O știre care a trecut aproape nevăzută în România. Cu excepția G4Media (care și ei o publică doar schematic) n-a discutat-o nimeni.
Știrea sună așa: Unul din patru europarlamentari actuali este penal. Adică a fost deja condamnat măcar în primă instanță de minimum o infracțiune. Cele mai comune? Hărțuire sexuală și furt (delapidare, șantaj, infracțiuni asociate corupției, etc.) – urmate de constituire de grup infracțional organizat. Ultima e chiar ironică întrucât Uniunea Europeană în sine este grup infracțional organizat, dar sărim peste.
Le Monde, una din organizațiile care au luat parte la această investigație, ne amintește de scandalul Qatargate drept un mare eveniment care a zguduit încrederea în „instituțiile europene” și convingerea că acestea sunt o fortăreață anticorupție.
Povești de adormit copiii. O fi fost evenimentul ce-a motivat această investigație care să numere câți eurodeputați sunt penali – dar nicidecum vreun mare eveniment per ansamblu.
Chiar prima Comisie din această Uniune Europeană (adică post-Maastricht) – comisia Santer – a fost și prima care a demisionat în masă din cauza multiplelor scandaluri de corupție. Această Uniune Europeană este fondată pe corupție. Și a pretinde altceva nu e decât propagandă.
Revenind la ancheta jurnlistică despre care presa de la noi n-a găsit timp să scrie, din ea aflăm despre cazul Larei Comi (Forzza Italia) care e deja condamnată la 4 ani închisoare pentru furtul a €500.000 bani publici. Ca să vă faceți o idee, asta e de aproape 23 de ori mai mult decât suma cu care Liviu Dragnea a prejudiciat statul. Serios, Dragnea a făcut bulău pentru un prejudiciu de exact 108612 lei.
Ați văzut vreun din ăsta pro-UE protestând în stradă împotriva corupției dragniste din Parlamentul European? Firește că nu. Corupția nu există când corupții sunt buni europeni. Cum, nu știați?
Tot din ancheta cu pricina aflăm că 6 din cei 21 de eurodeputați belgieni sunt penali. Filip De Man (Vlaams Belang) de pildă nu fură bani publici – ci e mare fan al distrugerii în formă continuată. În special mașinile vecinilor îl tot enervează din ceva motiv.
Ancheta originală (a cărui link îl găsești doar dacă tragi cu tunul pe Internet) are și câteva cazuri mai degrabă frivole. Precum cazul lui Gunnar Beck (AfD) care a fost amendat că nu a folosit corect titlul de ”profesor” când a completat formularul pentru alegerile europarlamentare din 2019. Însă majoritatea cazurilor documentate sunt solide, de infracțiuni pe bune care în mod normal se termină cu pușcărie dacă le comit eu sau voi cei care citiți aceste rânduri.
Cum se compară cu România?
Cel mai penal Parlament al României în ultimii ani a fost legislatura 2012-2016.
Conform unui articol din Hotnews din 2014, din cei 580 de parlamentari, 35 aveau probleme cu DNA (Dragnea și Cosma printre ei) și alți 15 erau implicați în dosare penale ”normale”. Să zicem că toți erau de fapt vinovați (deși unii dintre ei au fost achitați ulterior). Asta înseamnă că cel mai penal Parlament al României avea 6% penali. De patru ori mai puțin decât actualul Parlament European.
Să zicem că HotNews n-a numărat bine. Și să zicem că Justiția a mai scăpat vreo câțiva. Dar chiar și-așa, și dacă presupunem că numărul real e cu 300% mai mare – tot iese Parlamentul României mai puțin ticsit cu infractori decât actualul Parlament European.
Mai mult context
Anul trecut zice-se că Ungaria a fost cea mai coruptă țară din Uniune. Dacă prezumăm că tot ce zice presa de opoziție despre deputații Fidesz-KDNP este adevărat, abia atunci reiese că aproximativ 15% din Parlamentul Ungariei este penal. Foarte rău, dar tot mai bine decât Parlamentul European. Asta, desigur, presupunând că presa de opoziție din Ungaria nu minte – o presupunere… liberală în sine.
În Germania nu e săptămână să nu se mai găsească încă un ofițer FSB fie pe lângă guvern fie pe lângă Bundestag. Și presa scrie conștiincios despre ele, dar niciodată nu le pune în context – căci dacă ar face-o, s-ar naște întrebarea legitimă: E cineva în conducerea Germaniei care NU lucrează pentru FSB?
Apropo de FSB, tot în ultima săptămână a aflat toată lumea că Tatjana Ždanoka (de la grupul Verzilor) lucrează pentru direcția a 5-a a FSB de 20 de ani. Doamna Ždanoka a fost europarlamentarul anului în 2019.
Ziceți ce vreți, dar în lumina faptelor, e absolut firesc ca euroscepticismul să fie în creștere. De fapt, ar fi o surpriză dacă NU ar fi în creștere.
Parlamentul European s-a erijat cu regularitate în rolul de profesor de anticorupție al României. Poate ar fi vremea să întoarcem masa. Nu, uite cum stă treaba: Ascultați voi denoi despre cum e cu anticorupția. Că până una alta nu noi suntem ăia cu un sfert din parlamentari infractori.
Conducătorii României ar trebui să găsească 🥚🥚 mai des și să-i spună Parlamentului European ceea ce i-au spus apărătorii ucraineni navei de război rusești.
Dacă nu acești conductăori ai României, atunci următorii pe care-i vom alege anul ăsta. Dar este esențial pentru binele țării noastre să nu i se mai permită Parlamentului European să-și asume o poziție de superioritate morală față de România. Dimpotrivă! România ar trebui să-și asume în mod explicit și fără nicio jenă postura de superioritate morală absolută față de Parlamentul European. Și mai ales față de Comisie.
Европарламент, идите на хуй, cum ar veni. Această instituție nu merită respectul românilor – mai ales al românilor care se revendică de la cauza anticorupției.
Eh, și-acum să-i vedeți pe toți ăia cu anticorupția-n gură cum fac pe Dracu’ în patru să nu discute despre subiectul ăsta, deși e campanie taman pentru europarlamentare.
