Das Pantoffeltierchen (রাশিয়ান অনুবাদ)

Advertisements
জার্মান

Das Pantoffeltierchen

Ich sprach einmal
mit einem Pantoffeltierchen
 
Es schwärmte von
Weiterentwicklung
und
höherem Bewusstsein
 
Ich lächelte
und schwieg
 
Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke দ্বারা বৃহস্পতি, 19/09/2019 - 11:55 তারিখ সাবমিটার করা হয়
সাবমিটার এর মন্তব্য:

Was sind schon 3,5 Milliarden Jahre Evolution?

Übrigens: Pantoffeltierchen waren 2007 die Einzeller des Jahres!

Weitere Infos: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantoffeltierchen

রাশিয়ান অনুবাদরাশিয়ান
Align paragraphs
A A

Амёбка

সংস্করণ: #1#2
Однажды я разговаривала
с амёбкой.
 
Она увлеклась
развитием
и
высшим сознанием.
 
А я улыбалась
и молчала.
 
Do whatever you want with my translations.
They no more belong to me than the air I breathe.
silencedsilenced দ্বারা মঙ্গল, 08/10/2019 - 13:18 তারিখ সাবমিটার করা হয়
লেখকের মন্তব্য:

Just a tribute to this wise and clever poem. You would of course put it better than I will ever be able to.

"Das ..." এর আরও অনুবাদ
রাশিয়ান silenced
মন্তব্যসমূহ
Sophia_Sophia_    মঙ্গল, 08/10/2019 - 20:19

Спасибо!
Приятно видеть, как ты переводишь на русский Regular smile

silencedsilenced    মঙ্গল, 08/10/2019 - 20:31

Очень забавное и мудрое стихотворение Regular smile

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 07:51

Я в восторге, большое спасибо, silenced!
Удивительно, что амебы потенциально бессмертны, потому что у них нет проблем с отходами.
Так что теоретически наш предок мог бы жить и сегодня ...

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:06

Ну да, надо спешить с ними болтать, пока мы их не убили кислым океаном или подобными следствиями своей глупости...

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:23

Но теперь ты слишком строг с человечеством.
Мы (homo stupidus) здесь несколько сотен тысяч лет, и мы, без сомнения, выживем в ближайшие 10 лет (так или иначе) ... Так что, пожалуйста, немного больше оптимизма!

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:58

Ладно. Дай-ка подумать...
Кажется амебы не представляют непосредственной угрозы. Вот повод для оптимизма!
Блин! Опять неудача...

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:14

Ха! А как насчет амебной дизентерии??
И именно об этой угрозе человечеству я пишу стихи!! Wink smile

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:32

Даже амёбам нужна наша шкура. Нам действительно крышка.

Sophia_Sophia_    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 12:15

Ну, вообще-то в оригинале говорится про инфузорию-туфельку, а они не патогенны Regular smile

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 16:49

Не важно, что же различие между амёбами, инфузориями -туфельками и нами?

vevvevvevvev    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 16:52

Основная жизнь на планете сосредоточена под землёй на глубинах до трёх километров. Я думаю, что эти микроорганизмы живут и даже не замечают нас. Так что убить их у нас, при всём желании, не получится. Спешить с ними болтать надо пока мы по своей глупости не убили себя Regular smile

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:00

Это шокирует! Мы - венец творения, и есть действительно глупые бактерии, которые даже не заметили нас???
Это должно быть четвертое нарциссическое заблуждение Фрейда ...

vevvevvevvev    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:06

Масса жизни под землёй многократно больше массы всей наземной жизни (включая нас с Вами Regular smile ) и это научно доказанный факт.

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:43

... а когда мы исчезли - кто будет нас оплакивать?

vevvevvevvev    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:49

Ну, с инфузорией же уже диалог налажен... Договоримся Regular smile

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:51

We could build robots for that. Engineers can design pretty durable stuff when the marketing guys don't prevent them doing so.

воронворон    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:17

пока они не превратились в высшее мыслящее существо и не зазнались
потому молча-чтобы не помогать развиваться амебному уму
оочень продуманный стих

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:32

It seems to me being overthrown by sapient amoebas is not the most pressing threat we are currently facing Teeth smile

воронворон    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:05

кто знает что дальше будет-если с ними начать разговаривать)

Pinchus ZelenogorskyPinchus Zelenogorsky    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:40

Так и бог с нами: улыбается и молчит. Один знакомый иудей мне, правда, сказал, что для бога хороший человек скорее как собака.

