pounds of garbage a day. That is twice what we each made thirty years ago.
• For every one garbage can of waste you put out on the curb, 70 garbage cans of waste were made upstream to make the junk in that one garbage can you put out on the curb.
Go and watch the presentation and use this information to improve your life and the world around you. Pass the word.
I'd like to recommend a website: The story of stuff. Here you can listen to a presentation about material economy: how we produce stuff, where it comes from, how we deal with it and where it goes after we throw it away. It's very interesting because it reveals what really happens along the way. The speaker, Annie Leonard, goes through the main stages: extraction, production, distribution, consumption and disposal. From one phase to the other, she adds all the information that we need to have, all the things that nobody talks about, she adds the truth. Here are some facts that she mentions in the presentation:
• In the past three decades, one-third of the planet’s natural resources base have been consumed.
• In the United States, we have less than 4% of our original forests left.
• Forty percent of waterways in the US have become undrinkable.
• The U.S.has 5% of the world’s population but consumes 30% of the world’s resources and creates 30% of the world’s waste.
• If everybody consumed at U.S. rates, we would need 3 to 5 planets.
• There are over 100,000 synthetic chemicals in commerce today.
• Only a handful of synthetic chemicals have even been tested for human health impacts and NONE have been tested for synergistic health impacts.
• In the U.S., industry admits to releasing over 4 billion pounds of toxic chemicals a year.
• The average U.S. person now consumes twice as much as they did 50 years ago.
• We each see more advertisements in one year than a people 50 years ago saw in a lifetime.
• In the U.S. our national happiness peaked sometime in the 1950s.
• In the U.S., we spend 3–4 times as many hours shopping as our counterparts in Europe do.
• Average U.S. house size has doubled since the 1970s.
• Each person in the United States makes 4 1/2 pounds of garbage a day. That is twice what we each made thirty years ago.
• For every one garbage can of waste you put out on the curb, 70 garbage cans of waste were made upstream to make the junk in that one garbage can you put out on the curb.
Go and watch the presentation and use this information to improve your life and the world around you. Pass the word.
11 October 2008
Kann man die Sprache einfach so ändern?
Hallo zusammen,
hier ist mein erster Eintrag auf Deutsch! Ich frage mich: kann man wirklich die Sprache einfach ändern? Die Deutschen haben es schon zweimal gemacht. Ihr denkt: WAS?! Blödsinn. Doch: Mit zwei Rechtschreibungreformen. Und jetzt will ein Professor noch etwas in der Sprache ändern: er will Deutsche anders zählen lassen. Ein Beispiel: 21 = twenty-one. Auf Deutsch: einundzwanzig. Nee. Für diesen Professor soll es "zwanzigeins" ausgesprochen werden. Lesen wir mal...
Das Problem kennt jeder: Man tippt die sechsstellige Nummer ins Telefon, doch statt Tante Erna meldet sich am anderen Ende eine wildfremde Stimme. „Oh, falsch verbunden“, murmelt man, doch das Display zeigt, dass nicht das längst ausgestorbene Fräulein vom Amt Schuld ist sondern wieder mal ein Zahlendreher. Die leisten sich die Bundesbürger auch im modernen Zahlungsverkehr mit bundesweit allein sieben Milliarden Banküberweisungen im Jahr sehr viel häufiger als viele andere Völker. Der Grund: Die Deutschen sprechen im Computerzeitalter mehrstellige Zahlen noch immer so verdreht aus wie ihre Altvordern, die mit Kerbhölzern rechneten. Das will der Verein „Zwanzigeins“ ändern – und kämpft um Aufklärung.
„Das Problem, warum wir 'einundzwanzig' sagen, aber 'zwanzigeins' schreiben, ist 500 Jahre alt“, sagt der Vereinsvorsitzende und Bochumer Mathematikprofessor Lothar Gerritzen. Damals, im Jahr 1482, wurden die arabischen Ziffern erstmals in die deutsche Schriftsprache aufgenommen, und es wurde zudem empfohlen, sie von links nach rechts auszusprechen, wie im Arabischen oder Lateinischen auch: Etwa die Zahl 21 als „zwentzigeins“, heißt es im ersten deutschen „Rechenbuch“ von Jakob Köbel.
Dass Köbel sich jedoch nicht durchsetzte, lag auch an Martin Luther, der, dem Volk aufs Maul schauend, in seiner Bibelübersetzung bei der üblichen deutschen Sprechweise blieb. Die war wiederum vor 4000 Jahren entstanden: Mangels Ziffern ritzten die Indogermanen damals Zeichen in ein Kerbholz: Immer zunächst die Einerzahl – ein Strich für eine Eins, zwei Striche für eine Zwei und so weiter – und dann erst die Zehner – jeweils ein X als Symbol gekreuzter Hände für eine Zehn. Das Zeichen IXX wurde deshalb als einundzwanzig gelesen.
