Monthly Archives: syyskuu 2016

Studio Eut(h)anasia

Normaali

Viikko 39


 

Debattiohjelma, joka lähetetään torstaisin klo viittä vaille kahdeksan kanavalla 5 on ajankohtaisohjelma, jossa puhutaan viikoittain jostakin aiheesta, joskus ankkalammikkoa sivuavasti. Koska siinä on interaktiivinen live-toteutus, yleisö on voinut lähettää lyhyitä kannanottoja studioon nauhoituksen aikana. Ja ohjelman kielihän on ruotsi, vaikka ei sitä aina tarvitse puhua mestarin ottein päästäkseen mukaan.

Otin osaa ja laitoin argumentin aiheesta ”Eutanasia: puolesta ja vastaan”. Alussa tunne oli ”en jaksa tätä aihetta — vähänkö kuollut aihe”, mutta koska tämä tunne on tullut NIIN monesti aiemminkin koskien BP:ä, purin hammasta ja aloin pujotella. Lopulta keksinkin oman kantani. Eutanasian kannattaminen on aina tuntunut jotenkin siltä, että se on hörhöjen, vapaa-ajattelijoiden ja sellaisten äärimmäisen mukavuudenhaluisten ihmisen hommaa, jotka mielellään säätävät jokaista pikku detaljia kotonaan kaukosäätimellä, joten päätin peruskantani: Vastaan. Sitten argumentti. Ajattelin, että lääkäreille sen täytyy olla turhauttavaa. He puurtavat sairaaloissa kädet veressä, jotta ei tulisi hoitovirheitä tai ylipäänsä kuolemia, ja sitten tulee joku hörhö, joka sanoo haluavansa kuolla AVUSTEISESTI (= lääkärien avustamana) pois. Tapahtuu potentiaalinen lääkäreiden demoralisaatio ja työn laadun ja tason lasku. Siihen meillä ei ehkä ole yhteiskuntana varaa, jos haluamme kävellä elossa sairaaloista ulos.

Debatin keskustelijoista lääkäri Heikki oli isoa E:tä vastaan ja ”mummo” Jutta sen puolesta, mutta sen sijaan kansanedustaja Maaritin ja sairaan lapsen äidin Monan olisi voinut vaihtaa päikseen eri puolille. Maarit nimittäin antoi jatkuvasti E:tä puoltavia liennytyksiä (= pro), ja äiti puolestaan tuskailullaan vaikutti olevan lopulta kaikkea muuta kuin valmis painamaan ”vaihtoehtoa E” (= contra). En ymmärrä, miksei heitä ollut laitettu ristikkäin pöydän laidoille. Oletan, että se johtui M:n kansanedustajastatuksesta (tietyssä puolueessa ja -kurissa), mikä tuntuu edelleen sulkevan suita vapaan sanan ohjelmissa.

Sorvasin lopulta seuraavan lauseen (joka julkaistiin ajassa 20 min 30 sek):

obs-debatt-3Vaikka katsoin luomustani alussa hyvinkin tyytyväisenä, minulle sattui sikäli vahinko, että ”fostra Livet” ei tietääkseni ole hyvää ruotsia (juontaja B. sanoi: ”Tajuan, mitä kirjoittaja tarkoittaa”). Syy: Minun piti nopeasti lyhentää twitter-viestiä alle 140 merkin ja etsin vaihtoehtoa sanoille ”upprätthålla Livet” (= ylläpitää elämää). Keksin sitten fraasin ”to foster Life” anglismina, joka kääntyi nopeasti muotoon ”fostra Livet”. Fostra on kuitenkin päämerkitykseltään ’kasvattaa (lapsia)’ ja sivumerkitykseltään ’aiheuttaa, lietsoa (jotakin pahaa)’, joten se ei oikein toimi. Toimivia, lyhyitä ratkaisuja olisivat olleet kenties ”främja Livet”, ”bejaka Livet” tai ”hysa Livet”. Tällaista tapahtuu, kun merkkimäärä on 140, ja siihen pitää sisällyttää vielä aihetunniste.

Luulen kuitenkin sisäistäneeni twitter-debattiin osallistumisen prototyypin. Oli argumenttisi mikä hyvänsä, todennäköisesti se sisältää pitkän virkkeen tai 2 lyhyttä lausetta; enempään ei ole tilaa. Tämän lisäksi twitter-debatoinnissa on pakonomaista käyttää

a) lyhenteitä
b) jäävuoritekniikkaa (= minä sanon tämän, yritä kuvitella loput)
ja
c) kärjistyksiä, jotka menevät hieman edemmäs kuin mitä oli(si) varsinaisesti tarkoitus.

Edellä mainittu ei tietenkään tarkoita sitä, etteikö debatista Twitterissä tulisi säännöllisesti väärinkäsitysten juhlaa.