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:01

Что еще осталось Богу? Он создал нас. Теперь он ДОЛЖЕН улыбаться ...

BlackSea4everBlackSea4ever    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:05

I think He needs to atone for his sins. Design was extremely flawed and and fixes aren't coming out.

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:58

Let me summarize a wonderfully funny French short story to atone for my translation sin:

- This way, doctor
- Hello boy, your Mom tells me you've been a bit sad lately, mmm?
- Well, Mister, it's my creatures, you see. They won't listen to a word I say, they fight amongst themselves all the time and they keep spoiling their litter. Sure, I can teach them tricks, but deep down they don't love me, I just know it. Bwaaah! Bad, bad creatures!
- I see. So you gave them free will, eh? Why not simply design them to love you?
- Sob... That would be cheating. I want to be loved for what I am. And yet I tried everything: threats, cajoling, bribes. I even went to visit them once. Pah, they just crucified me. Would you believe that? Ungrateful vermin, the lot of 'em. I hate them, I... Aaaargh! Bwaaah!!!
- Come now boy. here, take my handkerchief. It will be alright...
- So, doctor?
- Well, I know being a single mother isn't easy. Lack of paternal figure and all that... He seems to have a lot of anger and frustration to vent on these poor little critters of his. Maybe you've been a tad bit overprotective with this young man? You might want him to meet more young fellows his age. Don't you worry though, it's just a phase. He will soon involve himself in more positive activities.
- Oh doctor, that's a relief. And what about the creatures? They are becoming quite a nuisance, you know. The noise... and the smell...
- Ah, these? Your son shall soon have no use for them. You can then dump the whole silly contraption down the gloopster and be done with it.

So far nobody managed to identify the exact purpose of a gloopster, but that's probably where we're headed.

The original goes into hilarious details about some silly aspects of religion and the psychology of a tyrannical child, but this is the gist of it, or so I hope.

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 16:57

Two planets meet in space.
"Brrrr", said the one of them.
"What's the matter?" asked the other one.
"I've got humans".
"Don't worry, you'll be rid of them soon..."

воронворон    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 08:45

нуу если дословно -"раб божий",конечно может бытовать самоуничижительное мнение, хотя с некоторыми избранными вроде велись задушевные разговоры, их потом святыми еще называли, пророками итп
другой вопрос-кто именно с ними разговаривал
мне тут недавно попалась статейка ,сперва про отличия католицизма и христианства всё было предельно понятно,а потом начались ужасТные дебри /для меня/ ,ибо там вполне себе аргументированно показано \доказано, что скорее сатана "разговаривает" у таких в голове,мда.вот такая печаль.так не захочешь никаких разговоров-сперва задушевных,а потом-душу отдай

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:15

Well, try picturing the consequences of an amoeba chatting with Mr. Milton Friedman. We can consider ourselves lucky that never happened.

воронворон    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:18

амебы могут превзойти нас интеллектуально и будут морально подавлять и презирать деградирующее человечество

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:42

Maybe you are right: Amoebas would never believe that they have to go to hell or to return to earth as a sort of seaweed (bad karma) after eating other amoebas. God is love, so many people say, but in this case, God would never expect a quid-pro-quo-compensation, because God is no dealer! - Or maybe God is: We get drugs (endorphin and adrenaline) and have to pay with "good" behavier, whatever it is. The Aztecs for example thought it was a good idea to put off the skin of enemies or their own people (if disabled and not useful for war) and eat their flesh. The question is, how can a drug-addict be "good" when he is always busy to get his "drugs"? So God has to remain silent and smile...

воронворон    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 09:49

вопросы теологии\религии достаточно сложные, и очень часто видение у каждого своё

я вижу определение любви в данном контексте--как попытка помощи от высшего разума каждому конкретному человеку --обрести некое умиротворение и гармоничное существование души

другой вопрос, что некоторые получают такое подобие от убийств или наркотиков, тут дело личного выбора, кто что считает для себя правильным\приемлемым\не может остановиться
остановиться--побороть свои привычки\инстинкты--вот задача развития разума
с инстинктами, естесна, всегда сложнее, но что поделать-или жить простой скушной жизнью, или вперед: бороться и побеждать

с собой бороться сложнее всего
да и зачем-не такая долгая жизнь, тем более кто знает сколько кому осталось. айда напиваться и куролесить)

Vladimir4757Vladimir4757    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:12

These comments....so interesting. To that matter and going off from Amobeas to atheists since why not, I'd argue the same. If God is all-loving would he really have quarrels with people who just don't want to believe in him? Doesn't it sound like God is egotistic and narcissistic if he punishes those who don't believe? And in the end, he can just opt to do nothing with the non-believers instead of punishing them. If he has to punish "non-believers" well, then goes the rest of the religions on Earth, who all interested God in their own unique way, or believed in something entirely different.

