ሓንሳዕ ንደማመፅ እሞ!!
ብሓየት ሰጋር (ካብ ማሕበራዊ ሚድያ)
እዚ አብ ሓደሓደ ኸባቢታት ትግራይ ሎሚ ንርእዮ ዘለና ተቃውሞታት፣ ቀደም ህወሓት/ኢህወደግ አብ ስልጣን እንዳሃለወን፣ ገባሪ ሓዳጊ እንተሎን እንተዝኸዉን ነይሩ ከመይ ጽቡቅ ነበረ። ዂናት፣ ፅንተትን ዕንወትን ዝብሃሉ ነገራት አይምተፈጠሩን። ኮታስ እቲ ስርዓት ትኽክለኛ መስመሩ ክሕዝ ተገይሩ፣ ዓድን ህዝቢን ቀሲኑ፣ ምናልባት እውን ናይ ልምዓት ተረባሒ ኾይኑ ምነበረ። ሎሚ አብዘይቦትኡን ጊዚኡን ፃሕበርበር ምባል ሓንቲ ዓይንኻ አንቊርካ አብ ፀላም ንምንባር ዝግበር አካይዳ ዓይኒ ዕሙተይ እዩ። ብአደባባይ በዚ መንገዲ ክዝርዝሮ አይደልን ነይረ፣ ግን እቲ ኹነታት አገዲዱ አሎ። እዚ ንህወሓት ወይም ነቶም ሰበ ስልጣናት ብምሕላቅ ዘተፀሓፈ ወይ ድማ ፕሮፓጋንዳ ሓደ ካድረ ገይርኩም ከይትወስድዎ። ንልዕሊ ዓሰርተ ሓሙሽተ ዓመታት አንጻር ህወሓት ዝዘርግሖ ናይ ዓፈና ስርዓትን ብሽም ህዝቢ ዝሽቅጡሉ ዝነበረ አካይዳኦም ጠጠው ከብሉን ቅድሚ ማንምን ልዕሊ ማንምን ዝቃለስ ዝነበርኩ ሰብ እየ። ትማሊ ይኹን ሎሚ አነ ዘቀድሞ፣ ናይ ሎሚ ጥራሕ ዘይኮነስ መጻኢ ወለዶ ትግራይ እዩ። በዚ ምኽንያት እውን እየ ናብ ፖለቲካ ዝተሰሓብኩ። እሞስ ንደማመፅ!
1) ብቀዳምነት ፀላኢና ነፂርና ንፍለጥ። ብሰንኪ ሕወሓት ተዓሚፀ/ነፂተ ኢልካ አውያትን፣ ብህወሓት ተዓሚፀ/ነፂተ ኢልካ አውያትን ሓደ አይኮነን። ዘራኽብ እውን የብሉን። ብሰንኮም ይኹን አይኹን ብዘየገድስ፣ ብገበን ክሕተት ዘለዎ ጸላኢ እቲ ዓማጺን አንጻቲን እዩ። እቲ ገበነኛ ክሳብ ሕጂ ተሓታቲ አይኮነን ዘሎ። ዝሕተት እውን አይመስልን። ብገበን ዘይምሕታቱ ጥራሕ ዘይኮነስ፣ ሓራ ከም ዘውጸአና ሓይሊ ገይርካ ምቅባል እውን ተጀሚሩ አሎ።
እስኪ ብሓደ አብነት ንላዘበሉ። ኣነ ሓየት ምስ ሓደ ውልቀ ሰብ እንድሕር ተባኢሰን፣ እቲ ውልቀ ሰብ ንዓይ ንምርካብ ንሰበይተይ እንድሕር ዓሚጽዋ፣ ገበነኛ እቲ ዓማጺ እምበር አነ አይኮንኩን። ዋላኳ ብስነከይ (ሓየት ምስቲ ሰብ ስለዝተበኣስኩ) ሰበይተይ እንተተዓመጸት፣ ጸላኢ ሰበይተይ እቲ ዓማጺኣ እዩ። አነ አይኮንኩን። ሕነ ንምፍዳይ ተባሂሉ ዝተፈጸመ ግፍዒ እውን እንተዝኸውን ነይሩ፣ ስቲል ቁጽሪ ሓደ ተሓታቲን ገበነኛን እቲ ዓማጺኣ እዩ።
አብ ልዕሊ ትግራይ አብይ አሕመድ ዘበጽሖ ህልቀት፣ ሕነ ምፍዳይ ከምዘይኮነ ዓለም ዝፈልጦ ሓቂ እዩ። በዚ ደረጃ ህወሓት/ኢህወደግ አብ ልዕሊ ማንም ህዝቢ ይኹን ሓይሊ ዝወሰዶ ናይ ጽንተት ስጉምቲ ስለዘይነበረ! እታ ዓባይ ብኽያቶም “የበይ ተመልካች ኮይንና” እያ ዝነበረት። ንጽንተት ትግራይ ልዕሊ ክልተ ዓመት ተሊሙን ስትራተጂታት ሓንጺጹን ናብ ተግባር ዝአተወ ጉጅለ ኦህዴድን መሻርኽቱ ብአዴንን፣ ከም ማንም ካድረ/አመራርሓ ህወሓት አብ ዘመነ ኢህአዴግ ይጉሕሉ፣ መሬት ይሽቅጡን ይብዕልጉን ነይሮም። ንህዝቢ ትግራይ ዘጸንት ምንም ዓይነት ገበን ህወሓት አይፈጸመን። ይትረፍ ዶ ብቀጥታስ፣ ብሕነ ምፍዳይ ደረጃ እውን ክምኽነ ዝኽእል፣ ንህዝቢ ትግራይ ናብ ጽንተት ዘብጽሕ ገበን ህወሓት አይፈጸመን። ሶ ዝዓመጸካን ዘንጸተካን ሓዲግካ (ሓቊፍካ)፣ ብስንክኹም እዩ ብዝብል ምኽንያት ጻሕበርበር ምባል፣ አህያውን ፈርቶ ዳውላውን ከምዝብልዎ እዩ። ካውኡ ሓሊፉ እውን ሓንቲ ዓይንኻ ምጥፋእ እዩ።
ብዛዕባ ሓንቲ ዓይኒ ክምለሰሉ እየ፣ አህያውን ፈርቶ ዝበልክዋ እስቲ በታ ናይ ሰበይቲ ሓየት አብነት ነብርሃያ። ወዮ ዓማጺኣስ እንተ ብጉልበቱ ወይ ብምልሓሱ ወይ ብሃፍቱ ካባይ ካብ ሓየት ትርር ዘበለ ኾይኑ ተራእይዋስ፣ እዚ ኹሉ ብሰንክኻ እዩ ኢላ ንሰብኣያ ክትፈትሕ እንድሕር በጺሓ፣ በቃ ሰላም አውሪዳ ማለት ድዩ? ከም ውሽማ ተቀቢላቶ፣ ካባይ ካብ ሰብኣያ ሓየት ሓራ ከምዘውጽኣ ገባሪ ጽቡቅ ክትቅበሎ ድዩ? አብይ አሕመድን ሎሚ ናይታ ሀገር “ስቴት አፓራተስ” ዝተቆጻጸሩ መዳርግቱን ብገበን ከይተሓተቱ፣ አብ ልዕሊ ህወሓት ፋሕጠርጠር ምባል፣ ከምዛ ናይ ሰበይቲ ሓየት ውሽማኻን ገባሪ ጽቡቅካን ገይርካ ንአብይን መዳርግቱን ከም ምቅባል እያ። አብ 1984 ናይ ጆርጅ ኦርዌል መጽሓፍ እንድሕር አንቢብኩም፣ 2 ክድመር 2 ይኸውን 5 ክሳብ ዝብል ቅጥቅጥ አቢሉ ንዘእመኖ ዓማጺኡ፣ “ትኽክል ኢኻ ጎይታዋ” ኢሉ ከምዝተቀበሎ ዊንስተን ስሚዝ ማለት እዩ። ካብ ጌም ኦፍ ትሮን እውን ንጥቀስ ተተባሂሉ፣ ነቲ ጉዳዩ ቆሪጹ ጠቢሱ ንዘብልዖ ገፋዒዑ ጎይታይ ኢሉ ከምዝተቀበሎ ትዮን (ድሕሪ በትሪ ድማ፣ ሪክ) ማለት እዩ። እዚ ዋላ እናመረረና ይኹን እናቅሐረና ክንውሕጦ ዘለና ሓቂ እዩ!!!
