it looked like this on parts of the road when I drove here on Tuesday! (parking-permissions on the windscreen, not so beautiful! :-))[Updated in the end March 29. I will perhaps proof-read this text later. I did the translation very quickly - once again. Now I am going to the town to shop food, tomato-seeds etc.]
Some blog postings triggered thoughts… About oppression and who need to plead the cause (föra talan) of the oppressed? Who ought to be spokesman to the oppressed? Who need to plead the child's/children's cause? Can the child do this on her/his own? Who need to plead to other oppressed’s cause?
There was a review of a new book about “the mother” of the Master Suppression Techniques Berit Ås. Angela Davis had said to Ås that it isn’t poverty in itself which causes rebellion. For rebellion (and questioning) to happen/occur or take place a leader from the higher societal classes ["higher societal classes" in a metaphorical sense too!!??] is needed to step forward and lead the oppressed people/person(s) and their revolts(s) [a therapist has this role too? Helping her/his client understanding, questioning, seeing as wrong, rebel against wrongdoings that were done - and are done].
I draw parallels to different relations and different levels of the society, and even to the world’s...
A child needs having someone pleading its right on the “lowest” level already… A child needs help to be able to question and see as wrong and to rebel. Without this what happens?
Children in general in society need this too!? That things are spoken about and able to speak about. That about taboos... What's unspeakable and taboo, things one isn't allowed to touch upon?
And what does a child actually need (respectful treatment for its person, feelings etc.)? What does a grown up need? What are righteous, justified needs for a human being in a society, things we all need and which are justified for all living human beings?
All with power of different degrees have more responsibility for what they do, say, behave etc. towards the one under him/her. Journalists have responsibility for what they write…
The postings which triggered this posting were written from a feminist view(stand?)point…
About how it is in society today, and how it was. And a common denominator is that there is a real backlash in society. Which I agree to too.
I want to translate from the texts:
Ås is influenced by the Norwegian psychologist Robert Levin (a former teacher of hers?). According to him and his research the democratic leadership is the most effective, functions most effectively, and the authoritarian leadership results in discord, dissension and bad cooperation in the groups exposed to this sort of leadership [thinking of our quite authoritarian school-minister Jan Björklund, leader of the liberal party here, and other authoritarian 'leaderships' such as those in therapies, help-forums etc. What does an authoritarian leadership cause in these, and what has it caused?].
Ås and the interviewer, and author of the book about Ås, thinks that the society in fact is leaning on an invisible women-cultural basis, that would fall apart, fall to pieces, if women one day decided to come out on strike (if they should say: No, we don't find ourselves in this!?). This culture is held together with women’s unpaid jobs, the work which isn’t valued, isn’t paid and isn’t spoken of but is taken for granted – as the air we breathe. Ås also says that it is the exploitation of women which characterizes the man’s culture.
And back to what Angela Davis said; that it isn’t poverty in itself which cause rebellion. A leader from the higher societal classes is needed for rebellion. A reflection from me: and to these “higher societal classes” mothers belong for children, fathers too, men for women in many occasions (because men still have more power, a higher status etc.) etc. etc. …
The reviewer writes that today when the individualism is highest fashion and the prevailing liberal ideology claims that all are unrestrictedly egoistic [but why are we if we are???] we are made blind to this fact.
Of course this lays in the oppressors interests, that we all get suspicious towards these persons fighting for many people’s rights and not least that we dispatch those people fighting for groups they themselves aren’t part of, don't belong to [as Cecilia von Krusenstjerna, daughter to the former VD for Volvo P. G. Gyllenhammar in a discussion-program recently about "Are we on our way back to a maiden-society? (having servants again)"!!]. Nonetheless such a disinterested, altruistic behaviour has been the condition, not only for the working-class’ climbing from unrestrained sucking out, but also for women’s liberation. For example, without the support from men women’s fight for equality would have been in vain.
The reviewer thinks on J. S. Mills standpoints, as well as the men which made it possible for women getting Academic exams and work with research despite powerful critics from contemporary co-brothers.
That Berit Ås is very critical to the neoliberalism’s emphasis on the egoism and the individualization of society you can’t miss. She believes in teamwork and cooperation, on the thesis that together we are strong; alone we can’t bring any change about.
But I would add that teamwork and cooperation shouldn't be a prescription in everything we do either; that all have to be involved in everything!!?? Must one exclude the other though? Because, yes, I need my own time and I need a certain amount of freedom... The collective doesn't have to (and shall/should not) exclude the individual... I am an individualist too, but also need people around me!? Does the collective have to exclude the individual or vice versa, the individual exclude the collective*? What would be the soundest? What did Pia Mellody say about independence/dependence?
A younger woman than the reviewer above writes in another posting, on her blog:
Some blog postings triggered thoughts… About oppression and who need to plead the cause (föra talan) of the oppressed? Who ought to be spokesman to the oppressed? Who need to plead the child's/children's cause? Can the child do this on her/his own? Who need to plead to other oppressed’s cause?
There was a review of a new book about “the mother” of the Master Suppression Techniques Berit Ås. Angela Davis had said to Ås that it isn’t poverty in itself which causes rebellion. For rebellion (and questioning) to happen/occur or take place a leader from the higher societal classes ["higher societal classes" in a metaphorical sense too!!??] is needed to step forward and lead the oppressed people/person(s) and their revolts(s) [a therapist has this role too? Helping her/his client understanding, questioning, seeing as wrong, rebel against wrongdoings that were done - and are done].