Or take it from this perspective : that every one thing is existing in its own reality detached from other's realities. Everything is defined from the observer. Reality is simply what each man believes and that in the end, what purpose is fighting over religion when we all see and live in our own differing realities that have no effect on one-another? The amoeba sees things without regard to religion, they don't need religion, but at the same time, from another person's perspective, say a scientist, they see the amoeba and go "Well, this is an Amoeba, one of the simplest organisms on Earth." That sounds harsh, the scientist is, after all, implying the simplicity of the amoeba without realizing the amoeba may be more complex because surely the amoeba doesn't understand how complex humans are. Surely, the amoeba cannot fathom this fact. However, this revelation cannot be answered because amoebas cannot speak nor think, however, from the perspective of an amoeba, life and everything we know is instead not true or doesn't exist.

From everyone else's view, no matter the time period, they say and reasoned differently. This makes sense, it is logical, isn't it? They might not have had the concepts of modern morality. Times were different. How can we ever judge or know how they viewed morals and what is right or wrong? So why would we apply our modern ways of thinking, the modern perceptions that judge our own existence, to times where maybe they thought different? Maybe they believed something we just do not know or understand and that to them it was solace, it was what was most important to them and we'll never understand that. How would their God past-God see our Modern-God? What interactions would they have? Do they disagree? Do they suffer a terrible fate for doing what our God says is wrong that their God says was instead good? How do we tell and how can we ever define what their actions were and are in a larger context of life without our own current ideas muddying the waters? In the end, what truly is right and wrong? Has there been a universal set of morals, at least one thing that across all time has been accepted as right or wrong?

BlackSea4everBlackSea4ever    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 17:19

When humans went from the vegetarian gatherers to hunters, they began the endless path to hunting and gathering MORE. Few have developed a sense of morals, religion non-withstanding, most are using the God-concept to milk the brethren for MORE.

Vladimir4757Vladimir4757    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 18:07

Which is inevitably human nature. We're like all other animals on this planet : driven to survive. Sure, we live at a point where some people don't have to worry about this as much as others. But in the end, we're no better than the other animals on this planet who only care for those around them and ignore those they simply think are of no use. Those who live across an ocean and are suffering are of no importance to someone who has everything in life and so much more.

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 18:42

Yippee! Now is my chance to rant like a sententious old fart. Let's make the most of it.

Like about every inhabitant of this planet these last 30 or 40 years, you've been raised to count greed and selfishness among ontological truths and cardinal virtues. This has not always been the case. You simply can't build a cathedral or a pyramid within a society ruled by such a system of belief, and yet the cathedrals and the pyramids still stand.
We also are the only animals consuming dozens of times more energy than they can procure by their own means. Oil is already running out, and yet we don't even seem to notice this orgy can't last much longer. Another of these ontological truths that will soon be revealed as the suicidal illusion it has always been.
Greed and selfishness are just traits among others. They work up to a point, and then they stop working. Now would be a good time to remember empathy and selflessness proved they could achieve a few things too.

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 18:48

Absolutely. The question is, what future would you rather contribute to build?
Personally, the thought of my generation being remembered as one of the most selfish, greedy and plain stupid to ever walk the earth keeps me awake at night, but your mileage can vary.

Vladimir4757Vladimir4757    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 18:44

Well, we also know our alternatives. And yet we are so selfish that we care about our bottom line than the survival of other humans. Yeah, oil is running out. There is solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, etc. Science says we should make a giant solar array around our own sun so our civilization can live longer than the resources on earth and yet even that cannot unite humanity under a common goal. It is as-if we are a group of factions bidding for only our own factions survival and no one else's. Soon we'll all perish because we're not like the amoeba, able to exist peacefully accepting that things although there is little we can control, what we have control over can make a difference for our own survival. Amoebas don't worry about money or petty human things like friendship, betrayal, patriotism or loyalty. Amoebas aren't racist, sexist, or prejudice. Amoebas don't hold grudges or hatreds. They exist. Free-floating in their gloopy microscopic reality free of the issues most beings have. So why don't we live life like an amoeba? Accept we're all tiny in the grand scheme of things, and that although we're so small, the world we live on is small. And instead of doing great things that kill ourselves, worry about one another. Maybe group together to make a complex multi-celled organism.

