Here starts the cycle of hate

Today, I wanted to talk about my experience in a little nice cafe in the center of Buenos Aires, and about my thoughts on “certified exams” such as the CAE, which I’m taking today and tomorrow.
But, unfortunately for that very interesting topic, something else caught my eye today.

Rusia, shame on you. This phrase will open and close the topic.
I’m part Russian. My great-grandfather and his wife were Russian, and that shows now-a-days in my very pale complexion, blond hair, and clear grey eyes. His name was Leon, and I really admire his story, as told by my grandma.
Apparently, he was born in a very small town in the big and cold country, with very few people, even fewer kids, and a single teacher who went from neighbor towns to his’ during the week to teach. There, the man discovered that Leon was an incredibly intelligent kid, faster than most children his age, and also eager to learn. His speed usually got him to the point where he wouldn’t have anything left to do while the rest of the kids were still stuck halfway-through, so he got quite bored in class, and soon enough lost all interest in that small school.
You see, Leon wanted more. He wanted to see what was beyond his parents’ field, where they worked all day; he wanted to discover how the world looked like -not by books, but through his very eyes. He wanted to grow as a person and become a successful and knowledgeable man. And, you know what? I’ve felt the same since I was a little kid.

So, as you can see, I really feel I have a strong connection with this man I’ve never met, but who inspires me so. He is almost the only reason why I feel some sort of longing towards Russia, as if something mysterious was tying me to that place.

And, as if he wasn’t enough of a reason, there’s also my father. Did you know he was a militant communist until 1989, an year before the destruction of the Berlin Wall? Even during his teenage years, when the military practically prohibited anything that was red, my father and his parents still read about communism, discussed it, and dreamed of the most widely shared utopia in the world. Russia, for them, was the place where the dreamed land could come true.
Of course, we know how that ended up; but, nonetheless, there’s no denying that Russia was one of the very first communist experiments, and that adds some sentimental value to it.

Once, so far ahead its time. Now, it lives in the middle ages again.

You may be wondering why on earth am I talking about Russia and what connects me to it. To that I answer that you should read the news more.
Today, a law censoring “non-traditional sexual relationships propaganda” towards the Russian children, was passed by the country’s legislative representative, with almost an unanimity.
Now, I won’t talk about how the lack of semantic specificity allows for abuses of this law; I think that’s pretty obvious in and of itself.
This, as you might guess, was an anti-LGBT project.
What Russia is doing, is preparing the way for a generation of hateful human beings to take up the country in the future. And hateful citizens make for hateful countries.
Under the excuse of “protect the children from deprivation”, and using the church as a shield, homophobic groups have put enough pressure on the country’s agenda and representatives to make sure that their children will be able to happily live inside a bubble of racism for the rest of their childhood. Good for them, uh?

“Ignorance is power”, Orwell chose as one of 1984’s fascist government’s mottoes. Like this, Russian kids will grow up separated from those depraved beasts, focusing only in the good ol’ bible’s handful of traditions and morals, and will, thus, have the excuse of ignorance to hate unreasonably on the LGBT community. This is no different from making kids read about how Jews are all greedy and mean, and how they all have big noses with a big nasty hairy spot where they end; the result is the same: blind, unjustified fear. And with fear, comes hate. With hate, comes violence. And then, the cycle of blood starts.

It wouldn’t surprise me if the next nutzo to claim unlimited power in the world and declare war against humanity, had a specially harsh speech against the LGBT. Neither would it surprise me if he/she was Russian.

I’m disappointed, and worried about the future of the children in Europe. With this, and the episodes of violence occurring lately in France, I seriously think any LGBT member in that continent, or any person who supports them there, is going to have some though times ahead.
Be strong. Even though there shouldn’t be a need to even have to explain why everyone deserves the same rights and privileges, you shall. And, as you are speaking from love and respect, you know your arguments will hold up to those who only preach hate towards what they can’t, or refuse to, understand.

Have faith, not in an invisible god, but in the will of those who understand. Look upon Latin America and it’s example of inclusion, and thrive for a similar future for your people.

Oh, and:
Shame on you, Russia.

Thanks for reading.
Mila.

Who shows you what you see?

