the wording taken from Lena Andersson's latest column (27/4) entrenched. She wrote about society's perception of vulnerability ”as the noblest”.
I nod in recognition, however, mean that it is worse than that. Vulnerability has become a shield against being questioned, and to avoid having to have their arguments examined.
But this vulnerability is a complex history and no one necessarily is or is not. All is hudlösa in the periods of the life. And of this periodicity follows a state of more or less rather than either-or.
There is no blood test that measures the degree of vulnerability. And it is not unusual to the individual's respective environment have different perceptions of which particular attention is justified.
the vulnerability. Empowerment somewhere in between. And where on this scale you should place the Greta Thunberg?
She is a child. She herself has told about their multiple neuropsychiatric diagnoses. And how they affect her view of the world.
But Greta Thunberg is also a person who is rubbing shoulders with world leaders. Invited to speak at the forum be given the opportunity to even visit. Who is nominated for the Nobel peace prize. And that, along with president Donald Trump is on Time Magazine's list of the 100 most influential people in the world.
find themselves in getting the formulations, proposals, and even some family matters dissected and placed in the tabloids – as body parts in a forensic autopsy. So shall it be, even if I think that some snittytor from time to time are well detailed.
All this avoids the individuals – and individuals who are perceived as vulnerable. Individuals figures usually are not at all in the media and thus have a limited arena to advocate their views. Thus, there are no arguments to account for.
as each and every other urges me to listen to Greta Thunberg, it would be of course great if I also understood what she said.
people Exposed to the stories, however, can be turned up great. And even in the case where the messages are political, such as higher compensation to victims of crime or call for a fossil-free world, there will be rarely some clarifying follow-up questions or any real debate. It is considered indecent to force a person in crisis or other exposed position to stand up for their opinions.
And there it can also be. It would be wrong to require a man who just lost his whole family in a coherent and logical conclusion on the legal adjustments which should be made. She is to be left alone. And not, as more and more often now-a-days, offered a large space in the public sphere – in order to monologform get to express their views on political change.
calls all of us to listen to Greta Thunberg. I have done it. I have gone through some of her most notable speech, and I have reviewed the most widespread interviews. What Greta Thunberg want is no doubt. It is ”the why” of it. How will the transition go?
At the World economic forum in Davos to declare Thunberg to solar panels and wind power is not the solution. Nor do electric cars won her approval when she performed on ”Skavlan”.
So what is the world Greta Thunberg see? How will our houses be heated? How are we going to move? It is a Hedenhöstillvaro as she looks in front of him?
I'm looking on the web for any clarification website – but the cams to zero. I am looking for Helena Iles, who have been identified as press officer, but is told that she is not a spokesperson for Greta Thunberg and I get the council to contact her yourself.
I do not.
And why don't I do it? For that she is a child. And for that, I get it that it buzzes like heck around her, because I don't want to disturb and I – right or wrong – perceive her in any way ”vulnerable”.
for A while, I was thinking to try to contact her mother, but then I thought that it would be even more bizarre. The journalist is calling Stefan Löfvens wife to ask about something that the prime minister – who is not on Time Magazine's list of the world's 100 most powerful – said or done?
Now, of course, you can say that it would be unreasonable to require that a 16-year-old should have the answers to all the questions. True. But as each and every other urges me to listen to her, it would be of course great if I also understood what she said.
that she has a black and white view of the world. It seems the journalists and the authorities also believe that we need to take her seriously. For the one who sees nuances and conflicting objectives, political agenda makes no sense.
Should people who live in the rural areas will no longer be able to do reseavdrag for their car journeys to work because it is a kind of subsidization of dangerous carbon emissions? And how do we solve the in this case, the conflict between thinly accommodations and greenhouse transport? To mention just one of the many difficult trade-offs that must be made.
I call no answer by Greta Thunberg. But I think it would be fair if all of that mean that it is not at all a problem to let a child hårdlansera a political idea could ask the supplementary questions that I can't cope ask. Just because she is a child.