Episodul complet în pagina dedicată, în biletul 217 sau în Donors’ Circle
Aburii sărbătorilor au trecut de tot așa că e timpul pentru clovnerie campanie electorală. A fost prima săptămână plină (din cele cel puțin 35 ce vor urma) de campanie în care politicienii s-au întrecut în a-și da cu stângul în dreptul, fiecare încercând să-și mobilizeze segmentul țintit de electorat.
Tonul l-a dat Claudiu Târziu cu un discurs livrat prost și formulat foarte stângaci, dând astfel ocazia adversarilor să-l facă albie de porci. Dar n-a durat mult și-au venit repede din urmă și ceilalți: Întâi premierul Ciolacu, apoi Dreapta Unită, apoi Dacian Cioloș, urmând ca săptămâna să fie încheiată tot de PSD care ușor-ușor scoate negocierile pentru prezidențiale în public.
Între timp, imaginația opiniei publice a mai fost ocupată cu o scurgere de date de la Camera Deputaților, o serie de acuzații (probabil false) aduse unuia dintre fondatorii Untold de către un fost președinte al PSD Cluj, dar și de notele de plată pentru activismul cu finanțări dubioase: în speță activismul ecopupu ”Salvați Roșia Montană” (2012-2017) și activismul vaccinist (2021-2022). Râdem, glumim, dar Faiză și Gabriel Resources își vor banii.
În segmentul geopolitic discutăm despre un succes al diplomației ucrainene care n-a fost discutat deloc în „lumea bună” – succesul fiind atribuit insipizilor ălora de la Bruxelles.
Tot în segmentul geopolitic discutăm despre criza politică de la Kiev, realinierile energetice din Intermarium, extremismul de la ONU precum, progresul negocierilor Armenia-Azerbaijan și, la final, despre o nouă declarație fără context a președintelui Tadjikistanului.
În știri externe discutăm despre un succes important al administrației Meloni, discursul insurecționist practicat de un membru al Camerei Reprezentanților a SUA, începutul unei crize economice sistemice în China (Taiwanul de Vest), extinderea influenței turcești în Germania și, spre final, apariția unui nou conflict diplomatic în America Latină.
Dezbaterea despre Suedia în NATO se poartă acum în ungurește. Cu toate (dez)avantajele care decurg din asta. În segmentul geopolitic intrăm în lumea din Ungaria unde dezbaterea se poartă în termeni pe care nu i-am văzut deloc în presa din România (nici măcar pentru a fi criticați).
Dar până acolo, în segmentul intern trece prin cele mai noi sondaje, discutăm un pic despre psihiatra învelită (nu, nu e glumă), despre cititul în palmă în mod instituționalizat pe bani publici cu un mason fost angajat la Microsoft (nici asta nu e glumă), o veste excelentă de la TVR și puțin despre TikTok.
Ceva mai mult timp dedicăm subiectului luptei pentru supraviețuire a ministerului zice-se al educației – aceasta fiind cheia reală în care trebuie citită discuția despre homeschooling. Inerția demografică ajunge din urmă excrocheria numită eufemistic sistem educațional de stat și, spre surpriza nimănui, servitorilor civili din școli și licee nu le place deloc.
Tot în subiectul intern discutăm despre fosta teorie a conspirației – astăzi subiect de dosar penal – recte diagnosticele fictive de Hapciu19 și de ce medicii de familie nu sunt cu nimic diferiți de alți medici, în ciuda „revoltei” lor pe care, pe bună dreptate, o bagă în seamă aproximativ nimeni. Și, în fine, to în segmentul intern discutăm despre cea mai recentă prostie a CNCD, chit că e greu să nu manifești schadenfreude.
În segmentul geopolitic, pe lângă subiectul aderării Suediei la NATO, intrăm mai mult în geopolitica Turciei care, de fapt, nu e deloc complicată însă este făcută complicată de o presă care nu pricepe nimic.
Tot în segmentul geopolitic discutăm demografia Chinei, limba moldovenească și, desigur, revelația care nu șochează pe nimeni – faptul că o agenție ONU a avut teroriști Hamas pe statul de plată.
În segmentul extern remarcăm cum premierul Bulgariei confirmă predicția noastră făcută în martie 2023 și apoi dedicăm amplu spațiu plânsetelor, bocetelor și panicii din sectorul eurofanatic, pe măsură ce aceștia realizează ce-i poate aștepta în iunie.
Spre final discutăm despre cel mai nou eșec al tehnooptimismului și, firește, despre lucrurile minunate care se întâmplă în presa americană – portdrapel fiind concedierile de la Los Angeles Times.
Now, sure, all of the above-cited policies have various issues – from legality, enforcement or morality. But one thing is certain: The notion of regulating smartphones is no longer a fantasy – but a growing trend. So the debate is no longer whether smartphone use should be regulated, but rather how should this be done in such a way that doesn’t violate fundamental rights but at the same time addresses the issues that arose from excessive smartphone usage.
The issues
Jonathan Haidt, who is hardly a right-wing reactionary bigot, wrote in 2021 about the smartphone trap.
In a paper we just published in The Journal of Adolescence, we report that in 36 out of 37 countries, loneliness at school has increased since 2012. We grouped the 37 countries into four geographic and cultural regions, and we found the same pattern in all regions: Teenage loneliness was relatively stable between 2000 and 2012, with fewer than 18 percent reporting high levels of loneliness. But in the six years after 2012, rates increased dramatically. They roughly doubled in Europe, Latin America and the English-speaking countries, and rose by about 50 percent in the East Asian countries.
From 2012 onwards, and especially after 2015 (when smartphones became very cheap), mental health issues skyrocketed among teenagers in ways not seen in two or even three decades prior to the advent of smartphones.
The biggest issue is attention span. Nobody today denies that attention span in social media addicted societies has visibly decreased. Between 2000 and 2015, the median attention spans of Americans shrank by a whopping 25%. In 2000, the median attention span was 12 seconds. Fifteen years later, it’s shrunk significantly to 8.25 seconds. That’s less than goldfish, whose attention span runs for 9 full seconds.