2) ዓቅምና ብደንቢ ንፍለጥ። ንዓና ከይርድአና ይኽእል ይኸውን፣ አብይ አሕመድን ብልጽግናን ግን ብደንቢ ዝፈልጥዎን ዝፈርሕዎን ሓይሊ፣ ቲዲኤፍ እዩ። ምስ ኦነግ ንልዕሊ ሓደ ዓመት፣ ምስ ፋኖ ንልዕሊ ክልተ ዓመት፣ ይኳሻሕ አሎ። ብድሕሪ ኦነግ ይኹን ብፍላይ ብድሕሪ ፋኖ፣ ሻዕቢያ ከምዝነበረን ከምዘሎን፣ እቲ ዂናት ናይ ፕሮክሲ ከምዝኾነን ብልፅግና አጸቢቁ ይፈልጦ እዩ። ይኹን እምበር፣ ክንዲ ሓምት ዘስግእዎ አይኮኑን። ናብዞም ሓይሊታት እዚኦም ህወሓት ንሓምት ሒዙ እንትጽምበር፣ ፍጻመ ስርዓቱ ከምዝኾነ ብልጽግና አጸቢቁ ይፈልጦ እዩ። ነዚ ድማ እዩ ጎናጎኒ ምድላዋት ዂናቱ፣ ንህወሓት ዘዳኽም፣ ንህዝቢ ትግራይ ዝኸፋፍል፣ ዝተፈላለዩ ዘመቻታት ከፊቱ ዘሎ። ዓማጺኹምን ቀታሊኹምን ገዲፍኩም፤ አብ ሕወሓት አስናንኹም ክተብልሑ ዝገብረኩም ዘሎ። ንስርዓት ብልጽግና ካብ ውድቀት አድሒንኩምን፣ ካብ ብገበን ተሓታቲነት ነጻ አውጺእኹምን፣ ከም ውሽማ ንኽትቅበልዎ ብዝኸፈተልኩም ናይ ፕሮፓጋንዳ ዂናት አብይ አሕመድ ይዕወት አሎ።
አብዚ ክንጽር ዘለዎ ጉዳይ፣ ምስ ካልኦት ሓይሊታት ዝግበር ፅምዶ እዩ። ትማሊ ንትግራይ ጨፍጭፊካ ንምንብርካኽ፣ ምስ ሻዕቢያን ምልሻ አምሓራን ምሽራኽ ስትራቴጂካሊ ንብልጽግና ትኽክል እንድሕር ነይሩ፣ ሎሚ ንብልጽግና ካብ ፊንፊኔ ምስ ዘይትሓልፍ ስርዓቱ በንቂርካ ንምቅባጽ ምስዞም ሓይሊታት ህወሓት እንተተጻመደ ገበን፣ ሓጥያት ወይክዓ ኢሞራላዊ ዝኾነሉ ምኽንያት እንታይ እዩ? አብ ፖለቲካ ቋሚ ፈታዊ ወይ ጸላኢ የለን። ረብሓኻ ጥራሕ እዩ ንኹሉ ዲክቴት ዝገብሮ። ይትረፍዶ አንጻር ብልጽግና ንልዕሊ ክልተ ዓመት ክቃለሱ ምስ ዘጸንሑ ሓይሊታት ምጽማድ፣ ዋላ ሓንቲ ጎንጺ ዘይነበሮም እንድሕር ነይሮም እውን ዓሲብካ (ብኽፍሊት ይኹን ብኻሊእ ረብሓ) አብ ጎንኻ ክተሰልፎም እንድሕር ክኢልካ፣ አንፈት ቃልስኻ አይሰሓትካን ማለት እዩ።
ኖ አብይን ብልጽግናን ብገበን አይንሕተቶ፣ ኩሉ ንረስዓዮ፣ ሰራዊትና በቲንና አብ ትሕቲ መግዛእትኡ ንእቶ፣ እንትስሕቅ እናስሓቅና እንትበክይ እናበኸና ብሳንባ አብይ ክንትፍስ፣ ጸጽቡቁ መኪና ክንዝውር፣ ጠጥዑሙ ክንበልዕ፣ ሰላም ይሕሸና፤ ዝብል ሓይሊ እዩ አንፈቱ ስሒቱ ዘሎ። ኸሽዑ አቀዲሙ፣ ባርነት አሜን ኢልካ ክትቅበል ዝጉስጉስ ሓይሊ እዩ አንፈቱ ዝሰሓተ ሓይሊ። ሰራዊት እንትብተን፣ አመራርሓ እንትጠፍእ፣ ሓድነቱ ካብ ብሕጂኡ ዝተዘረገ ህዝቢ፣ ዋላ ሓንቲ ዋሕስ የብሉን። ዋል ሓንቲ! ግበር ዝተብሃሎ ክገብር፣ ኩን ዝተብሃሎ ክኸውን እዩ። 2 እንትድመሮ 2 ይኸውን 5 ኢሉ ክቅበል። ሽምካ ሓየት አይኮነን ዝብኢቀትሪ እዩ እንትብሃል፣ ሓቅኻ ዝብኢቀትሪ እዩ ሹመይ ክብል። ወዮ ካብ ተሓታትነት ተድሕኖ ዘለኻን፣ ከም ውሽማ ክትቅበሎ ፋሕጠርጠር ትብለሉ ዘለኻን ስርዓት፣ ጽባሕ ዝለመዶ በትሪ አልዒሉ እንትቅርሽመካ፣ በትርኻ ናፊቁን ነይሩ ኢልካ ክትውሕጣ ጥራሕ እንተዘይኮኑ፣ ዋላ ሓንቲ ካሊእ መዋጽእቲ የብልካን።
እሺ፣ ንግፍዒ ትግራይ ብህወሓት ነሳብብ፣ ግፍዒ ህዝቢ አምሓራኸ ብመን ይሳበብ? ብፋኖ? ንፋኖ ዝወለዶ እንታይ ኮይኑ? ፋኖ ከም ህወሓት አብ ስልጣን አይነበረ። ተገፋዕኹ ዝበለ ህዝቢ ዶ አይኮነን እዩ ንፋኖ ዝወለዶ። ንፋኖ ረኸብኩ ኢሉ፣ ንኹሉ ዝቅጥቅጥ ስርዓት፣ ጽባሕ ንዓኻ (ድሕሪ ህወሓት ወይ ሓምት) ክምሐረካ ዶ ይመስለካ? ጽባሕ ድሕሪ ጽባሕ፣ ህወሓት ሀለው አይሀለወ፣ ባርነት አይቅበል ዝብል ወለዶ አብ መንጎኻ ምፍራዩ አይተርፍን። ክሳብ ሕጂ ንዝተፈጸሙ ገበናት ፍትሒ ደላይ ወለዶ አብ ውሽጥኻ ይፈርይ እዩ ዘሎ። ጽባሕ ብሰንኩ እውን ምቅጥቃጥካ አይተርፍን ። ክትቅጠቀጥ ኢኻ ድማ። እዚ መሰረታዊ ባህሪ እቲ ስርዓት እዩ። ስልጣን ካብ ኢዱ ክሳብ ዘይወጸእት፣ በኸቢድ ገበን ክሕተት ከምዘይኽእል ስለዝፈልጥ፣ ካብ ተሓታትንት ንምምላጥ ዘለቶ አማራጺ አብ ስልጣን ተጣቢቅካ ምንባር እያ። እታ ወንበር ወይክዓ ሞት! ነዚ ረሲዕና ኣብ “አህያውን ፈርቶ ዳውላውን” ምጽማድና መሕዘኒ እዩ።