Ok, so I’ve been “accused” many times of being a kirchnerist by my friends. Now, this isn’t by any means a bad word. It just means you are in favor of the current government. Or, at least, it should mean that.
If that was its only definition, then I would probably say, “yes, I kind of am”. But that’s not what my friends mean when they say that to me. I deny it, and I’m going to explain to you just why I do so, and how this came to be.

Another of Clarín's first pages from those times.

“New Government” Referring to the three representatives of the military that took the power after kicking the democratically elected president.

I’ve talked about the media here, haven’t I? The general picture is: the little group of people that have all the money, also control all the mainstream media. I think some of you must be familiar with this concept, right?
Anyways, that’s how it works here, and how it’s been working since… Well, I’d say since the beginning of this country, but honestly, it only got this bad after the last dictatorship.
The Clarín Group, managed by the Noble family (yes, that’s their family name. I find it ironic), took a hold of Papel Prensa, the biggest producer of paper for the press. How? Oh, you know, by torturing its rightful owners into signing the selling papers.
They are currently on trial for this.
Now, for this to happen, they needed the brute force of the army, which was in the power at that moment. They got to their good side by siding up with them.

Clarin's first page right when the coup d'était started.

“The Militay Council is the State’s supreme organ”

By tricking the population into thinking nothing was going on, and that this was only a peaceful and transitory government, and convincing them that they wanted the military on the power because of the “terrorist threat”, they managed to make a lot of people oblivious of what was going on.
Sounds familiar, whatever US citizen reading this? Well, it shouldn’t surprise you. After all, the US military had a lot to do with the military getting a hold of the government, and of their violent methods once there; but I’ll talk about that some other day.

Anyways, by seemingly becoming one of these people’s tools, they were able to use them to their advantage. After all, one of the people in charge of making the paper producer’s owners to sign, was one of the most important functionaries of the military council (who is now in trial, yes).

Not much later…

And yet another of Clarín's front pages.

“Videla (illegitimate president) inaugurated the Papel Prensa plant”. There, you see Videla, with the Noble couple, re-opening the plant after they ‘bought it’.

Wait, I had a point here…
Ah, yes of course!

After buying the plant which produced the paper for each and every one of the newspapers and magazines of the country, they were legally able to set prices at will. So, for their own newspaper, Clarín, its cousin, La Nación, and to every other newspaper or magazine they liked, the prices were minimal.
But, for newspapers which didn’t share their views, the price was… Slightly… Definitely higher. This meant that Clarín was much cheaper, making it more accessible for the common man.
And that, kids, is how Clarín got so popular, and grew SO big in such little time.

They got so good at what they did, and so close to the government, their lies started becoming more and more reckless.
During the Malvinas War, they actually helped convince the general populi that our country was actually winning! Our country. Extremely unprepared for war. Sending teenage boys with no training over there. With lack of food. Against England. It didn’t take a mastermind to figure out that was pretty fucking impossible.

Guess what?

“Imminent recuperation of the Malvina Islands”. No doubt there.

I’m losing my track of thoughts again…
Oh, righ.

Ok, back to present day. Now that you have a general, very subjective, and extremely opinionated idea of where this group comes from, you can slightly understand what they do, why, and how.
(Seriously, guys, I only know this part of the story. I do encourage you to investigate and let me know what comes across your path).

So, yeah, as you can imagine, they’ve been manipulating the population the same way ever since. They helped to economically overthrow the first democratic government after the process; pushed candidates like Menem into the government; pushed Ministers of Economy like Cavallo into the Ministry (ask Ecuador how much good HE did over there); they were the ideological responsible for the neo-liberal policies applied in my country, and for the epic economical crash of 2001. You might have heard about it.

The minute they saw what ideologies Nestor Kirchner, who assumed as president right after that, held high in sight, they understood he meant trouble for their wallet, and empire.
I don’t think there has been a single day passing without the Clarín newspaper, or any of its branches, badmouthing, criticizing, and aggravating him and his wife, our current president. Sometimes the critics were spot-on. And sometimes it was just someone throwing shit at them for no good reason, other than the rage they felt.
And, being this the most popular newspaper, news channels, and celebrities magazines in the country, their ideas spread fast.

