Neagu Djuvara and his oppinions

http://www.catavencu.ro/neagu_djuvara_sint...ripa-16027.html

Interesting as usual... Neagu Djuvara... waiting the paper to read all!

Me too! If it's interesting, I'll make a scan when the version will get to me - hope it's legal...

So the European youth is burning cars... That's it? That's how N.D. sees European youth?

Neagu Djuvara is an eurosceptic. Nothing wrong with that, lots of other people are. It is a free world and everyone is free to believe whatever they want. That does not mean he is right. He is just a man with an opinion and his opinion is as good as the next man's.
Young people have always been protesting.
Radu

Well, except he's a little older and more experienced... so his opinion is a little more than that! - Of course, that's MY opinion...
I just received the magazine this evening - the written form is way bigger and more interesting! I'll post it tomorrow or in the weekend...

For me Neagu Djuvara's opinions are way more important than any other cultural personality from today! This doesn't mean he can't be wrong but at least be read and listen carefully (at least)... He's one of few people who I respect the most!

Djuvara strikes again
http://www.realitatea.net/djuvara-romania-...oxa_773832.html

Oh, I've just seen that - he's undoubtedly right! It's (unfortunately) historically proven that our affinity towards the Orthodox (Eastern) Christianity has led us on a "slower" road...

And you obviously have arguments to back this up, don't you? Or is it enough proof for you that Djuvara says it?

So, Mr. Djuvara looks at Hungary, Poland and Romania and picks religion as the explanation.

Right, it must be religion:

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/7408/invs.jpg

Yes, Victor, I have!
It's rather a counter-argument: the Protestant doctrine encouraged the free initiative; also, the Catholic doctrine encouraged discipline and obedience; the Orthodox doctrine - at least what was "adopted (or applied) in our area didn't encourage progress...
Of course, things are definitely not simple and cannot be explained in a forum post... :D:D
There are serious works - more serious than Mr. Djuvara's "short stories" - which debate these things; more precisely, what was the measure in which a certain religion determined a certain evolution. I have to dust off some of my college memories, but I'll keep this particular thread under close surveillance in the days to come
PS: observing my series of posts, I don't think I strike you as a "follower" of opinions, but rather a "Gică-contra"!

The religion has nothing do to do with the development of a certain nation. There were no "christian" nations who developed flourishing civilisations in antiquity, as it were catholic or protestant nations who massacred "savage people" who were more advanced culturally as they were. See the deeds of spanish conquistadors in South America from XVIth century.

In this idea, romanians and orthodoxism has nothing to do with romanian development as a nation. Romanians are not more or less inteligent as other nations, not lazier or hardworked as other nations. Romanians just didnt create for themselves a mature and adult way of thinking, as a nation. They are still in the age of childhood with their way of thinking, more often waiting some to fall from the sky, instead of thinking how to do and after that even doing so.

1. I object! Just look closer at the history of some states, like England - after they adopted Anglicanism, or, why not, US of A, in their early period! Or the Islamic states of XIX-th and XX-th centuries (and XXI-st, unfortunately).
2. And this is exactly what Mr. Djuvara points at! "pară mălăiaţă", with its contemporary "social/unemployment funding" version...

England, with it's anglicanism if yoy like so, conquered a big part of the world and made it it's colonies. Tens of milions people from diferent nations across the world were made subjects of british rulers and put to work for them. Their lands were exploited in the benefit of the new rulers, their former owners were reduced to be tools for work. Let me be well understand: I am not a comunist, but I hate when someone, being it even an entire nation, suffer because force is used against it. It is about what is good and what is wrong to be used in XX and XXI century: the force of the law or the law of the force (forţa dreptului sau dreptul forţei)?

Religion was for too many centuries a weapon of indoctrination, to fool stupid people to fight each against other, giving them a spiritual reason if a material one lacked. Also, religion has nothing to do with the development of a nation. Bizantium was a ortodox empire and for a thousand years it was as powerfull as others, non-ortodox was. But his time run out and he colapsed, as it will colapse nowadays or future empires and as always they did.