 

The Division Bell

Normaali

Viikko 38


 

Motion: THW rethink the roles of the Left and the Right in politics
Role: MP (govt.)


There is one eternal Question.
Should I vote Democrat/Republican? Should I vote Labour/Tory? Should I vote leftwing/rightwing? Socialist/capitalist? Or, liberal/conservative? (In my country, this latter division is not very prominent.)

More questions:
How should I vote? What decides my vote? Who decided my parents’ vote? Should I vote as my parents would? What if my parents are or were divided by 180°?

A subversive, simplistic, reductive way to tackle the problematics of voting is to think that most of us are underclass, working class or lower middle class, and the better off are somewhere higher up. That means we’re for the most part Labour/leftwing/liberal. We will vote for lefties and liberals, until we become so wealthy that we can afford to vote otherwise in an attempt to preserve our privileges, our frequent-flier mileage and our distant holidays in the sun. At least most conservative parties in a given country aim at the retention and legal protection, with armed forces if needs to be, of the value and worth of accumulated PRIVATE material property. That’s what the name conservative means in democratic nation-states, perhaps even more so under military-led or fascist regimes.

The split between poor leftists and wealthy rightwingers can be seen as a seesaw. We’re either at one end of the seesaw (poor), or at the other end (wealthy or rich). There is hypothetically a clear fulcrum or tipping point at which our loyalty changes. It is the moment when we have gotten enough or too much through the toil of our hands and minds so that we become fearful of losing or sharing it. After we’ve plentifully, our natural inclination is to vote for rightwingers, just as it was before for leftists. In this scheme, voting is a matter of preservation, self-interest and survival. Of course, it isn’t quite that clear-cut and simple, so more on that….

Some people live in rags throughout their lives, while others make the transition from rags to riches. Such as artists and actresses, who typically wait on tables at the beginning of their careers. One has to wonder why the cultural agents, actors, producers, artists and their spokespeople always speak for and to the Left (we don’t know if they vote for it.) That doesn’t make any sense. They are as if saying: ”We want to make a money transfer from the Loaded to the Underdogs.” In reality, what happens is that they make the opposite money transfer: they direct money from the penniless (their senior high-school/street-living/student audience) to the loaded (their production/record company) in selling merchandise, products, records and tickets. This is the usual modus operandi business-wise. I suppose that these people have to state the opposite by 180°, since otherwise they would not do much business. There are blatant examples of e.g. musicians who say one thing and do the other thing.

Then there are the reputable people who do the caring, daring and sharing, who can both ”eat off the cargo” and deal that cargo up. Leftist parties are often such that they will rather keep the status quo than change it for the significantly better. If there are needy and poor people around, leftists have more leverage to pressurize anyone with that living proof. Consequently, most leftwing parties don’t want the situation to change A LOT, since otherwise their ”business” would come to a dead end. They need a nice amount of needy, poorly, sick and unemployed people in their constituency. The latter are the votes and they are the weight, worth it in gold.

As I see it, there is a general instinctive divide. All kinds of rightwingers everywhere would have it so that
a) we have a certain amount of tax revenue and we want to have a govt. whose scope is limited to the amount of tax money that we have and can collect at the most. I.e. this way we’d never run into debt, save for some special contingencies, such as a war with foreign nation-states, for which purpose we’d take money on credit.
On the other hand, all kinds of leftwingers everywhere would have it so that
b) we have a certain, gradually accumulated level of public sector that we simply want to entertain, and we have to extend our debt to the level of expenditure that running this kind of government requires. In turn, this type of governance would redeem a greater social rest as opposed to more social unrest, no matter how high the debt ceiling should ultimately be raised to.

As the situation is ultimately strange and unlovable, I can not recommend let alone dictate how you should vote. Vote according to your conscience. If you feel that the Left Wing is the right choice, vote for it. If you feel that the Right Wing is the only true longterm choice left, vote for it. Whichever way you vote, you will get the result that suits you, Sir.


Puheen kesto: 5 min 36 sek
Arvio: * * *. Puheessa analysoidaan ansiokkaasti aloitteen käsittelemää asiaa, mutta siinä ei oikeastaan oteta kantaa itse asiaan millään tavalla. Siinä ikään kuin dekonstruoidaan pelikenttä palasiksi mutta sitten jätetään palaset paikoilleen odottamaan, että joku muu rekonstruoi ne yhdeksi uudeksi kokonaisuudeksi. Koska järjestyksessä seuraava puhuja on whip, tätä ei kuitenkaan periaatteessa tule tapahtumaan. Jos whip on fiksu, niin hän voi kuitenkin halutessaan tehdäkin näin, jotta kaikille jäisi hyvä maku suuhun. Tästä syystä puheen pisteet nousevat keskitasolle.

