Op-position

There is this story of a patient whose brother made a show at a hospital not too remote in location some time ago. His brother was being treated of a not so common head pain, and although the doctor had attended to him, the pain seemed to persist. In his frustration, he caused a fuss in the hospital and no little one at that, complaining about how the doctor does not know his job and how his brother's ache had extended to the neck, mouth, nose, face and even arguably to the spine. His complains also drifted to exorbitant hospital fees and the likes. He had many supporters who believed they had also been wronged by the corrupt health system in our country, and that crowd is not hard to find at all. In essence, the whole hospital gave him audience.
Only a few inquired of the doctor as to the extent of the anomaly his brother suffered and some still asked why he had not paid attention to the patient. The doctor then explained that the medicine he administered would take about 3 hours for the effects to show and what was important was for the patient to rest and have enough fluid.
This is what the opposition party is doing to this country. They absorb all attention on the basis that they are the "brother" to the patient and are in themselves victims of a sort. They use this opportunity to conveniently exaggerate the illness of this country, point hands at the wrong cause, heat the polity and in effect confuse the whole populace. The people with the answers we actually require are the doctors but we would rather listen to the patient's brother on account of sympathy.
If a boy complained of waist pain, we would ask, "did you fall?" or "did someone push you" but now we ask "who is the head doctor of the hospital you went to? He must have caused this" . We neglect the right cause of the problem and the problem itself and focus on the paramedic.

Europe Royale

The definition of power has become a popular topic of debate in present times and I suspect more so in previous ages, and yet future debates will definitely have a filled day at the topic too. The flexibility with which concepts, theories and even defines can be tussled in the discussion plates of intellectuals seem to make these things more complex and ambiguous than were meant to be. I already submitted my paper to my professor, so don't be infuriated just yet with these big words.
I am just unsettled in the dynamics of powers in Europe. Of the women in the seat of authority, which would refer to the Queen of Buckingham Palace and the Chancellor of Germany, who would we think has more power or authority as far as Europe is concerned? Who holds more say and sway in the continent, irrespective of Monarchical rights, splendour and dinners. What could even be considered to be the extent of the Queen's powers besides ceremonial.