September 27, 2009

Oh fuck!

Some days ago, talking to FR, he asked me out of the blue:

- And do you read "The Economist"?
- No, I don't.

And as if I were a criminal:

- "Why not?"

If the first question surprised me, the second one left me completely helpless.

- Well, I guess I don't think it is particularly of my interest. I have check it a couple of times and...
- You should read it. It is a perfect and objective weekly radiography of the world.

The determination of his words and sight made me feel ashamed. So, the next Saturday I bought it, of course, to check it very carefully. Since I was in Zürich, I even paid 65% percent more of the price (10 Francs instead of 5.50 Euros). I liked the concise way of presenting the articles. At a first look, it indeed seemed to me to be objective, although later I found out that it is not. Of course. How stupid and naïve!

Anyways. Short after landing in Italy, I asked T about it. Of course she knew it and explained me very carefully why she doesn't like it. Fine.

On my way back I was too interested on Mark Twain's adventures, that I didn't dare to check "The Economist" further. And then I came to the office, and AD asked me:

- If you were German, whom would you vote this Sunday?

I didn't followed the duels and the campaigns, so I really lack of a mature opinion. Her question came to me as unexpected as FR's question the week before.

- Well, I haven't followed the whole thing, but I think I would vote for a coalition.

Of course, we, Mexicans, cannot accept that we are ignorant, but we always have a handy answer to offer. Yes, the day before I learned that Germans have two votes. That's why I answered that about the coalition, a possibility I hadn't thought about before.

- And which kind of coalition?

S got interested in the conversation, as she was about to vote as well. And then I remembered the "objective and fair radiography of the world", and spit out what the "The Economist" had suggested some days ago.

- I am not sure, but I guess that I would vote for Merkel and this guy, Westerwelle.

An immediately and loud complain threw me to the floor.

- That is terrible, he is soooooooo terrible. I could understand that you would vote Merkel, but Westerwelle! Impossible!
- Well, I don't know, really...

It was too late. I had already spoken.

I was really so apathetic towards this election, that I didn't even care about checking who the heck Westerwelle is. I just knew that Steinmeier is not my cup of tea.

Elections were held today, and either everybody here reads and follows "The Economist", or it was just the English way of showing how accurate they are in their predictions. The thing is that Merkel-Westerwelle won.

Then I checked who the heck this guy is, and started reflecting about the last 4 Merkel-years to falsify my own ("The Economist"'s) opinion. I still cannot answer AD's question about whom would I had vote if I were German, but at least I do know now that I wouldn't had given my vote to Westerwelle. I do not like at all the neoliberalism and open market politics he proposes, among other things. It seems that I didn't read carefully enough that line of the article: "the FDP is not only the most pro-business of the parties but also the most pro-American". Fair enough.

About Merkel: I have big concerns about her atomic energy interest and I do not agree with the war Germany has in Afghanistan, nor the kindness towards Russia.

It would had been much better to say "I have no clue" than to repeat like an idiot what I had read on a bloody English newspaper. Shame on me!


Roberto said...

Which one is objective? I can't name one it's not influenced by the editorial line they follow. I do like to buy from time to time, or read it in the internet, The Economist. It's not like a radiography, since that is 100% objective, but it's quite close.


bastl said...

Ich stimme Zu!