Democracy = Monarchy - (Oligarchy - Terrorism)
Finding
escrito por Dini Harmita
Due to attacks to mi gadgets as always, couldn’t explore more on the monarchies yet, but learned a lot especially from yesterday’s mid-day walk. As you could see from the previous today’s homework post, the network pattern of Putin et al is similar as Soeharto et al, Megawati et al, SBY et al, they make their surroundings rich.
Like preparing the families of parliamentary members, for example, it’s not wrong; nonetheless sometimes it’s used and too much. Even a hard working Jokowi married his son during his presidency, for example. They even closed the road surrounding the palace when SBY married his daughter. How much incomes of the poor were missing because of that?
Perhaps the initial purpose was to make them having less probabilities to corrupt, but in reality: ‘why do they need to stop something that makes them getting what they want?’ Again, rational behaviour. Too comfortable.
Political parties are the problems indeed, but little we discuss about the individuals. If we want candies, and we get 1000 of per day, big possibility we are going to have at least toothache by the upcoming week the latest. Like the wild animal in the Masha’s tale; you read it right, Masha of Masha and the Bear. He ate the granny, granddaughter, and cookies. It was too much obviously, he vomited them all in no time.
In this discussion of less being too much, who gets to be the nanny? People, through social movements mainly, right? Nevertheless not few of the demonstrations were paid by the oligarchs (Bagg, 2021), by involving terrorism like radical and far right in the latest protest in Spain. EU’s big success currently perhaps is only seen as Euro because single market and or monopoly tends to hurt customers; but Spanish presidency not only brings tidy documents but also the possibilities of collaboration between political parties. Something that used to be very impossible becomes possible. Isn’t it enough to celebrate at least? One little step in democracy. Thus, should not be the rule of law or institutions taking that part of being the nanny? Like alarm. Perhaps in the conquest of finding the monarchies with less influences of oligarchs and terrorists, we could also search for the examples where rule of law and institutions could be a kind yet disciplined nanny.
Having observed my ‘friends’ and ‘enemies’ from the Muslim groups, I could also categorise them like political spectrums, as terrorists, terrorist supporters, non-terrorist supporters, and they don’t care. I’ll take the example of one of my sisters from PKS, she is very caring and I don’t think she’s a terrorist. Nonetheless, those who have different parts in the ideologies seem to be united for example to tell the world that ‘my religion is right, not yours’. When actually it doesn’t have to be like that right? Cause each ideology has a sacred and calming point, and I will repeat, none of them would suggest us to force anything. Therefore, the debates on keep saying that your ideologies are the right ones and others are wrong should be stopped. I don’t want to see Tweets saying Israel is right and Islam is wrong anymore. At the same time, I don’t want to hear PKS’s zoom saying Islam is right and Israel is wrong anymore.
Love, profcbs 🦋