“Is she under psychiatric treatment?”. Noticias magazine, under the Clarín Group’s management, accusing Cristina Kirchner, then first lady, of having a bipolar disorder, without proofs, without consulting any of her doctors, without her consent, without anything. Obviously, it was a lie. But the idea was installed in society ever since. This is the power and impunity of the media.

Now, let me make this very very clear. There is nothing I find better than someone making a thoughtful critic about a certain government, policy or ideal, and discussing it with other people. But, and I’m not just talking, this is serious, most people who right-out HATE the Kirchner couple, have memorized this speech, repeated it all over the place, and to themselves, until they believed it, and couldn’t think in any other way. Sometimes this is applied literally. I am not joking.
Most people don’t even realize how deep in their brains some concepts have been carved.

Repetition, impunity, power. These are the elements they have to make people think what they want them to think. They give new concepts to every word they use, and make it so that it’s actually used in a daily basis.

They’ve made words like ‘officialism’, ‘kirchnerist’, and ‘officialist’ into insults. And what I mean by that is that people have actually tried to insult me by calling me all that in debates and forums.
They have divided this country into “K” and “Anti-K”, and then accused the actual government of being responsible for this bipolarity (though they haven’t done much to fight that, really).

By calling yourself a ‘kirchnerist’, some people around you automatically think you are a poor brainwashed person who blindly follows the current government. By calling yourself an ‘oppositor’, some people around you think you are a hateful human being who blindly follows the commands of the Clarín Group.

But, of course, the world isn’t black and white; it’s full of greys, and, quite frankly, that’s probably the only thing that makes it bearable.

I like greys. I enjoy watching them, and I enjoy belonging to them. My thoughts belong to the grey zone. My ideologies aren’t just that or what, they are a combination of ideas, concepts, and knowledge. My way of thinking is unique, and so is everyone else’s.
What bothers me the most about these people, is not only that they claim to be the voice of the whole population, nor really their bloody past, though these things do bug me. What bothers me the most is the fact that they imply you can either be on one side or the other. They deny the greys. And that is not healthy for society, not in the least.

And not only is it unhealthy, it’s proven to be fatal. This is not the first time people like this have tried to divide the society of my country. They have tried, and succeeded before. And every time they did, guess what happened in the end? War. And, in the worst cases, civil war.
Realists vs Autonomists, Federalist vs Unitarians, Conservatives vs Radicals, Peronists vs Gorillas, K vs Anti-K. Our history is marked by the rivalry between two completely opposite groups. And, most of the times, things heated up enough to escalate to wars.
Divide and conquer, you know. As we are too distracted fighting between each other for no real reason, the people who orchestrated all that, swim in their impunity. And money.

By labeling themselves, they usually give up to the possibility of looking at the good attributes of the other side, and actually constructing. Together. Like people who live in the same country. Together.

Taking on definitions like those means not wanting to accept the rest.

Labeling is… Well, I’m short for words. Labeling is stupid. Specially when it refers to political ideologies. It blinds us from our real problems, and from the people we should be looking at with special care.

And that’s why I don’t do that. There.

Well, thanks for putting up with my ranting again.
Take care of yourselves, and remember to pay attention to what you read, what you think, who you side up with, and who you’re really against. What are you not seeing from the general picture? And, who is blocking your sight?

-Mila.

Transgenics

Every time I read a north-american or european report on nutrition, agriculture, or food’s business, the topic of transgenics rises up. It seems that the northern world is afraid of them.

The last year, countries like Germany started a debate over the honey they were importing from Argentina, claiming that the bees used to fabricate it took the pollen from genetically modified cultivation around the zone they were working on, and thus, the honey was dangerous.

You see, according to lasts years’ numbers, Argentina is the world’s second regarding honey production, and the world’s first regarding it’s exportation, as 95% of it’s production is meant for the external market. The principal destinies are: Germany, the UK, the USA, Italy, Canada, Japan and Australia (source).

So, if our principal client for this product claims that he won’t be accepting our products anymore, as long as it has traces of genetically modified species, how do you think that’d affect us?

The problem between the europeans and transgenics, has a common purposes and ideals with enviromental ONGs. In fact, if you dig up in the laws and statements behind the prohibition of transgenics in some countries in europe, you’ll stumble upon this organizations’ fighting and pressing for it to happen.

