This week was better to think of writing. Had to pass the time for what seems inexplicable is this more clear and understandable. If allowed to pass the time more clearly drawn lines connecting the different points and let you set, contextually, an interpretation of the assassination of a political militant in a union dispute.
Naturally, they must be careful what you say and what is written in the first place because there is a death and then because the exercise of violence as a means of conflict resolution is not trivial. The Government should keep the first caution and prudence as we are accustomed, saved that part and gave us a sad and shameful spectacle. His newsagents increased, if that's possible, daily shame absurd lies and unwarranted operations.
But I want to take a second to a different dimension. The Government proposes a look at the democratic experience policy in a form defined itself from confrontation and not from the cooperation. Its external authorizer, prestigious and comfortable living in social Europe, we proposed, we, the poor relations, a version of democracy undervalued and stupid. Both intellectuals and journalists and opinion makers, but mainly the presidential marriage itself-here mostly for convenience and psychic empathy for intellectual reasons, chose to praise and a way of raising the policy that has within it many opportunities to exploit the worst human tensions .
Can you think some of the features of the Government and its social results, outside of what happened on the railway tracks between the Union and the Labor Party?
In this blog I said what I think are the salient features of the cultural form Kirchner, confrontational populism, ownership memory and capture the center-left ideology. All these edges promote the creation of antagonistic political adversary. From the official silence behind the words of Hebe de Bonafini, the show of force (is it ever possible that the policy Argentina is allowed to replace this metaphor?) of Moyano River and its own statements about the hypothesis of a Peronist government, to the refusal to extradite Apablaza for trial by the Chilean democratic power, constitute the real proof understanding of democracy that underlies the Government. Populate the shares ideas, ideas have consequences and and l confrontational temperament and their legitimizing discourse generated its own offspring, what and now refuse to recognize.
From where I see things, governments produce a type of society and unless you give up over-the proceduralism, types of democracy that governments draw or use different, more or less explicitly formulated social and cultural temperaments. The company that produces the Kirchner is a broken society, because it regards democracy from a break provoked and stimulated. The different ways in which society deals with the break you need greater reflection and may not be always a sign of greater democratization. In fact, particularly in areas off somewhat, the response to this breakdown is the fear and end up taking more conservative positions that would be taken against a political situation more pleasant.
What I think is, in essence, that can not be stressed to maintain, enhance and glorify union power than about their characteristics, and then surprised because things happen this type. I wonder, in this sense, what will it mean for CFK find the masterminds behind this?
0 comments:
Post a Comment