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 19:00

A complex multi-celled organism is a pretty good definition of a human society.
That is, before this indigent model of a collection of greedy, paranoid individuals buying stuff off each other was forced upon mankind.

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 19:09

"Everything is defined from the observer." - Yes, and that is Einstein's relativity. There are no blue or red planets, it depends on your point of view.
In former times, war was essential and there were Gods who wanted us to kill and eat our enemies. The Roman Empire for example had its God of war, Mars. Then all battles were won, an extended multi-cultural-country asked for law and order. So Mars was kicked off his throne, and they took the peacful Jesus (although some years before they killed Christians in the circus). Money? Give the emperor, what belongs to the emperor!
Violence? Offer your other cheek! - Religion always depends on the circumstances of culture.

"without realizing the amoeba may be more complex" - An amoeba has no human brain, no "filter" between a very complex reality and the own consciousness. There a billions and billion of information outside, but we realize only a few, and then we take this very few information and make them bigger and bigger with help of our former experience and so called knowledge. It is working like a double funnel. And finally what we find is, what we have inside. And the amoeba? Maybe this creature is like a baby, no possibility to "think", there is only a very intense feeling, a total and direct perception of the world outside. No moral, no compromise. Why should an amobea be stupid? It is the same sort of life as we are...

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 00:14

Among our ancestors there is this "homo habilis" guy. He appeared about 2 million years ago and lasted a few hundred thousand years.
All he ever managed was crudely flake some stone.
I'm sure they had a cave somewhere where their own Newton, the genius who first banged two rocks together, was worshipped.
Apparently their own Einstein was eaten by a sabretooth tiger or fell into a tar pit before he had a chance to add a stick to the stone and make an axe.
I also imagine they thought themselves pretty smart. Maybe their scientists collected very long sticks in hope to finally succeed in poking the moon?
Yet these guys outlived us by far. I wouldn't bet we'll still be there in a few hundred thousand years' time.

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 19:39

"I also imagine they thought themselves pretty smart." - LOL! But that is the point! I can really imagine they did. The same as we do now...

silencedsilenced    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 23:52

Exactly. Dark matter detectors and the large hadron collider might well be nothing but somewhat longer sticks.

Vladimir4757Vladimir4757    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 23:27

Which is always fun. Every generation has their "greatest" being. And they never like being challenged. That throne is theirs only, without contest. "The first inventor" who should be praised for his ingenious intellect. But we do this honor to more than just science.
See it like R.J. Oppenheimer, "The Father of the Atomic Bomb". He first believed that the power of atomic energy could be used for good, not as a weapon of war, and hoped that it would be used as such. The amount of energy that can be generated is massive, but he was a fool to believe humanity wouldn't fight for over fifty years and threating the very earth with such a weapon. Whichever primitive who made the ax never would've thought that it'd be used to kill people. Or the inventor of the pillow, that bastard thought it was a good device for comfort and convenience, and yet man uses it to snuff people out in their sleep. Or dogs, man's "best friend". They were used for hunting, but someone thought "I can use this animal to kill other humans for me."

Besides humans, apes seem to have a similar intellect as to ours. However, they are not as complex as us (yet). But still, what did we do differently? Where did we branch off from them? We're the only species on this Earth who has mastered the destruction of every species on this planet, except the amoeba. Nothing can kill an amoeba. They're microscopic, everywhere, ubiquitous if you will, and yet they just show up everywhere. How is it that we can master the ability to kill every single complex organism on a planet, who gets that trophy? Does humanity collectively get the "Father of Total Anhilation" for this? I don't think we can go anywhere else. Why is it we cannot accept our bitter fate? Why is it so hard to realize that since the inception of mankind we have been murdering, raping, and robbing one-another? We've been in this sour relation for so long, so why don't we get tired of it? Why do we not settle for different? Sure, we'll be friends with some groups, but as Trump proves, it just takes one person to soil that in a jiffy. Why do we not see other humans? A black man and white man are the same minus thier skin and genes. Same cells, same body, same everything. Only different is the genetic makeup of their skin and hair.

