Viitorul primar general al Bucureștilor

Telegrafic

După lansarea oficială a Ludovic Orban se pot trage câteva concluzii:

  • viitorul primar al Capitalei nu va fi de la partidele mari. Deci nu va fi candidatul oficial Ludovic Orban dar liderii liberali vor fi la curent cu lansarea ”candidatului surpriză”.

  • Ludovic Orban a fost ales pentru că electoratul liberal este învățat că Orban cedează în cursă pe ultima sută de metri și voturile vor fi canalizate ușor și într-un mare măsură spre adevăratul candidat. Deci Orban este doar toboganul pe care voturile liberalilor vor fi canalizate spre candidatul câștigător.

  • Adevăratul candidat cu șanse 100 % de câștig va fi unul special pregătit, va avea o campanie atipică, va veni pe o agendă mai mult apolitică și va beneficia de ”efecte de scenă și elemente pirotehnice” pregătite de o echipă de campanie asamblată în afara structurilor de partid,

  • ”candidatul surpriză” va beneficia de o staff electoral similar cu cele folosite de Oprescu și Iohannis, va avea o strategie de mobilizare care va extrage lecțiile din momentul Busoi.

  • Momentul Bușoi de fapt a testat elemente posibile din viitoarea campanie a candidatului surpriză:

    • dacă să fie folosit Iohannis sau nu în campanie ? și cum ?

    • dacă să se folosească modelul de mobilizare emoțională tip Colectiv sau cutremurul din 77 ?

    • dacă să se folosească proiecte megalomanice de tip : șosea suspendată, cel mai mare spital din sud-estul Europei

    • dacă rețele online/offline post-Colectiv vor reuși singure să ofere structuri de oportunitate politică suficiente pentru  mobilizare sau echipa va avea nevoie să genereze si altele pe termen scurt ?

    • daca să folosească sau nu structuri instituționale administrative locale care să genereze mobilizare non-politica

    • un element central din strategia ”candidatului surpriză”: electoratul va fi expus unei campanii care pune accentul pe focalizare și se va evita promovarea diferențierii. Candidatul surpriză va fi inventiv și eficient pe strategia focalizării și va reuși să genereze mai multă mobilizare non-politică decât restul candidaților.

Cam atât, mai urmărim, mai analizăm.

Siria- începutul planului de pace

Joint Statement of the United States and the Russian Federation, as Co-Chairs of the ISSG, on Cessation of Hostilities in Syria via U.S. Department of State

 

Any party engaged in military or para-military hostilities in Syria, other than “Daesh”, “Jabhat al-Nusra”, or other terrorist organizations designated by the UN Security Council will indicate to the Russian Federation or the United States, as co-chairs of the ISSG, their commitment to and acceptance of the terms for the cessation of hostilities by no later than 12:00 (Damascus time) on February 26, 2016.

In order to implement the cessation of hostilities in a manner that promotes stability and protects those parties participating in it, the Russian Federation and the United States are prepared to work together to exchange pertinent information (e.g., aggregated data that delineates territory where groups that have indicated their commitment to and acceptance of the cessation of hostilities are active, and a focal point for each side, in order to ensure effective communication) and develop procedures necessary for preventing parties participating in the cessation of hostilities from being attacked by Russian Armed Forces, the U.S.-led Counter ISIL Coalition, the Armed Forces of the Syrian government and other forces supporting them, and other parties to the cessation of hostilities.

Military actions, including airstrikes, of the Armed Forces of the Syrian Arab Republic, the Russian Armed Forces, and the U.S.-led Counter ISIL Coalition will continue against ISIL, “Jabhat al-Nusra,” and other terrorist organizations designated by the UN Security Council.

The Russian Federation and United States will also work together, and with other members of the Ceasefire Task Force, as appropriate and pursuant to the ISSG decision of February 11, 2016, to delineate the territory held by „Daesh,” „Jabhat al-Nusra” and other terrorist organizations designated by the UN Security Council, which are excluded from the cessation of hostilities.

Eco

Umberto Eco, 84, Best-Selling Academic Who Navigated Two Worlds, Dies

Psihologie

How Psychology Helped Support — and Subvert — the British Empire By Jack Meserve

That maze, and that dark story behind it, proves the point at the heart of Erik Linstrum’s Ruling Minds: Psychology in the British Empire: All too often we draw a clean, hard line between science and dogma, between reforming unjust structures and validating them. In reality, science is frequently used simply to justify preexisting belief systems and power relationships. And one of the clearest examples comes from how psychology was used by the British Empire in the early 20th century.

With hindsight, it’s easy to think of psychology in the first half of the 20th century as an art rather than a science, and its place of practice as the psychoanalyst’s recliner, with the patient exploring the nature of castration anxiety, rather than as a tool embraced by government and academia. But Ruling Minds takes the reader through the largely forgotten history of how Great Britain tried to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its empire through the new “mind sciences,” a broad category that included personality and intelligence testing as well as the theories of Jung and Freud. From Uganda to India to Burma, government bureaucrats, academics, missionaries, and anthropologists used tests like Porteus’s to try to research, rationalize, and control the empire.