Tag Archives: svp

Artist shitstorm as seen in Switzerland, January 2012.

So you ask all them culture and arts dudes and dudettes to bitch about the Hildebrand case. Or rather, how certain media (Weltwoche, cough) or certain political figures (Lei, Blocher, cough) kicked the Swiss society in the balls, or are hugely misjudged, or totally wrong so we need to Do Something™. And how we guys and gals feel about it, generally speaking, artistically and whatnot. Being all artsy and cultural and stuff about it, too.

Well, my estimate: We hate it. At least, I do, which means quite a few persona unless I take my meds, or enough beer. Or, preferably, both. But I digress.

I can’t know what Hildebrand did or didn’t do for sure. That’s sorta the point: You can’t prove your innocence. That’s why we have all them laws and regulations in place, so nobody gets damned without any proof. Proof as in The Law™, rather than some arbitrary morality talk you spew because, well, you think you’re right, or your opponent is in the wrong party, or fucks your stock returns.

This is important: The laws are in place simply because one guy’s or gal’s moral understanding will be different from what others will deem appropriate. That’s the main reason we have laws to begin with. Going all “but it’s wrong!” simply because you lost a couple of thou on the markets is not very, well, moral.

But as the Hildebrand case has been, mainly, a discussion between different media exponents, with few political powers chuckling about how everybody turns moral all of a sudden, there isn’t anything I could add to this aspect of the pseudo-discussion.

What I can comment on is the way either side talks about what they think is reality. It may be in the eye of the beholder, but for Gods’ sake stay consistent! In this respect, the Weltwoche-SVP-Blocherarian bunch loses. Not because I don’t like them, but because they negate their own statements all too quickly.

Reality, conceived by society, is made up through discourse. And, in the end, reality is what the majority decides on. Reiterating statements that have been negated long ago is not a sign of a sane mind, but might be sensible for your cause. Reacting to people asking you why you’re lying with “you need to see the big picture, and I didn’t lie, reiterate” is insane behaviour, no matter what. Which is fine by me, mark the meds above, but for fuck’s sake:

Keep consistent in your arguing!

Well, as I’m supposed to answer this plea artistically, let me add a photo. Make of it what you may.

Immigrant cows climbing over our borders need to be stopped.

Guide dogs are overrated, especially their use for the blind.

The Swiss IV or Invalidenversicherung, social services specially targeted at the disabled, need to spend less. Billions of Swiss Francs drain from already tight pockets, more and more residents need to apply for financial support. Or, as certain parties like to stress in the blindness of voters’ loyalty, apply with no need but loads of criminal energy.

But do the blind need guides? Apparently, not.

Hey, who asked them blind people to get dogs? There’s loads of Accessibility Services in modern computers, screen readers, and GPS that talk to you! And well, you have a family, don’t you? Okay, your sister lives in Morocco and can’t go shopping in your stead, but – tough luck! Why should social services, the public pay this much for food an medical care for a dog? Dogs are pets, hence: luxury items. You have more important things on your mind than remaining self-determined. We paid asked dog health specialists, and they said our rates are well beyond the reasonable. Hey, there’s always tidbits from the slaughterhouse if you really think you need a guide dog, so stop complaining. We have mucho real issues to deal with. Here, have a leaflet, and don’t vote SP or Green, thanks a bunch.

It’s quite clear why the IV sticks with the label “invalid” to describe both its insurance system and its clients. In-valid. I agree with 50 % of that.