Argentina has three different transgenic cultivation approved by the nation’s standards: cotton, corn, and soy. Those three are cultivated through-out the whole country, are perfectly safe, and commercialized inside and outside of Argentina.

I think most people’s fears for transgenics are funded. Let’s look over some facts:

  • Definition: “Transgenic plants are plants that have been genetically modified by inserting genes directly into a single plant cell. Transgenic crop plants modified for improved flavor, pest resistance, or some other useful property are being used increasingly” (source).
  • The fact that they are more resistant to pests, means the usage of dangerous pesticides is lowered, as they are not needed. In other words, less chemicals needed for transgenic cultivation.
  • To start freely selling and cultivating transgenic seeds, they must be first approved after going through very strict tests and exams, as well as fulfilling every single requirement asked by the law. In Argentina, the process to approve a finished seed can last for around 5 years before finally being legalized. So go figure.
  • Transgenical seeds are sometimes modified to have more resistance to extreme weathers, so they can grow in places where it would’ve been impossible for them to grow before. This is incredibly helpful for countries that are not geographically or metheorologically beneficed for agriculture.
  • It adds to the value of the final product, the seed, as it has been injected with knowledge developed by a country’s fourth kind of industry. This is important for countries that are developing, like mine.

So, with all of this said, we can get to a conclusion. Transgenics makes it possible to cultivate on zones where it was impossible before, expanding the limits of most countries’ agropecuary capabilities, it allows for the less usage of what could be dangerous chemicals, as they’re not needed anymore for the plant now defends itself, making the cultivation healthier, and it allows countries with an agro-exporter economy to get more money for their products, while they have also been proved to be completely safe.

What universal issue do you think transgenics help to solve, knowing all this?

Exactly.

HUNGER.

GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are a key part of what will be the fight for a solution for the most endemic situation in the whole world. And this is why the largest interests don’t like them very much.

You see, a country deep in hunger and desperation, is a country with accessible workers, who’d work for nothing if that lets them have some more food, and can be easily replaced by others like them. This is what has been happening in Africa, the south of Asia, and Latin-America for the last centuries, and to the day. And this is why those interests don’t want you to like, or even know, about transgenics.

If you are against GMOs, and have been fighting against them ’till now, then I urge you to look for information elsewhere. Close that book your favorite ONG gave you, and look for scientific facts. You’ll find them if you truly look for them.
You will probably also find, that you have been consuming products that, at some point, had something to do with GMOs, without you even knowing. In the USA, for example, transgenic cotton is approved, and being cultivated freely. Some of your favorite clothes may have been done with it.

So, what are your opinions on this subject? Were you aware of some of the things said here?

-Mila.

Equality

At the beginning of this year, there was a pretty popular beer advertisement here. The brand responsible for it was Quilmes, originally Argentinian, but recently bought by brazilian capitals, if I remember correctly. Quilmes is well-known here for it’s original and well-made publicities, that always get to be very popular with people, because of it’s humour, and quite accurate description of what we usually call our ‘argentinity’.
So, this summer’s theme, was ‘equality between genres’.

If you’re interested in the video, and won’t have a problem with watching it in spanish, here’s the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W62dc9Q-ZYg

Now, I don’t doubt it must have been pretty funny for a lot of people, specially if they saw themselves identified with some of the described situations in the video.
I’m glad I didn’t, though.

On one side, you have the men’s army. The situations they’re complaining about, have to do mostly with their girlfriend’s obsession with punctuality and good-looks, as well as their peeking into their privacy, and bothering them about little details they don’t really care about.

‘They say: ‘you have a different face when you’re with your friends’. I have a different face with you! With my friends, I wear the original!’

Now, on the women’s side, we have complaints for their boyfriends’ supposedly ‘lack of attention’, or not caring about the little details their obsessive minds look for. Also, about the guys not caring about their looks or weight, while they ‘sacrifice’ on behalf of a good body.

‘Since when is it that we’re fat, while on them the tummy ‘looks sexy’?’

Once they collide, they tell each other to do those things they were just complaining about. A guy tells his girl to make a credit card extension, ‘explode it!’. A girl tells his boyfriend to compare her to his mother, ‘I just love that’.