Femme Fatalities

Normaali

Viikko 37


 

Date: Sep 11th, 2016
Motion: THW focus on the bad out of the mixed (hand)bag that feminism is
Role: PM (govt.)


We’re now living in the first sextile of the 21st century. Feminism is still a watchword that occasionally makes headlines, its way into articles or a case for this or that. What I give is a broadside against that ism, since I believe that it is past its prime, lost in the woods without a compass. My speech will have subheadings that branch out into the French Resistance, Newsrooms at Newspapers and Grinning Politics. So, lean back, listen to what I have to say and enjoy the ride. This is completely free of charges, or, should I say, complimentary.

The French Resistance

Feminism is a little like the French Resistance that was active from the days that France got occupied by the Axis power Germany in the early 1940’s. Feminists act like resistance members did. They like the idea of resistance more than direct action. They pass on coded messages, directions, maps, pamphlets and other stuff to each other in the form of genre literature. They like to discuss before any act of rebellion. Their heroine is a figure who was alive and well during the days of the Nazi occupation and who published her most famous opus right after the war, i.e. ”The Second Sex” by Simone de Beauvoir. Feminists may work for the Man during the daylight hours, but when the evening comes, resistance members long for seeing one of their soulmates in the dark of the September night, lighting a cigarette and knocking some vin rouge back.

If we consider men nazis and women French Resistance members, there is one difference though. The real war ended in 1945, after which France got its sovereignty back. Feminist Resistance members, on the other hand, continue the war as if it had never ended (in 1945, or 1990, or 2015, for that matter), for the activity is so gratifying from an aesthetic point of view that they like the idea of an ongoing war and an occupier more than a solution and peacetime.

Newsrooms at Newspapers

I recently read a piece of news that declared, ”women of all ages favour men that are older than they are”. I asked myself, ”don’t the men have any say on that matter?” Then I realized that it’s a politically ”correct” choice. Editors in the decision rooms of newspapers in most Western countries want to formulate it in that way, since then they are able to imply that it’s women who make the choice and who are in command. In truth, it’s a ”two’s a company but three’s a crowd” situation, for also men are complicit in this deal in actively favouring younger women. If I show a given man pictures of a peer woman and a woman of a younger generation and ask him, ”which one of them is more attractive in your eyes”, chances are good that he’ll point his finger at the younger woman, and this can happen even at an age when the peer woman would be sexually fertile/mature and generally speaking pleasant. Editors don’t want to formulate headlines that read ”men favour younger women across the spectrum”, for if they did, in their minds they would ”snuff out” the remaining hope that there is for these early middle-aged women to couple up and marry.

Another question entirely was the fact that the age difference that women wanted to exist between themselves and the older men was in Finland only 3 years on average. As far as I’m concerned, three years is almost nothing, and it does not lead to differing coming-of-age experiences. If we take a man and a woman born in 1956/1959, 1966/1969, 1976/1979, 1986/1989 and 1996/1999 — regardless of the birth order — I consider them peers, as each of those pairs would essentially belong in the same generation, respectively. Newsrooms are for some reason indoctrinated with ”seraphising” all kinds of minorities or underdogs, even if it meant demonising those that are regarded as the majority or stronger parties. Newsrooms forget that the fact that you’re ”of majority” or ”strong” does not mean that you’re ”wrong” — at least I can’t see an equal sign between these two variables.

Grinning Politics

Considering that feminism is giving rise to more and more singles in general, as more and more men and women wander out there alone, you might think that it could adjust its aims and means to address this issue. But, no, the only thing that happens is that lonely people merely begin to rally behind partisan movements and claim that society favours families at their expense. They don’t see that it couldn’t be in the 180° opposite way. Then, the cart would begin to pull the donkey, and not the other way round. But my colleague, Minister, can go into that in greater detail.

The corrosive ism that I have been railing against gets things wrong, but it’s not yet consigned to the trashheap of history, a fate some other isms have faced in the recent past and past few decades. The damage that has been done is irreparable, according to some, and inevitable, according to others. You can make up your own mind as this debate continues.


Puheen kesto: 7 min 3 sek
Arvio: * * * *. Avauspuheeksi tämä on aika lailla omiaan, sillä siinä ei tarvitse vielä ottaa huomioon ”mitään”, ei keskeyttelijöitäkään. Tätäkin jotkut osaavat hyödyntää ja toiset eivät. Siksi puhe lataa tiskiin kolme pointtia, joista toinen on paras, koska siinä on selkeä argumentointi sisällä. Toisaalta toisen pointin referoima lehtiartikkeli (joka linkistä avautuu) on tosiasiallisesti varsin tasapuolinen ja esittää asioita ei pelkästään naisten vaan myös miesten kannalta pyrkien osittaiseen neutraaliuteen. Mutta se ei ”avaudu” keskustelun kulussa. Tämän puheen jälkeen saman puolen seuraajan on helppo tai vaikea, valmistautuneisuudesta riippuen, jatka samaa linjaa.