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 00:24

We certainly have a knack for playing with loaded guns and remarkably less aptitude for putting them down.

You might want to look into research about racism. Take a few 4 years old and show them pictures of kids with various skin colours. Now ask them who stole the chocolate. The truth coming out of the mouth of these delicious creatures will be "the guy with a different skin color, ma'am".

So racism is not an artificial creation. It's just an instinct that might have saved our distant ancestors at some point, but has long become a burden. No different from the urge to steal an apple when you're hungry.
Education is what can rid us of it. Just like we listen to songs or go to the movies to vent our dangerous pulsions into harmless fantasies.

Now of course, when education becomes threatened by things like consumerism, poverty, inequalities, lack of purpose and fluffy cats while various black clouds gather on the horizon, it's no wonder to see the ugly beast rear its head again. And ignorant imbeciles get elected to do its bidding.

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 14:35

The "color of skin" argument is a biased argument, IMHO. A person from Africa isn't just characterized by the colour of his/her skin, but also by the shape of his/hear head, by his/her way of speaking, and by the way he behaves (as a general rule - of course there always are exceptions). So the association is made between all these characteristics and the supposed wrongdoing. For instance, most of the rappers are black, and they behave in a most shocking way, so how could there not be an instinctive association between "black" and "rapper-like" ? This didn't prevent Leopold Senghor to be a famous poet, but how many Leopold Senghors can you see around? And if you take the case of the Roms, they are not black at all, but nearly anybody would associate the word "Rom" with "dirty, liar, beggar, thief" etc. - in France just as in Eastern European countries. This is not necessarily partiality, since Roms are known in France since the 16th century if I'm not wrong, and native people have a long experience of them (and they were already described as dirty, liars, beggars and thieves in the 16th century !)

BlackSea4everBlackSea4ever    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 14:49

But take a black or rom and raise them in my-kind of family and there wouldn't be an iota of difference. We put people in position where they aren't doing well and then blame-associate them with negative connotations. I bet if you were raised as rom, you wouldn't have the knowledge you possess and would go unnoticed for your poetic talents. So education seems to be the difference. Although, I agree there are exceptions to everything in nature.

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 15:26

This would take us too far, but you should ask Hungarian or Slovak people what they think about that. In these countries, the governments have tried to make something for the Roms, they gave them flats or houses, sent their children to school, etc... About the result, you'd better ask people from there. I personallly only have an experience of my car being plundered during the night in Košice (Slovakia)... not by Slovaks, I guess. There you can find the "ghetto" of Lunik IX (it was not meant to be a ghetto at first.)  Here you can see how it looks like. There is an interesting article on French Wikipedia about it (the English one is rather poor). Of course, the Slovaks are more or less suspected to be responsible of the situation... just as the French authorities in France, and just like in every country where you can find Roms. Sometimes you have to face reality and throw away your pink glasses...
 
And what exasperates me most is that in France, when there are news about a mischief committed by Roms, they nearly never say "Roms", they say "Romanians" for example (because they are often supposed to be Romanian citizens). If I were the President of Romania, I would attack France at the United Nations for discrimination. Actually, many French people make an instinctive association between "Roms" and "Romanians" and don't even know there is a difference, thanks to that biased information.

BlackSea4everBlackSea4ever    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 15:40

Ok, thoughtless endeavor ended as well as it was thought through. People, all people, need purpose not just charity. Giving them flats and sending children to school was great, but was there a thought how they will earn living, how to overcome cultural issues where freedom to roam was ingrained into generation after generation? Unlikely. More likely, someone took government money to populate these buildings.
I don't want to argue, but often you confuse me displaying disdain instead of comprehension. On these occasions, you are on MZ side tipping the scale heavily against my believe in humanity.

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 15:49

Would that be a reason for throwing your garbage just out of your window ?

BlackSea4everBlackSea4ever    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 17:36

Of course not. I don't justify the wrongs as acceptable. And certainly not when the environment is getting trashed. Again, you surprised me.

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 18:19

If you want the words of wisdom of a failed social worker, the very first thing we learned in school is that you must start with an actual request. Not just manipulating people into agreeing to ideas you forced down their throats. I mean genuine, spontaneous requests.
That is, if you pretend your goal is helping people. You can also whip them into submission, naturally. But that's not the same thing.