‘Give me whatever you want to wash, I’ll do it by hand’

‘Here, take my cellphone, look over all of my messages, step over my privacy’

Etc.

The conclusion is the following, when the voice in off speaks and says:

‘When feminism and machism collide, equalism is born’.


I’m sorry, but am I the only one who thinks this is really wrong?

Just the other day, I was having a discussion with some friends, over what we considered as ‘gentlemanly’. Two of them said it meant to honour and respect the women, by acting politely and helping them around.
But I agreeded with my other friend, who said that it was only another way to put the opposite gender up over a pedestal, and to make the other one feel inferior.
Politeness should depend on your sex.

Personally, when I was younger, I defined myself as a feminist. I defended my rights as a proud woman, and reacted pretty badly to any kind of aggression against girls.

Now-a-days, I’ve come to understand more of the world -or so I like to think-, and came to a new conclusion.

After all, those differences this particular publicity talks about, are really stupid. There are deeper reasons why women and men usually collide, and it almost always doesn’t have to do with the way they decided to think.

How do you define a woman? Do you think of pink, flowers, poetry, romanticism, rabu-rabu, twinkly stars, and the like?
And what about men? Football, blue, being rash, and gross?

Well, I’m sorry, but that’s not what belonging to one gender means. That’s what you’ve been taught to think.

Since the moment you were born, it was decided what kind of role in society you’d fullfill. If you were born a man, then you’d have to be strong, never cry, and be good with girls. People would buy you action figures, and dress you with blue clothes at first. They’d cut your hair short, and teach you to define you gender as what they think it means.

If you were born a girl, then pink is the first thing you’d wear. Dolls and kitchen toys would be your present in your birthdays, and your hair would most likely remain long most of your childhood. Also, you’d be taught to be delicate, and to behave ‘like a lady’. Cooking, sewing, and the like are appreciated qualities on a woman.

Now, how much of what I’ve described is true for you? Probably more than what you realise.

You are not a woman because of what you like, of what you wear. You’re a woman cause you think of yourself that way. The definition of your gender is only defined by yourself!

So, what does this ‘equality’ concept really mean? It’s talking about a concept that proposes that our social differences, that are only there because of our lack of critic sense, co-exist in harmony -so, basically, the girls can bitch their heart out, while the men feel not guilt when treating them as their house-keeper.

That is NOT what equalism should mean for us!

We are not that different to start with! The only reason we think so, is because we were taught to do so! We are all people, humans, after all. Gender is just another excuse to discriminate between one other.

To discriminate between people’s gender, is no better than doing it because of their religion, ethnia, country of origin, or any other.

Equalism should mean the coming to understand, appreciate, and put aside our differences, to see each other as what we really are: people.
I thought this should be clear enough in the 21st century, but I guess we’re still being pulled back by old preexisting ideals.

So there. Sorry about the ranting, this is just a little frustrating for me, because, after all, the only ones to blame about all this are ourselves.

So, what do you think? What would you define as ‘equalism’? Do you know about any kind of similar movement?

Thanks for reading.

-Mila.

Green…. ‘Peace’?

Recently, this ONG has been flooding Argentina’s media and streets with publicty about it’s 25th anniversary here; they brag about how they have been defending their ideals, and never gave to the greed when dealing with big corporations, or the government.

Now, this probably will be a bitter subject for some, because I know Greenpeace is a world-wide organization, defending the ideal of ecology, and that it has millions of suscribers.
But I really hate these people.

Let’s go back to the starts of this green movement, back in the 19th century. People knew by that time that resources wouldn’t last forever, even though it wasn’t a hot topic. By the time, many laboring rights were given to the proletarians in England, a big step forward for the workers of the world. Of course, the big men there didn’t like this step very much, and were looking for a good enough excuse for their retrograde attitudes to lay on.
That’s when father Malthus appeared, together with his poisonus ideals. He said, and thoroughly deffended, that at some point, the world’s productivity regarding mostly food would reach it’s limit, when all of it’s productible lands were being used already. This meant that the problem to attack from there on was the number of people living on earth, needing that food.
That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, he said the problem for the future would be overpopulation! Now, this doesn’t sound so bad when explained like this, right? Seems legit: if we can’t produce that much food, we have to stop producing too many humans…?
So, Malthus kept on with this speech, and wrote that the part of the world that produced more births, were the poor people. You see where this is going? Oh, just keep on reading. So, if the poor people were having too many babies even while not having enough to feed them, then, if they escalated socially, and started having enough money for them, being stupid as they obviously were -cause they were poor-, they’d have even more babies. So, if more money for the poor meant more babies, and more babies meant the earth’s end was nearer, then what you’d logically have  to do, is take that money away from the poor people, and give it to the rich -and therefore more intelligent- people, to administrate it better.

