Spanish Joke

Some time ago, I heard a joke that was applied to Spain, but could be used in other countries as well. The joke goes like this:

"When God was creating the world, he divided it in countries. In each country he put different people, and he decided to give two good qualities to the people of each country:

-Germans will be hard-working and efficient, English people will be polite and educated, Italians will be passionate and funny....

The list of countries kept going, until it was the turn of Spain:

-Spanish people will be intelligent, good and they will vote the party from the right.

Of course, the angels around God thought that it was a little bit unfair that Spanish people got 3 qualities, and they mentioned it to God. God answered:

-What you say is true. Therefore, Spanish people will be able to choose any 2 of the 3 qualities that they want.

That is the reason why, in Spain, you will find good people that vote to the right party, but they won't be intelligent. You will also find intelligent people that vote for the right party, but they will not be good. And finally, you will find good and intelligent people, but they won't vote for the right party."

I believe that this joke says something quite true. Of course, it defines things in a very "black and white" manner: How can you assess that somebody is "good"? Some right-minded reporters mention that supporters of the left would like to make right ideals illegal, and this kind of joke may give such an idea.

However, I would say that if you replace "not good" for "selfish", "self-interested" or a similar meaning, this is spot on and perfectly realistic.

In general, what does the right parties support? They have always supported tradition, religion, censorship, discrimination, power and money for the already rich and powerful, ignorance among the lower workers, kings and queens (or CEOs), patriotism, repression, more military and more participation in wars, less rights for the people, less freedom for the people, more work for the lower classes, and less money for the lower classes. In Spain (and other countries) you can add fascism, racism, sexism, dictatorial governments and other things that are usually limited to extreme right parties, but that in Spain is part of the main right party.

It would be simplistic to consider all that "bad", but it's easy to consider it "selfish", as in things that may give you some benefit while others get a worse situation.

And who would vote for these things? Well, there will be lots of low-class people that will vote them for their defence of patriotism, religion, tradition, sexism, racism, military issues and discrimination. For example, lots of lower class people may think that immigrants are taking their jobs, and therefore they vote right parties believing they will put a stop to illegal immigrants. Or they may feel that the other parties are not patriotic enough, or that this party will put women back were she belongs, at home in the kitchen and taking care of kids while men go to the bar and drink and smoke. It could also be something more simple and that it can be considered "good", which is to defend their religious believes.

All this clearly shows a lack of intelligence on the lower class part, since intelligent people will notice right away that there is a larger problem here: The fact that this party will basically screw the lower class as much as possible, which should be the main concern. If you think that a government that defends tradition is more important than being able to eat or to have a house, your priorities are wrong, and therefore it marks you as stupid. Same with religion, you can be a nice person, help the poor, try to support your community and all that, but if you vote a party because they support your religion without considering that the same party will multiply the amount of poor people in the streets and the cases of hunger, you don't have your priorities straight and you don't grasp that this party is not following the original meaning of religion, which usually is to be nice to each other. Again, this means you're basically stupid, sorry if it sounds harsh but it's true. Finally, you could believe the right party's messages that say they will make things better for everybody and vote them. This again shows you're stupid, since the right parties have always defended the same, which is benefits for a very few rich and powerful people while screwing everybody else.

However, there is intelligent people too that may vote for the right party. If you're high class it's evident that this party will protect you and your family, and your interests. If you're middle-high class you can also think that this party may not affect you that much, or that you share some of its ideas an the policies that are more repressive and violent will not affect you. This does not make you a "bad" person per se, but clearly more "selfish": You're supporting the repression, the censorship, the decrease in rights, since you're not really affected by it that much and you can more or less maintain your lifestyle.

Being selfish it's not really bad, you need to be selfish in some degree to achieve a certain happiness. Otherwise you'll always be miserable thinking about the things that you could do for others. However, when such selfishness affects such a big proportion of the population, making their lives so much worse, it cannot be considered good. Specially if you can still be perfectly happy and maintain your lifestyle while paying more taxes or keeping your ideologies at your home.