Then there’s the bullying issue. I personally have very little sympathy in that department but, nevertheless, since this is a political issue, the rules of politics and propaganda apply, rather than reason. And in propaganda, perception is reality. Cyberbullying may or may not be a big issue but, if enough people believe it is, then it is an issue.
And then there are the sex-based effects. Both boys and girls are affected by social media use – it’s just that they’re affected differently and at different moments in their development. Puberty is a very hard period for nearly all teens. Social media use makes that far worse.
Instagram had particularly strong effects on girls and young women, inviting them to “compare and despair” as they scrolled through posts from friends and strangers showing faces, bodies and lives that had been edited and re-edited until many were closer to perfection than to reality.
On boys, the effects on self esteem are similar to those felt by girls for similar reasons: the building of an unrealistic image of others. What’s different is the age. Boys are negatively affected by social media after the age of 14, while girls are affected from the ages of 11-12. One main difference is that boys overcome it harder, later and slower than girls. To make things worse, not only the issue is rarely being studied (money from Samsung and Apple make sure this stays under-studied), but when it is studied, the specific impact on boys is ignored due to generalized gynocentrism in the Academia. But that’s a story for another day.
Then there’s the issue of social media being a black box. X/Twitter published its recommendation algorithm. A step in the right direction but far from good enough.
We still have no idea what (and why) is recommended by Meta products and by TikTok. Experiments show that using a Chinese IP address will yield a very different type of recommendations than using an American address. There is increased awareness that TikTok is essentially the CCP’s spyware program.
But all of this ignores the obvious issue: Smartphones themselves. It would be easier to manage all of these without or with less smartphone usage.
”Oh, but I can’t” is the language of addicts. Which is also coopted by vested interests and, of course, naive people with limited imagination.
What vested interests? The smartphone global market was over half a trillion dollars in 2021 and poised to grow to almost one trillion dollars ($947 billion) by 2030. That’s a lot of money. The mobile app market was another $230 billion in 2023. And that’s before including video games for smartphones which is another $140 billion. That’s a lot of money. The GDP of Switzerland is slightly smaller than the current market worth of the smartphone and smartphone-dependent industries. The GDP of oil-rich Norway plus Sweden combined will soon be (if they aren’t already) smaller than the vested interests in smartphones.
So the opposition will be fierce and very well funded. Not to mention the limitless armies of social media zombies who will gladly be the useful idiots of Big Tech like all good junkies. And this is why I think the regulation has to be better thought-out.
Schools are a no-brainer
Long lauded as the most progressive country in the world because of its embrace of digitalization, Sweden is also the first to openly say that it’s been a disaster. Swedish kids can’t write anymore. So the Education Ministry is slowly phasing out tablets and all other digital assets from the classroom. Who knew? Those backward peasants of the past had a point. Education works best on paper, they say. The Karolinska Institute goes even further and asserts what we’ve been telling you on the Sofa for years: Digital tools impair rather than enhance student learning.
Seven years ago the Dutch have noticed that about a third of primary school kids had severe difficulties in learning to write. Some have placed this on the fact that there are more and more kids in Dutch schools with a migrant background. But the figure is much higher than the proportion of kids with a migrant background. It’s not just immigrants. It’s quite a lot of kids who are, for all intends and purposes, illiterate.
As it turns out, knowing how to use TikTok isn’t really digital skills even though that’s exactly what the progressive boomers who introduced digital tools in schools sincerely believed. And, as usual for boomers, they were wrong.
In practicality, the easiest way to get a majority to support a restrictive policy is to phrase it like this: No devices that can connect to the Internet are permissible on school grounds. Yes to dumbphones, no to smartphones.
It’s imperfect, but it’s a step ahead. And, in fact, it’s merely a return to the status quo of 2010 – when a majority of students had a dumbphone.
Smartphone-free spaces
There is increased demand for them anyway, as more and more are starting to realize the danger and the trade-offs, but there is still not enough courage to start promoting it openly.
Just like there are places that have a dress code, there can and should be places that don’t allow smartphone usage at all. Preferably with a jammer installed too.
There is such thing as a “digital Sabbath” which, quite frankly, should be encouraged but, in my estimation, it’s a low-return practice.
Much more interesting is the sudden and spectacular rise in nearly every country of the so-called “unplugged summer camps” for children and adults. Some are organized by NGOs, but a lot of them are organized by for-profit corporations. Nothing wrong with that, mind you. But they sure need more promotion.
And this is where the State can have a say: If a road trip with schoolchildren is organized using school resources even partially, then it is only approved if it’s a smartphone-free environment. This isn’t hard to implement and would run into very little opposition. Basically, treat smartphones like alcohol. There is a drinking age that usually is lower than 18 – but school premises have to be 100% dry. Well, same logic can and should apply to smartphones too: while smartphones aren’t (yet) forbidden to minors, that doesn’t mean they can be or should be used anywhere.
Regulation at the point of sale
Most countries don’t allow the sale of alcohol or antipsychotics to minors. Or they do, but only in special cases and with various controls. Why exactly shouldn’t smartphones be treated the same?
At the end of the day, and the evidence is increasingly clear on that, smartphones are a tool of mass psychosis. Its side effects on minors through extended use are very similar to the use of various psychotropics. As such, there is an argument to be made that they should be treated similarly.
While the argument is very difficult to make when it comes to adults (and I’m not even sure it’s worth trying), it is in fact very easy to make and implement when it comes to minors.
You have to prove you’re 18 to buy a gun, buy a bottle of vodka, a pack of cigarettes (even 21 in some places) or to check into a hotel. But for some reason we’re supposed to believe this can’t be done with smartphones? Gimme a break!
Yes, such a regulation is imperfect (like all regulations) and there are workarounds, granted. However, it sets a different tone of conversations in the family. It sends the message that the expectation is children don’t use smartphones at all.
Currently, too many parents aware of the negative effects are put in the situation of actively fighting to opt out of the de facto mandatory smartphone for their children. Such a regulation would move the focus once again where it’s natural: You have to purposefully choose to opt-in and physically show up with your kid to get him one.
Just like a gun purchased online isn’t directly shipped to you, the same can be done for smartphones. An adult has to show up in person to pick it up. This isn’t hard. And whoever tells you otherwise is either an addict himself or acting on behalf of the aforementioned vested interests.