3) ሎሚ ህወሓት ክምልሶ ዝኽእል መሰረታዊ ምምሕዳራዊ ፀገም ከምዘየለ ምፍላጥ የድሊ። ጊዜያዊ መንግስቲ አሎ፣ ከም ኩነታቱን ንሽርሕታቱ ብዝጠቅመሉ መንገዲ ብልጽግና (ፌደራል) በጀት፣ ድጋፍ፣ መሰረታዊ ግልጋሎት ወዘተ ይህብ። ተደልዩ ድማ ይኸልእ። ሎሚ ህዝቢ ትግራይ ነንባዕሉ ክከፋፈልን፣ አንጻር ሓምት/ህወሓት ክልዓልን ክሳብ ዝሓገዘ፣ አገልግሎት ኢንተርኔት፣ ስልኪ፣ መብራህቲ ወዘተ ትግራዋይ ከም ሀገሩ ተጠቃሚ ክኸውን ተፈቂዱሉ አሎ። ብዝኾነ ይኹን መንገዲ ዂናት እንተተላዒሉ ግና ደሪቡ ምስ ህወሓት/ሓምት ምእንታን ክጭፍጭፈካ፣ እዘን መሰረታዊ ግልጋሎት አይትረኽበንን ኢኻ። ንሳቶም ንህወሓት የዳኽሙለይ እቲ ምንቅስቃሶም ብሶሻል ሚድያ ይኹን ብኻሊእ መንገዲ ይሰራጮ፣ አነ ፈልዬ ንህወሓት ክቅጥቅጥ እየ፣ ኢሉ እተን መሰረታዊ አገልግሎት ክፍቲ አይገድፈልካን። አጽለሚቱ፣ ዓጽዩ ብሓባር ክምታ ዝለመዳ እዩ ዘንጽተካ።
ሞት ንሞቱ ብሓባር ምቅላስን ናብ ዓወት ምግስጋስን ዶ ይሓይሽ ወይስ ተኸፋፊልካ አብ ዝውላዕ ዂናት ደመከልብ ኮይንካን ተሰኲንካን ምትራፍ? ተጋዳላይ ይኹን ሲቪል፣ አብቲ ቃልሲ እጃም ዝነበሮ ይኹን ዘይነበሮ፣ ሎሚ አብ ኸቢድ ኩነታት ይነብር ምህላዉ ሓቂ እዩ። ነዚ ጸገም ክትፈትሕ ትኽእል ህወሓት ሎሚ የላን። ቁመነኣ አብቲ ደረጃ አይበጸሐን። ቀደም ምኾነ ሪሶርስ ከምድላያ ሞቢላይዝ እትገብር ሓይሊ ስለዝነበረት፣ ብዝተወሰነ ደረጃ ክትፈትሖ ምኽኣለት። ሎሚ ንባዕላ ብቸርኬ ትኸይድ ዘላ ውድብ እያ። እታ ዘላታ ዓቅሚን ጥሪትን፣ ተዋጽእ እያ አብ ትብላ አንፈት ቃልሲ ተውዕላ አላ። ጋምብሊንግ? መይ ቢ። ግን ድማ ኩሉ ኢንቨስትመንት ዳርጋ ቁማር እዩ።
ምኢቲ ፐርሰንት እርግጸኛ እየ መኽሰቢ እዩ እትብሎ ኢንቨስትመንት የለን። ግን ድማ ብዝተፈላለየ መዐቀኒታት መዚንና፣ ዝተፈላልዩ ሴናሪዮታት አነጻጺርና፣ እዚ ይሓይሽ ክንብሎ ንኽእል አንፈት ቃልሲ፣ ሎሚ ህወሓት ትኽተሎ ዘላ አንፈት ቃልሲ እዩ። ቀዳማይ ሓምት (ዓቅሚ ትግራይ) ንብልጽግና ምስ መዳርግቱ (ሻዕቢያ፣ ምልሻታት አምሓራ ኦሮሚያ ዓፋር ወዘተ፣ ድሮናት ዱባይ ወዘተ) ምስ እቲ ኹሉ ሀፍቲን ልቃሕን እታ ሀገር፣ ምስቲ ኹሉ መሓውር ፕሮፓጋንዳ (ሎሚ አንጻሩ ተሰሊፎም ዘለዉ ሓይሊታት፣ ከሽዓም አርቲስትታት፣ ሰራሕተኛ መንግስቲ ወዘተ)፣ ነዚ ኹሉ ዝመከተ ሓይሊ እዩ (ሓምት!)። ሎሚ ዳርጋ ኹሎም አንጻር ብልጽግና ተሰሊፎም አለዉ። ይትረፍዶ አንጻሩ ተሰሊፎምን፣ ብሓባር ክቃለሱ ምቅርራባት ጀሚሮምን፣ ንሳቶም ዘየለውሉ ንብልጽግና በይንኻ ንምምካት ዝሰንፍ ሓይሊ አይኮነን ሓምት። ብርግጽ ሓድነቱ ዝተዘረገ ደጀንን አመራርሓን ሒዝካ፣ ሓምት ከምቀደም ማዕረ ዓቅሚ አለዎ ኢልካ ክትተኣማመን አይትኽእልን ትኸውን። ግን ድማ ጸላኢኡ ብልጽግና እውን ከም ቀደም ዓቅሚ ዘለዎ አይኮነን። ብኹሉ አንፈት ዝተወጠረ፣ ቃልሲ ዝጸዓቆ፣ ጸለእቱ ዘብዘሐ ስርዓት፣ ብሓይሊ ፕሮፓጋንዳ ጥራሕ ከሰኩነካ እዩ ፋሕጠርጠር ዝብል ዘሎ። ሶ እታ ተዋጽእ ብዝተዋደደ ሓይሊ ብሓባር ምስቶም ካልኦት ተቃሊስካ ነቲ ስርዓት ምቅባጽ እያ።