Of course, if you directly vote them to get a lot more richer and to exploit to the lass drop of blood all your workers and lower class, or to impose your morals by force to people against their will, I will directly consider you to be bad. However, I don't believe that there are that many cases of this in Spain, and it's more like the case I explained of indifferent people that gain something while not losing much or not being impacted much.

That's why this joke is so true: If you are smart enough to have your priorities straight and to understand what each party offers and does, and you care enough about other people that you would like to improve rights and freedom of everybody even if it will not affect you that much, I don't see how you can vote for a right party.

One last comment: Right parties are known for his acts, not for his speeches. If a party defends a huge amount of the things the right parties defend, even with some concessions, that party is from the right, even while claiming to be "centre" or "left".

Therefore, in Spain one needs to be careful, since most big parties are rather "right-ish"....

Erasmus Anniversary

5 years ago, (plus a couple of days) I left Barcelona to finish my university degree in Lund, Sweden. That was one of the best decisions I've taken, and I really loved my time there and all the people I met there.

This is not the first time I had a similar experience, and probably not the last.

When I was 17, I participated in an exchange program in my high school. For a week, I had a Swedish girl (Marianne) living in my house and visiting my high school (together with other Swedes). This was the first time I was in such an international environment, and the first time I had to actively use English to communicate. The ones that participated in it also got to skip some classes, and it was really awesome. I made a friend, and I keep contact with her more than with most people in my high school. When we visited Sweden in return, it was also a great experience, seeing another culture and other ways to do things while using another language that was not our own.

That same year I did Santiago's way with my parents. This is a 740 km long route in the north-west of Spain, done in around 30 days. The origin is religious, but we did it just because we enjoyed walking and visiting new places. While doing it we met lots of nice and different people from all around the world, and one of the people I met was a girl from U.K, that introduced me to the fact that English music is fucking awesome. I already knew that, but I was not fully conscious of how bad the music in Spain was, I believe. This also increased my curiosity regarding U.K, and made me want to visit it and even live there some day. After the way, we lost contact with most of the people, even if we still keep in touch with a few. I realised a simple thing there: Doing the same path again would not feel the same way, because the people walking with me would be different. This way was done, and it would be impossible to repeat it. However, that does not mean you need to stop enjoying walking, or that you need to become obsessed with that single time when everything was so good and the people were so nice.

When I was 18, inspired by last year's meetings and trips, I went to England alone, and visited several cities there. I had great experiences, and I had a first contact with a country that has a wide range of defects, but also has quite nice qualities. After the first trip, I returned quite shortly to attend a music festival with the girl we met during the way and other people. It was great, and I repeated the trip a few more years. I lost contact with that girl, but I met great people while in the festival, people I never met again but oh well.

After this I had to study hard at university, but I did manage to make some nice trips, like the year I went to China for a month with some friends. The cultural shock was quite brutal, but it was really interesting and we survived somehow, even when we were basically backpacking around the place and searching places to stay from one day to the next.

Finally, before ending university I wanted to enjoy university life to the fullest before starting to work, and I went for an Erasmus, as I mentioned.

During an Erasmus you meet lots of people from all around the world, and you really have incredible amounts of fun. It is incredible to call some people you know, just grab the bike and go to some party somewhere. At least, to learn if you enjoy these things or not, and also to learn how to live by yourself and take care of things, organise events, meet and communicate, and all that.

I met my wife there, thanks to a Japanese common friend that I met on the very first day, while trying to find a supermarket to buy some basic survival food. We started dating later on, but without living there, without meeting by chance a person who was just also looking for food, that would have not happened. We always have fun with the fact that a Lithuanian girl and a Spanish boy met in Sweden, obviously. It confuses people a lot ^^.

