Reprofilare

Stanley Aryanto și-a dat demisia din funcția (bănuim plicticoasă) de inginer în 2014 și de atunci străbate lumea și prinde cu camera peisaje spectaculoase (exemple)

Fizicianul Robert Lang worked at NASA, where he researched lasers. He has also garnered 46 patents on optoelectronics and even wrote a Ph.D. thesis called “Semiconductor Lasers: New Geometries and Spectral Properties.” But in 2001, Lang left his job in order to pursue a passion he’s had since childhood: origami. In the origami world, Lang is now a legend, and it’s not just his eye-catching, intricate designs that have taken the craft by storm. Some of his work has helped pioneer new ways of applying origami principles to complex real-world engineering problems (exemplu)

Țarii Rusiei

In advance of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, Vladimir Putin met with young entrepreneurs, engineers and scientists.

Spicuiri din discursul oficial (via site-ul oficial al presedentiei ruse):

Petru cel Mare a purtat Marele Război al Nordului timp de 21 de ani. La prima vedere, el se războia cu Suedia luându-i ceva. El nu lua nimic, recupera. Așa a fost. Când a fondat noua capitală, niciuna dintre țările europene nu a recunoscut acest teritoriu ca făcând parte din Rusia; toată lumea l-a recunoscut ca făcând parte din Suedia. Cu toate acestea, din timpuri imemoriale, slavii trăiau acolo împreună cu popoarele fino-ugrice, iar acest teritoriu se afla sub controlul Rusiei. Același lucru este valabil și pentru direcția vestică, Narva și primele sale campanii. De ce ar fi mers acolo? El se întorcea și se întărea, asta făcea. În mod clar, a căzut în sarcina noastră să ne întoarcem și să ne întărim și noi. Pentru a pretinde un fel de leadership – nu mă refer nici măcar la leadership global, mă refer la leadership în orice domeniu – orice țară, orice popor, orice grup etnic ar trebui să-și asigure suveranitatea. Pentru că nu există nici o cale de mijloc, nici un statut intermediar: fie o țară este suverană, fie este o colonie, indiferent cum se numesc coloniile”.

Mai jos transcrierea in engleză.

“I am very happy to see you,

Today, as we see, we are at VDNKh – a large park complex where all of Russia’s best achievements in all major spheres of development have traditionally been presented for decades: achievements that have always been Russia’s pride, that have helped it stay at the leading edge of development. We can say that over the last several decades our country has come a very long way in transformation and change, and this very complex of achievements – VDNKh – shows this progress in Russia.

You are young, but perhaps many of you know that this centre of achievements from Soviet times fell into a state of disrepair and was used for a cheap marketplace, but gradually, as the situation in the country improved, so did VDNKh. And now here we are, reviving the basic idea on which this exhibition centre was founded, which provides a place for you and people like you – young, beautiful, good-looking, smart, creative, and ambitious – to demonstrate your achievements. This is happening on a new basis, but still in a variety of areas.

Our meeting is being held in advance of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, and I have asked my office and my colleagues from the Government to organise this meeting to hear your ideas on where we are now, where we are going and what we need to do to ensure our absolute and unconditional progress, to make it beneficial for the country and everyone involved in this remarkable process.

And I promise that I will try to respond to all your proposals and ideas. It is easier for me to do this than for you. I just give instructions; you need to come up with ideas, while I just need to listen to you and give instructions. (Laughter.)

This will certainly help me and my colleagues understand how we should organise work at the St Petersburg Economic Forum.

I would like to begin by saying the following. We live in an era of change; this is obvious to everyone; everyone understands and sees this. Geopolitical, scientific and technological transformations are happening. The world is changing, and it is doing so rapidly. In order to claim some kind of leadership – I am not even talking about global leadership, I mean leadership in any area – any country, any people, any ethnic group should ensure their sovereignty. Because there is no in-between, no intermediate state: either a country is sovereign, or it is a colony, no matter what the colonies are called.

I am not going to give any examples so as not to offend anyone, but if a country or a group of countries is not able to make sovereign decisions, then it is already a colony to a certain extent. But a colony has no historical prospects, no chance for survival in this tough geopolitical struggle. There has always been such a struggle (I just want to make it clear); it is not that we are looking at what is happening around us and saying “Wow!” It has always been like that, you see, and Russia has always remained at the forefront of ongoing events.

Yes, there were eras in the history of our country when we had to retreat, but only in order to mobilise and move forward, concentrate and move forward.

Sovereignty, in the modern sense of the word – actually, it has always been like that, but it is particularly clear today – comprises several components.

First, there is military-political sovereignty, and here, no doubt, it is important to be able to make sovereign domestic and foreign policy decisions and to ensure security.

Second is economic sovereignty where the development of the basic sectors of the economy does not depend on anyone in terms of critical technology or matters that underlie the viability of society and the state.

Technical sovereignty and social sovereignty are critically important in today’s world. I am talking about the ability of society to come together to resolve national challenges, to respect history, culture, language, and all the ethnicities that share a single territory. This consolidation of society is one of the core conditions for growth. Without consolidation, things will fall apart.

There may be other components of sovereignty, I gave you the basic ones, and it is clear that all these things are interconnected. I gave you a list of four components. In fact, you could reverse the order and start from the last one and go backwards, and then list them randomly, because one cannot exist without the other. How do you achieve external security without technological capability and technological sovereignty? It is impossible.

