Yesterday Richard Dawkins got an interview on the Belgian television. He had gotten an honorary degree of the University of Antwerp and he stated his usual (but for Belgium new) views on religion, Islam and especially on indoctrination of childeren in religion. This - according to him - is child abuse.
Richard Dawkins is not a young man (yes, this is relevant)
Today on the Belgian television we got an interview with a new political party, the VCD. They want to return the Catholic ethics. They are against abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage and lesbian marriage (yes, they seem to think the two latter are 'different' things).
Except for one complete -young - idiot, the members of the VCD seem to be in the same age bracket as Richard Dawkins.
These were obviously two opposites (the news-reader thought so as well). And although I know where I stand, I like the fact that both 'ideas' got equivalent exposure on tv, brought - in this case - by parties that looked exactly the same, neither side having the advantage. We need ideas - and the logic behind them - explained, so we can weigh and judge and form our own conclusions. Good job by our national tv !
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Sunday, April 26, 2009
let us be fair
I don't like politicians. I agree with Plato that "our guardians are not to have houses or lands or any other property; their pay is to be their food, which they are to receive from other citizens, and they are to have no private expenses; for we intend them to preserve their true character of guardians". For then there would be - for the first time in history - a useful priesthood. One that could truly save us.
The situation today is different. Politicians have to be popular. There's so many elections and election-campaigns that there's hardly any time for serious work. On top of that they have a private life and when you control your own salary, you're not going to make it "just enough for buying your food".
Having said all that, my personal opinion is that our politicians are not all that bad. Most are not mafia-controlled (as they were/are in Italy). Most don't steal too much and most genuinely have good intentions.
Throughout the years I've really liked what our foreign ministers do. Louis Michel was not afraid to tell Israel to back off from the Palestinians and he got his share of comments about that, but he was right (without denying that the Jews had a troubled past, but a troubled past does not give you "rights" over others today). Karel De Gucht is not afraid to tell the government of Congo (or whatever they call it today) that they are corrupt and basically just filling their own pockets. For they probably are. And yes, Belgium did a lousy job during the colonial days and yes, that is part of what is wrong in the region today, but emotional blackmail based on past mistakes is just not the way ...
So, what happened this week ? Well, one of our more radical politicians sicked a private detective on Karel De Gucht. He was to prove that said minister was corrupt. The detective found nothing. In a poll following these events a big majority of the respondees said they thought that Karel De Gucht is corrupt. And - more worrying - the majority agreed with the technique of sicking a private detective on another person.
I don't care whether or not our foreign minister is corrupt. Probably no more or less than your average politician. What I care about is that this country was build on the balance of three powers (executive, legislative, judicial). If a person has a problem with another person, you use the law. And the law will decide what to do (or not to do). This counts for our politicians as well. You don't take matters into your own hands, for that is not democracy, that is anarchy !
The situation today is different. Politicians have to be popular. There's so many elections and election-campaigns that there's hardly any time for serious work. On top of that they have a private life and when you control your own salary, you're not going to make it "just enough for buying your food".
Having said all that, my personal opinion is that our politicians are not all that bad. Most are not mafia-controlled (as they were/are in Italy). Most don't steal too much and most genuinely have good intentions.
Throughout the years I've really liked what our foreign ministers do. Louis Michel was not afraid to tell Israel to back off from the Palestinians and he got his share of comments about that, but he was right (without denying that the Jews had a troubled past, but a troubled past does not give you "rights" over others today). Karel De Gucht is not afraid to tell the government of Congo (or whatever they call it today) that they are corrupt and basically just filling their own pockets. For they probably are. And yes, Belgium did a lousy job during the colonial days and yes, that is part of what is wrong in the region today, but emotional blackmail based on past mistakes is just not the way ...
So, what happened this week ? Well, one of our more radical politicians sicked a private detective on Karel De Gucht. He was to prove that said minister was corrupt. The detective found nothing. In a poll following these events a big majority of the respondees said they thought that Karel De Gucht is corrupt. And - more worrying - the majority agreed with the technique of sicking a private detective on another person.
I don't care whether or not our foreign minister is corrupt. Probably no more or less than your average politician. What I care about is that this country was build on the balance of three powers (executive, legislative, judicial). If a person has a problem with another person, you use the law. And the law will decide what to do (or not to do). This counts for our politicians as well. You don't take matters into your own hands, for that is not democracy, that is anarchy !