If you build houses nobody asked for, they will remain empty. If you force people living in them, they will soon be rendered inhabitable. And so on.
You cannot magic away the Rom's way of life. All you can do is think of ways of coexisting peacefully, and let time polish the cultures as they brush against each other. Or decide their culture is too toxic and eliminate it, of course, but we all know the cost of that, don't we?

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 15:59

Let's assume for the sake of the argument skin colour is out of the equation.
In my opinion, a more pertinent approach to these hard to reconcile ways of life is the opposition between rural and urban culture. The vast majority of immigrants come from poor rural settlements. They behave in a way very similar to the peasant ancestors of these so proud chauvinists of rich countries. The only thing that separates them from these noisy and smelly foreigners is a couple of adequately fed generations. A mere matter of living standard homogenization.
Now when for some strange reason there is supposedly not enough cake for everyone, we get back to a situation very reminiscent of Dickens' 19th century England, where the last to arrive ('"you Irish lout!") are stuck in ghettos and relegated to the role of scapegoats for the sorry state of the world.

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 16:11

Cultures so different from each other as European and African cultures just don't mix up so easily. Just as our great thinkers decided that you just had to throw some nasty dictators into the dustbin and immediately countries like Iraq, Aghanistan or Libya would become exemplary democracies... how can one be so short-sightened?

Some right-wing politician in France (for whom I really have no particular sympathy - he's called Brice Hortefeux) once said about immigrants (Arabs, if I remember well) : when there is one of them, everything goes fine, trouble begins when are are many of them... Everybody immediately accused him of being a despicable racist, yet IMHO he was quite right: if you want to mix so different cultures, you have to go progressively, little by little, and supposing you have the financial resources to integrate them. This is no racism, it is plain common sense... But we are the Country of Human Rights, we are more clever than other countries of course... this is like a religion or a dogm, rather than like normal, intelligent thinking. Don't believe what you see, believe what is written in the Book. Because the Book can't be wrong.

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 16:49

Sure, the court of King Sarkozy was so crawling with ignorant mo[beep]ons and psy[beep]paths that Hortefeux just looked like your average Joe in the middle of the appalling zoo. Still, the guy is a prize pr[beep]ck. His joke reeks of the insufferable patronizing of heartless bas[beep]rds who have not the slightest idea of what it means to be one of these "many troubling Arabs". I happened to roam the jolly suburbs of Paris trying to work on child protection cases at the time, and being p[beep]ssed upon every day by these arrogant je[beep]ks did nothing to endear them to me.
Mmm... Apparently I'm still not over this god[beep]mn awful experience...

All this being said, I totally agree you cannot expect things to go smoothly if you park masses of poor people in ghettos with little or no hope of achieving a socially acceptable standard of living.

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 17:05

And as the saying goes : "Charité bien ordonnée commence par soi-même". Let's open our eyes and look how things go nowadays on the French countryside (for example) for ordinary French people (I could tell a lot about it), and then let's ask ourselves : OK, are we ready to welcome nearly one billion African people, plus the Middle East ones? And what will be the result? And are we really awful racists if we object that we are not able to do it?

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 17:29

Of course we aren't. For one thing, since 2008 economic growth is being entirely captured by the richest 10% (even 1% in the US). There are hardly enough riches around to satisfy the legitimate needs of the most valuable elements of our society! Now is not a good time to squander them on uncouth peasants.

Then there is the question of this standard of living we take for granted.
Clearly we can't expect 70 million people in France to live like the merry-go-lucky 30% or so of bourgeois showcased in every TV ad, every newspaper, every political speech (except those of the bad, bad guys, naturally).

So right now the only economically viable solution is to let the noisy and smelly foreigners die like dogs, send the cops to give a good what-for to the 50-60% of the population that gave up any hope of becoming a bourgeois, and resume worrying about meaningful things like #tellingonyourswine...

