You will probably agree that trust is sometimes naïve, but nevertheless a beautiful virtue. This is not a scam. It is therefore paradoxical that trust is a prerequisite for deception.
I am not just talking about Ponzi schemes or selling miracle cures, I am also talking about elections. The tactic of the left is to win people’s trust with picturesque outlines of the bright future that awaits all people if they vote for it in the elections. Although this later turns out to be a hoax, because its models did not work anywhere in the world, nor can they work, people tend to believe more beautiful words than (un)realised actions.
It is precisely trust that separates urban settlements from the countryside. In the villages, life is hard but fairly easy. People know that they will survive by their own hands, not by their words. Rather closed communities, where people know everyone, have survived, and preserved their language, culture, tradition, and religion precisely because of trust in their community and mistrust of foreigners. Their trust cannot be bought, it must be earned. And this path is very long. Although Kovač praised Obama, the conservative community cannot be changed in one visit, let alone with some activist tactics. That is why rural areas vote for conservative parties.
Unlike the countryside, cities are built on deception: they paint a parallel world as reality. A newcomer or an ideologically suitable person immediately receives all kinds of social assistance. It seems to him that this is something natural. And since he is transferred with all the benefits to a fantasy film, where the hero feels the asphalt under his feet like soft grass, he votes in the elections contrary to reality and natural values. This elaborate urban construct, which has experienced full expansion on the old continent in the last half century and has also touched Slovenia, tries to make imagination prevail over memory. The countryside is mainly based on memory experiences, while the urban settlement has to work out a huge amount of detail (from infrastructure to services) to transport its own memory into a fantasy (socialist) world. In other words: forgetting the traditional (natural) is the original part of the deception.
Since the fraudsters have not succeeded in the countryside so far, they are trying new scams: France will settle migrants in the countryside, the Democrats want to reduce the number of electoral votes in predominantly agricultural countries, in Slovenia, the left blocked the electoral legislation more than two decades ago, despite the clearly expressed will of the people. In addition to forced patterns of change, what the central government wants in the capital: spatial planning and plans are aimed at urbanisation (from tourism to the construction of apartment blocks), construction in the countryside is controlled by urban planners, building materials are used that are not compatible with the traditional environment. Despite this, the farming men still resists for now and the countryside remains a Slovenian national icon.
The result of today’s local elections is expected and reflects the gap between natural and traditional on the rural side and artificial and postmodernist on the urban side. Let’s hope that it will remain so for some time, because the countryside is the last bulwark of what can be called Slovenianness in its most noble form. In order for it to remain that way, the indigenous people in the countryside must have power in their own hands. The farmers know very well what the left-wing deception is: an attempt to do good and sow the fog so that a central-plan official in the socialist capital knows better than he does what is good for him. He immediately overlooks the danger when the socialists offer him that they will take care of preserving the cultural heritage in the countryside. They know exactly that they bring only destruction and poverty. Generations have learned these lessons, becoming immune to decisions made by completely unknown and malicious people far away from the farms.
However, urban sociologists, philosophers and political commentators compare the countryside to backwardness, a world that stopped centuries ago. The left sees the village idyll and the calm, monotonous life there as a class enemy: cultural backwardness preserves the spirit of feudalism and patriarchy, which prevents the progress of the ossified place. Such thinking is paradoxical because, on the other hand, they celebrate illegal migrants, saying that they will “enrich” the local culture. They find the people who, until yesterday, grazed goats on the slopes of Peševar, more acceptable than Slovenian farmers. Solely because they get new votes with camel drivers and goat bullies. The reduction of the standards of what constitutes chastity or value is the result of modern relativisation and the lowering of standards at home. Think about it. In villages, boys fight each other over girls, in cities over a ball (soccer); in the countryside, a woman with a larger number of children is highly valued, urban women compete with each other to see who will have more abortions. The difference between rural and urban settlements can therefore also be defined as the difference between the culture of life and the culture of death.
We can be satisfied with the result of the local elections. It showed that common sense still prevails in villages and smaller towns, that Slovenia is still blessed with its countryside.
By: Jože Biščak