In den vergangenen 500 Jahren haben zwar immer wieder Schriftsteller und Mathematiker auf das Problem der verdrehten Zahlenaussprache hingewiesen. Doch sie scheiterten allesamt an einer Obrigkeit die, wie auch im Fall von Gerritzens Verein, auf Änderungswünsche eher unwirsch reagiert. So wie das hessische Kultusministerium in einen Antwortschreiben an ein Vereinsmitglied: „Sehr geehrter Herr... Ich glaube nicht, dass es sinnvoll ist, die Benennung von Zahlen in der deutschen (oder einer anderen) Sprache mit den Kategorien der Logik zu messen. Die Zahl 15 heißt im Deutschen nun einmal 'fünfzehn' und nicht 'zehnfünf'. Niemand kann dies beliebig ändern“.
Allerdings führte Norwegen wegen volkswirtschaftlicher Probleme mit der verdreht-germanischen Zahlensprechweise in Schulbüchern schon 1951 die logisch korrekte Sprechweise ein. Heute sind die Kerbholzzähler in ganz Skandinvien zumindest in der Geschäfts-, Bank- und Postsprache in der Minderheit. Hierzulande müssen sich dagegen mehr als fünf Millionen Legastheniker und Dyskalkuliker sowie unzählige Schüler ohne besondere Lese- und Rechenschwäche damit quälen, dass sie beim Hören der Zahl 84356 von der zweiten Ziffer zur ersten springen müssen, dann zur dritten, zur fünften, um mit der vierten zu enden. „Dass das überhaupt funktioniert, ist verblüffend“, sagt Mathematik-Professor Gerritzen.
Leicht fällt das vielen Schülern nicht. Josef Kraus, Vorsitzender des Deutschen Lehrerverbands, weiß zu berichten, dass selbst Abiturienten beim Hören einer dreistelligen Zahl erst links den Hunderterwert schreiben, dann eine Lücke lassen, um rechts den Einer zu notiern und danach die Lücke mit dem Zehnerwert füllen. Vor allem türkischstämmige Schüler, die in ihrer Muttersprache „richtig“ zählen, haben Probleme mit der verkehrten deutschen Zahlenwelt.
Karlsruhe Dort, bei Schülern und Lehrern, trifft Gerritzen, der nun das Buch „zwanzigeins“ herausgegeben hat, auch am ehesten auf offene Ohren. Die Wald-Schule in Bochum hat nach seinen Angaben die unverdrehte Sprechweise inzwischen in den Unterricht eingeführt. Und zu einem unlängst von Gerritzen gehaltenen Vortrag seien mehr als 500 Lehrer und Schüler geströmt. „Es wird aber noch mindestens 25 Jahre dauern, bis sich was ändert“ befürchtet Gerritzen. Dann wäre der Mathematiker neunzigzwei Jahre alt.
Quelle:
● Mathematik: Professor will Deutsche anders zählen lassen von Jürgen Oeder für Welt Online, 6. Oktober 2008
hier ist mein erster Eintrag auf Deutsch! Ich frage mich: kann man wirklich die Sprache einfach ändern? Die Deutschen haben es schon zweimal gemacht. Ihr denkt: WAS?! Blödsinn. Doch: Mit zwei Rechtschreibungreformen. Und jetzt will ein Professor noch etwas in der Sprache ändern: er will Deutsche anders zählen lassen. Ein Beispiel: 21 = twenty-one. Auf Deutsch: einundzwanzig. Nee. Für diesen Professor soll es "zwanzigeins" ausgesprochen werden. Lesen wir mal...
Das Problem kennt jeder: Man tippt die sechsstellige Nummer ins Telefon, doch statt Tante Erna meldet sich am anderen Ende eine wildfremde Stimme. „Oh, falsch verbunden“, murmelt man, doch das Display zeigt, dass nicht das längst ausgestorbene Fräulein vom Amt Schuld ist sondern wieder mal ein Zahlendreher. Die leisten sich die Bundesbürger auch im modernen Zahlungsverkehr mit bundesweit allein sieben Milliarden Banküberweisungen im Jahr sehr viel häufiger als viele andere Völker. Der Grund: Die Deutschen sprechen im Computerzeitalter mehrstellige Zahlen noch immer so verdreht aus wie ihre Altvordern, die mit Kerbhölzern rechneten. Das will der Verein „Zwanzigeins“ ändern – und kämpft um Aufklärung.
„Das Problem, warum wir 'einundzwanzig' sagen, aber 'zwanzigeins' schreiben, ist 500 Jahre alt“, sagt der Vereinsvorsitzende und Bochumer Mathematikprofessor Lothar Gerritzen. Damals, im Jahr 1482, wurden die arabischen Ziffern erstmals in die deutsche Schriftsprache aufgenommen, und es wurde zudem empfohlen, sie von links nach rechts auszusprechen, wie im Arabischen oder Lateinischen auch: Etwa die Zahl 21 als „zwentzigeins“, heißt es im ersten deutschen „Rechenbuch“ von Jakob Köbel.
Dass Köbel sich jedoch nicht durchsetzte, lag auch an Martin Luther, der, dem Volk aufs Maul schauend, in seiner Bibelübersetzung bei der üblichen deutschen Sprechweise blieb. Die war wiederum vor 4000 Jahren entstanden: Mangels Ziffern ritzten die Indogermanen damals Zeichen in ein Kerbholz: Immer zunächst die Einerzahl – ein Strich für eine Eins, zwei Striche für eine Zwei und so weiter – und dann erst die Zehner – jeweils ein X als Symbol gekreuzter Hände für eine Zehn. Das Zeichen IXX wurde deshalb als einundzwanzig gelesen.
In den vergangenen 500 Jahren haben zwar immer wieder Schriftsteller und Mathematiker auf das Problem der verdrehten Zahlenaussprache hingewiesen. Doch sie scheiterten allesamt an einer Obrigkeit die, wie auch im Fall von Gerritzens Verein, auf Änderungswünsche eher unwirsch reagiert. So wie das hessische Kultusministerium in einen Antwortschreiben an ein Vereinsmitglied: „Sehr geehrter Herr... Ich glaube nicht, dass es sinnvoll ist, die Benennung von Zahlen in der deutschen (oder einer anderen) Sprache mit den Kategorien der Logik zu messen. Die Zahl 15 heißt im Deutschen nun einmal 'fünfzehn' und nicht 'zehnfünf'. Niemand kann dies beliebig ändern“.
Allerdings führte Norwegen wegen volkswirtschaftlicher Probleme mit der verdreht-germanischen Zahlensprechweise in Schulbüchern schon 1951 die logisch korrekte Sprechweise ein. Heute sind die Kerbholzzähler in ganz Skandinvien zumindest in der Geschäfts-, Bank- und Postsprache in der Minderheit. Hierzulande müssen sich dagegen mehr als fünf Millionen Legastheniker und Dyskalkuliker sowie unzählige Schüler ohne besondere Lese- und Rechenschwäche damit quälen, dass sie beim Hören der Zahl 84356 von der zweiten Ziffer zur ersten springen müssen, dann zur dritten, zur fünften, um mit der vierten zu enden. „Dass das überhaupt funktioniert, ist verblüffend“, sagt Mathematik-Professor Gerritzen.
Leicht fällt das vielen Schülern nicht. Josef Kraus, Vorsitzender des Deutschen Lehrerverbands, weiß zu berichten, dass selbst Abiturienten beim Hören einer dreistelligen Zahl erst links den Hunderterwert schreiben, dann eine Lücke lassen, um rechts den Einer zu notiern und danach die Lücke mit dem Zehnerwert füllen. Vor allem türkischstämmige Schüler, die in ihrer Muttersprache „richtig“ zählen, haben Probleme mit der verkehrten deutschen Zahlenwelt.
Karlsruhe Dort, bei Schülern und Lehrern, trifft Gerritzen, der nun das Buch „zwanzigeins“ herausgegeben hat, auch am ehesten auf offene Ohren. Die Wald-Schule in Bochum hat nach seinen Angaben die unverdrehte Sprechweise inzwischen in den Unterricht eingeführt. Und zu einem unlängst von Gerritzen gehaltenen Vortrag seien mehr als 500 Lehrer und Schüler geströmt. „Es wird aber noch mindestens 25 Jahre dauern, bis sich was ändert“ befürchtet Gerritzen. Dann wäre der Mathematiker neunzigzwei Jahre alt.
Quelle:
● Mathematik: Professor will Deutsche anders zählen lassen von Jürgen Oeder für Welt Online, 6. Oktober 2008
09 October 2008
Laptops instead of text books at school
Dear readers,
here is some interesting news. Honestly, I'm very suprised to see that it comes from Italy. A primary school in Turin has decided to use computers instead of books for its pupils for a year.
Pupils at a school in Italy are replacing all their text books with computers for a year - in what is being described as a unique experiment. More than 60 children - aged between eight and 10 - at Turin's Don Milani school will be using mini laptops with the full curriculum. Their access to the internet will be controlled by special software. The experiment, which is backed by parents, aims to test how a computer alone can improve the learning process.