We would never have hypersonic weapons if it were not for the capabilities of our science and industry. Never. You understand that fully only when you start dealing with these things directly. So, when we got hypersonic weapons, I asked for a list of developers to give awards to. I have already said this publicly before, but I will tell you again. They brought me a thick folder. I started flipping through it, but I saw that there were no peoples’ names, only names of enterprises, design bureaus and research institutes. Frankly, even I was surprised. I asked the person who brought it to me what it was all about. He said that without even one name on that list, the product would not have been possible. Thousands of people worked on it, see? Thousands. And then I realised the depth and the capabilities of our defence industry.

The same is true of the economy in general. A limping, sneezing and coughing economy is the end of it. What kind of consolidation of society can we then talk about? And if there is no consolidation, there will be nothing else, either.

In order to be able to effectively possess and use all of that, it is necessary to address basic tasks, such as demography, which means healthcare, environment, research, education and upbringing, which is very important.

Some time ago I had a discussion with the Patriarch about education, and he happened to say that even though education was indeed crucial, without proper upbringing we would not succeed at anything, because you can teach a person something, but the question is how they will use their knowledge. Science, education, upbringing, and health care are critically important, because without them demographic issues cannot be resolved, and so on. What about culture? If we do not rely on the basic values of the national cultures of the peoples of Russia, we will not consolidate our society. Without consolidation, everything will fall apart. And the fact that we have to sort of defend ourselves and fight for it is obvious.

We visited the exhibition dedicated to the 350th birth anniversary of Peter the Great. Almost nothing has changed. It is a remarkable thing. You come to this realisation, this understanding.

Peter the Great waged the Great Northern War for 21 years. On the face of it, he was at war with Sweden taking something away from it… He was not taking away anything, he was returning. This is how it was. The areas around Lake Ladoga, where St Petersburg was founded. When he founded the new capital, none of the European countries recognised this territory as part of Russia; everyone recognised it as part of Sweden. However, from time immemorial, the Slavs lived there along with the Finno-Ugric peoples, and this territory was under Russia’s control. The same is true of the western direction, Narva and his first campaigns. Why would he go there? He was returning and reinforcing, that is what he was doing.

Clearly, it fell to our lot to return and reinforce as well. And if we operate on the premise that these basic values constitute the basis of our existence, we will certainly succeed in achieving our goals.

You are experts in your fields, and I want to apologise upfront if I am unable to answer some of your questions. As a matter of fact, I would like to listen to your ideas in order to keep them in mind when organising the St Petersburg Economic Forum rather than turn our meeting into a Q&A session.

I would like to close my lengthy monologue with that and turn the floor over to our moderator. Please go ahead.

<…>

Vladimir Putin(following up on remarks by Polina Morozova, Skoltech postgraduate student and materials chemist who works on developing new-generation K-ion batteries for uninterruptible power supply for fixed systems) The first thing I would like to point out is that you used the term “closed economy.” Our economy will not be closed. We have never had one and never will. If anyone is trying to limit us in any way, they are limiting themselves in the first place.

For the sake of argument – this has nothing to do with you, but nonetheless – they are trying to put limits on our fertiliser exports only to see prices in their countries go up more than here. They tried to limit our energy exports and, again, prices went through the roof. They are already using my name instead of inflation when we have absolutely nothing to do with it. (Laughter.)

Seriously. That is the truth. We have absolutely nothing to do with it. This is the outcome of their mistakes, long-term ones at that, which they talked about every year even before today’s developments. They made these mistakes themselves, and are now – excuse me, ladies – trying to cover a certain part of theirs, trying to turn this around on Russia, claiming that Russia is to blame for everything. We have nothing to do with it. They imposed restrictions and pursued their energy policies for years and decades on end, which led to the current state of affairs. And then they started imposing sanctions and aggravated the situation in these and other areas even more.

Your field is important and promising. Storing and transmitting energy using the latest high-tech methods is the future in the economy in general, in individual industries, and in the defence industry. Are you working on batteries?

Polina Morozova: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: We know what we are talking about: silent submarines and so on. This has an extremely broad range of applications.

In addition to oil and gas, rare earth metals are also here.

Should you need any additional support, we are here to help. The Ministry of Industry and Trade has a programme to support non-resource exports. We will expand these forms of support.

As for “the closed economy” as you said, I would like to say this again that we did not have a closed economy. That is, we had it in Soviet times when we isolated ourselves by creating the so-called Iron Curtain. We created it with our own hands. But we are not going to do this again and fall into the same trap. Our economy will be open. Those who do not want it will steal from themselves. They are already stealing from themselves and creating problems. If they continue following this path, they will just make a bad situation worse.

Yes, we will be short of something because those who are doing this do have certain competitive advantages, especially in modern technology. This is clear. However, the world is big and diverse. You have just mentioned China and India. But why just China and India? What about Latin America? Yes, Africa may be still “asleep” today but it is “waking up.” About 1.5 billion people live there. And what about the whole of Southeast Asia? You should understand that it is impossible to build a fence around such country as Russia from the outside. And we are not going to build such a fence around our country.

But it is certainly necessary to help such start-ups as yours to enter world markets. We will be doing this, even more so since our trade and economic ties with these countries are making steady headway.