I draw parallels to different relations and different levels of the society, and even to the world’s...
A child needs having someone pleading its right on the “lowest” level already… A child needs help to be able to question and see as wrong and to rebel. Without this what happens?
Children in general in society need this too!? That things are spoken about and able to speak about. That about taboos... What's unspeakable and taboo, things one isn't allowed to touch upon?
And what does a child actually need (respectful treatment for its person, feelings etc.)? What does a grown up need? What are righteous, justified needs for a human being in a society, things we all need and which are justified for all living human beings?
All with power of different degrees have more responsibility for what they do, say, behave etc. towards the one under him/her. Journalists have responsibility for what they write…
The postings which triggered this posting were written from a feminist view(stand?)point…
About how it is in society today, and how it was. And a common denominator is that there is a real backlash in society. Which I agree to too.
I want to translate from the texts:
Ås is influenced by the Norwegian psychologist Robert Levin (a former teacher of hers?). According to him and his research the democratic leadership is the most effective, functions most effectively, and the authoritarian leadership results in discord, dissension and bad cooperation in the groups exposed to this sort of leadership [thinking of our quite authoritarian school-minister Jan Björklund, leader of the liberal party here, and other authoritarian 'leaderships' such as those in therapies, help-forums etc. What does an authoritarian leadership cause in these, and what has it caused?].
Ås and the interviewer, and author of the book about Ås, thinks that the society in fact is leaning on an invisible women-cultural basis, that would fall apart, fall to pieces, if women one day decided to come out on strike (if they should say: No, we don't find ourselves in this!?). This culture is held together with women’s unpaid jobs, the work which isn’t valued, isn’t paid and isn’t spoken of but is taken for granted – as the air we breathe. Ås also says that it is the exploitation of women which characterizes the man’s culture.
And back to what Angela Davis said; that it isn’t poverty in itself which cause rebellion. A leader from the higher societal classes is needed for rebellion. A reflection from me: and to these “higher societal classes” mothers belong for children, fathers too, men for women in many occasions (because men still have more power, a higher status etc.) etc. etc. …
The reviewer writes that today when the individualism is highest fashion and the prevailing liberal ideology claims that all are unrestrictedly egoistic [but why are we if we are???] we are made blind to this fact.
Of course this lays in the oppressors interests, that we all get suspicious towards these persons fighting for many people’s rights and not least that we dispatch those people fighting for groups they themselves aren’t part of, don't belong to [as Cecilia von Krusenstjerna, daughter to the former VD for Volvo P. G. Gyllenhammar in a discussion-program recently about "Are we on our way back to a maiden-society? (having servants again)"!!]. Nonetheless such a disinterested, altruistic behaviour has been the condition, not only for the working-class’ climbing from unrestrained sucking out, but also for women’s liberation. For example, without the support from men women’s fight for equality would have been in vain.
The reviewer thinks on J. S. Mills standpoints, as well as the men which made it possible for women getting Academic exams and work with research despite powerful critics from contemporary co-brothers.
That Berit Ås is very critical to the neoliberalism’s emphasis on the egoism and the individualization of society you can’t miss. She believes in teamwork and cooperation, on the thesis that together we are strong; alone we can’t bring any change about.
But I would add that teamwork and cooperation shouldn't be a prescription in everything we do either; that all have to be involved in everything!!?? Must one exclude the other though? Because, yes, I need my own time and I need a certain amount of freedom... The collective doesn't have to (and shall/should not) exclude the individual... I am an individualist too, but also need people around me!? Does the collective have to exclude the individual or vice versa, the individual exclude the collective*? What would be the soundest? What did Pia Mellody say about independence/dependence?
A younger woman than the reviewer above writes in another posting, on her blog:
“It feels a little cliché-like to say, but it’s true that we live in a time, an era, with an enormous fixation on appearances and looks [is this blog a satire upon this, or only about joking and having fun???], where human dignity is converted into bridges of the noses, rows of teeth and body-shapes [Aren't we good as we are, and if not why not? Do we need to be perfect? In every sense? Being superhuman beings? People rebelling through self-destructiveness and/or destructiveness? And the power, stand in for our parents, tells us whom, what and how we ought to be? Yes, what is actually human dignity?]? Or, we are already there?
I often walk over the cemetery to my work, an old cemetery in central Uppsala, with mossy stones over great dead men and their more or less deeply, under the forgetfulness’ anonymity, buried spouses. A picture of past times./…/
…that one still is there with the wave of life and its strong forces of sickness, and just establish, accept, the dead ones implacable suborder.”
Quotes from Angela Davis:
"Progressive art can assist people to learn not only about the objective forces at work in the society in which they live, but also about the intensely social character of their interior lives. Ultimately, it can propel [driva fram] people toward social emancipation [social frigörelse]."
"Imprisonment [fångenskap] has become the response of first resort to far too many of our social problems."
Was tipped by a friend about the shorter version on “Psychopathy and Consumerism” titled “Consumerism the fastest Growing Religion” – thanks!
Addition March 29: as you can rad in the article above about consumerism.
“Few societies could imagine themselves surviving very long when one of their central institutions was advocating unrestrained greed.”
And see about John Dewey and the progressivism!
Inlägg
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar