are interwoven conversations between people in a completely different, but describing the same behaviors.
The first is a college professor who takes issue with the meritocracy that is sought, in his opinion, too many parts to not be suspicious. In particular, responds to the accusation of nepotism (the famous chairs passing from father to son) Recalling that in many other areas of our country and this happens in such cases there is scandalized (personally I always shock me, but maybe I do not text ...).
The other is a man who defends his party - The league - the accusation of having brought his son to the succession of leaders, with the exact same argument: we speak of all the others who do that!
's interesting how very dangerous to pass a message, but if others do, why not me? If others do not pay taxes, why not me? If others go with the red, why not me? If the other take the capital in Antigua, why not me?
When a way of thinking is prevalent among parties, classes and generations, can only be a deep cultural trait, which is likely - alas - not even the next generations will be able to eradicate.
And thought I run to my friend Carol, from Los Angeles, with whom I spent an interesting summer job at the University of La Verne. Late one evening we returned from dinner on the sea, you arrive at a red traffic light direction, with anyone who was on the other side I told Carol I pass? She said no, you can not do, thus breaking the law. And I said, but there is no Carol.
Answer: I am here! Lesson
cross cultures: Thanks Carol.
She writes 
0 comments:
Post a Comment