weekly's Children of the Street [11.23] Constitution [10.08] Who Is Protecting Who? [08.04] Statistics [07.21] Derogations [07.07] The Mammouth [06.15] Criticism [05.25] State Theft [05.17] The "Christian" Socialism [05.09] Freedom of Speech [04.21] Circle of Power [04.16] Redistribution [04.05] Anti-corruption [03.22] CNSAS [03.15] Working Code [03.10] Health [03.03] special Romania, for whom? [05.31] Perversion of diplomacy [04.30] Iraq War [03.25]

05.17.2003

State Theft

The Nastase Government does not miss any occasion to sanction those who want to do something in Romania. The last aberration in the domain is a government decision establishing that the owners of personal heating systems have to pay a part of the other lodgers' payments, because they benefit by the "heat" received through the walls from those neighbors still linked to RADET.

The stupidity of the decision is obvious: those having central heating give to the neighbors at least the same heat they receive, usually more. But this doesn't matter, because the old communist type logic of the government transforms the "bourgeois" with apartment heating systems in intruders with no rights in front of the community. The completely arbitrary decision of the government comes back thus to the hardest logic of forced collectivization: it is right to take away because they have; if they have let's take from them because this is the only way we can also have. Obviously, the "argument" is not just miserable morally, but also vicious economically. Even if we could find a reason to oblige those who afford bigger payments to pay also the rates of those who can not or don't want to pay, which seems yet impossible, to fleece people having personal heating systems will never solve the huge RADET problems.

Actually, all the PSD politics is organized through this fundamental objective: encouraging the irrational collectivism and the passivity. Those who want to realize something , to develop themselves and improve the environment, will have always the tendency to negotiate their position reporting to others, to offer something in exchange of what they want to obtain. On these bases it starts a rational process, equitable negotiated, of producing the decision in society, and implicitly of selecting the people who have the mission to political represent the citizens. In other words, here starts a direct danger for PSD, because this party does not represent clear interests and does not offer something in exchange of the vote it requires. The PSD remains at power by speculating the automatism of those who identify it with the state. Beside the nationalism practiced by the party- state under the shelter of the alliance with UDMR, the PSD exploits the vegetative reflexes of the Romanians, who have as fundamental values the obedience of the people to the community interests and the absolute consensus which has to be put against the external factors potentially dangerous to the community.

The PSD is a party-state not just due to its ponderosity and totalitarian reflexes, but most because it is the "rightful" successor of the power in Romania. This is a power absolutely unique, because it was always so, not only in the time of communism. The period before the War it is not really an exception, for the democracy was mostly by façade in the conditions in which the elections were won mathematically by the government appointed by the king; that is also why it was so easy to abolish the democratic institutions and setting up the Carol the II-nd dictatorship. The PSD it is seen by its electors as the Power in itself, obviously a paternalistic power which does not sign any contract with those it leads. It's the power around which people get close by reflex, in the virtue of an eternal external danger and who has no alternatives. That's why "the opposition" is yet perceived by many as a factor of scission or destabilization.

That's why, the atrocious collectivism of the governmental decision which gives absolute power to the lodgers' associations is quite logical. The individual has got any power neither any right. The association decides how much will pay the heating systems owners for the heat consummated by the other lodgers, how much will pay those who has installed water meters (so their meters become useless); also, the "bourgeois" who afford to pay people to make some services for them (cleaning, repairs etc.) are obliged to pay them if these come more than 15 days a month. If the owners them self would do those services, consuming the same water quantity, of course would not pay extra money. But if they have money to pay some people, why should PSD miss the occasion to shove once again its hand in the pocket of some stinky "bourgeois"?! It is also interesting the manner in which it is established the list with the services performers for who the employers are obliged to pay gratis: they are those people who "perform house-hold activities visual ascertained or noted by the other people". For PSD, the good faith and civilized negotiation methods mean nothing. It automatically starts from the guilty presumption of the "bourgeois", against which it institutionalizes the peculation and the espionage, to the huge delight of the old women in the block, who will have an official mission, from the government.

Generally, all this government decision it is very similar to the sentences given in the 50' against the "people enemies". It doesn't matter who what right has; important is to strike those who get out from the line, take off from those who have something. All the decision does only to establish various occasions in which people who "have" will pay gratis for the others' payments. Another example: the payments for the common TV antennas are supported by all the lodgers, proportional to the sockets number in the apartment; it doesn't matter if they use or not the antennas. If they have money for the cable, why shouldn't they pay also for the others' antenna, even they don't benefit from it? So it is logical, according to the dirty logic of the government party.

Through these yet, PSD does not define it self least as a consensus party, although it wildly antagonizes those who want to build a personal way in life, to live better in a more civilized society. These are for PSD and for the Romanians that it represents, excluded from the "organically" collectivity of the nation. They have no any right, and are exploited as the Channel deportees, as they are obliged to work gratis for the others. But their exploitation doesn't mater, because they, having the courage do define them self individually and to have personal ideas and aspirations, get out themselves automatically from the "good people" monolithic group.