The first semester was amazing, but of course most people left, and therefore it's the same as in Santiago's way, not possible to really repeat even if we lived there again.

After the Erasmus, I found a job by pure luck in my current company, that offered me the option to continue travelling. I visited Vancouver, and after some years I had (finally) the chance to go and live in U.K., in London.

While working for London Olympics, again I met people from all around the world, and every week there was some party at some pub (even if I didn't go to most of them, there was the option). It reminded us a lot of an Erasmus, actually. In London there were also people I met in Sweden, so my wife and I managed to keep contact with them and meet them, while meeting others who were there working with me. It was also a great experience. London was not as nice as I thought when I was 18, but it was still pretty awesome, the music still was way better than in Spain, and in general we had a great time there. We got married there, and we have an English marriage certificate, as a matter of fact.

Our London life was strangely similar to an Erasmus, and we enjoyed it  a lot too. Afterwards, most co-workers went to their separate ways, and we had the chance to move to Russia and work for Sochi Olympics.

Here again we have met lots of nice people. Here again we have had great experiences.

Our first son (that's the official opinion) will be born here, in a month or even sooner. We will have fun explaining that we're a Lithuanian-Spanish couple that met in Sweden, married in England and had a child in Russia (obviously).

And here again we will leave and it will not be possible to repeat it, but we will take this great experiences and know that we have enjoyed them a lot.

And later on, maybe there will be other countries to visit, other places to live, new people to meet...

Without travels, without Erasmus-like experiences, I would be different. I am married because of Erasmus. We will have a child because of Erasmus. Without Erasmus I might have done these things...or maybe not. But because of Erasmus, these things have happened. And every trip, every second, or third, or fourth Erasmus or pre-Erasmus we have, we enjoy it as if it was the first, even when the people and the places are different and the same conditions are always unrepeatable.

I believe that all these trips and meetings make you open your views, make you learn new things, make your life change for the better. I believe that everybody should have such experiences, if they could. We would be smarter as a society if we would do so.

Finally, I believe that these trips and meetings are really, really funny and nice^^. So don't miss the chance to do them, if you can.

Time To Fire People

In lights of my future parenthood, we are trying at home to prepare everything to make our baby legal.

We decided to have a baby in Russia while living there temporarily and being Lithuanian and Spanish. That may cause some problems, as you can imagine, and the past few days we have tried to call our different embassies and consulates to understand what will be needed from us to make the governments understand that the baby is ours, that therefore he has a right to be Spanish and Lithuanian, and to obtain a passport so he can legally be in Russia.

I guess it comes as no surprise to anybody that the result is a clusterfuck of idiocy, papers, lack of logic, incompetence, bureaucracy and so on...

It seems terribly hard to comprehend for authorities of any country that you are actually you. I understand that if it was easy to pretend to be someone, there would be a lot of associated problems to that. I also understand that in the dark ages, the only way to proof that you're "You" would be to bring numerous amount of papers and documentation, together with signatures and even some witnesses.

However, for he past few years, there's this little thing called "electronic ID" or "electronic passport", that we have been using. If you know a little bit about cryptography, you can easily see the point...if you don't, trust me on this: A digital signature can be INCREDIBLY hard to falsify, compared to what can you do using dark photos, good handwriting skills and make up. Specially if the digital signature is authenticating stuff like your actual picture and your digital prints.

Given these facts, all paperwork should only require such a digital signature, the same one that is already used in lots of passports and IDs, like my Spanish ID or my Spanish passport. (I mean, these things are already used regularly, we're not talking about science-fiction stuff you can only find in MIT labs).

Anyway, these facts and my latest interactions with certain personnel has reminded me about a core problem that, I believe, is an important cause of such clusterfucks, and also an important cause of corruption, idiocy, outdated systems and other such things in Spain (and other countries): We need to fire people.