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 19:31

Sure, in an ideal world, the richest would give a part of their wealth to help the poorest. Only they won't do it. Too bad.
Even the so-called "socialist" (if I remember well) Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, seems to have recently discovered what an awful mess has become the Porte de la Chapelle - among many other places. It shouldn't be like that. But it is. And the more "migrants" (the word "clandestine" having been banned) we will go and fetch (because by now, we go all the way to the Libyan coast in order to help them immigrating into Europe), the more catastrophic the situation will be. And not only in Paris (look at what's happening in Greece and Italy, look at Merkel's "Herzlich willkommen!" politics in Germany). The result ? Extreme-right rising everywhere, attacks and dead (until now mainly islamic attacks and some fascist attacks too, but this could evolve). It shouldn't be like that. People are not supposed to vote for the extreme-right, they are supposed to vote like they are told to do. But they do just like they want it (those idiots!) And more and more so. Something went wrong, but what? And what will happen next ? What happened in Germany in the 1930s ?

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 19:45

I wouldn't call that an ideal world, just a world where the rich know when to stop. Where inequalities would be kept within reasonable bounds. Say, no more than 1000 times the minimal wage. Basically the wealth repartition of 1970 in rich countries like the US.
The idea would just be to let the crazies obsessed with amassing money have their little fun, while remaining a manageable nuisance to the vast majority of people not suffering from this particular mental issue.
This explosion of inequalities is like a planned suicide. A collective madness. Greed as a cardinal virtue means death.

BlackSea4everBlackSea4ever    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 19:47

And what do you think will happen when thousands of Isis prisoners head for Europe now that TRUMP not US abandoned Kurds? In a minute, I will be told that I'm discussing politics, but look at what happens when politics aren't discussed. Your worries and ours are common, but the best people are not vociferous. Facebook once again running trump's lies, once again trump sides with dictators, once again he is an idiot in charge.

Vera JahnkeVera Jahnke    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 14:07

"I don't think we can go anywhere else. Why is it we cannot accept our bitter fate? " - In my opinion the reason can be that we are all "drug"-addicted. But I don't talk about "harmles" drugs from outside. I talk about the inner drugs. I call them "endorphin" and "adrenalin", so this hormons are symbols for "love" and "hate" (emotions), for "attraction" and "repulsion" (physical world) and so on. If you want to know what will happen, ask a alkoholic or junkie: First you have to go really down, than - maybe - it become better. We are all talking about philosophy, for example here in this thread, but at the same time we behave like junkies.

Another point is what Sigmud Freud said. People say he is undead like Count Dracula, but I think he was a genious, but at the wrong time on the wrong place. He used strange words, from mythology, but that was, because he was the inventor. If you read between the lines, you can find very interesting things. The same with me: I can't express myself in English or Russian, but if you try to read between the lines, maybe you can figure out what I mean. For example, he wrote about the 3 narcicisstic deceptions (?): 1) We are the center of the universe! - You laugh? - Until today we are talking about sunset. Hey, there is no sunset at all... 2) We and the apes have the same roots! - You agree? - But why we are talking about a Humanism (if something is good) and a beast (if someone was a mass murder)? 3) We are not master of ourselves? - You agree again? But we don't accept it! We are the master of the universe. Ozone holes? WE created them and WE can solve the problem: no hairspray any more!
Do you know what it is strange? The ozone holes are at the poles. And there the magnetic field of the earth is very weak. Every 300.000 years the poles changes. At this time we loose your magnetic shield, many living form died. Since the 40th this effect become stronger. Nowadays there are areas in the South Pazific, where this effect already has begun. So maybe, I don't know, the Ozone holes were the first sign of this pole change. And we can do nothing, absolutely nothing against it.

We can think about the past and the future, so what? We feel guilty or sad about the past and are full of fear regarding the future. Happy amoebae, they don't worry! - We kill all dangerous animals, wolves, bears and so on, but look, what the animals do, for example in Africa: The antilopes eat their grass, quietly, while at the same time the lions sleep nearby. There is nothing to do. If the lions start to attack, the antilopes will run away. It is so easy! And they are still here, on this earth, with their simple and "stupid" strategy. Wow!

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 15:38

Poor Sigmund has been thoroughly vilified, ridiculed and trampled into the ground by the triumphant behaviourists these last few decades.
Sure, the dear old chap occasionally talked a lot of nonsense, and some of his followers deified him into absurdity.
But depriving ourselves of all his thinking is as terrible a regression as chucking Marx out the window for fear of the hated communism.
Especially to replace him with an indigent utilitarian view of the human mind as a black box with rows of buttons and levers to fiddle with in order to induce the expected behaviour. Heartless, soulless and manipulative. Goes hand in hand with the odious "homo oeconomicus" model. A shipwreck of the mind...