Right to log off
Belgium, France and Kenya so far have already enacted legislation (France did so 8 years ago!) that explicitly states the right of employees to go fully offline outside of their work.
There’s a EU Parliament resolution on that too from 2021, though it will probably go nowhere for reasons that are worth discussing some other day. Still, the idea behind it is sound, albeit poorly articulated in some places.
The fact is that so many people feel pressured to always be online. Whether the pressure is real or not is another discussion. In many cases it is real. And few people are like yours truly to have rudeness necessary to answer with “go fuck yourself, I ain’t your personal ChatGPT” to angry e-mails or messages complaining that it’s been over 24 hours since they wrote to me and I haven’t replied. Most people want to be nice. And they strive to be nice until they drive themselves crazy. And when they snap, everyone pretends to be shocked and insists they have no idea how this could’ve happened.
Such legislation should not apply just in work relations, but more generally. Just like the anti-censorship legislation in many jurisdictions which punishes attempts to censor someone else in public, the right to log off could be framed similarly: with punishments for those who pressure others into usage of digital tools.
You may think that what I just wrote is fantasy, but it’s already happening. Sweden and Ireland are getting ready to punish stores that refuse cash. “Digital exclusion” is increasingly discussed in the circles of power as a crime in and of itself.
Now, of course, this will be a difficult argument to make because the tech grifts are going to fight this tooth and nail (like they did in France). Why? Because “digital transformation” is in itself an $800+ billion grift. A lot of that money already goes on propaganda to convince people and businesses to surrender their privacy and mental health to tech grifters who promise to make our lives more convenient.
Of course, the fact that they absolutely don’t make our lives better is immaterial. With enough propaganda you can convince tens of millions of people to act against their best interests. Take self-check-out for instance. It’s an abject failure. Who pays for that failure? YOU, my dear reader. Where do you think those stores will recoup their investment from?
The tech grifters got their money and moved on to the next “digital transformation” grift.
This is the extent to which “the right to log off” should ideally go: Codify into law the assumption that digitalization is bad and move the onus on the proponent to prove otherwise. Again, this will be hard to achieve because those hundreds of billions spent on propaganda will be used to fight tooth and nail any measure that protects regular people against the predatory practices of Big Tech.
Miscellaneous policy changes
Just like uber-digitalized Sweden was able to roll back the “progress” (and continues to do so), it stands to reason that this is possible elsewhere as well. Special interests be damned.
There are many ridiculous policies in so many countries that de facto force people to have a smartphone. Under the umbrella of “combating digital exclusion” – a lot of those policies can be abolished or amended.
I’m still upset I didn’t get to test this in court during the pandemic project when the Romanian government was stupid enough to try to impose the so-called “passenger location form” which could’ve only be filled in electronically. You see, because Ceaușescu didn’t let us travel, traveling now is an unalienable right in our Constitution. I would’ve loved to take the case to the Constitutional Court. Unfortunately, someone else was smart enough to advise the government to abolish that ASAP. And so they did before I needed to travel abroad and get the chance to violate that policy and then challenge it in court.
But oftentimes it doesn’t require complicated challenges in court. Oftentimes it requires very basic discussions. Like, for instance, when cities remove the option to pay for public transport in cash. At any hint of pushback, the vast majority of such measures are thrown away. I have a long list of cities where this happened.
What’s important when lobbying against such policies or for various normal-friendly amendments is to avoid coming off entirely against technology. Not only is that politically dangerous, but you also lose allies. A good chunk of smartphone addicts are victims as well and they’re not in favor of digital exclusion necessarily.
A change of attitude and lead by example
The most meaningful and impactful change, however, will be brought by regular people and private businesses with enough cojones.
Every year I, personally, convince two people to either ditch their smartphones entirely or to reduce their usage to less than a tenth of their previous habits. How do I do that? By simply existing.
This is me, more or less unironically
You see, given that I made (and still make, to a certain extent) my living in data centers and other tech-related activities, I’m fully aware of the limitations of technology. And especially about how brutally unsafe your data really is. Once you explain that to people, free of the self-interested shilling that nearly all techbros practice (oftentimes without even realizing it), a lot of people start thinking. It becomes even easier if you’re able to explain that in proper language rather than using wooden language rife with jargon that no reasonable human being will ever learn.
But this is hard. Most of those who oppose the over-extension of technology into our lives do so under an impulse. They sense that something’s really wrong, but have little idea on how to describe it, let alone to explain it or propose meaningful change. This aspect is mercilessly exploited by both Big Tech and tech grifters, aided by the hordes of zombie addicts who feel personally attacked when you start discussing their habits in the proper negative light.
Nearly all of those who peddle techno-optimistic baloney online and offline do so not out of a sincere belief in technology, but out of personal financial interest. And they will fight tooth and nail to defend their grift. First and foremost to prevent YOU from understanding that what they’re doing is not progress, but a grift.
Nevertheless, we must persist. We will not change the world over night, but the world does change one person at a time.
Last week a father contacted me to thank me for mocking his concerns about what would happen if he continues to “fail” to buy his 4th grade(!!!) daughter a smartphone a few years ago. She’s now 16, still doesn’t have one and, as a result, blows her peers out of the water because she possesses the valuable skill of being able to talk to people (something which her generation seriously lacks) and the valuable skill of being able to focus a bit more than 10 seconds on something.
She took an apprenticeship at a carpenter’s store last summer and this summer wants to go to an outdoor camp organized by some church where they’ll learn to cook, set up a tent and things of that nature. She is, in my book, a normal teenager who is experimenting. Unfortunately, by the standards of her generation, she is abnormal and exceptional. Her peers are getting ready for the college scam and later on join the ranks of overly entitled know-nothings. Hopefully she’ll be able to withstand the peer pressure because her path is objectively better.
Instead of conclusions
Unfortunately, we were all too dumb or too lethargic to have this discussion when it would’ve made a bigger difference: say in 2005. Before 2005, smartphones were marketed nearly exclusively to the enterprise market one which, arguably, needs it more. The discussion on whether to allow extending this to the civilian market, and especially to children, would’ve been better suited in 2005. But we didn’t. Because reasons. No point dwelling on the past now.