Until Wednesday, the Don Milani di Rivoli elementary school was like any other in Italy. Children turned up, got out their books and pens and began the process of learning. But now, 60 fifth grade pupils and a number of third graders will start using computers only.
The mini laptops, which run Windows software, weigh less than a kilogram, can be dropped from a height of one-and-a-half metres and are waterproof. Instead of spending the equivalent of $700 (£400) a year on books, the laptops, built by the Italian company Olidata, cost less than $400 (£228).
Source:
● Italy pupils ditch books for PCs by Duncan Kennedy for BBC News, Wednesday 8th October 2008
here is some interesting news. Honestly, I'm very suprised to see that it comes from Italy. A primary school in Turin has decided to use computers instead of books for its pupils for a year.
Pupils at a school in Italy are replacing all their text books with computers for a year - in what is being described as a unique experiment. More than 60 children - aged between eight and 10 - at Turin's Don Milani school will be using mini laptops with the full curriculum. Their access to the internet will be controlled by special software. The experiment, which is backed by parents, aims to test how a computer alone can improve the learning process.
Until Wednesday, the Don Milani di Rivoli elementary school was like any other in Italy. Children turned up, got out their books and pens and began the process of learning. But now, 60 fifth grade pupils and a number of third graders will start using computers only.
The mini laptops, which run Windows software, weigh less than a kilogram, can be dropped from a height of one-and-a-half metres and are waterproof. Instead of spending the equivalent of $700 (£400) a year on books, the laptops, built by the Italian company Olidata, cost less than $400 (£228).
Source:
● Italy pupils ditch books for PCs by Duncan Kennedy for BBC News, Wednesday 8th October 2008
14 August 2008
Italy: the nightmare goes on
Hi everybody,
the police state in Italy goes on.
They killed another innocent, a guy who was 80% mentally disabled. Allegedly, he had thrown crackers at a girl, injuring her. There are no crackers, there is no girl. Listen to his mother describing what happened :
Giuliana Rasman
here's the text in English:
Interview in English
They broke into his flat and beat the hell out of him, tortured him using barbed wire as well. When other investigators went into the flat, they found blood stains everywhere. It seems they had even used a chair to beat him.
It turns out, police knew him: they had already beat him once, when a neighbour called them because he was listening to radio and it was too loud.
The policemen have been acquitted. Of course. You cannot trust police, let alone the judicial system.
SHAME ON THEM
the police state in Italy goes on.
They killed another innocent, a guy who was 80% mentally disabled. Allegedly, he had thrown crackers at a girl, injuring her. There are no crackers, there is no girl. Listen to his mother describing what happened :
Giuliana Rasman
here's the text in English:
Interview in English
They broke into his flat and beat the hell out of him, tortured him using barbed wire as well. When other investigators went into the flat, they found blood stains everywhere. It seems they had even used a chair to beat him.
It turns out, police knew him: they had already beat him once, when a neighbour called them because he was listening to radio and it was too loud.
The policemen have been acquitted. Of course. You cannot trust police, let alone the judicial system.
SHAME ON THEM
26 March 2008
Italy
You probably think that Italy is a wonderful country, you want to go there to spend some time at the seaside, visit some very nice towns and cities, have fun. Please, take time to see what also happens in Italy, that probably you've never seen before:
G8:FILMATI SU VIOLENZA SCONVOLGENTE DELLE"FORZE DELL'ORDINE"
Police attack aged people nearby Naple (Pustarza)
The blog's interviews: Roberta Radici
The blog's interviews: truth for Federico
Italy is and has always been a wonderful country, but this government, these policemen, this system are destroying it. The government is full of criminals and uses violence against their own citizens.
As for the criminals in the government, here's a detailed list:
If you know them, you avoid them
The file is in Italian but you can easily see the names sorted by the parties they belong to.
Always look for the correct information. It can save your life.
V2 Day, 25th April 2008 Free information in a free state.
"... let's make this a better world... " Toto
G8:FILMATI SU VIOLENZA SCONVOLGENTE DELLE"FORZE DELL'ORDINE"
Police attack aged people nearby Naple (Pustarza)
The blog's interviews: Roberta Radici
The blog's interviews: truth for Federico
I want to express my disgust and my anger towards the police state in Italy.
Shame on them.
Shame on them.
Italy is and has always been a wonderful country, but this government, these policemen, this system are destroying it. The government is full of criminals and uses violence against their own citizens.
As for the criminals in the government, here's a detailed list:
If you know them, you avoid them
The file is in Italian but you can easily see the names sorted by the parties they belong to.
Always look for the correct information. It can save your life.
V2 Day, 25th April 2008 Free information in a free state.
"... let's make this a better world... " Toto
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)