ባይዘወይ ብልጽግና ንሓምት ክብትን ላሕ ኢሉ ምስ አበዮ፣ ዘቅረቦ ሕቶ አብ ጎነይ ተሰሊፍኩም ነቶም ካልኦት (ፋኖ፣ ኦነግ፣ ሻዕቢያ፣ ወዘተ) ንቀጥቅጥ እዩ ነይሩ። ሓምት ነዚ ነጺጉ፣ አሰላልፋኡ ብተቃራኒ ምግባሩ፣ አርሒቁ ምሕሳቡ ዘመላኽት እዩ። ጽባሕ ምስ ዝጠፍእ አንጻቲኻ ስርዓት ካብ ትዕረቅ፣ ንዘልኣለም ጎረባብትኻ ኾይኖም ምንባር ምስዝቅጽሉ ህዝቢታት ምትዕራቅ ዘላቂ ሰላም የርክብ። ምስ ብልጽግና ተዓሪቅካ ንዘልኣለም ምስ አምሓራን ኤርትራን ተጻሊእኻ ክትነብር እዩ ነይሩ ዕላማ አብይ፣ ክትብቀሎም ክፈቅደልካ፣ ድጋፍን ዲፕሎማሲያዊ ሽፋንን ክህበካ፣ ወዘተ። እዚ እንተዝኸውን ነይሩ፣ መጻኢ ወለዶ ትግራይ ምስ ጎረባብቱ ኸመይ ክነብር ከምዝኽእል ንምግማቱ አይከብድን። ክፍፍል ህወሓት ብጉጅለ ጌታቸው ዓብላልነት እንተዝዛዘም ነይሩ፣ እዚኣ እያ ክትኸውን ነይራ። ሎሚ ብልጽግና አብ ዘቀጻጽሎ ዘሎ ፕሮፓጋንዳ ዂናት ይዋጥዩ ዶ የለዉን? ዝእዝዝዎ ሰራዊት እንተዝህሉ ነይሩ ድማ መዋፈሩ ነይሮም። ጉጅለ ጌታቸው ብዘይ ምስዓሩ ግን፣ ሓምት ካብ ምፍራስ እውን ጸረ ኻልኦት ህዝብታት ካብ ምስላፍ እውን እዩ ተሪፉ።
ህውሓት ንሓምት ሒዛ ብዝተዋደደ ሓይሊ ተቃሊሳ እንድሕር ተዓዊታ፣ ህዝባ ትክሕሰሉ ዕድል ክህሉ እዩ ኢለ ይግምት። ዝበልዕወን ምትፋእ፣ ዝወሰድወን ምምላስ፣ ወዘተ ትኽእለሉ ዓቅሚ እንትህልዋ፣ ንብዓት ህዝባ ሓቢሳ ትኽሕስ ትኸውን። ህዝቢ እውን ሎሚ ክሕንገጦ ጀሚሩ ዘሎ፣ አጥቢቅካ ናይ ምሕታት ወነ፣ ቀጺሉሉ ሕቶታቱ ንክትምልሰሉ ዘገድደሉ ኩነታት ክፍጠር፣ ፍታሕ ክውሃቡሉ ምናልባት እውን ብሓባር ፍታሕ ክእልሹሉ ዝኽእሉ ዕድላት ክፍጠሩ ዝኽእሉ ድሕሪ ዓወት እዩ። ሎሚ አብ መቀጸልታ እቲ ዝሓለፈ ኲናት ዝኾነ ሓያል ውጥረት ኮይንካ ክትምክቶ ትኽእል ጸገም የለን። ኩልና ዘይንክሕዳ ሓንቲ ሓቂ አላ። ንሳ እውን፣ ሎሚ ምስ ህወሓት ዝግበር ጎንጺ፣ ፍሪክሽን፣ ዘይምስናይን ወዘተ፣ ዋላ እኳ ህወሓት ክንዲ ድላያ ዓቅሚ እንተሃለዋ፣ አብ ልዕሊ ህዝቢ ትግራይ ከተስዕቦ ትኽእል እቲ ዝኸፈአ ሕማቅ ነገር፣ ካብ ዓፈና አይሓልፍን። ህዝቢ ከም ህዝቢ ክነጽት፣ ክበርስ፣ ብአልማሚት ስጉምቲ ክትወስደሉ ትኽእል ዂነታት ክፍጠር ፈጺሙ አይኽእልን። ካብ ውሽጢ እቲ ህዝቢ ዝወጸት ውድብ ከም ምዃና መጠን፣ ናብ ህዝባ ምትኳስ እንትትጅምር፣ ንባዕላ እውን ክትፈርስ እያ። ነንባዕሎም ስለዝታኾሱ። ተተሓሒዝካ ምጥፋእ ስለዝኸውን።
ብአንጻሩ ህወሓት ሃለወ አይሃለወ፣ ምስ ብልጽግና ናብ ውጥጥ እንድሕር አቲኻ፣ ከምዚ ዓይነት ስጉምቲ ፈጺሙ ዘይተርፍ እዩ። ሓንሳብ ደፊሩካ፣ ተምጽኦ ነገር ከምዘየለ ዝፈልጥ ሓይሊ፣ ደጊሙ ደጋጊሙ ካብ ምዕማጻ ዝእግዶ ነገር የለን። ዝእግዶ ክሳብ ዘየለ ድማ ዋላ ሓንቲ ዋሕስ የብልካን። ተጋሩ (ሓምት) ብዘይሳተፉሉ ብረታዊ ቃልሲ ብልጽግና ካብ ስልጣን እንድሕር ተወጊዱ እውን እቲ ቀጺሉ ዝመጽእ ተረኛ ካብ ብልጽግና ክሓይሽ ንምኽኣሉ መተኣማመኒ የብልካን። መተኣመመኒኻን ዋሕስካን ዝተወደበ ኩለመዳያዊ ቃልስኻ ጥራሕ እዩ!! ሶ ንቅሕ ደኣ!
ድሕሪ ዓወት ንህወሓት ይኹን ንሓምት ከመይ ናብ ህዝባዊን ዲሞክራሲያዊን ሓይሊ ዋላ አገዲድና ክንቅይር ከምእንኽል ብሰፊሑ ከምዝፅሕፍ ቃል እንዳአተኹ፣ ንሎሚ አብዚኣ ክሰናበተኩም። ፅሑፍ ስለዘንዋሕኹ ይቅርታ፣ ስለዝተኸታተልኩምኒ ድማ የመስግን።
ትግራይ ትዕወት!!
