Socrates once remarked (well not exactly, i just need to cite his name as an authority) " I know the most because i know that i dont know"
That s the theme of my day on Tuesday... I savored a really a mediocre ramen, but one that i really want to eat for quite sometimes..
My friend, Eli and I can finally meet up and 'travel' to the wonderland for 3 hours.. We 'talked' a lot about knowing..
The word know is so powerful and profound.. Throughout the discussion we discovered how much we knew... that we didnt know.
Some people come to me and complained that they are confused and that they are unhappy. Worse, some people are supposed to feel happy about their lives but they just feel something is missing.
Yes, I am referring to wealthy fellows who procure the 'Zara', 'Mango' or those luxurious stuffs and convince themselves that they are happy because of they can buy those things. Can you feel what they feel at that particular moment when they are holding the new Zara or Louis Vuitton?
They "ought" to feel happy because society tells them that to have the money and to be able to procure is a reason to be happy. That luxurious and wealthy life, are supposed to be a state of "happiness". While deep down there, when these supposedly wealthy guys sit down alone, they feel the subconscious urge that something is just missing.
They dont "know" that they are not happy..
One thing I am so proud of is that I know, not that I know all/many things, but that I Know I know nothing nothing... that I know I am lost... that I know that I am confused... that I know that I am not happy..
That makes a great and happy day to me
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
No one can gauge the depth of me
Watching good will hunting (starring Matt Damon and Robin Williams) for another time after 6 years illuminated me of certain philisophies I couldn’t capture last 6 years. It stroke me hard, as if I am seeing myself, full of anger, disappointment, and discontent. I see the abyss of my reflection... The all-times-anger, pushing people away before they start leaving or hurting me. I am developing a huge distrust over anyone surrounding me. It’s classic. It’s called self-defense mechanism. But mine is much bigger than anyone else’s. I know, i know it very well.. it s called selfish. It’s called insensitive.
Perhaps, I need to sit down and figure who i was more clearly before i can figure out who i am. When i stand in that fancy room during the public lecture of Sri Mulyani, I can only tell myself.. i could have done a much better speech, it s an utterly/completely superficial word game. Articulation? I can do better, mimicking? I can do better. But why people listened to her and not me? Are people grading her for who she is rather than what she actually said?
Again, i know, i know... there are more to life than intelligence.. there are experiences, there are people skills. Seriously... i am fed up of it... i know the limit.. i know there are certain norms, courtesies, whatever bullshit meaningless dictions you want to assign to it. Nonetheless, it does not excuse you from being a complete failure... When i present good social skills, they tell me you are not intelligent enough, when i present magnificent intelligence, they tell me intelligence is no everything...
They tell me good is not enough and intelligent is not enough. It is not what i have that is not enough, it s what they have that is not enough AND because i have more than they do, they are fucking afraid of me...
I m sick of this hopeless world sometimes. It s even remote of any hope... Sick fucked up humans... Stupid fucking maggots... they will waste their whole lives living as a fucking slave in a jail
The irony is i m living in it. People (philosophers) coin it as a structure i can’t escape. It s a structure that defines me... I can't be a free person if i dont live in a jail, right? I can't be liberated if i have never been jailed, right?
The struggle is painful, fucking tormenting... To want friends and hate friends... to want love and hate love...
It s all so lonely... all the sounds and sights are just meaningless. My attempt to assign them meaning are not only difficult but also ridiculed...
Perhaps, i need to take a break... perhaps, complete insanity can liberate me from this jail? Just like leonardo di caprio in shutter island? Insanity liberates me from social norms, “people’s feelings”, pretense, hypocrisy, the want to be a conformist, the want to belong to a group (if not majority, certain class of people)... I need to be free... AND freedom to define “free”..
Perhaps, I need to sit down and figure who i was more clearly before i can figure out who i am. When i stand in that fancy room during the public lecture of Sri Mulyani, I can only tell myself.. i could have done a much better speech, it s an utterly/completely superficial word game. Articulation? I can do better, mimicking? I can do better. But why people listened to her and not me? Are people grading her for who she is rather than what she actually said?
Again, i know, i know... there are more to life than intelligence.. there are experiences, there are people skills. Seriously... i am fed up of it... i know the limit.. i know there are certain norms, courtesies, whatever bullshit meaningless dictions you want to assign to it. Nonetheless, it does not excuse you from being a complete failure... When i present good social skills, they tell me you are not intelligent enough, when i present magnificent intelligence, they tell me intelligence is no everything...
They tell me good is not enough and intelligent is not enough. It is not what i have that is not enough, it s what they have that is not enough AND because i have more than they do, they are fucking afraid of me...
I m sick of this hopeless world sometimes. It s even remote of any hope... Sick fucked up humans... Stupid fucking maggots... they will waste their whole lives living as a fucking slave in a jail
The irony is i m living in it. People (philosophers) coin it as a structure i can’t escape. It s a structure that defines me... I can't be a free person if i dont live in a jail, right? I can't be liberated if i have never been jailed, right?
The struggle is painful, fucking tormenting... To want friends and hate friends... to want love and hate love...
