Remarks about a lecture by us ambassador
I attended a lecture by us ambassador in czech republic and I noticed some hints that I would like to comment on. This lecture was in the context of one hundred years of czech-us relations and it was basically about strenghtening friendship between these two countries in order to help economy, safety and growth. He said a nice thought and that was that young people and consequently all people shoud be fulfilling the promise of what they are good at. we are here for reason. This is very promising but I think that it contradicts a bit what he said earlier. In order to build a growing community, we need to create occupations that help it. today young people are very often choosing humanistic studies, art and so on and these are not really intended to build economy. on the other hand, even these studies make our surrounding a better place to live. sometims less is more. sometimes less economic values may create our lifes better- for example good social care of the weak of do not contribute to economy of the state says a lot about the state, nation and community.
another thing he mentioned that cought my attention was that he did not take the speeches of us president into seriously into their consequences. after all the president is a proxy for people but the people are different than the president nevertheless. in czech republic almost half the population does not like the incumbent president and yet he is the president of all people. similar it is with Donald Trump. maybe now evem more people that voted for him are against him. so the president is not really a voice of the crowds. I even think that there is nothing like a nation. in czech republic we have one language, does it make us nation? in us ther are many languages, are they a nation? I think that nation is only a social construct that in fact does not exist. we can only have communities with some affinity towards ideals -for example constituion in the us. but even here, should I feel more close to a compatriot than with someone from another state? should our culture make us feel more closer? i do not think so. Trump fulfilled no promise and what? Nothing happened. Those who like him usually vote him his fails notwithstanding and those who dislike him only dislike him more. what can we do with this situation? the modus operandi of any democracy should be the will of people. democracy does not guarantee all people their rights and that their will shall happen but it guarantees (or it is the core of any democratical system) that their voice shall be heard. This right must not be allienated or infringed. If there is nothing that can be done constructively, even talking about it as a solution-or a draft of solution and if not, then we are instructed for thefuture time-dialogue is never a wasted time, unless we try to talk about artifical problems. Once we stay in serious business of talking about problems that exist and not start thinking non existent problems up, then we are creating a surrounding of acceptance of a relevant dialogue. after all, it is impossible to judge which dialogue is constructive and which not, this is naturally subjective, nevertheless, we should accept any kind of dialogue because we cannot judge that what for one is problematic for some other may not be.
another topic was guns. second amendment is very important for Americans. they have the frontier ideal of guarding ones farm against the disfavour of people, animals and second amendment alsu guarantees the people to take up guns against government that spoils the ideals of American society and constitution. he also remarked that majority of people were under twenty five in the audience-they know only freedom. freedom comes with prize but the young people do not know the prize, only freedom. their freedom was redeemed by blood and fights of their ancestors. another cost of liberty if neverending vigilance to guard democracy against enemies – either endemic or from outside. we shoud not take it for granted. freedom to wear guns comes with the responsibility of risking an attack by a madman, nevertheless, the freedom to be armed is stronger for American people than the risk of mass killing (death of more than four people) which in the US comes every two months.v who is the enemy after all? is it immigrants? all americans are immigrants, so it is a bitter irony that they want to oust the newer immigrants. there is an inscription on the statue of liberty by Emma Lazarus saying: Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless, tempest tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
we see that if america want to keep this ideal, it must retain the ability to accept all other races and nations-if it believes in it, because both are social constructs after all. the only real inhabitans of America are indigenous people.
in the end, he also mentioned the west and east relationshiops. democracy does not say we should agree, friends do not agree but are friends their quarrels notwithstanding. so if someone tosses a stone on me, I should be ready to guard my ideals and ideas but should not consider the one evil but rather equally endowed but in different aspects and be ready to lead a dialogue, not toss back.
Používam Rychlý zápisník