Great Ideas E04. Liberation, Then Reflection
A few rungs down. One level of education, itself a very high one, has been reached when man gets beyond superstitious and religious concepts and fears and, for example, no longer believes in the heavenly angels or original sin, and has stopped talking about the soul’s salvation. Once he is at this level of liberation, he must still make a last intense effort to overcome metaphysics. Then, however, a retrograde movement is necessary: he must understand both the historical and the psychological justification in metaphysical ideas. He must recognize how mankind’s greatest advancement came from them and how, if one did not take this retrograde step, one would rob himself of mankind’s finest accomplishments to date.
With regard to philosophical metaphysics, I now see a number of people who have arrived at the negative goal (that all positive metaphysics is an error), but only a few who climb back down a few rungs. For one should look out over the last rung of the ladder, but not want to stand on it. Those who are most enlightened can go only as far as to free themselves of metaphysics and look back on it with superiority, while here, as in the hippodrome, it is necessary to take a turn at the end of the track.
Friedrich Nietzsche – Human, All Too Human. Section One: Of First and Last Things – Aphorism # 20
Great Ideas E03 – The Median Isn’t the Message
By Stephen Gould
My life has recently intersected, in a most personal way, two of Mark Twain’s famous quips. One I shall defer to the end of this essay. The other (sometimes attributed to Disraeli) identifies three species of mendacity, each worse than the one before—lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Consider the standard example of stretching truth with numbers—a case quite relevant to my story. Statistics recognizes different measures of an “average,” or central tendency. The mean represents our usual concept of an overall average—add up the items and divide them by the number of sharers (100 candy bars collected for five kids next Halloween will yield twenty for each in a fair world). The median, a different measure of central tendency, is the halfway point. If I line up five kids by height, the median child is shorter than two and taller than the other two (who might have trouble getting their mean share of the candy). A politician in power might say with pride, “The mean income of our citizens is $15,000 per year.” The leader of the opposition might retort, “But half our citizens make less than $10,000 per year.” Both are right, but neither cites a statistic with impassive objectivity. The first invokes a mean, the second a median. (Means are higher than medians in such cases because one millionaire may outweigh hundreds of poor people in setting a mean, but can balance only one mendicant in calculating a median.)
The larger issue that creates a common distrust or contempt for statistics is more troubling. Many people make an unfortunate and invalid separation between heart and mind, or feeling and intellect. In some contemporary traditions, abetted by attitudes stereotypically centered upon Southern California, feelings are exalted as more “real” and the only proper basis for action, while intellect gets short shrift as a hang-up of outmoded elitism. Statistics, in this absurd dichotomy, often becomes the symbol of the enemy. As Hilaire Belloc wrote, “Statistics are the triumph of the quantitative method, and the quantitative method is the victory of sterility and death.”
This is a personal story of statistics, properly interpreted, as profoundly nurturant and life-giving. It declares holy war on the downgrading of intellect by telling a small story to illustrate the utility of dry, academic knowledge about science. Heart and head are focal points of one body, one personality.
In July 1982, I learned that I was suffering from abdominal mesothelioma, a rare and serious cancer usually associated with exposure to asbestos. When I revived after surgery, I asked my first question of my doctor and chemotherapist: “What is the best technical literature about mesothelioma?” She replied, with a touch of diplomacy (the only departure she has ever made from direct frankness), that the medical literature contained nothing really worth reading.
Of course, trying to keep an intellectual away from literature works about as well as recommending chastity to Homo sapiens, the sexiest primate of all. As soon as I could walk, I made a beeline for Harvard’s Countway medical library and punched mesothelioma into the computer’s bibliographic search program. An hour later, surrounded by the latest literature on abdominal mesothelioma, I realized with a gulp why my doctor had offered that humane advice. The literature couldn’t have been more brutally clear: Mesothelioma is incurable, with a median mortality of only eight months after discovery. I sat stunned for about fifteen minutes, then smiled and said to myself: So that’s why they didn’t give me anything to read. Then my mind started to work again, thank goodness.
If a little learning could ever be a dangerous thing, I had encountered a classic example. Attitude clearly matters in fighting cancer. We don’t know why (from my old-style materialistic perspective, I suspect that mental states feed back upon the immune system). But match people with the same cancer for age, class, health, and socioeconomic status, and, in general, those with positive attitudes, with a strong will and purpose for living, with commitment to struggle, and with an active response to aiding their own treatment and not just a passive acceptance of anything doctors say tend to live longer. A few months later I asked Sir Peter Medawar, my personal scientific guru and a Nobelist in immunology, what the best prescription for success against cancer might be. “A sanguine personality,” he replied. Fortunately (since one can’t reconstruct oneself at short notice and for a definite purpose), I am, if anything, even-tempered and confident in just this manner.
Hence the dilemma for humane doctors: Since attitude matters so critically, should such a somber conclusion be advertised, especially since few people have sufficient understanding of statistics to evaluate what the statements really mean? From years of experience with the small-scale evolution of Bahamian land snails treated quantitatively, I have developed this technical knowledge—and I am convinced that it played a major role in saving my life. Knowledge is indeed power, as Francis Bacon proclaimed.
The problem may be briefly stated: What does “median mortality of eight months” signify in our vernacular? I suspect that most people, without training in statistics, would read such a statement as “I will probably be dead in eight months”—the very conclusion that must be avoided, both because this formulation is false, and because attitude matters so much.
I was not, of course, overjoyed, but I didn’t read the statement in this vernacular way either. My technical training enjoined a different perspective on “eight months median mortality.” The point may seem subtle, but the consequences can be profound. Moreover, this perspective embodies the distinctive way of thinking in my own field of evolutionary biology and natural history.
We still carry the historical baggage of a Platonic heritage that seeks sharp essences and definite boundaries. (Thus we hope to find an unambiguous “beginning of life” or “definition of death,” although nature often comes to us as irreducible continua.) This Platonic heritage, with its emphasis on clear distinctions and separated immutable entities, leads us to view statistical measures of central tendency wrongly, indeed opposite to the appropriate interpretation in our actual world of variation, shadings, and continua. In short, we view means and medians as hard “realities,” and the variation that permits their calculation as a set of transient and imperfect measurements of this hidden essence. If the median is the reality and variation around the median just a device for calculation, then “I will probably be dead in eight months” may pass as a reasonable interpretation.
But all evolutionary biologists know that variation itself is nature’s only irreducible essence. Variation is the hard reality, not a set of imperfect measures for a central tendency. Means and medians are the abstractions. Therefore, I looked at the mesothelioma statistics quite differently —and not only because I am an optimist who tends to see the doughnut instead of the hole, but primarily because I know that variation itself is the reality. I had to place myself amidst the variation.
When I learned about the eight-month median, my first intellectual reaction was: Fine, half the people will live longer; now what are my chances of being in that half? I read for a furious and nervous hour and concluded, with relief: damned good. I possessed every one of the characteristics conferring a probability of longer life: I was young; my disease had been recognized in a relatively early stage; I would receive the nation’s best medical treatment; I had the world to live for; I knew how to read the data properly and not despair.