I think our trade with China is already US$140 billion. I believe during the past year our trade with China increased by 34 percent and with India by 87 percent. Do you understand? And do you know how much our trade with Turkey has gone up in the first half year? It increased 2.3 times. It is clear why but it has its own problems – high inflation and so on but it is developing and has advantages of its own. If we work with each other and we want to do this, there is only upside. The same is true of BRICS.

Two-thirds of the planet’s population live in the regions I mentioned. Yes, some countries are only taking their first steps in some areas but they are taking them and will continue. Economic growth rates in these countries, in Asia, were about 5 percent, in the United States 1.7 percent and in the Eurozone 1 percent in the past ten years.

We also have our own problems and we are aware of them but we will keep moving rather than hide behind some fence.

But it is necessary to help people like you and we will. I will certainly discuss this with the Government and relevant structures that are in charge of supporting exports in our country. It is necessary to expand this support and we will definitely do so.

<…>

Yury Shilov: This question is frequently asked by young entrepreneurs: what, in your opinion, are three key qualities a leader should possess?

Vladimir Putin: Three qualities… This applies to all walks of life, science, whatever you like, even education and politics.

First, you have to be devoted to your work. I know that, perhaps, many will not like hearing it but, for example, in science, there was a well-known married couple, Marie and Pierre Curie, who sacrificed their health, life, absolutely everything, to achieve something they devoted their lives to. In education, our prominent teachers in the 1930s devoted their lives to children and achieved outstanding results. There were nuclear and rocket projects in our recent history… Sergei Korolev, Igor Kurchatov – they dedicated their lives to what they were doing and, in fact, they lived and breathed it.

This does not mean that you should confine yourselves to living in a sort of box. Clearly, you should have broad knowledge but still, to a certain extent, you should be devoted to your profession and dedicate your lives to it.

Second, flexibility is important and the ability to soundly and objectively assess the results of your work and have respect for people with whom you are trying to achieve goals to which you devoted your lives. Be critical but constructive, and you can mobilise a team.

The ability to work in a team, especially if you lead a team, is a key element of success. That is basically it.

<…>

Vladimir Putin(in response to the remarks by Anna Krasavina, a research fellow of the Dukhov National Automatics Research Institute in charge of developing analogue systems for long-distance fibre-optic data transfer. As a developer, she is concerned over Russian microelectronics) Our Government has been trying for several years to launch or recreate Russia’s microelectronics industry. This is a complicated issue and one of the hardest blows at Russia in this entire array of restrictions.

Actually, it has always been this way since the times of the Peter the Great. The ships he built, the methods of their construction and so on were largely secret in his time. So, Peter went to the West and acquired this knowledge by working as a carpenter. This continued throughout our history. COCOM lists in Soviet times and the like. It was like this even in the best years of our cooperation with our so-called Western partners. Restrictions were preserved. Now they have simply ratcheted them up, and this is one of the main blows. We decided we could sell oil and gas and buy everything cheap. In fact, we funded their work with our cheap energy resources. This is broadly speaking, of course, but it is essentially what happened. And so, owing to these restrictions, we are compelled, thank God, to develop our own engineering schools, including in this area.

I will also take everything you said from the transcript of our conversation today and I will talk to the Prime Minister about this, because he is personally dealing with this problem at my request”

Admiral Hyman Rickover (1900-1986), the “Father of the Nuclear Navy,” was one of the most successful—and controversial- public managers of the 20th Century. His accomplishments are the stuff of legend. For example, in three short years, Rickover’s team designed and built the first nuclear submarine—the Nautilus—an amazing feat of engineering given that it involved the development of the first use of a controlled nuclear reactor. The Nautilus not only transformed submarine warfare, but also laid the groundwork for a whole fleet of nuclear aircraft carriers and cruisers (which was also built by Rickover and his team).

The text below is an excerpt from a speech Rickover delivered at Columbia University in 1982, in which he succinctly outlined his management philosophy

“Voltaire once said: “Not to be occupied and not to exist are one and the same thing for a man.” With those few words he captured the essence of a purpose in life: to work, to create, to excel, and to be concerned about the world and its affairs.

The question of what we can do to give purpose or meaning to our lives has been debated for thousands of years by philosophers and common men. Yet today we seem, if anything, further from the answer than before. Despite our great material wealth and high standard of living, people are groping for something that money cannot buy. As Walter Lippman said: “Our life, though it is full of things, is empty of the kind of purpose and effort that gives to life its flavor and meaning.”

I do not claim to have a magic answer. But I believe there are some basic principles of existence, propounded by thinkers through the ages, which can guide us toward the goal of finding a purpose in life.

Among these principles of existence, responsibility is the one which forces man to become involved. Acceptance of responsibility means that the individual takes upon himself an obligation. Responsibility is broad and continuous. None of us are ever free of it, even if our work is unsuccessful.

Responsibility implies a commitment to self which many are not willing to make; they are strongly attracted to accepting a course of action or direction for their lives imposed by an external source. Such a relationship absolves the individual from the personal decision-making process. He wraps himself in the security blanket of inevitability or dogma, and need not invest the enormous amounts of time, effort and, above all, the thought required to make creative decisions and meaningfully participate in the governance of his life.