But this leaves us in a reactive situation. This mess will have to be cleaned up. And the way to do that is under debate.
There is no single answer. There is no single policy, or even package of policies that can be adopted and everything will be fixed. This will be a long and messy process. And, for now, with a lot of trial and error until the discussion reaches pleb level. And it will take a while because bypassing Big Tech’s wall of censorship isn’t cheap or easy. It’s doable, but don’t expect huge leaps so early on in the game.
But the first, and arguably the most important step, is this: The discussion should no longer be accepted under the terms of “should smartphones be regulated”. Reject the very notion. That debate is over. It is clear that smartphones (and the wide Big Tech grift) must necessarily be regulated. The debate is now how should that be done in such a way that has the least amount of trade-offs. It’s not an easy balance. And all sides will make mistakes for sure. But that is the legitimate debate.
Or, alternatively, you can do nothing and guarantee a generation of zombies who will, for sure, make life far worse for nearly everyone else. In fact, such a scenario would be explicitly in my own financial interest, even though I’d hate its toll on my mental health 🤷🏻♂️
Consulatul federației ruse din orașul bulgăresc Ruse a fost închis la sfârșitul lui iunie 2022 ca urmare a deciziei guvernului de la Sofia de a expulza peste 200 de diplomați ruși. De atunci, clădirea în care a funcționat consulatul a rămas închisă așa cum au lăsat-o diplomații ruși.
Vineri, 19 ianuarie, municipalitatea, care deține clădirea, a ordonat o inspecție pentru a evalua starea imobilului în vederea găsirii unui noi chiriaș, în condițiile în care imobilul se află într-o zonă cochetă a orașului și chiria în acesta reprezintă o sursă importantă de venit pentru primăria orașului dunărean. Ce-au găsit acolo este descris drept prăpăd pentru Radio Bulgaria de către inspector.
Vencislav Iliev, custodele clădirii, a constatat că lipsesc tocurile de la uși (și ușile cu totul), robineții de la baie și de la bucătărie și porțiuni din mobilierul din bucătărie.
Am crezut că municipalitatea le-a scos înainte să mă pună pe mine custode în vederea unei renovări. Însă în clădire nu a intrat nimeni de la plecarea rușilor până să vin eu astăzi [vineri, 19 ianuarie]. La etaj, unde sunt apartamentele, e prăpăd. Au demontat paturile și au scos seifurile cu totul din perete. Nu mai zic că lipsesc robineți și mobilier de bucătărie și o mulțime de elemente pe care nu te-ai fi gândit că le vor lua cu ei acasă.
Înainte să fie misiune diplomatică, această clădire a fost grădinița aferentă cartierului ”Renașterea”. A fost desemnată misiune diplomatică în 1984 odată cu reforma partidului comunist care a eliminat și numele musulmane și a decis ca după o pauză de 100 de ani să repună în funcțiune o reprezentanță diplomatică rusească la Dunăre.
Vencislav Iliev a fost parte din echipa de arhitecți care a transformat clădirea din grădiniță în misiune diplomatică alături de specialiști din Uniunea Sovietică în 1984 și 1985. ”Am fost practic zi de zi aici în timpul renovărilor. Știu exact ce s-a făcut și unde. În special biroul consulului și al vice consulului. Rușii nu au schimbat nimic în acești ani. Din octombrie 1985, când am semnat recepția și până vineri am mai fost o singură dată aici.” – spune el furios pentru ziarul bulgăresc.
Deyan Gherasimov, consilier local în Ruse spune că „s-a format o comisie pentru a inventaria pagubele și stabili bugetul necesar renovării pentru a putea refolosi clădirea. La urma urmei aparține cetățenilor din Ruse și a venit vremea să-i găsim o întrebuințare. Să nu mai arate a fortăreață de care să se teamă cetățenii să se apropie. Să nu mai aibă turnuri de veghe, gardieni și sârmă ghimpată. Asta a simbolizat rusia cât a fost aici și așa le e soiul peste tot în Europa. În mintea lor atât s-a putut. Păcat că n-au luat cu ei și monumentul armatei sovietice de alături, măcar știam o treabă.”
Consiliul local ia în considerare transformarea ei într-o clădire de recepție publică în care să se oficieze căsătorii și alte evenimente. O decizie finală va fi luată după evaluarea costurilor aferente reparațiilor.
Ce timeline mai e și ăsta în care protestele ”de extremă dreapta” cer ceaușisme iar în inima wokăismului, la Davos, se promovează capitalism pe pâine? Dubios timeline, dar csf? 🤷🏻♂️
Pe măsură ce aburii sărbătorilor trec, se reîncălzește și scena politică românească. Tatonările între partidele mari sunt încă slăbuțe – acuzele fiind din zona nimic important, recte încălcări ale regimului campaniei electorale. Soluția evidentă este reformarea prin desființare a legii 215 întrucât este probabil neconstituțională cel puțin în parte.
Între timp, la USR și RPR începe să le devină și lor clar că n-au cu cine. N-au suficienți oameni. Ai zice că remarcând asta s-ar grăbi să devină mai atractivi dar… nu. Soluția lor e să se păruiască în public între ei și mai mult.
Cel mai mult timp în segmentul intern îl petrecem discutând punct-cu-punct revendicările protestelor (lista celor 76 de puncte publicată de presă), ce șanse au să fie adoptate (politic, economic, procedural) dar și care ni se par direct inacceptabile.
Tot în segmentul intern abordăm reformele din învățământ care, printre altele, vor să taie clase de a IX-a din liceele din care promovează Bacalaureatul 0% dintre absolvenți. Un pas înainte, zicem noi, dar unul foarte-foarte mic.
Și, în fine, remarcăm că până și angajații CNCD se află în proteste – semn că nici ei nu așteaptă campania electorală legală, chit că HotNews a șters știrea ulterior publicării.
În segmentul geopolitic discutăm despre zbaterile impotente foarte amuzante ale regimului separatist de la Tiraspol, despre coada de cetățeni ruși la cetățenii moldovenești, cel mai apropiat exercițiu militar NATO, dar și schimbările geopolitice iminente din Orientul Mijlociu.
