End of Poverty: Possible?

Perseverant Poverty
Three reasons for poverty to persevere:

1. Social injustice – to be born in impoverished communities augments the chances of not having access to the same opportunities to advance than those being born in more privileged environments.
2. Political agendas – it is politically appealing to keep bubbles of poverty as a means to promote social policies and win elections; to organise charity fund raising events (where political endorsements are fixed and realpolitik occurs); to manipulate the image of a nation and collect aid funds.
3. Personal will – some people just want to be poor. They do not want to have a job; they reject stressing themselves with projects, deadlines, promotions; having the responsibility of paying bills, taxes, mortgages etc. They just want to be left alone. 

Mental Poverty
It is said that Portugal has 2 millions of poor people.
This economic crisis has led many families to recourse to charity food banks; however most do not because of shame, therefore condemning their kids to malnutrition.
Our Minister of Education, Isabel Alçada (a famous Portuguese author of juvenile books), marked the beginning of the school year by addressing the students and explaining the importance of eating wholesome food and having breakfast before attending classes. Since the Ministry of Education decreased the budget for its Nutrition Programs I’d like to know how the children of low-income families will be able to eat properly before going to school.
The Portuguese government is proud of its “Magalhães” project (image below): every kid in primary school is entitled to a laptop with the compliments of the Portuguese Republic. It sounds quite technologically advanced, doesn’t it? Now imagine little children accessing the internet through these technological hand-outs with an empty stomach...

(Source: Wikipedia)

Soul Poverty

• An individual lives lavishly and eats three meals a day. He has a neighbour who is going through financial woes; and knowing this the comfortably-living being doesn’t break bread with his neighbour. 
• A rich person attends charity events. Big checks are written; photos are taken. This individual has a poor relative whom is not interesting to help since helping family does not generate headlines. 
• One is called a man of God, of the spirit; he is revered, he is known as being wise and the guiding light. One is a racist. 
• A politician is irresponsible for the well-being of the nation she runs. This person drives around town, in a Mercedes, while small children (with snot running down their nose, with a swollen belly covered by rags, bare footed, selling greasy fried fish-bones by the side of the road instead of being at school) wave at her with a hungry smile sealed upon their face.

Poverty is an entrapment. It is so intricate a web that it is only possible to attenuate it.
Ending it is impossible.

I now invite you to read LS' opinion on this matter: Here.

Monsieur Guerlain and Perfection

“Pour une fois, je me suis mis à travailler comme un nègre. Je ne sais pas si les nègres ont toujours tellement travaillé, enfin...”(Jean-Paul Guerlain)

Before commenting this statement I would like to present the rabble-rousing translation presented by The Huffington Post:

“And for once I started working like a [racial epithet]. I don't know if [racial epithet] ever worked that hard.”

First: the French word “négre” does not mean the offensive English N word (although many decided that it does). This word derives from the Portuguese and Spanish non-derogatory word “negro” (meaning black, dark, person – initially the Moors). Second: by offering such passion-stirring translation, the Huffington Post proposed itself to worsen an already tense situation; and one might ask itself whether this site was not being more racist, in its intent to slander a rich and respectable French citizen, than Mr Guerlain himself. 

The proper translation would be “And for once I started working like a black. I don’t even know whether blacks have always worked that hard, oh well...” 

Comment: although I understand what Mr Guerlain meant to say, it must be said that his words a priori sounded rather appalling. By saying that he worked like a black person he was not being racist, he was rather recognising that black people toiled to the point of enriching the Western world through their enslavement. By saying that he doesn’t know if they have always worked that hard may be viewed as disappointment towards the present black situation, and who’s to blame? African leaders; who by pillaging their people and not developing their nations, offer the impression that black people yield to the five giants: want, squalor, idleness, ignorance and disease. 

In the controversial interview, Mr Guerlain was explaining that when producing a specific parfum for a client, he toiled and tried to rich perfection 33 times, before presenting the final product (hence his comment “I don’t know whether blacks have always worked that hard [i.e. if they have always put their mind to advance 33 times]”). Well, monsieur Guerlain, so far black people didn’t have the opportunity to try once let alone 33 times developing and perfecting their existence; however they will once they get rid of their Western-supported corrupt leaders and shake off their induced complex of inferiority. 

This topic brought to memory a certain case: in 2000, L’Oreal (another famous French brand) outsourced employees to promote their Garnier hair products. Nothing wrong with this, except for the fact that it exclusively demanded its workers to be Bleu Blanc et Rouge (= Blue White and Red; i.e. French Aryan folks). The French SOS Racism denounced the company and sued it; nevertheless I didn’t see the world boycotting their products. 

Now, everybody is crying “Foul!!Boycott!!” at Guerlain products...there is an obvious double standard. Could it be because Guerlain represents a premium product (for the rich, bien sure) and L’Oreal targets a broader social sector? One wonders, n’est-ce pas?

Image: Jean-Paul Guerlain (photo borrowed from here)

Shredding 3 General Convictions

There is hell.
What if we came to discover that hell is here on earth?
We are told that hell is a horrible place we go to in order to pay for our sins. If we believe in reincarnation, it is not difficult to believe that hell is the idea of staying away from Home, by repeatedly reincarnating on earth until we learn whatever we must learn; until we break the cycle of re-birth; until we fulfil the mission we were sent for. If we don’t believe in reincarnation, then why should we search for an even worst place than earth to be punished? We experience enough evil and suffering here: verbal violence; abuse; assault, murder, rape; paedophilia; promiscuity; corruption; vices; envy; starvation, wars...endless diseases etc.
Do we need further penalisation?