Responsibility also implies a commitment to others, or as Confucius taught, each of us is meant to rescue the world. It is the business of little minds to shrink from this task or to go about it without enthusiasm. Neither art, nor science, nor any of the great works of humanity would ever come into being without enthusiasm.

The sense of responsibility for doing a job right seems to be declining. In fact, the phrase “I am not responsible” has become a standard response in our society to complaints on a job poorly done. This response is a semantic error. Generally what person means is: “I cannot be held legally liable.” Yet, from a moral or ethical point of view, the person who disclaims responsibility is correct: by taking this way out he is truly not responsible; he is irresponsible.

The unwillingness to act and to accept responsibility is a symptom of America’s growing self-satisfaction with the status quo. The result is a paralysis of the spirit, entirely uncharacteristic of Americans during the previous stages of our history. Even complaints about high taxes and high prices are illusory. Behind them is hidden the reality that the majority, in terms of sheer creature comfort, never had it so good. Those who are still on the outside looking in are not strong or numerous enough to make a political difference.

The task of finding a purpose in life also calls for perseverance. I have seen many young men who rush out into the world with their messages, and when they find out how deaf the world is, they withdraw to wait and save their strength. They believe that after a while they will be able to get up on some little peak from which they can make themselves heard. Each thinks that in a few years he will have gained a standing, and then he can use his power for good. Finally the time comes, and with it a strange discovery: he has lost his horizon of thought. Without perseverance, ambition and a sense of responsibility have evaporated.

Another important principle of existence which gives purpose and meaning to life is excellence. Because the conviction to strive for excellence is an intensely personal one, the attainment of excellence is personally satisfying. Happiness comes from the full use of one’s power to achieve excellence. Life is potentially an empty hole, and there are few more satisfying ways of filling it than achieving and exercising excellence.

This principle of excellence is on which Americans seem to be losing, and at a time when the Nation stands in need of it. A lack of excellence implies mediocrity. And in a society that is willing to accept a standard of mediocrity, the opportunities for personal failure are boundless. Mediocrity can destroy us as surely as perils far more famous.

It is important that we distinguish between what it means to fail at a task and what it means to be mediocre. There is all the difference in the world between the life lived with dignity and style which ends in failure, and one which achieves power and glory, yet is dull, unoriginal, unreflective, and mediocre. In a real sense, what matters is not so much whether we make a lot of money or hold a prestigious job; what matter is that we seek out others with knowledge and enthusiasm—that we become people who can enjoy our own company.

In the end, avoiding mediocrity gives us the chance to discover that success comes in making ourselves into educated individuals, able to recognize that there is a difference between living with excellence and living with mediocrity. Sherlock Holmes once told Dr. Watson, “Watson, mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself. It takes talent to recognize genius.” To which he could have added, it takes talent to know that what counts is condemning mediocrity not in others but in ourselves.

We should honor excellence, but not necessarily with material rewards alone. The Japanese have a custom which I believe it would be well for us to emulate. Instead of honoring their artists with peerages or knighthoods, they give them the respectful title, “National Human Treasure.”

Creativity is another of the basic principles of existence which I believe help to give purpose in life. The deepest joy in life is to be creative. To find an undeveloped situation, to see the possibilities, to decide upon a course of action, and then devote the whole of one’s resources to carry it out, even if it means battling against the stream of contemporary opinion, is a satisfaction in comparison with which superficial pleasures are trivial.

To create you must care. You must have the courage to speak out. The world’s advances always have depended on the courage of its leaders. A certain measure of courage in the private citizen also is necessary to the good conduct of the State. Otherwise men who have power through riches, intrigue, or office will administer the State at will, and ultimately to their private advantage. For the citizen, this courage means a frank exposition of a problem and a decrying of the excesses of power. It takes courage to do this because in our polite society frank speech is discouraged. But when this attitude relates to questions involving the welfare or survival of the Nation, it is singularly unfitting to remain evasive. It is not only possible, but in fact duty of everyone to state precisely what his knowledge and conscience compel him to say. Many of today’s problems can be brought forward only by complete candor and frankness; deep respect for the facts, however unpleasant and uncomfortable; great efforts to know them where they are not readily available; and drawing conclusions guided only by rigorous logic.

To have courage means to pursue your goals, or to satisfy your responsibilities, even though others stand in the way and success seems like a dream. It takes courage to stand and fight for what you believe is right. And the fight never ends. You have to start it over again each morning as the sun rises. Sir Thomas More wrote: “If evil persons cannot be quite rooted out, and if you cannot correct habitual attitudes as you wish, you must not therefore abandon the commonwealth. You must strive to guide policy indirectly, so that you make the best of things, and what you cannot turn to good, you can at least make less bad.”

These principles of existence—responsibility, perseverance, excellence, creativity, courage—must be wedded with intellectual growth and development if we are to find meaning and purpose in our lives. It is a device of the devil to let sloth into the world. By the age of twenty, some of us already have adopted a granite-like attitude which we maintain throughout life. Intellectually, we must never stop growing. Our conscience should never release us from concern for the problems of the day. Our minds must be forever skeptical, yet questioning. We must strive to be singularly free from that failing so common to man, deplored by Pascal in the “Pensees,” of filling our leisure with meaningless distractions so as to preclude the necessity of thought. To be an intellectual in the fullest sense, one’s mind must be in constant movement.