I’m not kidding. This was an actual ideal from that time, and is still around us to the day!

The higher classes and bourgeois loved all this, and made sure to put all this ideas into action as quickly as possible.

With time, Malthus became a ‘respected thinker’ of his days, and his school of thoughts, called Malthusians or Negativists, were put against the Positivists when talking about the Earth’s future (Positivists said that the land’s productivity didn’t only depend on it’s area, but also and the science and technology put into it’s cultives).

Now-a-days, we know the Positivists were, if anything, closer to the truth than Malthus, specially after the Green Revolution took place in the agriculture field all over the world.

But the malthusians weren’t only known for this thoughts over agriculture. Their obsetion with overpopulation never grew thin, and the people to support them always existed. There was even a so-called ‘pseudo-science’ (even though it can’t even be considered that), that seemed to help this ideals, and that reached it’s peek of popularity during the first half of the last century: none other than Eugenesics.
Yes, yes, that science Hitler used to justify his hatred, his thoughts of superiority over other ‘races’, and his genocide of this ‘needless‘ people (such as african-american, jews, gipsies, homosexuals, and I can go on…).

Eugenesics have actually a pretty interesting history in all of Europe before WWII. As most had already accepted that +population = -resources, this ideology’s standing of ‘birth control of the ‘unfit’ (mostly people from the ‘third world’), and conservation of the south’s resources’, was like a ring to their fat fingers.
After the Holocaust, though, their direct racist speech, and wishes for the ‘unfit’s’ forced unfertilization, had to become more subtle, and, if possible, more confusing for those who could then find it offensive.

So their focus had to leave the population alone for a while, and point a subject that was still stinging, and that grew in influence in the last decades: nature. More specifically, the third world’s resources.
Why? Well, the first world already screwed their land bad with their own industrialization and progress, so they couldn’t just let those incapable and abnormal people from the south just do the same with theirs! I mean, what would the industrialized countries do then? See how they developed and grew in numbers as they did the previous centuries without worries, ‘wasting‘ their resources in their own growth? Hell no! They were gonna take control of what was, according to their thinking, ultimately theirs, as they were the best adapted, and more prone to surviving, part of the species.

That’s how you have Julian Huxley, member of Britain’s Eugenics Society, and it’s president from 1959 to 1962, creating and becoming director of the UNESCO, and then organizing the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). After some time, around the 50’s, he realised he  needed more money for this organization to work.  How concidential it is, that in 1961, the very well-known WWF (World Wildlife Foundation), one of the first conservational organization for raising founds, was founded, and localized in Gland, Switzerland, at the very same building, and sharing the administrative body with the IUCN. Pretty curious coming from a supposedly independent ONG, huh?

And there you have it, my friends, the origin of ecologist and conservarionist movements, and ONGs of the kind.

And this is all the same for Greenpeace, they come from the same kind of ideologies.

So, as a latin-american, and a jew, coming from a family and a land that has suffered so much from this kind of thinking, people, and ways of acting, of course I would be a little rencorous over them. Don’t think badly of me please. I’m just human. And, if you ask an eugenesist, or a conservationist, I’m just an unfit.

Please, DO look around for this organizations and people. You’ll find some very interesting facts. I personally recommend ‘Ecofascismo’ (if you can find it, and read in spanish), by Jorge Orduna, for more information and proven facts. Here’s an article from when his book was published. I’ll tell you if I can find links in english.

Well then, what do you think about organizations like Greenpeace, or the WWF? Have you had any experiences with them, or the like? Did you know about their relationships with Eugenesics? If so, do share!

Until next time.

-Mila.