Jesus and Jews are two separate things.
This is the excuse racist Christians use. Jesus (Yeshua) was a Jew from the moment he was born until the day he was crucified and then resurrected. Just because he suggested new ways of thinking and behaving; just because he clashed with Jewish religious authorities; it doesn’t mean that he was less Jewish than he was. So, whenever I see and hear an anti-Semitic Christian I can’t help but to despise that ignorant, nonsensical and brainless individual.

Smiling = kindness and sympathy.
To smile at someone is often thought of as being kind, nice and sympathetic; however this is not always the case. Many times a smiling face equals a lying, deceiving, backstabbing or even a plotting face. One can smile at you and sleep with your spouse; one can smile and harm your kids; one can smile and plan to hurt you; one can smile and curse you; one can smile and hate you. A smile can hide envy and so much more other negative emotions.
Like “The Undisputed Truth” sang “Smiling faces sometimes pretend to be your friend; smiling faces show no traces of the evil that lurks within, can you dig it? (...)”


Image: Bia, the Illegitimate daughter of Cosimo I di Medici by Agnolo Bronzino

An Admirable Man

I’d like to congratulate Professor Liu Xiaobo for having been awarded with the 2010 Peace Nobel price. It’s well deserved.

I confess I didn’t know much about this former college lecturer, but once I read about him, I thought to myself “What an admirable man!”

Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese citizen, has been incarcerated for the past 2 years (not the first time).
Now, you could ask yourself “but why?” and the answer is quite simple: this honourable man fights for freedom of speech in China. He also fights for the introduction of political reform, in that region (e.g. the end of a sole political party; independence of the judicial power and freedom of association).
This rebel with a cause struggles against the authoritarianism and tyranny of the Chinese government: he defends that all of his fellow-citizens should have the right to express their thoughts and opinions freely (even if silly); that they should have the right to be informed (not manipulated) and critique the government whenever they’d see fit without fear of reprisals.
Notwithstanding, Liu Xiaobo stood up and fought knowing that retaliation would be the unavoidable result of his political endeavour. He is a man with a cause, a plausible one.

He won the Peace Nobel Prize. He faces war from jail.
I don’t see the Left meshing huge crowds, in public plazas, to rally for his release.
I don’t see the Left organising flotillas, in the sea bathing China, to set him free.
I don’t see the Lefties setting up groups to go to China and protest against the injustice practiced against this Human Rights marcher.
I don’t see the Left Wing boycotting Chinese products in order to see this brave soldier of democracy experiencing freedom.

Liao Xiaobo is a synecdoche of the Chinese People.

The Left Wing offers the impression that it is more concerned with social issues and human rights violations than any other Wing. Well...

...Liu Xiaobo needs help. Where’s the Left?

Image: Liao Xiaobo's wife shows his picture (by Petar Kujundzic/Reuters).

The Portuguese Republic Centennial

I’d like to thank the freemasonry for having killed King Carlos I, in 1908.
One of the reasons of the regicide was the generalised discontentment towards the Royal Family for having allegedly humiliated Portugal (by obediently handing over Rhodesia to the British government led by Lord Salisbury); but one can guess the real reason: the masons wanted to get and spend as much as His Royal Highness.
On the 5th of October 1910, at 11:00 in the morning; after much confusion, revolution and exile of the Royal Family; the Portuguese Res Publica was born.
On the 20th of April 1911, the bill of separation between state and church was passed.

I would also like to thank the Catholic Church for having placed the good catholic fascist, António de Oliveira Salazar, in power (1932-1968). Thanks to him, Portugal was blessed with a dictatorship; people couldn’t begin to think “Cogito ergo sum” without being arrested by the secret police (PIDE) and tortured, freedom of expression was an unattainable dream; the nation had loads of money (in 1928, when darling Salazar took office as the Minister of Finance, he put the national accounts in order...deficit was an unknown word by then); our currency was accepted anywhere in the world; our citizens were illiterate (75% of illiteracy in the country), only the elites would go to school; we had no roads, no signs of development or modernity...if we wanted modernity or development we’d have to go to the colonies.

I’d like to thank the freemasons, once again, for having helped organising the revolution of 1974, and then cowardly leaving the country in the hands of communists and socialists who ruined Portugal for the subsequent 36 years (yes, meanwhile we had 3 central-right wing governments from which only 1 developed this country so successfully that until today Right Wingers cry for another Cavaco Silva [our present President, who at the time left the country with a surplus] and Left Wingers bash him [by calling him Salazar] for lack of courage to admit that he was the greatest PM of Portugal, during the Rechtsstaat [State of Law]).
After the revolution the rich were persecuted, their assets were seized and nationalised; many were arrested, others were forced into exile; the state became “rich” on assets that didn’t know how to manage; the country learned new words such as “debt”, “deficit”, “high taxes”, “IMF”...but it also learned new concepts like “free education”, “partially free health care”, “freedom of speech” (at least until 2005, when this present socialist government first took office and began hunting down journalists that would criticise “the regime”) and “bank loans”...

Our Republic is 100 years: Happy Anniversary!!!
So much trouble to dethrone a prodigal Royal Family to empower prodigal governments; and then empower frugal fascists; then empower thriftless left-inspired governments; then bring to power a frugal yet competent government; to then bring us to this present thriftless socialist-government that wastes money like there’s no tomorrow and led Portugal to recall bad words such as “IMF”, “deficit”, “debt”, “empty coffers”, “sell gold reserves” and learn new vocabulary like “credit ratings”, “Moody’s”, “Standard & Poor's”...

Would’ve it been so terrible if Portugal had remained a Monarchy? The Republic hasn't proved to be any better than the previous system, except for the commoners: they also got to suckle from the same nipple...

Republic: Hip Hip, Hurray!

Image: Day of the Republic Proclamation borrowed from here.