Cel mai mult timp în segmentul geopolitic îl petrecem intrând un pic în detalii despre protestele din Bașkiria, care au strâns peste 10,000 de oameni și care au forțat Kremlinul să trimită trupe de la Moscova pentru a calma spiritele și nu e clar că le-a și reușit. Motivul protestelor? Încarcerarea unui activist foarte eficient care a mai oprit planuri ale Kremlinului în regiune și a cărui organizație a fost interzisă pe motiv că ar fi „extremistă” în 2020.
În segmentul al treilea intrăm puțin în discursul lui Javier Milei de la Davos și efectul (nu tocmai) surprinzător pe care l-a avut.
În alte știri, sectorul IT în SUA a creat doar 700 de locuri de muncă în 2023 – iar acest lucru nu are cum să nu producă efecte în România; modul în care Bulgaria își îndeplinește „angajamentele pentru Schengen față de Austria” este unul care ar trebui copiat și la noi și, în fine, Macron aduce în atenția publică un subiect important – cel al efectului fundamental negativ al smartphone-urilor și al social media asupra minorilor. Însă, tipic Macron, ”soluția” propusă este o inutilitate în cel mai bun caz și o tâmpenie în restul timpului.
Un episod cu invitat special și cu mult amuzament.
Americans have an obsession with symbolic dates. It’s part of being a young nation. They’ll get over it, eventually. But until that happens (and it won’t happen this century), the Iowa Republican caucuses are a symbol: it’s the official date that marks the start of the election season.
It’s not even an old tradition. It dates as far back into pre-history as… 1996. Prior to 1996, there were other states and other primaries (and not always Republican) that would hold the first primary election. In fact, prior to 1972, the whole primary process wasn’t heavily publicized and it involved a lot more basic politicking than now – like having ‘favorite sons’ – which meant State politicians running only in their home state so they can slate their own delegates and act as kingmakers at the Convention.
Somehow, however, it got into the minds of political observers in the US and abroad (!) that the Iowa caucuses are not only significant (they’re not – they decide 1.6% of overall delegates), but that they’re somehow a bellwether. That somehow the candidate that wins the Iowa caucuses takes a relevant lead in the overall competition. There’s just one problem: It’s not true.
Statistically, the winner of the Iowa caucus on the Republican side became the nominee in 43% of the cases since the introduction of this system in 1972. Since the Republican Iowa caucuses became the symbol (de jure in 1992, de facto in 1996), the record is even more stark. Here’s the winner of the Iowa Republican Caucus since this contest became a symbol:
1992: Caucus cancelled ❌
1996: Bob Dole ✅
2000: George W. Bush ✅
2004: Caucus cancelled ❌
2008: Ron Paul ❌
2012: Mike Huckabee ❌
2016: Ted Cruz ❌
In other words, it’s been nearly a quarter of a century since these have predicted the nominee and even when they did predict the nominee, it was far from clear at the time that that would be the case. George W. Bush barely beat Steve Forbes in a 5-way race getting 10 delegates out of the 25. And Bob Dole got only 3% more than arch-conservative Pat Buchanan.
As we write these lines, the Iowa Republican Caucus hasn’t even begun and that’s exactly the point: At the end of them we’ll all still be none the wiser on how the primary contest on the GOP side will turn out.
But one thing is certain: After the Super Tuesday or so, there will be at least two, if not three groups of influencers, commentators and other social media personalities that we will all be able to poke fun at.
And while we completely understand those who work in one of the campaigns – and the Sofa salutes all of its political operative friends currently campaigning – we have less understanding for people who aren’t paid by any of the campaigns and yet they approach this issue with so much vigor and so little wisdom. Similarly, while we understand those who placed a bet, we also feel that one’s personal financial interest should be kept separate from evaluating the relevant data (or, in this case, lack thereof).
Over the last 6 months, our mailbox was consistently bombarded with messages about the GOP contest and pressure to predict things, only to then “disappoint” by repeating this: It’s too early. We’ll see what happens.
In other words: No, you have no idea who will be the nominee, anymore than anyone else. Sure, you can pick “team” and stick with it and be lucky. But that doesn’t make you an expert.
The 2024 election season on the GOP side resembles the 2008 and 2012. An old establishment (like it or not, Trump is the GOP establishment now) challenged by relatively low-energy contenders. The only thing special is that there’s two Indians in the race – Nimarata Randhawa (aka Nikki Haley) and Vivek Ramaswamy, whose policies are great, but whose name not even his supporters can spell correctly in one fell swoop.
Democrats aren’t any better. Their top contender is also an establishmentarian octogenarian who is not liked anymore even by his party. And a presumed VP, Kamala Harris, who in 2020 got 1% among the Democrats in California.
The 2024 election season in the US is not, and will not be energetic and exciting like the 2008, 2012 and 2016. There’s no-one to drive energy. There’s no contemporary Obama, or Ros Perot, or even a Ron Paul for entertainment. The crazy ticket (RFK Jr.) went independent, Trump of 2024 is boring and unhinged and Biden’s primary challengers raise no reaction. So unless the Democrats decide to pull a surprise (like voting for Dean Philips en masse on March 5),… there is no hope for anything fun.
In addition to Trump and Biden, there’s also Marianne Williamson (D-MN) and Asa Hutchinson (R-AR) in the primaries who are over the age 70. RFK Jr’s 70th birthday is tomorrow, January 17. Out of the 9 candidates in total (3 Democrats, 5 Republicans and one Independent), five of them are aged 70 or older. Did we mention there’s too many old people?
In a competition dominated by old or very old people, of which the presumed top favorites (Biden and Trump) are in increasingly poor health… expecting some excitement is misplaced. Especially before Super Tuesday (which is on March 5, for those who don’t follow American politics that closely).
So the good word from the Sofa is this: Unless you’re a member of one of the campaigns, don’t waste your time with the mudslinging until after the Super Tuesday (assuming it’ll still be worth it by that time).
But no, seriously: Anyone who tells you that he knows now how things will turn out is either crazy, a grifter, or works with that campaign. It’s way too early to even make an educated guess, let alone a sound prediction. And the result of the Iowa Caucuses won’t change that. The Super Tuesday might. Unless we’re headed towards a b0rked Convention. Now THAT would be exciting.