It s all so lonely... all the sounds and sights are just meaningless. My attempt to assign them meaning are not only difficult but also ridiculed...
Perhaps, i need to take a break... perhaps, complete insanity can liberate me from this jail? Just like leonardo di caprio in shutter island? Insanity liberates me from social norms, “people’s feelings”, pretense, hypocrisy, the want to be a conformist, the want to belong to a group (if not majority, certain class of people)... I need to be free... AND freedom to define “free”..
Friday, May 14, 2010
Democracy is Not a Luxury for the Paupers: The Case for Not Paying Tax
http://en.hukumonline.com/app/dms/browser/detail/guid/lt4be3e57851f26
Friday, 07 May 2010 | 17:03:36
In the wake of the recent news reports of shocking corruption by Gayus Tambunan, an officer of the Tax Department, the Indonesian population has had its already flimsy trust in government diminished even further. Discontent has manifested in many Indonesians’ reluctance to pay tax. Gayus Tambunan is suspected to have embezzled IDR 28 billion (roughly USD 3.1 million). This is only the tip of the iceberg. This case is predicted to reveal more officers involved in the web of corruption. Democracy is being put to the test, and it appears to have failed once again.
Democracy now seems to be a golden ideal upon a pedestal; it is beautiful to behold, but it is never yours. Democracy, having its etymological root demos (common people, or ‘district’) and kratos (rule, or ‘strength’), is a form of struggle against the elite ruling power. In other words, democracy is a tool designated for ordinary people, with the connotation of being poor, uneducated or belonging to the lowest castes, to fight against the elite aristocrats with power, money and influence. In effect, democracy is the lever for the paupers to correct imbalances. One function of democracy is manifested in the State’s power to impose taxes. One of taxation’s raison d’être was to correct economic imbalances by distributing money from the rich to the poor in form of infrastructure, public works, and other projects. This is where the irony lies.
First, for the paupers in Indonesia, the taxation system is a nightmare. On the one hand, they barely have enough food to eat. On the other hand, taxes they pay are utilized for the benefit of economically privileged players. If we examine the National Budget Plan or ‘APBN’ as passed by parliament, budget allocation for the benefit of economically privileged players is more substantial than that for the benefit of the paupers. In practice, the situation is even worse. The education budget, for instance, is to be at least 20% of the state expenditure by constitutional mandate; the reality is that this money has always been reduced to 40% of that amount (i.e., less than 10% of the budget) in terms of what actually reaches the intended beneficiaries. Presumably, the rest goes to corrupt bureaucrats’ pockets or similar kinds of administration overhead.
In a nutshell, the poor are taxed, yet the money is allocated for the benefit of the businesses owned by the rich. Government will present the counter-argument that creation of big industries, in return, provides jobs for the paupers. This is not an excuse. If we draw the matrix of income or wealth distribution, it remains utterly unjust. How much of the money or other assets that should belong to the paupers are absorbed by the businesses of the rich in the process of translating tax receipts into the paupers’ prosperity? A lot. This theory works in the same fashion as price increases work: “The longer the distribution, the higher the price for consumers.” The fact that tax receipts take such a long path before they are eventually translated into daily needs is the crux of taxation issues in Indonesia, especially when the funds are circulated long enough among the upper-level players. If the premise is that democracy is manifested through, among other forms, taxation, then it has to provide wealth for all. Interesting to note, the substitute diction for state is commonwealth, inscribed to mean that the rationale for the creation of a state is to provide wealth for commoners. Since taxation does not create wealth for commoners in a fair sense, and ironically allocates money from the poor to the rich, it does not serve the democratic purpose. Therefore you cannot blame the paupers for not paying tax.
Second, for the middle or upper middle class, they are encouraged not to pay taxes and this is the reason why. First, since they can no longer trust government to redistributing the wealth for everyone’s sake, they should redistribute it by themselves. The idea is as simple as to “take over the government’s function,” which it fails to perform. Second, if the government argues that the money is needed for redistribution to the needy, you distribute it yourself. The dummy mathematical calculation would be “the money you should have paid for taxes,” you should distribute in your immediate surroundings, in particular, for the benefit of the needy. Buy them books, put them in schools, or provide a health service. If you think that the amount of tax you pay is too much or unreasonable, e.g. 5%, you cut it to 3% or 4% and distribute that money in any manifestation to the needy. I am certainly not advocating anarchy; I am saying that society may want to be part of the solution rather than being part of the problem.
The two points above conclude that “Democracy is not a luxury for the paupers.” This illustration improves along with improving economic conditions of a person or family. When people are poor, democracy is just a tool to climb up the social ladder. For those paupers, democracy is not about striking a balance of power or a healthy functioning government, it is simply how to survive until the next day. If you take a look at a popular political campaign, Indonesia has shifted from a dictatorship to uninformed general elections. The poor are either unaware or unable to do anything about it. For them, the choice is to eat to survive until the next day or die while trying to fight for their supposedly democratic rights. As a human being, I cannot imagine how to make such a choice and the mutually exclusive and exhaustive options are not their fault.