Breaking the News (Papers)

Normaali

Viikko 36


 

Date: Oct 13th, 2014
Motion
: THB that media owned by minorities should be strengthened sensibly in this country
Role: MP (govt.)


For the very first time, the Swedish Finnish patron of Swedish life in Finland, KSF Media, has been compelled to make staff redundant at its newspapers Hangötidningen, Hufvudstadsbladet, Loviisan Sanomat, Västra Nyland and Östra Nyland. The second-mentioned is the biggest and best out of this lot, and its mission is to be read in the whole of Finland, although it is heavily based in Helsinki. Its circulation reaches circa 38.000 people. About 6.000 have taken a combined subscription of that newspaper and one of the smaller ones, aiming to be hip to both national and local affairs. Curves are, nonetheless, going South. Namely, KSF made a loss of 5.8 million euros last year. The f(o)unding fathers and mothers have set the limit at 3 million a year, so the grim reality is that the newspaper(s) have just about doubled their allowed loss quota. What should the main newspaper do, what should it trim and how should it streamline its activity — in order to not saw off the branch it is sitting on, and, thus, survive into the future?

Ms. Barbro Teir, CEO, claimed that readers are often interested in so-called ’peripheral material’ such as cartoons, columns, crosswords, sudoku and TV-program guides. Staffan Bruun, one of the (now resigned) reporters, part of the seasoned staff, pointed to the importance of sports and politics and the need to have reporters at the scene when something happens in those two arenas. So far, the best examples of this thinking are Anna-Lena Laurén and Juri von Bonsdorff, who are the Russian and U.S. correspondents, respectively. Other Scandinavian capitals Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm and Reykjavik could also, theoretically speaking, be well represented in the paper.

Not taking my answers from staff, what do as a reader myself expect of ”Husis” (= pet name)? What would retain me as one of its readers? I speak passable Swedish and understand it just as well, if not better, when I’m reading (in) it.

To me, the main thing is the ability to learn new words off the pages of the paper. I have a semi-versed vocabulary, but I’m always, always on the lookout for novel words, preferably those that are minted, topical and contemporaneous. Newspapers are good disseminators of them. So, it is vital that editors have superb grammar and wide schooling and a general sophistication that they have not missed out on. This is the primary motivation for me to read the paper. But, and this is crucial, that does not preoccupy the paper’s core customers that much, as they’re native speakers. So, what else? What should be written about when that something is being written using good Swedish?

Swedish Finns have been accused of being ”pussified” or ”pussies” when it comes to their ”acquired taste”. This has a Darwinistic reason behind it. Devoutly Christian senior Swedish Finns are the last ones among their lot to give up on their identity, and as print, radio and TV journalists know this, they cater to this group’s needs routinely. There is, however, also strength in pussification. Some programs and content has the same kind of calming effect on me as the best nature documentaries by the BBC have. Comfort is needed in a world of air-strike images and stone-me circumstances.

One option would be to do a little syndication. Sweden proper is not in a publishing crisis. Some stories could be syndicated from there as a reflecting mirror for language-usage deviation, if not for any other reason. Also, some Swedish cartoons are superb compared with what is in Husis. It is telling that the evening tabloid Iltalehti in Finland publishes Rocky (the urban hound) by Martin Kellerman, when it could be available through Husis instead.

I would like to read about the ”Spirit of the Bourgeoisie” in the KSF papers. In a world dominated by working-class taste, it is sporadically pleasant if some write about pussified banking, education and finance, pussified golf, opera, politics, sailing and tennis. All of that should be on the agenda. The gold standard should be this: If Matti Klinge, an academic and nerd figure born in ’36 could read the article, then it was fit to print on the pages of HBL. Namely, this guy is a relic from another era and a one-man bastion of the bourgeois spirit in this country.

Tradition is often good, tradition is always conservative, and tradition has sometimes a tendency to renew itself, too.

Thank you.


Puheen kesto: 5 min 52 sek
Arvio: * * *. Puheen sisältö lienee hepreaa useimmille kuulijoille sekä yleisesti ottaen haukotuttavaa. Kuitenkin se sopii puolensa 3. puheeksi siksi, että painavampi ja universaalimpi aines lienee jo sanottu ja on hyvä, etteivät puhuvat päät toista toisiaan, ainakaan liian paljon. Myös puheen asia-aines (= faktat) on kunnioitusta herättävä. Tämän jälkeen whip saa koota palikat palapeliin ja tehdä niistä hyvännäköisen kuvatuksen mitään lisäämättä ja mitään unohtamatta.