Sven Laux, Elusive Moments

Time. It can either work for or against any cause.

I've met people that run, hastily, skilfully through life, like the rabbit from Alice in Wonderland, or the Men in Grey from Momo. In the #Ayotzinapa case, Peña Nieto has stated his interest in moving on, as fast as we can, towards the "promising" energetic future. 

Once again, I wonder, how can we be able to move past this tremendous sense of negative fantasy that's been created around all the cases of impunity in this country? With Raúl Salinas de Gortari acquittal, the Nasa (FIRMS Web Fire Mapper) showing a fire large enough, (the day after the Ayotzinapa students disappeared) in Chilapa, not Cocula as Murillo stated in his infamous press conference, to finally get to what I call sad loss #44: "Father Goyo's" death a few days ago. 

[nasa fire mapper]

"The diocese called on 'all the federal, state and municipal authorities to clarify the events and render justice for the death of so many brothers and sisters in the state of Guerrero.'

'Enough already!', the Mexican bishops conference said in a statement. 'We don't want more blood. We don't want more deaths. We don't want more people disappeared.'" [source]

Here's where time can work against the Ayotzinapa parents... What am I saying? Against all of us. Thinking even further... After three months, what's the difference time makes in cases like these? Now that I come to think of it, longer, faster, seems the same thing to everyone, we're used to dismissal. It's not our usual activities that will take us away from this issue, since this whole situation is not about wasting our rage and time on stupid theories that never seem to make sense. It's about the government's Art of Being Elusive and remain unpunished.

All threads of violence running parallel, untied, never clarified exhaustively while dead corpses keep bursting out like candies from a perverse piñata.

"A few years ago the city council of Monza, Italy, barred pet owners from keeping goldfish in curved fishbowls. The sponsors of the measure explained that it is cruel to keep a fish in a bowl because the curved sides give the fish a distorted view of reality. Aside from the measure's significance to the poor goldfish, the story raises an interesting philosophical question: How do we know that the reality we perceive is true? The goldfish is seeing a version of reality that is different from ours, but can we be sure that it is any less real? For all we know, we, too, may spend our entire lives staring out at the world through a distorting lens." [source]

This is how I feel about the Mexican scenario, the government keeps trying to distort the lenses of the reality we live in, but the effort to generate such a task keeps falling short. Short of intellect, short of plausibility, and ironically as a result, short of reality.

The trick is how to deal with their elusiveness and (failed) creative (or destructive) licenses orchestrated by our government? There must be a pattern in what seems random, because even randomness has some kind of predictability, and that optimistically only means less certainty about the outcome of an event. 

Do we have to keep watching this bad soap opera over and over again? Apparently, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow conclude that none of the situations; the fish inside the bowl or the humans outside of it, have it more real than someone, let's say, in space. You act according to what you perceive your environment to be, even if it's a distorted one.

If the state is the source of corruption and impunity, how do we set a strategy of peace and resistance against elusiveness?