A culture of dessolation

The excellent and noted bloger Dick Erixon comments the sentence of Anna Odell, infamous for the faked psychosis as an examwork of artschool, Konstfack. As Erixon writes, it is a victory for civilised vallues that a Swedish court could muster enough spine to convict Ms. Odell for the charges against her. Among which was violent resitance when brought to hospital. It was a quite lenient sentence, a fine equivalent of 50 days of work with a normal Swedish sallary, considering the abuse of much needed health resources.

Erixon is spot on in his assesment that this is still a victory for civilisation, against the culture of dessolation that the political left has been nuturing for all to many years in Sweden and the West. Me, naming it as a culture of dessolation, is because of the stated aim of questioning, eroding and finally dissolving the norms of society, that took hundreds of years to build. Erixon notes that, that type of society is a society where there are no trust and confidence in your neighbor and people suspects each other, instead of working with confidence towards a greater good of all and one's familly.

At the root of this bizare cultural landscape, Sweden is bestowed with, is the harmfull notion that the best provider with grants to art education and artist's are the state. If money comes from another direction, well then, you have become a sellout, you're comercial! In the leftist, Marxist influenced, cultural climate that has had Sweden in a stranglehold for so many years; that is probably the worst acusation an artist can recieve. But, why are the state such a neutral provider of grants? Is just a coinsidence that so many Swedish artists are lefist and that the political party dominating Sweden for the last 70 years are a socialist party? Or are there a connection? You do the math!

If Sweden weren't such a hurt country by over-taxation, there would be a lot more room for several different contributors to the Swedish culture. As it stands now, its the major companies and the state that have the funds to support art and culture and when it comes to the state, its the taxpayers money they are dooling out to the artschool's, like Konstfack, so their pupils can abuse rescue personel or go trashing sub-way cars as an art-project. Would these people, desiding at Konstfack, think it would be art if somebody would trash their home, record while doing it and put it on display at an exhibition? I think not!

If the government would stop viewing its populations income as theirs, with which they give us allowances, it might result in a climate where more people would have the abillities to support culture. I think Erixon is correct in stating that the culture in a society isn't richer than the amount of sponsors that can finance the said culture.

As a sad reminder of the bizare leftist-culture in Sweden, is the article in the Swedish major conservative newspaper, Svenska Dagbladet, by two rellatives to people who's been treated by Swedish psychiatric care. One of their points, among many questionable, is that Ms. Odell has showed that people with psychiatric illnesses can come back to a normal life. Why? But, Ms. Odell came back, you see and by that she gives hope to the ill. And, further, she shows that art can still be a transforming force in society. It's a sad state, indeed, that we live in!

Link's to Erixons articles (in Swedish):

http://erixon.com/blogg/2009/08/konstfack-anna-falld-en-seger-for-civilisationen/

http://erixon.com/blogg/2009/08/goran-hagglund-politisering-har-utarmat-kulturen/

Svenska Dagbladet (in Swedish):

http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/artikel_3400321.svd

Teacher kissing 14 year old spared jail because bad heart

Once more we hear the storry about a criminal being spared jail because some ailment that would make it to hard on the criminal. This time the report comes from the U.K., and its a teacher forcibly kissing a 14 year old girl. 14 years old! and getting away with a slap on the wrist. This is not isolated to britain, the trend is the same in many countries in Europe, not the least my own; there is allways some reason that makes the people, choosen to protect the citizens, to find something turning the perptrator into a victim. Why is it a reason to spare a childmolester from a prison sentence because it would be to hard on his heart? Come on! He commited a crime against a child! Apparently, it might not be the first time either. The big joke is the judge claiming to act in the interest of pupils and public. Like Lexie from the US says: You do the crime. You do the time!

This is not about being vengefull against people commiting crimes. It is to uphold one of the basic fundaments of a civilized nation. That people should be able to pursue their lifes goal and the search of happinies, without fear from either criminals or tyrants. Thus, criminals must be put in jail for the protection of the public regardless of them having a medical condition that could be worsened from jail-time. Otherwise you sentence law-abiding people to the jail of fear, having people with a "bad" heart on the loose. This understanding of the criminal, by the justice-system, may be called an act of mercy, but I say it is an act of imorallity against the people you are put to protect.

There are every reason to treat criminals as humane as can be - in jail! Not by having them on our streets. And, in the end, even those ever so understanding of people wouldn't like their daughters end up alone in a room with a teacher eager to explore their sex-life.

The link to Daily Mail: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1209695/Teacher-French-kissed-pupil-14-escapes-jail-teach-again.html

Time to change the aproach towards Iran

Today Haaretz reports about Iran admitting to have reached the stage called "Detonation" in their process towards getting nuculear weapons (anybody still doubting that, especially if this IAEA report is true?). As many have said for years; this is the goal of the Iranian regime. Think of the future with nukes in the hands of an apocalyptic-leaning regime in Teheran, arming it self for the final battle, ushering in the era of the Mahdi. Does President Obama still believe this is a regime that can be reasoned with? Does the American administration have the abillity to re-examine its positions, or are they to locked in to the Obama-reach-out-to-the-muslim-world agenda to be able to see the reallity for what it is?



Here is the article from Haaretz: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1110835.html


Read it all