As for me, I am quite certain our mind is dominated by unconscious forces mere intelligence is pathetically inadequate to contain. Explaining to an alcoholic that drinking is not a good idea is both patronizing and useless.
What contains our dangerous urges is education. Superego (the little cop in your frontal lobe) clobbering the id (the vestigial lizard brain in the back of your head) before it manages to take control. And sheer coercion (real cops clobbering you on the head) when your super ego allows the lizard to go on a rampage. The ego (the tiny little bit of our brains that forms conscious thoughts) is mostly a passenger occasionally driving from the back seat Regular smile
The id / ego / superego model is way better at explaining lots of common behaviours than anything behaviourists ever produced. Well, behaviourists are not even interested in explaining anything that goes on inside the black box, except to fiddle with their levers more efficiently. Did I mention I'm not very fond of these guys?

Vladimir4757Vladimir4757    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 16:59

Which is always interesting. In the grand scheme of things multiculturalism is a brilliant idea that is hard to execute. How do you mix so many cultures together without causing a riot? Welp, good luck figuring that out. You cannot throw them into ghettos expecting things to go smoothly. You don't give them an education and nice flats expecting they'll like that either. Give them social equality and equal rights, the way you go about that, well, is almost a monkey's paw if you ask me. You give them equality at the cost of social approval. If you give them social approval, then it is at the cost of equality. You give them homes, at the cost of standard of living. You give them an education at the cost of quality. This is how it always has been. Maybe there is a better way of handling this, however the times it boils over correctly so many years have passed. Look at the united states, slavery has been over now for two hundred (ish) years and racism is still an issue here. How you go about solving inequality is an issue greater than it sounds, and if you ask me, I don't think there is a solution because if there was one, then there wouldn't be the issues we're having with race and culture that we have today.

JadisJadis    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 17:10

True, some say "Things are going badly, among others in the suburbs, but they should not go this way". Other say "Things should not go this way, but so they do, and they're not improving at all, they're just going worse and worse". Different attitudes towards reality.
 

silencedsilenced    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 19:12

As I said, assuming the idea is to help people instead of simply moving them out of the way, the very first thing is to ask them what they want. I mean no disrespect, but reading your post I only see a list of things you think would be good for them.

Reducing discontent among a population in a not too violent way requires much talk and negotiation. This in turn requires a healthy political debate.
Unfortunately, we've been living in a wasteland of politics for a few decades now. At the very least since this pompous Fukuyama prick declared History had ended.

"We" are not better off than the Roman empire, seeing "ourselves" as a beacon of civilization surrounded by barbarians. While in reality, this "we" is just the upper X percent of the population that enjoy access to wealth, culture and social success.

The rest is left speechless, with no advocates or surrogates, no representatives, no alternative theory to explain the world except crackpot rants like flat earth or creationism, no political view except the most crass xenophobia and chauvinism.
Every alternative has been ridiculed or demonized to the absurd. If you're not happy here, you must be either sick or mad or evil. A communist, a rabid towelhead, a crackpot old hippie, etc.

Look who's getting elected now. No matter how much of a moron or an autocrat you are, all you have to do is tell these desperate people you're on their side. Even a hint of pride and purpose, however phoney, is better than the endless arrogance and contempt of little pricks like, for instance, our current French president.

воронворон    বুধ, 09/10/2019 - 18:51

амебы мало людские чаяния понимают
так и люди-куда им до высшего разума

если думать,что существует только то,что мы видим-и ничего кроме этих пределов,так и просидишь типо амебы-в своей луже
люди сами себя наказывают,существует набор условных "правил"-когда ты принимаешь какие-либо верования,ты по идее должен правила соблюдать эти,нарушаешь-должен понести наказание,но все такие мнения настолько условно-индивидуальны
мне кажется,что тут мы не придем ни к единой позиции,ни к даже пониманию
ну можем мило покивать друг другу,в итоге-каждый остается при своём
мне лично просто лень,ограничусь одной фразой (даже где-то тут была песня в тему)--я то в сатану не верю-а вот он верит в меня (не дословно)
по мне-так все эти рассуждения и мнения сводятся именно к этой фразе,и хоть ты целую философию можешь основать или секту

BratBrat    বৃহস্পতি, 10/10/2019 - 18:07

Well, basing on word analysis, I always suspected there's many germs in Germany, and that's just proved out. Congrats!