For the last remark describing the irony of democracy “Do not tell me “what you know about” and “how you think you can deal with” those paupers’ plight when you are sitting in five-star hotels in sumptuous and esoteric conferences conducted in the name of democratic government.”
Harjo Winoto is a final year law student, researcher on competition law, and writer on various social issues. He can be reached at harjo_winoto@hotmail.com.
Friday, 07 May 2010 | 17:03:36
In the wake of the recent news reports of shocking corruption by Gayus Tambunan, an officer of the Tax Department, the Indonesian population has had its already flimsy trust in government diminished even further. Discontent has manifested in many Indonesians’ reluctance to pay tax. Gayus Tambunan is suspected to have embezzled IDR 28 billion (roughly USD 3.1 million). This is only the tip of the iceberg. This case is predicted to reveal more officers involved in the web of corruption. Democracy is being put to the test, and it appears to have failed once again.
Democracy now seems to be a golden ideal upon a pedestal; it is beautiful to behold, but it is never yours. Democracy, having its etymological root demos (common people, or ‘district’) and kratos (rule, or ‘strength’), is a form of struggle against the elite ruling power. In other words, democracy is a tool designated for ordinary people, with the connotation of being poor, uneducated or belonging to the lowest castes, to fight against the elite aristocrats with power, money and influence. In effect, democracy is the lever for the paupers to correct imbalances. One function of democracy is manifested in the State’s power to impose taxes. One of taxation’s raison d’être was to correct economic imbalances by distributing money from the rich to the poor in form of infrastructure, public works, and other projects. This is where the irony lies.
First, for the paupers in Indonesia, the taxation system is a nightmare. On the one hand, they barely have enough food to eat. On the other hand, taxes they pay are utilized for the benefit of economically privileged players. If we examine the National Budget Plan or ‘APBN’ as passed by parliament, budget allocation for the benefit of economically privileged players is more substantial than that for the benefit of the paupers. In practice, the situation is even worse. The education budget, for instance, is to be at least 20% of the state expenditure by constitutional mandate; the reality is that this money has always been reduced to 40% of that amount (i.e., less than 10% of the budget) in terms of what actually reaches the intended beneficiaries. Presumably, the rest goes to corrupt bureaucrats’ pockets or similar kinds of administration overhead.
In a nutshell, the poor are taxed, yet the money is allocated for the benefit of the businesses owned by the rich. Government will present the counter-argument that creation of big industries, in return, provides jobs for the paupers. This is not an excuse. If we draw the matrix of income or wealth distribution, it remains utterly unjust. How much of the money or other assets that should belong to the paupers are absorbed by the businesses of the rich in the process of translating tax receipts into the paupers’ prosperity? A lot. This theory works in the same fashion as price increases work: “The longer the distribution, the higher the price for consumers.” The fact that tax receipts take such a long path before they are eventually translated into daily needs is the crux of taxation issues in Indonesia, especially when the funds are circulated long enough among the upper-level players. If the premise is that democracy is manifested through, among other forms, taxation, then it has to provide wealth for all. Interesting to note, the substitute diction for state is commonwealth, inscribed to mean that the rationale for the creation of a state is to provide wealth for commoners. Since taxation does not create wealth for commoners in a fair sense, and ironically allocates money from the poor to the rich, it does not serve the democratic purpose. Therefore you cannot blame the paupers for not paying tax.
Second, for the middle or upper middle class, they are encouraged not to pay taxes and this is the reason why. First, since they can no longer trust government to redistributing the wealth for everyone’s sake, they should redistribute it by themselves. The idea is as simple as to “take over the government’s function,” which it fails to perform. Second, if the government argues that the money is needed for redistribution to the needy, you distribute it yourself. The dummy mathematical calculation would be “the money you should have paid for taxes,” you should distribute in your immediate surroundings, in particular, for the benefit of the needy. Buy them books, put them in schools, or provide a health service. If you think that the amount of tax you pay is too much or unreasonable, e.g. 5%, you cut it to 3% or 4% and distribute that money in any manifestation to the needy. I am certainly not advocating anarchy; I am saying that society may want to be part of the solution rather than being part of the problem.
The two points above conclude that “Democracy is not a luxury for the paupers.” This illustration improves along with improving economic conditions of a person or family. When people are poor, democracy is just a tool to climb up the social ladder. For those paupers, democracy is not about striking a balance of power or a healthy functioning government, it is simply how to survive until the next day. If you take a look at a popular political campaign, Indonesia has shifted from a dictatorship to uninformed general elections. The poor are either unaware or unable to do anything about it. For them, the choice is to eat to survive until the next day or die while trying to fight for their supposedly democratic rights. As a human being, I cannot imagine how to make such a choice and the mutually exclusive and exhaustive options are not their fault.
For the last remark describing the irony of democracy “Do not tell me “what you know about” and “how you think you can deal with” those paupers’ plight when you are sitting in five-star hotels in sumptuous and esoteric conferences conducted in the name of democratic government.”
Harjo Winoto is a final year law student, researcher on competition law, and writer on various social issues. He can be reached at harjo_winoto@hotmail.com.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)