O săptămână lentă din punct de vedere al știrilor, ceea ce a lucrat în avantajul protestelor motorizate din ultimele zile, dar și în dezavantajul guvernului căci opinia publică a mai avut timp să se mai și gândească – ceea ce, în genere, e periculos, mai ales dacă ești PSD.
Dincolo de proteste, nici politicienii nu au avut o săptămână bună – în special cei nominal în opoziție care mai au și primari. Noua lege a bugetului nu mai lasă impozitul pe venit autorităților locale ci trimite banii din nou la București. Consecințele le vom vedea prin vară, zice Kelemen Hunor într-o declarație politică. Mai vedem.
Între timp, inclusiv în sondajele PNL nu stă PNL prea comfortabil, în vreme ce Ministerul Eudcației se judecă cu CNCD pe o decizie absurdă. Pe fundal, însă, CNCD a respins o plângere venită din zona activismului gheist întrucât consecințele trecerii ei printr-o instanță reală se puteau termina cu desființarea instituției.
Tot undeva pe fundal Dacian Cioloș și-ar negocia intrarea în PNL – un film (prost) pe care l-am mai văzut și în 2016.
Și pentru că a fost o săptămână lentă pentru știri, avem timp în segmentul intern să discutăm despre puterea pașaportului românesc și despre performanța remarcabilă și rar discutată a diplomației românești. Pașaportul românesc permite accesul fără viză sau cu viză la sosire în procedură simplificată în nu mai puțin de 179 de țări – o situație la care nici nu îndrăzneam să visăm în 1990.
Și tot pentru că a fost timp, discutăm și despre decizia clar greșită a CJUE în cazul Wizz Air vs. TAROM/Guvernul României – o decizie cu un potențial negativ uriaș ca precedent în dreptul concurențial european. Pe moment, familia de la TAROM e mulțumită că i-a supraviețuit sinecura iar meme-urile pe internet cu ungurii care ne vor și aerul au înflorit – însă consecințele acestei decizii nu au fost explicate deloc.
În segmentul geopolitic discutăm puțin despre demografia rusiei, pornind de la statisticile Rosstat și proiecțiile făcute de aceasta. Mai apoi discutăm puțin despre friguț, taxele vamale pe care afacerile din așa-zisa Transnistrie trebuie să le plătească de acum și, desigur, puțin despre ruviki 🤡
Tot în segmentul geopolitic discutăm pe larg situația din Ecuador și impactul pe care-l are asupra securității în vecinătatea apropiată a României – iarăși un aspect discutat în principiu deloc în așa-zisa presă de la noi.
Și, în fine, tot în segmentul geopolitic abordăm evoluția discuțiilor de pace dintre Azerbaijan și Armenia precum și declarația surprinzătoare a lui Aleksandar Vučić care, vreme de exact 10 ani, n-a fost deranjat când a fost făcut pro-rus în public și acum, brusc, este deranjat.
În știri externe discutăm despre dificultatea adoptării de noi reforme economice de bun simț în Grecia (precum și declarația premierului privind pidăreala), despre fricile eurofanaticilor (în special în zona Renew), despre înnoirea pe bune a clasei politice franceze (cu toate dezavantajele care decurg din asta) și, în fine, despre concedierile din ”tech” – în special treaba foarte bună făcută până acum de Elonie Muscă la X.
Алиев: в комментариях, полученных от Армении по мирному договору, нет никакого упоминания о Карабахе и карабахских армянах – https://interfax.az/view/907403
As announced on Youtube in the first day of 2024, every year between Christmas and into January we take a hard look on how we do things here at Sofa HQ and try to improve when and where it is possible, incrementally, with a view to avoid rocking the boat too much but to also make our work better.
Last year we announced multiple technical changes. Some of them panned out, some not so much. Those that worked are now being built upon while those that didn’t will be shelved and maybe tried again several years from now, at best.
This year’s changes are more in the realm of procedure rather than technical. A procedure is an official and/or established way of doing things. For many things that we do we continue to hold no procedure. This allows for fast adaptability (or agility as the corpo lingo these days calls it). However, as anticipated in years prior, some things can no longer be done without a procedure. Or they can be done but at an increasingly unsustainable cost.
The most important change comes by opening up (partially) our secondary server. Throughout 2023 we tested it for various tasks and modified a free version of a ticketing system to suit the needs of our operation.
In 2024 we are opening it up to the public. We don’t know what form it will take after public testing. Maybe excessive abuse will force us to revise this procedure to introduce a log in. Or maybe not.
Still, regardless of how it will evolve, most announcements will no longer be on this website but there. As a virtual “sticky note”. Still public, but not boosted. Only for those interested.
All announcements, including this one next year, will be there. The threshold for “major announcement” that warrants presence here will be raised very high.
No more DMs. Open a ticket!
The year 2023 saw a 200% rise in DMs (mainly on Telegram) on our staff compared to 2022. And in 2020-22 the number of DMS increased by further 300% compared to 2019. This is unsustainable and distracts us from our mission. Not only it has become impossible to reply to everyone, but even attempting to reply to half of the messages is a drain on mental resources. Not to mention that a significant proportion of the messages are repetitive.
As such, throughout 2024 we will work to answer to as few of them as possible and instead direct you to read the FAQ and fix your problems alone. And if that still doesn’t work, then you will be encouraged to open a ticket and wait. The response time will be increased to 72 hours at first and then increased even more.
With the exception of the Donors’ Circle, our DMs should be presumed closed. All tags on Telegram will also be unceremoniously ignored. The three people working closely on this have 400 unread messages or more every day. This cannot go on and will not go on.
Anyone who doesn’t follow the procedure will see his/her request ignored. All tickets whose answer is already available in the FAQ will be instantly closed with prejudice. Same goes with tickets with incomplete information or who don’t follow procedure.
While we understand that some of you prefer e-mail, some of you prefer Telegram, some of you prefer this or that… we are few and you are many. And we’d rather use the time to do the work that we have to do, rather than run around in circles for your messages.
The transition will be slow, but firm. Speaking of which…
The FAQ page right now only contains the really frequently asked questions. The ones that eat 50% or more of our overall time with communications.