Aristotle believed that happiness was to be found in the use of the intellect. In other words, ignorance is not bliss; it is oblivion. The inspired prayer does not ask for health, wealth, prosperity, or anything material, but says, “God, illumine my intellect.” Man cannot find purpose in his life without expanding and using his intellectual qualities and capacities. Liberal learning is a primary source of these qualities. By liberal learning, I refer to discerning taste; wise judgment, informed and critical perspectives that transcend specialized interest and partisan passions; the capacity to understand complexity and to grow in response to it.

A cause of many of our mistakes and problems is ignorance—an overwhelming national ignorance of the facts about the rest of the world. A nation, or an individual, cannot function unless the truth is available and understood; no amount of good on the part of the leaders or the media will offset ignorance and apathy in the common citizen. Since the United States is a democracy, the broad answer is that all of us must become better informed. Reading is one method of accomplishing this purpose. By spending a few dollars for a book, the thoughts and life’s work of a great man are available to us.

The proof of living, as Norman Cousins has said, “is in memory, and all of us, through reading, can live five or six lifetimes in one. Through reading, the sluices of the mind open up, making accessible a range of experiences otherwise beyond our personal reach.” In reading books, we grow both emotionally and intellectually.

As a reader, man is unique among living things. The ability to read—and more broadly, the ability to express complex ideas through language—distinguishes him from all other lifeforms. Without language, complex though is inconceivable and the mind is undeveloped. The inability to speak and write imprisons thought. In the same vein, sloppy, imprecise thinking begets sloppy, imprecise language. Language and thought are interconnected, and the written word is the vehicle which best advances both.

Therefore, I count reading, and its associated skill, writing, among the most significant of all human efforts. Good writing, after all, is simply the result of enormous reading, detailed research, and careful thought. It means studying to gain a good vocabulary and practicing to learn how to use it. It seems to me that these kindred skills should be developed and nourished from the very first, if man is to grow intellectually. And unless he can express his thoughts well, he can exert little influence on his fellowmen.

I now will discuss on final principle of existence essential to man’s purpose in life: the development of standards of ethical and moral conduct. God, it is generally conceded, has made a remarkable job of the physical universe but has, strangely, not done quite so well with the spiritual element. There is abundant evidence around us to conclude that morals and ethics are becoming less prevalent in people’s lives. The standards of conduct which lay deeply buried in accepted thought for centuries no long are absolute. Many people seem unable to differentiate between physical relief and moral satisfaction; they confuse material success in life with virtue.

The decline in morals parallels the decline of traditional religion in all areas of our society. In our desire to separate church and state, we have gone to the opposite extreme and have exorcised religious training from our public schools and colleges, thus depriving our youth of the lasting standard of the morals and ethics enunciated by the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount.

Morals are the quarrel we have with behavior. Any system of education which does not inculcate moral values simply furnishes the intellectual equipment whereby men and women can better satisfy their pride, greed, and lust.

We are now living on the accumulated moral capital of traditional religion. It is running out, and we have no other consensus of values to take its place. This is partly because man can now obtain on earth what previously was promised him when he reached heaven.

In our system of society, no authority exists to tell us what is good and desirable. We are each free to seek what we think is good in our own way. The danger is that where men compromise truth and let decency slip, they eventually end up with neither. A free society can survive only through men and women of integrity. Fortunately, there still exist human beings who remain concerned about moral and ethical values and justice toward others. These are the individuals who provide hope of the ultimate realism that is marked by a society’s capacity to survive rather than be eventually destroyed.

Ethics and morals are basically individual values. A society that does not possess an ethical dimension will find it almost impossible to draft a law to give it that dimension. Law merely deters some men from offending and punishes others from offending. It does not make men good.

It is important also to recognize that morals and ethics are not relative; they do not depend on the situation. This may be the hardest principle to follow in working to achieve goals. The ends, no matter how worthy they appear, cannot justify just any means. Louis Brandeis, who was deeply convinced of the importance of standards, said: “One can never be sure of ends—political, social, economic. There must always be doubt and difference of opinion.” But Brandeis had no doubt about means. “Fundamentals do not change; centuries of thought have established standards. Lying and sneaking are always bad, no matter what the ends.”

This is a very enabling statement. Life is not meaningless for the man who considers certain actions wrong simply because they are wrong, whether or not they violate the law. This kind of moral code gives a person a focus, a basis on which to conduct himself. Certainly there is a temptation to let go of morals in order to do the expedient thing. But there is also a tremendous power in standing by what is right. Principle and accomplishment need not be incompatible.

A common thread moves through all the principles I have discussed: It is the desire to improve oneself and one’s surroundings by actively participating in life. Too many succumb to the emotional preference of the comfortable solution instead of the difficult one. It is easy to do nothing. And to do nothing is also an act; an act of indifference or cowardice.

A person must prepare himself intellectually and professionally and then use his powers to their fullest extent. This view is well expressed in two extracts from I Ching, the Confucian Book of Changes:

  • “The superior man learns and accumulates the results of his learning; puts questions, and discriminates among those results; dwells magnanimously and unambitiously in what he has attained to; and carries it into practice with benevolence.
  • The superior man nerves himself to ceaseless activity.”

It is important to be both a thinker and a doer and to have sense of responsibility. A theoretician who has no responsibility is withdrawn from the real world. His recommendations are made in a vacuum. Because he is not required to carry them out, they may be irresponsible and do harm. Similarly, those in charge—the doers—are often devoid of any real thought.

To find a purpose to life, on must be willing to act, to put excellence in one’s work, and have concern for what is right ahead of personal safety. Life must be felt, not observed. But to do so means applying oneself to the task daily. Ralph Waldo Emerson said: “God offers to every mind its choice between truth and repose. Take which you please—you can never have both.”

No professional man has the right to prefer his own personal peace to the happiness of mankind; his place and his duty are in the front line of struggling men, not in the unperturbed ranks of those who keep themselves aloof from life. If a profession is to have its proper place in the further development of society, it must be increasingly dissatisfied with things as they are. If there is to be any exaltation in one’s work, one must learn to reach out, not to struggle for that which is just beyond, but to grasp at results which seem almost infinite. As Robert Browning wrote, “Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a Heaven for.”

Man’s work begins with his job; his profession. Having a vocation is something of a miracle, like falling in love. I can understand why Luther said that a man is justified by his vocation, for it is a proof of God’s favor. But having a vocation means more than punching a time clock. It means guarding against banality, ineptitude, incompetence, and mediocrity. A man should strive to become a locus of excellence.

Most of the work in the world today is done by those who work too hard; they comprise a “nucleus of martyrs.” The greater part of the remaining workers’ energy goes into complaining. Employees today seldom become emotional about their organizations or its output; they are only interested in making money or getting ahead. And many organizations are killing their employees with kindness, undercutting their sense of responsibility with an ever-increasing permissiveness. This is a fatal error. For where responsibility ends, performance ends also.

“We measure ourselves by many standards,” said William James. “Our strength and our intelligence, our wealth and even our good luck, are things which warm our hearts and make us feel ourselves a match for life. But deeper than all such things, and able to suffice unto itself without them, is the sense of the amount of effort which we can put forth.” Man has a large capacity for effort. But it is so much greater than we think it is, that few ever reach this capacity.

We should value the faculty of knowing what we ought to do and having the will to do it. But understanding is easy. It is the doing that is difficult. The critical issue is not what we know but what we do with what we know. The great end of life is not knowledge but action. Theodore Roosevelt expressed this concept well in his “Man in the Arena” statement:

“It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”

The man in the arena has found a purpose in life. He daily experiences Emerson’s declaration that nothing is achieved without enthusiasm. He knows that men seldom come within shouting distance of their hopes for themselves. Yet he does not quite in resignation as have those who have taken trouble with nothing except to be born. In his work he is buffeted from two sides, challenged by his own ideas which revolt at the compromises of reality, and assaulted by reality which fights the ideas. He spends himself in that struggle, and he wins by a constant renewal of effort in which he refuses to sink either into placid acceptance of the situation or into self-satisfaction

I believe it is the duty of each of us to act as if the fate of the world depended on him. Admittedly, one man by himself cannot do the job. However, one man can make a difference. Each of us is obligated to bring his individual and independent capacities to bear upon a wide range of human concerns. It is with this conviction that we squarely confront our duty to prosperity. We must live for the future of the human race, and not of our own comfort or success.

For anyone seeking meaning for his life a figure from Greek mythology comes to mind. It is that of Atlas, bearing with endless perseverance the weight of the heavens on his back. —Atlas, resolutely bearing his burden and accepting his responsibility that gives us the example we seek. To seek out and accept responsibility; to persevere; to be committed to excellence; to be creative and courageous; to be unrelenting in the pursuit of intellectual development; to maintain high standards of ethics and morality; and to bring these basic principles of existence to bear through active participation in life—these are some of my ideas on the goals which must be met to achieve meaning and purpose in life”

Obituary in The New York Times July 9, 1986: “In his career Admiral Rickover generated controversy on all sides. He attacked Naval bureaucracy, ignored red tape, lacerated those he considered stupid, bullied subordinates and assailed the country’s educational system. And he achieved, in the production of the nuclear-powered submarine in the early 1950’s, what a former Secretary of the Navy, Dan Kimball, called ”the most important piece of development work in the history of the Navy. He Was Intent on Doing His Job, Hyman George Rickover cared little for protocol, tradition or what other people thought of him, so long as he could do his job. He was cordially detested by his enemies, and even his friends admitted that his abrasive personality made him far from a lovable old sea dog

Times of war

Discursul integral al președintelui Ucrainei, Volodimir Zelenski în Parlamentul României pe 4 aprilie 2022

Din cauza unor probleme tehnice, traducerea discursului președintelui ucrainean nu a fost făcută în condiții optime. Primele minute ale mesajului nu s-au auzit. Ambasada Ucrainei a pus la dispoziția opiniei publice o traducere neoficială. Europa Liberă nu a intervenit în text.

Stimate domnule Președinte al Camerei Deputaților!

Stimate domnule Președinte al Senatului!

Stimate domnule Prim-ministru! Doamnelor și domnilor deputați și senatori!

Dragi prieteni!

Drag popor român!

Sunt recunoscător pentru această oportunitate de a mă adresa dumneavoastră și tuturor oamenilor dumneavoastră. Acum câteva ore m-am întors din orașele eliberate din regiunea Kiev – din apropierea capitalei noastre.

