Recent Posts

martes, julio 26, 2011

El discurso político y los fanáticos

En artículo titulado A right wing monster, que pretende ser un llamado de conciencia al discurso radical que contribuye a la conformación de "ambientes" propicios para las acciones irracionales de fanáticos, Ross Douthat escribe:
How should European conservatives react? Not with the pretense that there’s somehow no connection whatsoever between Breivik’s extremism and the broader continental right. While his crimes should be denounced and disowned, their ideological pedigree has to be admitted. But this doesn’t mean that conservatives need to surrender their convictions.
Douthat, no obstante, al hacer esta introspección pretende asimilar el discurso ecologista de Al Gore al de los predicadores conservadores cercanos a la xenofobia y al racismo, lo que me parece un exceso y alienta dudas respecto a las intenciones auténticas del texto. Lo que salva al artículo son varios de los comentarios que se han vertido como reacción al mismo, que derrochan la inteligencia que en esta ocasión faltó al colaborador del New York Times:
  • I for one am not surprised that yet again, some self-righteous person believes it is their God-given patriotic mission to go out and act violently against other people who are threats -- to rid their world of muslims, or americans, or communists or jews or immigrants or whatever. And these people do not act alone, and do not think alone: they are acting out on what others advocate in public rhetoric, and tone, and ideology. Violence is simply the physical acting out of the ideas of hatred. cofresi.
  • What's important is not whether an extremist's views are to the right or to the left, but the degree of extremity, or in other words, to what extent the views are allowed to eclipse common standards of decency and reason. The problem with Breivik and Kaczynski is the same: such radical dedication to concepts that they no longer value the humanness of their perceived opponents. If we are to live together in a society, we must put priority on these basic, common values, and compromise on the merely ''political'' issues.  Agia Sophia
  • The vision for political priority of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness over traditional political privilege based on birth, class, or ethnicity is not folly, but the most ennobeling form of civic life that has yet been invented. The atrocities perpetrated by Breivik stand as a sobering invitation to both Americans and Europeans to remember that we cannot work for a better life together while we are busy defending our justifications for why people of foreign languages, religions, and customs who move to our communities to live under our laws should be excluded from rational, open, political dialogue and participation according to our ideals for a just society. Sarah Wiler
  • But multiculturalism is the way the human race might grow up and mature and learn to love, to share, and appreciate the beauty of other cultures. Multiculturalism enables people to exit from their self protective cocoons of fear, judgement, hostility, and attachment to misguided beliefs in their own culture's superiority. Multiculturalism may not be easy, but it is a path to a more mature human race, and it would be worth the risks and growing pains. Growing pains are the process every human life goes through individually, and the same principal should not be denied for the larger societal growing process. Hank
  • I agree that conservatives need not abandon their ideals, but every time any of us calls, or thinks, our neighbors evil (rather than mistaken), because they disagree with us, or because we are not getting our way, we are contributing to the next Norway, the next 9/11, the next Bosnia, the next Rwanda. Bejay
¡Y se siguen acumulando!

0 comentarios:

Publicar un comentario