Another technical point then added even more solace. I immediately recognized that the distribution of variation about the eight-month median would almost surely be what statisticians call “right skewed.” (In a symmetrical distribution, the profile of variation to the left of the central tendency is a mirror image of variation to the right. Skewed distributions are asymmetrical, with variation stretching out more in one direction than the other—left skewed if extended to the left, right skewed if stretched out to the right.) The distribution of variation had to be right skewed, I reasoned. After all, the left of the distribution contains an irrevocable lower boundary of zero (since mesothelioma can only be identified at death or before). Thus, little space exists for the distribution’s lower (or left) half—it must be scrunched up between zero and eight months. But the upper (or right) half can extend out for years and years, even if nobody ultimately survives. The distribution must be right skewed, and I needed to know how long the extended tail ran—for I had already concluded that my favorable profile made me a good candidate for the right half of the curve.
The distribution was, indeed, strongly right skewed, with a long tail (however small) that extended for several years above the eight-month median. I saw no reason why I shouldn’t be in that small tail, and I breathed a very long sigh of relief. My technical knowledge had helped. I had read the graph correctly. I had asked the right question and found the answers. I had obtained, in all probability, that most precious of all possible gifts in the circumstances—substantial time. I didn’t have to stop and immediately follow Isaiah’s injunction to Hezekiah—set thine house in order: for thou shalt die, and not live. I would have time to think, to plan, and to fight.
One final point about statistical distributions. They apply only to a prescribed set of circumstances—in this case to survival with mesothelioma under conventional modes of treatment. If circumstances change, the distribution may alter. I was placed on an experimental protocol of treatment and, if fortune holds, will be in the first cohort of a new distribution with high median and a right tail extending to death by natural causes at advanced old age.
It has become, in my view, a bit too trendy to regard the acceptance of death as something tantamount to intrinsic dignity. Of course I agree with the preacher of Ecclesiastes that there is a time to love and a time to die—and when my skein runs out I hope to face the end calmly and in my own way. For most situations, however, I prefer the more martial view that death is the ultimate enemy—and I find nothing reproachable in those who rage mightily against the dying of the light.
The swords of battle are numerous, and none more effective than humor. My death was announced at a meeting of my colleagues in Scotland, and I almost experienced the delicious pleasure of reading my obituary penned by one of my best friends (the so-and-so got suspicious and checked; he too is a statistician, and didn’t expect to find me so far out on the left tail). Still, the incident provided my first good laugh after the diagnosis. Just think, I almost got to repeat Mark Twain’s most famous line of all: The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.
Source: AMA Journal of Ethics
ሃቅ ሃቁን ብቻ እናውራ ከተባለ …
ሃቅ ሃቁን ብቻ እናውራ ከተባለማ …
የፖለቲካ ወይም የኢኮኖሚ ፍልስፍና እይታቸውን ፈጽሞ የማልስማማበት፣ ነገር ግን በጣም የማደንቃቸው ባለ ከባድ ሚዛን አስተማሪዎቼ (ተጽእኖ ፈጣሪዎች) በምድር ላይ ሁለት ሰዎች አሉ/ነበሩ። መለስ ዜናዊ እና አያን ራንድ። የአትላስ ሽራግድ እና ዘ ፋውንቴን ሄድ ደራሲዋና ፈላስፋዋ ራንድ፣ በጆን ጋልት እና በሃዋርድ ሮርክ አማካኝነት የምታስተላልፋቸው፣ ፍጹም የማታወላዳበት የኦብጀክቲቪዝም ፍልስፍና ብላ የምትጠራው ግለሰባዊነትን እስከጥግ ድረስ ለጥጣ የምታወድስባቸው ስራዎቿ በብዙ የማልስማማባቸው (አንዳንዴ የምጸየፋቸው ጭምር) ቢሆንም፣ ብዙ የተማርኩባት እና የማደንቃት ጸሃፊ ናት። ስለ ራንድ በሌላ ጊዜ እንመለስበታለን። አሁን ስለ መለስ እናውራ።
ራሳችንን ካልዋሸን በስተቀር፣ መለስ በተለይ በኢኮኖሚክስ ትንተናው አንድን ትውልድ አነሳስቷል፣ ቀርጿል፣ ቢባል ማጋነን አይሆንም። በመለስ ዘመን ስለ ዴቨሎፕመንታል ኢኮኖሚክስ የማይደሰኩር ፖለቲከኛ፣ ምሁር፣ ተማሪ፣ ካድሬ ወዘተ አልነበረም ቢባል ማጋነን አይሆንም። ስለ ኢኮኖሚክ ፓራዳይም፣ ስለ ግሪን ኢኮኖሚ፣ ስለ ኒዮሊበራሊዝም፣ ስለ ኪራይ ሰብሳቢነት (ሬንት ሲከርስ) ወዘተ የማይወራበት፣ የማይተነተንበት እና የማይተችበት ቀን አልነበረም። በፖለቲካው ልንቃወመውና ልንጠላው እንችላለን (በዛም ረገድ ሻምፕዮን እንደነበር አሁን እየበራልን ቢሆንም)፣ በኢኮኖሚክስ እውቀቱ፣ የትንታኔ ብቃቱ፣ ከኢንግሊዝኛ ወደ አማርኛና ትግርኛ የመመለስ ብቃቱ ግን ማንም ሰው አይክደውም።
እስኪ እውነት እንናገር እና፣ ስለ ርዕዮተ አለም፣ ስለ ስኩል ኦፍ ኢኮኖሚክስ፣ ስለ ኢኮኖሚክ ፍልስፍና ከመለስ ዘመን ወዲህ በማህበራዊም በሉት በመንግስት ሚድያ ተወርቶ ያውቃል? ያ አጀንዳ፣ ያ ሙግት፣ ያ ትችት አልናፈቃችሁም? በነ ኮንፍዩዝድ እና ኮንቪንስ ዘመን፣ መደመር ከምትለው የ3ኛ ክፍል አርቲሜቲካ የዘለለ አንዲት ቃል ሳንሰማ አስር አመት ሊሞላን ደረሰ። በመለስ ዘመን ፎር ግራንትድ ወስደነው የነበረ ጸጥታ፣ የማዕከላዊ መንግስት ጥንካሬ፣ ወዘተ ከመለስ ወዲህ አፈርድሜ ግጦ፣ ወሬያችን እና ኑሯችን ሁሉ ስለ ጦርነት ብቻ አልሆነም? እንደ ዘመነ ደርግ፣ ብልጽግና እድሜዋን በጦርነት ፈጀችው። ቅቤው ኢንስፓየር ያደረገው ትውልድ ቢኖር እነ ምናምን ድሪምስ እንደሚባሉት አነቃቂ እና ሰባኪ ነን ባዮችን ብቻ ነው። (የበርትራንድ ራስል ፍልስፍና መጽሃፍ ካነበባችሁ፣ እንዲህ አይነት ሰዎች የሚበራከተቱ ከአንድ ማህበረሰብ ውድቀት እና ስብራት ብኋላ መሆኑን ትገነዘባላችሁ። ትኩረት ሁሉ ራስን ለማጽናናት፣ ቀኑን እንደምንም ለማሳለፍ ይሆናል። የስቶይሲዝም ፍልስፍናን በዚህ መልኩ ነው ሩስል የሚገልጸው። ግሪኮች በጦርነት ተሸንፈው አገራቸው እንክትክት ስትል እና በሌሎች ቁጥጥር ስር ስትወድቅ፣ ያ ሰማይ ምድሩን የቧጠጠው፣ ከአተም እስከ አጽናፈ አለም የቃኘው ፍልስፍናቸው ከስሞ በነ ኢፒኲሬስና ኢፒክቲቱስ የሃፒነስ ፍልስፍና ተተካ። አይንህን ጨፍነህ የልብ ትርታህን ካዳመጥክ፣ ጭንቀትህ ሁሉ ውልቅ ብሎ ሲሔድ ታያለህ። የደስታ ምንጭ ወደ ውስጥ መመልከት ነው። ወዘተ)
መለስ በአደባባይ ጭምር ደረቱን ነፍቶ እየተከራከረ የኢትዮጵያን ኢኮኖሚ ከኒዮሊበራላይዝም ታደገው። በየጊዜው የሚቀርብበትን ጫና ተቋቁሞ፣ ተከራክሮ፣ እነ ጆ ስቲግልቲዝ አስደምሞ፣ የኢኮኖሚ ሉኣላዊነቱን አስከብሮ አለፈ። (አገሪቱ በየጊዜው የምትቀበለውን ምጽዋት ወደጎን ብለን)። ዛሬ አንድም ሳይቀር ገበያው በሙሉ ተበርግዶ ላለው ሲሰጥ፣ አንዲትም ክርክር አልተደረገም፣ ወይ አመክንዮ አልቀረብም። እንደሾካካ የተባለቱን ፈጽመው ጭጭ አሉ። ሃሳብ የደረቀበት ስርዓት እና ዘመን ላይ ሆነህ እንደ ወ/ሮ ጊዜሽወርቅ ተሰማ በድፍረት ምስክርነትህን ስትሰጥ … ያምርብሃልና የኔን እንሆ አልኳችሁ።
Great Ideas E02 – Great Scientific Ideas That Changed the World
By Steven L. Goldman
It is easy to fall into one of two traps in dealing with ideas: either to dismiss them as abstractions and, thus, of less consequence than concrete things, such as swords, plowshares, and factories, or to glorify them as abstractions, as creative inventions of the mind, and thus, praiseworthy independent of any practical consequences whatsoever. Ideas are, nevertheless, as concrete as swords and plowshares because they are always tied to a concrete context of values, actions, beliefs, artifacts, and institutions out of which they arise and on which they may act. The concreteness of ideas derives from their being produced not only within a particular cultural context but out of that context, and it is because ideas are produced out of a particular context that ideas are able to influence and even to reshape that context. Treating ideas out of context, then, treating them as if their existence were, in principle, independent of any particular context, deeply distorts the reality of ideas and obscures their power to affect the world.
