The Green Deal has become one of the staple dogmas around which the EU anchors its programmes. It is designed to inject within all that gets done, the priority to enforce measures which protect us from the ongoing climate warming worldwide.

So, all actions undertaken must conform with the aim of reversing the warming phenomenon that is still ramping up.

It is difficult to contest such directives.

However all dogmas carry their own inadequacies. They become so overpowering that for many, just parroting them over and over again is more than enough. Once that’s done, everybody else will believe the matter has been seen to.

The aims of the green deal are of crucial importance to people the world over. Still it seems to me that the time has come to give a practical recognition of this importance by providing a full account wherever the dogma is being applied as to how and why it is needed – again not by way of dogmatic assertions but by clear and concrete explanations.   

***

SOUND ON GAME

European football is again rolling at full blast as national league competitions strive to clear fixtures that were left pending because of the corona virus pandemic. Play is going on out of season, at times under a blistering sun, and with no specatators at all in attendance.

As of now, fans have accepted this way of doing things; they hardly have an alternative. What is interesting though is how games seem to be taking place in an atmosphere that is completely different to how things used to happen in the presence of crowds. The background noise is not that of fans reacting to what’s going on, but that of players getting in each other’s way.

The approach of the English league by which crowd sound effects are played during an ongoing match hardly seems effective. It makes a game feel like a variety show on one of Berlusconi’s TV channels.

***

BLOATED REPORTS

Due to the climate of political suspicion that has recently deepened around us, much of what is being said in the judicial and police soap opera that is now proceeding incessantly gives rise to hypotheses and scenarios that are inherently rocambolesque.

The same people who delight in telling us how crucial it is for the rule of law to prevail, seem to also be delighted by this development.

The way by which with the agreement of all concerned, investigations and inquiries get organised and carried forward, is just not right. All follow up should be done through substantial and trained resources, implemented fast, clinically, with intellectual and organizational efficiency.

Instead, we assist at processes which, like many others before them, though studded with scandals and allegations of scandals, seem designed to get matters buried in sand. It’s all done in the same cycle of inquiry and allegation that supposedly will bring all misdeeds into the open.

One can hardly doubt what the ultimate “solution” to such a tragic farce is bound to be: we will set up another agency charged with doing I do not know what, so that it can contribute further to the institutional paralysis in which we are accustomed to live.