Din teritoriile din care i-am alungat pe ocupanții ruși și am văzut ce făceau pe pământul nostru cu ucrainenii. Și vreau ca să vedeți aceasta acum.

(Sunt prezentate imagini video ale corpurilor neînsuflețite lăsate pe străzi de soldații ruși în retragere. La televiziunile din România, potrivit legii, imagini atât de dure nu pot fi redate decât blurate. Europa Liberă funcționează online, consideră că realitatea trebuie cunoscută așa cum este ea, dar plasează de asemenea un avertisment privind duritatea imaginilor n.r.)

Aceea ce ocupanții au lăsat în urma lor. Îmi pare rău – videoclipul este dur, dar aceasta este realitatea… Numele orașului nostru Bucia este acum pentru totdeauna în istoria mondială. În istoria crimelor de război. În istoria exterminării oamenilor.

Până în prezent, se cunoaște de peste 300 de civili torturați, împușcați sau uciși în alt mod la Bucia. Locuitori obișnuiți ai unui oraș obișnuit din apropiearea Kievului. Încătușați la spate, împușcați în ceafă sau în ochi și uciși pe străzi. Zdrobeau vehiculele civile cu echipamente militare. Cu oameni în ele! Violau femei și fete…

Și aceasta este doar începutul anchetei. Nu toate dovezile au fost strânse încă. Nu toate înmormântările au fost încă descoperite. Nu au fost încă inspectate toate subsolurile în care militarii ruși au torturat oamenii.

Există toate motivele să credem că numărul locuitorilor uciși din Bucia și din alte orașe ucrainene din apropiere va fi mult mai mare decât ceea ce cunoaștem astăzi.

De ce militarii ruși au comis aceasta? În aceeași zi, 3 aprilie, când lumea a fost îngrozită să vadă cadavrele celor uciși la Bucia, pe site-ul agenției de știri de stat ruse RIA Novosti a fost publicat un articol care justifică genocidul ucrainenilor. Numele lui este destul de elocvent, citez: „Ce trebuie să facă Rusia cu Ucraina”. Nu este doar un text.

Aceasta este una dintre dovezile pentru viitorul tribunal împotriva criminalilor de război ruși.

Articolul descrie o procedură clară și calculată de distrugere a tot ceea ce face din ucraineni ucraineni și poporul nostru însuși. Pe cei care nu-i vor putea înfrânge și îngenunchea.

S-a spus că trebuie efectuată „de-ucrainizarea” și „de-europenizarea” Ucrainei.

Se spune că până și numele statului nostru trebuie șters.

De fapt, se spune că uciderea cât mai multor dintre oamenii noștri în război este doar binevenită.

Vreau să subliniez încă o dată: acesta este site-ul agenției de știri de stat din Rusia, unde în condițiile cenzurii de stat deschise, poate fi publicat doar ceea ce corespunde poziției ideologice oficiale privind războiul împotriva Ucrainei.

Orice lucru care nu corespunde unei astfel de poziții pur și simplu nu ar fi trecut prin filtru de cenzură.

Adică vreau să mă înțelegeți: ei nici măcar nu se ascund.

Ei vorbesc deschis despre scopul invaziei pe teritoriul Ucrainei.

Dacă armata noastră nu ar fi rezistat, dacă poporul nu s-ar fi ridicat în apărarea statului, aceștea ar fi făcut ceea ce au făcut la Bucia – dar pe tot teritoriul Ucrainei.

Cunoaștem despre uciderea deliberată a profesorilor și educatorilor în teritoriile temporar ocupate.

Cunoaștem despre teroarele deliberate împotriva tuturor celor pe care ocupanții i-au văzut ca activiști, ca oameni conectați cu armata.

Chiar și simpla prezență în apartamentul unei persoane a simbolurilor naționale ale Ucrainei, steagului statului și stemei, prezentau deja un motiv pentru ca ocupanții să ucidă această persoană sau cel puțin s-o amenințe că o vor ucide.

Dar de ce ei nu se ascund?

De ce chiar și acum, când totul este clar pentru lume, spun deschis cum vor să distrugă poporul întreg?

Există două răspunsuri la această întrebare.

Pe primul îl veți înțelege foarte bine. În 1989, Nicolae Ceaușescu și-a încheiat în sfârșit viața. De mulți ani a fost limpede că acest om își pierduse adecvarea. Era clar că el, soția lui, cei apropiați de el, „Securitatea” lui trag țara voastră și oamenii în jos – spre suferință, spre sărăcie, spre izolare nu doar de lume, dar și de tot ce e mai avansat în lume. Acel regim se baza doar pe intimidare și represiune, brutalitate și înșelăciune. Nu era nimic luminos în aceasta.

Poporul român s-a revoltat și s-a apărat, s-a salvat. După ce a răsturnat puterea inadecvată. Pentru că aceasta era singura cale. Ceauşescu, soţia lui, cei apropiați de el şi Securitatea lui nu au putut fi convinşi. De asemenea, este imposibil să-i convingi pe cei care promovează războiul în Rusia acum. Pe cei care dau ordine criminale. Pe cei care elaborează planuri pentru genocidul poporului ucrainean și distrugerea Statului Ucrainean.