Ideas and their contexts interact in complex, mutually influential ways such that the resultant effect on society of introducing a new idea is unpredictable. The evolution of the Internet from a modest computer networking project to a global technology transforming commerce, industry, politics, warfare, communication, education, entertainment, and research illustrates the unpredictability of the idea-social context interaction. The still-unfolding consequences of a small number of innovative ideas introduced to solve technical problems posed by enabling different kinds of computers in different locations to share information in real time continue to surprise, confound, and disturb us!
Unpredictable though it may be, however, for 200 years now, the interaction of science and technology with society has been the primary driver of social and cultural change, first in the West, then globally and at an accelerating rate. During this period, social and personal values and relationships; social, political, and economic institutions; and cultural values and activities have changed and continue to change almost beyond recognition by our great-grandparents. What is it that has enabled such deep transformations of ways of life that have been entrenched for centuries and even millennia?
Certainly, we can identify artifacts—the telephone, the automobile, airplanes, television, the computer— that appear to be causes of social change. But identifying artifacts does not reach down to the causes of innovation itself, nor does it expose those features of the sociocultural infrastructure that enable innovations to be causes of social change. Artifacts, in spite of their high visibility, are symptoms of causes at work; they are not themselves causes. It is not television or automobiles or the Internet that have changed society. Instead, forces at work within the network of relationships that we call society are causing television and automobiles and the Internet to take the changing forms that they take. One of these forces is ideas, explicitly in the case of new scientific ideas and implicitly in the case of ideas in the past that have been internalized selectively by society, thereby shaping both the sociocultural infrastructure and the lines along which it is vulnerable to change.
Source: From “Great Scientific Ideas That Changed the World” by Steven L. Goldman
Great Ideas E01 – I, Pencil
By Leonard E. Read
I am a lead pencil—the ordinary wooden pencil familiar to all boys and girls and adults who can read and write.
Writing is both my vocation and my avocation; that’s all I do.
You may wonder why I should write a genealogy. Well, to begin with, my story is interesting. And, next, I am a mystery —more so than a tree or a sunset or even a flash of lightning. But, sadly, I am taken for granted by those who use me, as if I were a mere incident and without background. This supercilious attitude relegates me to the level of the commonplace. This is a species of the grievous error in which mankind cannot too long persist without peril. For, the wise G. K. Chesterton observed, “We are perishing for want of wonder, not for want of wonders.”
I, Pencil, simple though I appear to be, merit your wonder and awe, a claim I shall attempt to prove. In fact, if you can understand me—no, that’s too much to ask of anyone—if you can become aware of the miraculousness which I symbolize, you can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing. I have a profound lesson to teach. And I can teach this lesson better than can an automobile or an airplane or a mechanical dishwasher because—well, because I am seemingly so simple.
Simple? Yet, not a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me. This sounds fantastic, doesn’t it? Especially when it is realized that there are about one and one-half billion of my kind produced in the U.S.A. each year.
Pick me up and look me over. What do you see? Not much meets the eye—there’s some wood, lacquer, the printed labeling, graphite lead, a bit of metal, and an eraser.
Innumerable Antecedents
Just as you cannot trace your family tree back very far, so is it impossible for me to name and explain all my antecedents. But I would like to suggest enough of them to impress upon you the richness and complexity of my background.
My family tree begins with what in fact is a tree, a cedar of straight grain that grows in Northern California and Oregon. Now contemplate all the saws and trucks and rope and the countless other gear used in harvesting and carting the cedar logs to the railroad siding. Think of all the persons and the numberless skills that went into their fabrication: the mining of ore, the making of steel and its refinement into saws, axes, motors; the growing of hemp and bringing it through all the stages to heavy and strong rope; the logging camps with their beds and mess halls, the cookery and the raising of all the foods. Why, untold thousands of persons had a hand in every cup of coffee the loggers drink!
The logs are shipped to a mill in San Leandro, California. Can you imagine the individuals who make flat cars and rails and railroad engines and who construct and install the communication systems incidental thereto? These legions are among my antecedents.
Consider the millwork in San Leandro. The cedar logs are cut into small, pencil-length slats less than one-fourth of an inch in thickness. These are kiln dried and then tinted for the same reason women put rouge on their faces. People prefer that I look pretty, not a pallid white. The slats are waxed and kiln dried again. How many skills went into the making of the tint and the kilns, into supplying the heat, the light and power, the belts, motors, and all the other things a mill requires? Sweepers in the mill among my ancestors? Yes, and included are the men who poured the concrete for the dam of a Pacific Gas & Electric Company hydroplant which supplies the mill’s power!
Don’t overlook the ancestors present and distant who have a hand in transporting sixty carloads of slats across the nation.
Once in the pencil factory—$4,000,000 in machinery and building, all capital accumulated by thrifty and saving parents of mine—each slat is given eight grooves by a complex machine, after which another machine lays leads in every other slat, applies glue, and places another slat atop—a lead sandwich, so to speak. Seven brothers and I are mechanically carved from this “wood-clinched” sandwich.
My “lead” itself—it contains no lead at all—is complex. The graphite is mined in Ceylon [Sri Lanka]. Consider these miners and those who make their many tools and the makers of the paper sacks in which the graphite is shipped and those who make the string that ties the sacks and those who put them aboard ships and those who make the ships. Even the lighthouse keepers along the way assisted in my birth—and the harbor pilots.
The graphite is mixed with clay from Mississippi in which ammonium hydroxide is used in the refining process. Then wetting agents are added such as sulfonated tallow—animal fats chemically reacted with sulfuric acid. After passing through numerous machines, the mixture finally appears as endless extrusions—as from a sausage grinder—cut to size, dried, and baked for several hours at 1,850 degrees Fahrenheit. To increase their strength and smoothness the leads are then treated with a hot mixture which includes candelilla wax from Mexico, paraffin wax, and hydrogenated natural fats.
My cedar receives six coats of lacquer. Do you know all the ingredients of lacquer? Who would think that the growers of castor beans and the refiners of castor oil are a part of it? They are. Why, even the processes by which the lacquer is made a beautiful yellow involve the skills of more persons than one can enumerate!
Observe the labeling. That’s a film formed by applying heat to carbon black mixed with resins. How do you make resins and what, pray, is carbon black?
My bit of metal—the ferrule—is brass. Think of all the persons who mine zinc and copper and those who have the skills to make shiny sheet brass from these products of nature. Those black rings on my ferrule are black nickel. What is black nickel and how is it applied? The complete story of why the center of my ferrule has no black nickel on it would take pages to explain.
Then there’s my crowning glory, inelegantly referred to in the trade as “the plug,” the part man uses to erase the errors he makes with me. An ingredient called “factice” is what does the erasing. It is a rubber-like product made by reacting rapeseed oil from the Dutch East Indies [Indonesia] with sulfur chloride. Rubber, contrary to the common notion, is only for binding purposes. Then, too, there are numerous vulcanizing and accelerating agents. The pumice comes from Italy; and the pigment which gives “the plug” its color is cadmium sulfide.
No One Knows
Does anyone wish to challenge my earlier assertion that no single person on the face of this earth knows how to make me?
Actually, millions of human beings have had a hand in my creation, no one of whom even knows more than a very few of the others. Now, you may say that I go too far in relating the picker of a coffee berry in far-off Brazil and food growers elsewhere to my creation; that this is an extreme position. I shall stand by my claim. There isn’t a single person in all these millions, including the president of the pencil company, who contributes more than a tiny, infinitesimal bit of know-how. From the standpoint of know-how the only difference between the miner of graphite in Ceylon and the logger in Oregon is in the type of know-how. Neither the miner nor the logger can be dispensed with, any more than can the chemist at the factory or the worker in the oil field—paraffin being a by-product of petroleum.
Here is an astounding fact: Neither the worker in the oil field nor the chemist nor the digger of graphite or clay nor any who mans or makes the ships or trains or trucks nor the one who runs the machine that does the knurling on my bit of metal nor the president of the company performs his singular task because he wants me. Each one wants me less, perhaps, than does a child in the first grade. Indeed, there are some among this vast multitude who never saw a pencil nor would they know how to use one. Their motivation is other than me. Perhaps it is something like this: Each of these millions sees that he can thus exchange his tiny know-how for the goods and services he needs or wants. I may or may not be among these items.
No Master Mind
There is a fact still more astounding: The absence of a master mind, of anyone dictating or forcibly directing these countless actions which bring me into being. No trace of such a person can be found. Instead, we find the Invisible Hand at work. This is the mystery to which I earlier referred.
It has been said that “only God can make a tree.” Why do we agree with this? Isn’t it because we realize that we ourselves could not make one? Indeed, can we even describe a tree? We cannot, except in superficial terms. We can say, for instance, that a certain molecular configuration manifests itself as a tree. But what mind is there among men that could even record, let alone direct, the constant changes in molecules that transpire in the life span of a tree? Such a feat is utterly unthinkable!
I, Pencil, am a complex combination of miracles: a tree, zinc, copper, graphite, and so on. But to these miracles which manifest themselves in Nature an even more extraordinary miracle has been added: the configuration of creative human energies—millions of tiny know-hows configurating naturally and spontaneously in response to human necessity and desire and in the absence of any human masterminding! Since only God can make a tree, I insist that only God could make me. Man can no more direct these millions of know-hows to bring me into being than he can put molecules together to create a tree.
The above is what I meant when writing, “If you can become aware of the miraculousness which I symbolize, you can help save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing.” For, if one is aware that these know-hows will naturally, yes, automatically, arrange themselves into creative and productive patterns in response to human necessity and demand— that is, in the absence of governmental or any other coercive master-minding—then one will possess an absolutely essential ingredient for freedom: a faith in free people. Freedom is impossible without this faith.
Once government has had a monopoly of a creative activity such, for instance, as the delivery of the mails, most individuals will believe that the mails could not be efficiently delivered by men acting freely. And here is the reason: Each one acknowledges that he himself doesn’t know how to do all the things incident to mail delivery. He also recognizes that no other individual could do it. These assumptions are correct. No individual possesses enough know-how to perform a nation’s mail delivery any more than any individual possesses enough know-how to make a pencil. Now, in the absence of faith in free people—in the unawareness that millions of tiny know-hows would naturally and miraculously form and cooperate to satisfy this necessity—the individual cannot help but reach the erroneous conclusion that mail can be delivered only by governmental “masterminding.”
Testimony Galore
If I, Pencil, were the only item that could offer testimony on what men and women can accomplish when free to try, then those with little faith would have a fair case. However, there is testimony galore; it’s all about us and on every hand. Mail delivery is exceedingly simple when compared, for instance, to the making of an automobile or a calculating machine or a grain combine or a milling machine or to tens of thousands of other things. Delivery? Why, in this area where men have been left free to try, they deliver the human voice around the world in less than one second; they deliver an event visually and in motion to any person’s home when it is happening; they deliver 150 passengers from Seattle to Baltimore in less than four hours; they deliver gas from Texas to one’s range or furnace in New York at unbelievably low rates and without subsidy; they deliver each four pounds of oil from the Persian Gulf to our Eastern Seaboard—halfway around the world—for less money than the government charges for delivering a one-ounce letter across the street!
The lesson I have to teach is this: Leave all creative energies uninhibited. Merely organize society to act in harmony with this lesson. Let society’s legal apparatus remove all obstacles the best it can. Permit these creative know-hows freely to flow. Have faith that free men and women will respond to the Invisible Hand. This faith will be confirmed. I, Pencil, seemingly simple though I am, offer the miracle of my creation as testimony that this is a practical faith, as practical as the sun, the rain, a cedar tree, the good earth.
Source: Anything That’s Peaceful: The Case for the Free Market (1964)