In time we will add new questions that tend to be repeated. The objective is to decrease the amount of time spent with communications by at least 90% outside of the Donors’ Circle. While this may sound radical, it is simply a return to the 2019 policy but adapted for the current realities. In 2019 we’d prioritize messages differently but the outcome was quite similar to the objective pursued now.
2024 is already a very busy year. We know we won’t have time for communications. So the next best thing is to equip y’all with the tools to no longer need that much communication. Of course, we mean electronic communication, not in person coffee ☕ . That remains as holy as it has always been.
New wishlist
The old wishlist was, at least in spirit, fulfilled. Also, some of its elements were already pasée. So we came up with a new one – that addresses the production needs in accordance with the current inventory. Please review it and see if you can help.
As always, any funding that doesn’t have an immediate or attached purpose goes towards the inventory, including the Wishlist.
Miscellaneous
Over time we will expand the use of and access to the ticketing system even more – in accordance to our general philosophy of controlling our own data and relying as little as possible on third-party corporations.
Generally, we will continue to strive to avoid contributing cluttering crisis. More than 70% of the people have at least three online accounts that they don’t even remember creating and at least five more that they can no longer access but can’t delete either. Managing online accounts is tedious business and is a drain on people’s mental health. As a result, we will try our best to accommodate those who don’t want more online accounts. This is one of the reason our paywalls are more permissive and have so many side-options.
Of course, this is also because we despise GDPR with a passion and because managing people’s private data is a headache in itself even without the burdensome regulation by the EU.
Speaking of paywalls, we are currently toying with an option to add paywalls to some articles. It is still unclear whether it’s worth the effort. But, should we decide to introduce it, the implementation will resemble the podcast paywall: as wide and as many options as possible and no requirement of signing up with yet another account with this website.
In previous years, we’d dedicate the first three weeks of January for tinkering with the tech and with the procedures. But, this year is busy. So this concludes the bulk of the yearly evaluation. All other minor changes will be announced on Services if need be.
And with that, we’ll get back to the regular work.
If you had told me on February 24, 2015, when I created the Freedom Alternative channel that almost nine years later I will still be writing scripts for new videos, I would’ve said that it’s likely, though not highly likely.
But if you had told me nearly 9 years ago that I’d be managing a workflow that involves work on 3 continents, a small team, and attendance to high-end meetings that shape the geopolitics of Europe and all of that under the banner of Freedom Alternative Network, I would’ve said you’re being too optimistic.
Make no mistake: I did this before and I was expecting to do it again. It’s just that I didn’t expect to be able to do it again as legit independent. And so soon!
As I’m writing these lines, I’m slowly wrapping up an episode on Kyrgyzstan from Kyrgyzstan in which I present the post-communist history of the country in a way that not even the darling of the Kyrgyz intelligentsia would dare (even though he believes it). Because he would risk being kicked out of the university if he says it like it is.
Nine years ago, being able to do this required the endorsement of a big studio and a certain narrative script had to be followed. Even the more independent-minded studios still expected you to use some tired clichés when presenting. Oh… and time limits. Everything had to fit in a segment.
I remember 11 years ago when one of the few reporters that I can respect even when I disagree with him made a segment on North Korea. A very good one, mind you. But… too short. He then struggled to tell the rest of the story in various other shows in other places, plus a book – The country with a single fat man. Only in the book he was able to go a bit more honest (and that’s because this is Romania. In the PC-driven West of 2013 he would’ve been in hot waters for fat shaming or who knows what else).
The fact that I, a bona fide nobody, can afford to do something like that is an honour, a privilege and a responsibility as well. And for that I have to remain grateful to the donors who keep this whole thing going and evolving in a way that I couldn’t have predicted (which means the enemy couldn’t have predicted either).
Every year around Christmas and the first three weeks of January we take a look around the operation on a technical and procedural level. This means backups, corrections, add of new pages/features, cleanup of things that are no longer necessary, archiving stuff (raw footage over the years means dozens upon dozens of terabytes) and other tinkering under the hood. It is the less pleasant and the less visible but equally necessary kind of work. Without it, not only you wouldn’t be reading these lines, but we would’ve achieved even less overall.
So, ever since I came back from Asia, my allotted time for Freedom Alternative time has been divided between making new videos and tinkering in the background alongside a few other people in order to fulfill even more of the wishes expressed in last year’s article on resilience.
A full announcement will be published when the period allotted for this will be over later on this month but, if you want a sneak peak, check out the Services server. It is not yet fully ready for public consumption but that’s the place where (most of) these writings will be moved going forward. It remains to be seen how the final form and procedure will look like.
At this point, even if I trusted someone enough to be my communications manager (and I might have to find such a person this year), the communications overall are overwhelming. There’s no way I can manage all of that without either going insane or start ignoring people I shouldn’t or waste time on and with people I should be ignoring. There is no solution, of course – but one acceptable trade-off is profesionalization via procedures and layers.
And that’s what the partial opening up of the internal system is for. Since I can’t convince everyone of consequence to be in the relevant Telegram group(s), then what I can do is have everyone submit communications on the same URL. How to do that without spam and how to mitigate other risks is still under testing. But one thing is certain: In order to have a fruitful 2024 and beyond, direct communication between yours truly and most people reading this will have to be winded down.
So, through a combination of a FAQ page, ticketing system and, hopefully soon enough, delegation of most of the answers… next time I reset passwords on the paywalled content, I will have to answer fewer e-mails and even fewer Telegram messages. Same with requests: I will shamelessly ignore any request that is not in the Internal System™. There will be complaints and I will try to mitigate the most reasonable ones but, overall, this has to be done. The alternative is worse. Manually managing 6 categories of contacts is no longer feasible.
Also soon enough I will add paywalled articles as well. They will look something like this. But, again, needs more testing. Especially considering that I have no intention on collecting data (by making any of you create accounts) because that’d be another headache for me and for y’all. So a method of a relatively universal credential will have to be found. I don’t know yet how that will happen, but it will. Eventually.
So, yeah, that’s basically what’s been going on in the early days of 2024. Oh, and I’m also researching for the Latin American tour. And scheduling payments and soooo… much more. No pressure 😂
And with that said, see y’all soon. I got some pages to fix, create, link and synchronize.
