Cav's Place

As Liz once very correctly pointed out, my primary communication tools are those of debate and conflict, so this is what I thrive on when it comes to interacting with others. Of course, knowing me, this interaction must be strictly on-line and this obviously doesn’t also apply to the people that I am or would want to be particularly close to, but it does apply to pretty much anyone else and, unless I’m feeling very drained for other reasons, the more people disagree with opinions and concepts that I firmly support and the more I fight, the more I get a sort of “bloodlust” that motivates me and keeps me going even longer. However, now I find myself quite fed up with it and wanting to take a break for a while.
Admittedly, that “bloodlust” I mentioned appeared less and less often since Andra left and there have been plenty of moments when I was too drained to argue, but I already mentioned this as the exception and it has nothing to do with the debates or arguments themselves. This time, however, the problem actually seems to be related to the arguments, though perhaps somewhat indirectly. I imagine that I could keep arguing without problems against people that I’d normally see as opponents, but recently things seem to be going very badly between me and people or organizations that I’d really, really want to support… To the point that I’m starting to run out of things to support. And that’s what’s truly draining.

This series actually started a little over a month ago, when I ended up being banned from Remus Cernea‘s Facebook page after an argument during which I apparently complained about him not sticking to his original promises and expressed a few of my more radical views one too many times. But at least that wasn’t unexpected and I wasn’t exactly supporting him anymore, particularly since he and his party, the Greens’ Movement, had formalized their alliance with the Social Liberal Union. We obviously still agree on many goals but, while we also still disagree on some others, the main problem has to do with the preferred methods of reaching said goals, those chosen by them seeming about as unacceptable and even unthinkable to me as those I suggest obviously are to them, and to him in particular.
Still, that ban only blocks me from posting on his page and others are still open to discussions, so there are still ways to express my views regarding their actions, be they positive or negative. Unfortunately, a few days ago I also ended up being banned from the Facebook page of the Global Population Speak Out movement. I saved the whole thing, including the e-mail exchange that followed, but I can summarize the reason as apparently reminding them one time too many that voluntary measures are completely insufficient and very drastic ones need to be taken immediately if we’re to still be able to get the population back within sustainable limits within any reasonable time frame without needing to increase mortality in any way in order to do so. Of course, such a reaction is what I get almost every single time when it comes to this issue, but it’s saddening to see it from those who administer such a project.
Then again, I know all too well that I’m pretty much on my own when it comes to that, but I certainly thought that it was different when it came to the causes supported by the Romanian Pirate Party. However, yesterday I found myself arguing with one of its founders on the page meant for the protests organized here against ACTA in particular and the slew of laws, treaties and regulations aimed at restricting and controlling the Internet in general. The discussion, which started from an opinion he expressed in a blog post that the administrator of that page linked to but otherwise had nothing to do with the issues that the Pirate Party should be focusing on, moved from the page to private messages and eventually ended with the conclusion that my support is no longer desired if I don’t fully agree and associate myself with their organization as a whole and all the opinions they express. Which also means that I won’t be trying to participate in any further protests, because such a course of action may now carry risks that I’m not willing to take.

Speaking of those protests, there was supposed to be one yesterday as well. It should have been turned into a simple flash mob, because it was the day before elections and trying anything more than that might have resulted in problems, but I didn’t see anyone else there when I arrived, some three minutes before the announced time. A few minutes later, I noticed one more person who was probably there for the same reason and might have been the one posting that there are no protesters, seeing as he pulled out his laptop around the time that message was posted, plus a few others that I was unsure about, but any chance of a flash mob had been lost because people failed to gather at the set time and nothing else seemed to be happening, so I left after about 20 minutes of wandering around.
Still, at least I tried, and I have participated in all previous protests organized in the same spot for this reason, so it felt awfully unfair when I was accused of being infiltrated among their ranks to ruin their efforts. I once again ended up being accused of being “Basescu‘s man”, which was a rather frequent accusation when opposing anything stated by Remus Cernea or others from the Greens’ Movement as well, but this time my explanation that I don’t stand or work for anyone but myself seemed to have been accepted… Only for that accusation to be replaced with one of having my own hidden agenda then, because I’m too determined to disagree and express negative opinions to be a regular naysayer and apparently only people who have such agendas and serve obscure interests may do that.
Actually, there have been a few more accusations and “slaps” after that as well, in the private messages, and yes, I threw some of them right back at him as well, but those were less relevant. Then again, none of it was relevant, seeing as it all started from him saying that he won’t vote because he loathes the current electoral laws and none of the parties or candidates that meet their admittedly dreadful requirements may be worth voting, which prompted me to ask him why is he trying to form a party and, more importantly, what right will he have to ask people to vote for his party when it’ll be registered, which will imply meeting these same requirements, when he now claims that nobody who runs for office may be worth voting simply due to the electoral process, regardless of who the candidates are or what they plan to do. But he ignored my questions, only snapping at my annoyed remark about the failed protest. That meant that he was still reading, which prompted me to ask again, but that only resulted in that slew of accusations, plus an annoyed remark posted by that page’s administrator.

But I’ll just say that apparently making sense is unacceptable when talking to people who see themselves as leaders and leave it at that for now. These debates and arguments gave me a few more ideas that could be turned into some posts, but you know you shouldn’t hold your breath for that, so we’ll see what will happen over the following weeks.