Acești oameni sunt inadecvați. Au pierdut orice legătură cu realitatea și sunt dispuși să sacrifice milioane de vieți pentru a-și realiza ideile lor nebune.

Iar al doilea motiv pentru care Rusia apelează în mod deschis la genocid și din cauza căruia crimele ocupanților, pe care le-a văzut toată lumea la Bucea sunt posibile, este încrederea oficialilor de vârf ai Rusiei că liderii europeni sunt slabi. Că Europei îi lipsește un leadership. Și că națiunile europene nu sunt capabile să apere valorile care au unit continentul.

Doamnelor și domnilor! Drag popor român!

Împreună trebuie să-i oprim pe acești oameni inadecvați care sunt obișnuiți cu impunitatea și, prin urmare, au decis că li se permite absolut totul.

Împreună, trebuie să-i oprim pe cei care vor genocid în Europa.

De ce ar trebui să facem aceasta împreună? Fiecare dintre voi înțelege că Ucraina nu este ultima țintă a agresiunii ruse.

Trupele ocupanților încearcă cu încăpățânare să ocolească orașul nostru Nicolaev pentru a încerca să captureze Odesa. Și de la Odesa este un pas până în Moldova.

Propagandiștii de stat ruși au spus de multă vreme că Moldova este și ea o țintă pentru expansiunea Rusiei.

Prin urmare, apărarea de către ucraineni a propriului stat este o condiție fundamentală pentru securitatea și independența Republicii Moldova. Și, deci, o condiție prealabilă pentru pace în întreaga regiune mare a Dunării.

Acum pe teritoriul Ucrainei se decide soarta întregii Europe de Est și Centrală și a regiunii Mării Negre.

Astfel, apărarea libertății Ucrainei și a ucrainenilor înseamnă garantarea securității Europei.

Ce trebuie făcut?

Da, au fost impuse sancțiuni Rusiei pentru acest război. Dar războiul pentru libertatea noastră durează de 40 de zile deja. După 8 ani de război în Donbas.

Aceasta înseamnă că doar sancțiuni nu este suficient.

Rusia trebuie să caute pacea cu Ucraina și cu întreaga Europă. Pentru a face acest lucru, Rusia trebuie să fie lipsită de toate resursele. În primul rând, financiar și economic.

Uniunea Europeană trebuie să ajungă în sfârșit la o decizie de principiu și să închidă porturile pentru navele rusești.

Să oprească tranzitul de mărfuri și orice activitate economică cu Rusia. Limitarea fluxului de bani pentru sursele de energie rusești nu are o alternativă.

Se poate discuta care ar trebui să fie formatul: un embargo complet asupra proviziilor sau un program precum „petrol în schimbul produselor alimentare” – dar aceasta este necesar.

Dar nu numai aceasta.

Fiecare politician dintr-o lume democratică trebuie să apere necesitatea de a oferi Ucrainei toate armele necesare. Pentru că pe câmpul de luptă se decide cine va fi învingător în acest război – libertatea sau tirania.

Toți cei de care depinde acest lucru trebuie să facă tot posibilul pentru a aduce rapid și inevitabil în fața justiției pe toți militarii ruși și liderii lor care sunt vinovați de comiterea crimelor împotriva civililor pe teritoriul temporar ocupat al Ucrainei.

Astăzi, am convenit cu Uniunea Europeană acordarea unui sprijin financiar și tehnic echipei de investigare Eurojust, a statelor membre ale UE și Curții Penale Internaționale.

Cred că leadership-ul României va fi unul dintre factorii decisivi în restabilirea dreptății și protejarea vieții normale atât în regiunea noastră, cât și în Europa în ansamblu.

Sunt încrezător că România și companiile românești vor participa și la programul de reconstrucție postbelică al Ucrainei. Invităm partenerii noștri din Europa să preia patronajul asupra unui oraș, regiune sau industrie care a suferit în urma agresiunii Rusiei.

Potențialul vostru, puterea voastră interioară pot crea un nou exemplu de leadership în construirea unei vieți civilizate și pașnice.

Sunt sincer recunoscător întregului popor român pentru atitudinea amabilă fața de ucrainenii deplasați care și-au găsit siguranța pe pământul dumneavoastră.

Sper că împreună vom reuși să creăm cât mai curând astfel de condiții, când Rusia va renunța la război și astfel poporul nostru se va putea întoarce acasă, în Ucraina.

Și această experiență de asistență în situații extreme, respect reciproc, bunăvoință între oamenii noștri a devenit deja o bază a unei și mai mari apropieri a statelor noastre.

De îndată ce situația va permite, vreau să lansez un dialog cu dumneavoastră asupra unui nou acord atotcuprinzător care să garanteze protecția absolută și dezvoltarea cuprinzătoare a minorităților noastre naționale – comunității ucrainene din România și comunității române din Ucraina.

Pentru că destinul nostru este să fim atât de aproape cât de mult putem.

Destinul nostru este să fim apărători ai libertății în regiunea noastră.

Destinul nostru este să fim împreună în Familia Europeană.

Și cred că foarte curând mă voi putea adresa către dumneavoastră și cu cuvinte de recunoștință pentru sprijinul României pentru aderarea Ucrainei la Uniunea Europeană.

Slavă României! Slavă Ucrainei!