Now, this is a controversial statement. Plenty of times I've indicated that the Spanish problem is otherwise, how easy has it become to fire people. This is also true, so let's specify: We should be able to fire people that are really incompetent or useless on purpose, regardless of position or organization. I hope this clears it more. I can think of 3 groups that would require more firing options.

First, there's public administration workers. Public workers, at least in Spain (maybe in some countries it's different), cannot be fired, ever, except in extreme circumstances (as in, peeing over customers may cause them to be fired. Short of that, it's a rather hard thing to happen).

I know public workers that are great people and good at their job. Just these days I've talked with very competent people. However, I've also talked with really idiotic people, who clearly were bothered by the fact that they had to work now, after a question!.

For some reason, it is very hard to fire public workers, and that's a big problem, because we all need a certain amount of "fear" to perform a good job.

Liberal theories tend to support the idea of companies having lots of freedom when dealing with workers. One of the ideas behind this is that, otherwise, workers are not productive enough and the company will fail. Social theories indicate that company bosses, if given enough freedom, will exploit workers as much as they can, making society a much worse place. Both theories, however, sometimes seem to fail to ignore a more basic principle: We people are, in general, bastards that sacrifice someone's else well-being and freedom if it means we get to have some benefit out of it. It is not true of everybody, but given the chance to do something "bad" that brings a benefit to you, a large amount of us will take the benefit. 

If you apply this principle to bosses, you can see that most of them (not all) will exploit workers if they have the chance. However, applied to the workers, it also says that most workers (not all) will actually be not productive at all if given the chance.

Therefore, we need an equilibrium of worker rights and company rights. This equilibrium would mean that the company cannot exploit workers and fire them at will, while workers need to actually work or be fired.

In the public administration we do not have this equilibrium, and without the fear of being fired some people simply refuse to work. I was told by a public administrator that when someone works normally, not overdoing it but not taking unnecessary constant breaks, lots of other public workers usually complain because it makes them look bad.

It has reached a point where I believe that some people try to enter public administration to avoid work whatsoever. This is unacceptable, and it´s one of the causes of the administration clusterfuck we usually suffer.You may be regular at your job, and then you should not be fired. But when you´re consciously doing nothing most of the time, to the point where yearly evaluations could show how little you are really doing, it should be possible to fire you.

There's lots of possible jobs in the world, and there's always something you can be good enough at to be able to work on that, or something that interests you. Even if you cannot work in something that you´re really passionate about, you can always work at some place and do some regular, good enough, job. The problem is when you´re not even doing that...

The second group that could use more firing is the "kings of the hill". As in Firefly: "Sad little king of a sad little hill". Self-important pricks.

There's lots of people in administration and in different organizations that has some position and believes themselves to be very important. And maybe inside that organization they are important, we're not denying that. However, they act as if everybody everywhere should give them respect just because of that.

A classic example is the typical case of an on-line community, where its creator and moderator, instead of taking a more passive approach or attitude, participates a lot and with hot opinions. Regardless of right or wrong, some of these community creators act as gods, banning people who disagree with them, giving extra benefits to the people who are nice to them, and all that.

Applied to something more serious, the big political parties all work kind of like this. Some public organisations also work like this, and the reason sometimes paperwork takes so long is because these people, by how important they are, need to stamp everything with their signature before it can be approved...while being too busy to do that very often, of course (several of these overlap with the first group).

The end result is that administration and some other organizations are full of very very stupid steps that do not help, do not give anything, and in this day and age can be easily made more secure and easier to perform by technology.

Therefore, we could improve things by firing some of these positions that are rather obsolete, while also getting rid of very annoying behaviours and attitudes that accompany such people plenty of times.

The final group that we need to be able to fire in an easier way are governmental officials and similar high positions. I'd talk about them, but there's no need: To prove why do we need that, we can always check today's circus at the Spanish parliament, the conclusions of which are that the current rulers will deny doing anything wrong ever, and if you voted for them that's too bad, if you want to change any tiny little aspect of their policies you'll need to wait until next elections.