Skip to main content

The shadow of a doubt

The shadow of a doubt

For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

shadowHello there. Hi. Remember me?

It’s been a while.

When I’ve started this blog, a few years back, I didn’t really know what I wanted to write about. It was (mostly) a place for me to jolt down bits of ideas and stories that I find interesting and/or worthwhile. Its other (not so) obvious purpose was to provide me with a sandbox where I could mock about in the English language – which I’ve come to know and love almost as well as my native Romanian.

That was then.

I’ve changed, but then again, so do we all. I’ve started reading a few blogs, and then a few more, and found out what a blog really is. Entertainment. Humour. Opinionated editorialism. Gossip. Snark. A platform for one’s interests, or hobbies, or ideas. A chariot from which one could spear one’s enemies – metaphorically speaking, of course. A never-ending source of funny-faced cats speaking in cutely misspelled sentences. And oh, so much more, all fresh and new and updated regularly, in order to keep the reader’s interest alive.

And by those measures, this is not a blog.

I was away on holiday for the better part of last month, visiting relatives and friends back in my country of birth. And as chance would have it, I happened to run into Loridani version 1.0 – an old journal of mine, started way back in 1991 and rarely updated. Handwriting and language aside, it bore a striking similarity to my present style (and frequency) of writing. My younger self was writing down wild ideas and speculations about anything from religion to quantum physics, or any other topic that got me mesmerized at that time. Not for any honours or illusions of achievement, but merely to allow them to settle down and crystallize on page.

I am a firm believer in serendipity – I owe most of my present life to fortuitous coincidences, as friends would surely testify. And this particular bit of time travel couldn’t come at a better time. I’ve been pondering for a while now whether to keep on writing here on Loridani. Over the years this site has gathered an audience which, although rather small, is still large enough to trigger my sense of guilt for neglecting to make time for updates. Which reminds me: thank you so much for reading me.

On the other hand, this is who I am, and this is how my brain works. I don’t want this site even to seem like work; I do have a day job, and that’s more than enough for me. Updates will still be posted every Random(30) days, give or take. And if you really REALLY miss me, just give me a sign, and I’ll see what I can do.

I hope you will enjoy reading this journal at least as much as I enjoy writing it.

Cheers.

We went and fought in World War III

We went and fought in World War III

For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

soldierBack in the days of  the Cold War, we though the third great world confrontation was months, if not days ahead. We had a visceral fear of the Nuclear Holocaust, with all that entailed – the millions of deaths, the fallout, the radiation poisoning, the endless nuclear winter… A whole generation grew up taught to think in terms of us and them, fed on fear and propaganda, but mostly fear. We had the Berlin crisis and the Cuban missile crisis. We had the standoffs, the nuclear tests, the war games and the wars-by-proxy. We even had Comrade Krushchev telling the West quite literally “we will bury you”. The year was 1956. People were listening to Elvis and building fallout shelters in the backyard.

But the years went by, and crisis after crisis was averted by means of diplomacy and concessions on either side. Leaders came and went, but the doctrine remained the same. Arm yourself more than the other guy. Talk tough. Make a show of strength. DO NOT USE IT. It kept on going for 40+ years, right until the Berlin wall collapsed, taking with it an ideology and a way of life that dominated the XXth century. There were, of course, several occasions where war was narrowly averted – for instance this was one of them. But the thing is, it didn’t happen, and that is probably why today we are alive and well and able to click our way around the Internet, instead of scavenging for tins in the ruins of the Western civilization.

What I belatedly came to realise is that World War III did actually happen. In the military High Commands of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, on the boards – and later the computer screens – of intelligence analysts, in the nightmares of world leaders, World War III happened over and over again. And no matter where it played, no matter how it started, it always ended the same way. Nobody won.

That is why, in this nuclear age, the era of the great war has passed. Never again will we see tens of millions of soldiers marching across the world to re-enact the clash of the Titans. The political leadership of any faction, group or country may still be use the Cold War rhetoric – indeed, North Korea still does it to this day – but they will always stop short of action. That is why I am not concerned, for instance, about Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Oh, they might huff and puff about the great Iranian nation, but the most a nuclear Iran can hope to get out of an alleged military nuclear program is a stronger position at the bargaining table.

This does not mean we saw the end of wars. There will still be skirmishes, thawing conflicts, African civil wars, nationalist guerrillas, jihadist terrorists and Somali pirates, and many more. Plenty of opportunities to field test the new generation of weapons and to let the new recruits cut their teeth on a real theatre of confrontation. There won’t be peace in my lifetime, no matter how hard we may wish for it.

Still, one can always hope.

The blindness of the righteous

The blindness of the righteous

For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

blindnessThe Merriam-Webster Dictionary doth define righteous as follows:

1: acting in accord with divine or moral law : free from guilt or sin

2 a: morally right or justifiable <a righteous decision> b: arising from an outraged sense of justice or morality <righteous indignation>

Tomes have been written about the first interpretation of the word. According to some religions, there are no righteous people in the world; we are all sinners here. Some of us became sinners just by being born. Others are working very hard on it as we speak. It is an interesting topic, and I might come back to it on another occasion.

No, it is rather the second meaning of the word that I would reflect upon in the following lines. It’s the “morally right and justifiable” deed that “arises from an outraged sense of justice or morality”. An outraged sense. Righteous. Right.

And when did outrage ever led to anything even remotely positive? A lynching mob may consider itself righteous in its outrage, no doubt fuelled by a keen sense of justice, or perhaps morality. The only problem is, justice and morality are subjective, relative values. Being an abhorrent human in the name of your outrage is never a good thing, regardless of how righteous you might feel. Because, believe you me, the feeling will pass. And if you have a shred of human decency, you will shoulder your burden of guilt for whatever outrageous deeds you enacted in your righteous rage. Righteous people are bulls before the cape. They’re blind to the consequences.

In Rwanda, 15 years ago, we saw again the rise of the righteous. Neighbours killing neighbours. Friends killing friends. One million people died under the knives of those who imagined that truth, justice and indeed, divine right were on their side. Let us all spare them a thought this day.

And next time you feel that righteous anger bubbling in your throat, take a moment – and consider the consequences.