April 30, 2014
My English dictionary reads: “High personal standards of what is right and what is wrong used as a guide to behaviour”.
“A guide to behaviour”? How many among the world’s people follow this norm? If we analyse those people who live around us, we may find ourselves lost in thoughts because they may not follow principles in most cases. Is this a consequence of modern life? Or have we forgotten the teachings we inherited from our ancestors?
If we turn our eyes to politicians, then something worse is happening. Corruption has invaded our political ambit, and there seems to be a political trait that those involved commit very important crimes with briberies galore. Briberies that reach astronomical figures.
I remember my young years that there was a saying among the population – saying that I believe is still there – that one did not need more than one month to become rich in politics. That keeps being so nowadays sixty years afterwards.
Politicians in my country hold legislative immunity. They can only be judged by the High Court, something that does not happen anywhere else in the world. I can see that in many civilised countries – those in the so-called West – a politician is bound to step down for any break of an ethical principle. I have seen politicians resign for just lying, something that even happened to a President of the USA.
The ruling party here made pledges in its electoral campaign which it did not comply with once elected. And these were not minor promises as they affected the general welfare of the population and condemned people in general to the lowest poverty indexes we ever had in this country, the number of people on the dole queue reaching six million. If we multiply this number by the average components of each family, the figure we get becomes really spectacular.
But the rich – you know, those whose role in corruption is the most important – are now richer and more powerful.
When are the people in Spain going to awake? I do not dare to say…
April 29, 2014
I have often invited guests to my home. Never have I controlled how they were dressed or how they behaved when they visited. My ways have always been those of a tolerant person, and I consider that if I invite someone home it is because I know them.
I have been asked to visit a new blog by the blogger who owned it and I wanted to oblige by sending a short post wishing him success in his adventure. My intentions were to be an asiduous visitor and take part in discussions that arose that interested me, but to my amazement I saw that my post had been subjected to moderation. And it was held so for four or five days, which I could not understand after having been invited to participate. I aborted my intentions and so let the said blogger know in correct words. He did not like it.
Urbanity does not seem to be what it was
April 26, 2014
I watch the telly and see how the Vatican tries to canonise two men: John XXIII and John Paul II, and I cannot but wonder: If both of them did their duty while they were popes, is it because none of the others had exceeded their obligations? If Catholicism bases its doctrines on sainthood and Christ’s sacrifice, how is it possible that the only saints to be canonised had been popes? One of them, by the way, guilty of trying to hide what priests far from the civilised world did to help those who Christ said were the first ones to enter the Kingdom of Heavens?