Funny. Of course, during courses we have been taking an interest to learn about how life goes on in Poland.
Just a couple of minutes ago, I have finished the class and we were still talking about the wages in Poland, and a French guy was so into the matter. “How can you live with these wages? And with the prices as well! I have been to Manufaktura and bought this t-shirt at the same price as in France! It’s totally unacceptable!”
And he started to express his opinion that the government has to do something about, if not it’s a shitty government and all.
On the other hand, I keep to my opinion/”theory” that has 3 components: hierarchy + “conspiracy theory”/manipulation + individualism.
In order to maintain this “good life” one needs to think that there’s always somebody who is doing worse (optimistic brainwashing), and also that there’s always somebody who is doing better (fake-goals brainwashing).
There is always a chance to “take care” of the people around you, but that’s of course for “their own good/sake”. Or at least this is what they say. Some of us are acquainted with this just by paying attention to the mass-media.
This is also connected to the previous Social Role of Media course, with Monika. While she was speaking about media ideology, I was quite skeptical about having an ideology behind the media. I understand perfectly that media is often (if not always) connected to politics, but… BUT… I really don’t think that nowadays you have strong ideologies when it comes to media. News can be distorted, but they are often distorted because of the immediate interests – Iraqi war, national Mafia or under-the-counter deals.
That’s why I couldn’t agree 100%. In my mind at least, and maybe I am totally wrong, but I think that an ideology needs to have a beginning, an on-going present and a future/ending. So… acting upon an ideology is for me different than action upon interests.
I’m thinking about a good example to differentiate the two… and thinking… and thinking…
I guess that I will not find a better one than this:
Consider having a plane from Warsaw to Stockholm.
During the flight, the plane encounters heavy storm and since it cannot go over the clouds, it needs to steer left, almost going straight to Copenhagen.
This is an example of acting upon interests. The interest was to get as far away from the storm.
Then, the situation gets better, and steers back right, in order to follow the course to Stockholm again.
This is an example of acting upon goal/ideology. The goal was to get to Stockholm.
Isn’t this a big difference, Monika?
It is also important to keep the people divided. We were talking about prices at Manufaktura. I’m sure that if the people in Łódź would have started a campaign and convince themselves not to put one step in Manufaktura for two weeks, they would have immediately started to lower their prices! But keeping them to the state of “look how beautiful Manufaktura is & maybe this is why the prices are so big” was a key-point for keeping the business with such high prices!
The same thing with the present Polish leadership. Everybody says that the Polish people doesn’t like them, but yet… they voted for them. Conclusion: voting for the least bad option. I wonder how the system works in Poland, because the natural thing would be to have the people not voting and thus not giving enough votes to empower a new leadership! Simply saying “We don’t see a big difference in electing one of the candidates. We want better! Show us better!”
Without strong and real standards and true criticism there’s no other way to move forward with confidence. Simply waiting for that small chance of having a powerful and clean leadership does nothing good. But then again… who am I to have these thoughts? Romanian mentality if somehow beyond the Polish one, though I think that overall we are more moderate then they are.