The undeserved mercy.

The undeserved mercy.

These days we see pitiful scenes around, we hear alarming news, and at the same time a very strong anger grows when we see that in the end, all that is happening is that the account of the previous malpractices arrives.

I mean, take the gas story. Now, how long has it been that we tell industrialists that they have to change their regime and that they have to modify production to be low-emissions? How long have we been telling them to abandon fossil fuels? How long have we been telling them that this way of producing is not ecologically sustainable and that they had to change production systems to produce in a way that required fewer fossil fuels?

About 20.25 years old.

What did they do? On the one hand they have moved the lobbies to delay the climate agreements: 2020, 2025, 2030, 2037, 2040, 2050, and now we are talking about 2070.

On the other hand, they have flooded the newspapers with news such as "starting today our reception has an electronic system that saves water when we water the company cactus", or "the new coffee machines will only use the energy of the green dolphins' song".

Interesting. But the production methods remained intact.

Now comes a gas crisis, and for this reason an industrial system that promised to be green by 2030 is completely in crisis because there is a lack of fossil fuels.

And now the common citizen is being asked to save money and keep their homes cold. Result: gas cylinder explosions and deaths from stove poisoning, because no country is as flat as Belgium, and if in Bologna it may make sense to turn on the radiator in November, in Gaggio Montano (which is also the province of Bologna ) people will chatter their teeth, and they will use stoves of all kinds.

Those who already had stoves will continue with those, those who didn't have them will buy gas stoves. Prepare for the funeral.

But… and why does the common citizen have to pay? If we enter homes, by now all household appliances range from class A to class A+++. Gas boilers, thanks to continuous revisions, are now almost always very efficient models. Can we say the same about companies? No. Gas was cheap anyway.

Can you explain to me why those who have done their duty and use low-consumption systems must make sacrifices to save industrialists who have not made innovations?

No, I have no pity for the bar that will close due to the very high bill, when I know very well that almost no one has LED lights, almost everyone makes excessive use of ovens that are not made to be used in the bar, which make a criminal use air conditioning, and all.

While the retired old woman passed out to buy an energy-saving boiler. No, no mercy.

Ditto for the storms. For twenty years now municipalities have been told to stop cementing and the regions have been asked to make hydrogeological adjustments. Canals, lakes, reservoirs, both to contain the water to be used in dry periods, and to channel and slow down the waters.


Although the Italian population does not grow, houses are being built. And though every rainy spell is a stormy disaster and though every sunny spell is a disaster, no one does land planning.

How can I pity a population of real estate developers who get what they deserve?


The press obviously has strategies to FORCE people to take refuge in the rhetoric of pietism, or the rhetoric of the apocalypse, depending on the facts.

In the case of the storm, this happens:

  • They could also avoid cementing even the fuck, if they didn't want the devastation.
  • But it was a thunderstorm/water bomb/cloud beast/premature granny abelard type 3 supercazzola weather antichrist. It wasn't a normal occurrence.

My answer is simple: there are no “normal” weather events. Each event is unique.

  • They could also avoid cementing even the fuck, if they didn't want the devastation.
  • but it's the fault of global warming premature supercazzola as if it were antani in nomine rava et fava.

We are well aware that global warming exists and we are well aware that extreme events will happen more and more often.

  • They could also avoid cementing even the fuck, if they didn't want the devastation.
  • But a child died ooooo how faiiii to be so inhumane that he was guiltyaaaaaaaaaaa.
  • The child died because of whoever built the cement. Even less pity. The judgment is even more severe.
  • BUT his mom is crying, you can't see the tears
  • If he doesn't go shoot the mayor, he's complicit.

Another technique in use is that of the emergency. Stop looking for the culprits, because we are in an emergency and we need units here at all costs. It was done when COVID decimated the health of Communion and Liberation as if nothing had happened, and it is done again with the history of gas.

  • If the industrialists shut down because of gas, it's because in the last 20 years those who told them to transform production into something less energy-intensive didn't give a damn.
  • But there will be 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 unemployed!

This is the first. Shut up and don't you dare go on the industrialists, otherwise jobs will be lost. My answer is that if 35% of the industrialists close down, the remaining 65% will take their place on the market. The government's problem is not to save those who close, but to reward those who don't close.

But you can not 'say silence, otherwise' are other unemployed!

  • For years everyone whined against North Stream because according to them it was a thing of the wicked Germans. Then it closes, and it turns out that many sucked from that tube. Perhaps a contingency plan could have been had if someone had told the truth?
  • But there will be fifty thousand million warehouses, billions of unemployed, what are you doing, are you talking?

Again, don't bother the industrialists, and the press they own, because in the end it is fair to say that our industrialists are good and the rest are bad. In reality, two questions about a systemic risk never taken into consideration should be asked.

In all the disasters that are seen, and will be seen, the situation is always the same: they occur through NEGLIGENCE, but when one tries to investigate further, the journalists arrive and throw it into the racket with some alarm or some catchphrase, and no one can anymore ' to understand that if you don't (severely) punish the negligent, it will happen again, and aeven louder.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *