by the fact that today ...
LEAD IS JUST IN THE EARS OF THOSE WHO DO NOT LISTEN
LEAD IS JUST IN THE EARS OF THOSE WHO DO NOT LISTEN
Spinelli: "I'm not the '70s, these guys left out of politics"
Years of lead has become a catchphrase: useless, and at the same time banal and provocative. But the metal seems to be in the ears of those who can not hear, the word of Barbara Spinelli. Thursday Annozero Santoro said the politicians in the studio: we ask the kids if you want to dissociate from the violence, but if they do not respond to us what we want to hear you say - Then as it happened - we must be able to talk to them. Okay? Completely. It is more than legitimate to ask young people to reflect its dangers that can lead to violent acts. But the question here is not the dissociation of the boys, but opt \u200b\u200bfor a political discussion on a demonstration by citizens. should be given a space for dialogue: the young people that were in place have not made an attack, there are people with blood in his hands. La Russa gave the kids of cowards. He wanted to go, but remained. I know that it is very fashionable word canagliesca, that instinct, but a minister does not give these answers. Do not threaten to go away as soon as one begins to speak. Perhaps it would be better if it went really, if you can not do his job. The curriculum of every terrorist there is no recognition of institutions, politics itself is conflict resolution through use of the word of reason. La Russa is how the terrorists said to the boys and the policy implication: "I do not recognize you." But they are citizens. It means that the state does not recognize the voters? course This state puts out, because it is at war, among other things, it is not clear to whom, and exploits people's fears. Casini by Santoro said the police were there to protect the cradle of democracy. And one of the protesters had the courage to enforce as the coffin was the cradle of democracy "mercantile." The politicians who are sounding the call to protect the institutions, think healthy. The cradle of parliamentary democracy is empty. I do not say so you have to throw stones, but the student is right when he says that this is not the democracy of Pericles. That cradle is also a place where you frequently evokes the party of hate. any dissent, even peaceful, now is criminalized, as well as unheard. Plutarch writes that in Asian countries is always said yes, while in Europe, where there were democracies, they said no. I'm with Plutarch. A worn-out cliche has it that civil society has gradually detached from politics. In logical analysis, a movement from a place in society. Could it be that politics is so abysmal that has increased the distance that separates it from what the citizens want? Yes, it is a liability policy, and if the gap becomes very deep meaning that the company has no other places and ways to express itself and its hardships different from the square. The violent movements are dangerous. But I'm also a warning that the political class needs to listen, on pain of defeat. We saw in the revolt of blacks in Los Angeles ghettos in '92 it was then that was coined a new word: sottoveglianza, ie the inverse of the surveillance denounced by Foucault. The company began to monitor the power from the bottom up, it was not only subject and object of a control. The novelty is that in Italy this sottoveglianza exists now. And politics must take this into account, knowing that it is under constant supervision. So the recipe is an open society. But what are the spaces of dialogue so far not possible? places where politicians have to accept access also young people, who have the same pension as € 360 per month. I think the TV, for example. And then there must be no restrictions of expression on the internet. Politicians must begin to listen, because they are not faced with terrorists. I think the statements of young people in the revolt of the banlieues of Paris. They said on TV: "We do not we can talk. " The question is to be heard, to enter the agora. Today there is a form of segregation is as if a whole generation was called nigger. When I saw the picture of that boy beaten in Piazza del Popolo, the other day, I came back to mind the filmstrip on the beating of Rodney King in '91. Taken up by people who were there - and here again the sottoveglianza - when the police beat the young black man. The ghetto uprising was born there. Saviano wrote: "The infiltrators are always there, ever since the first worker decided to pull out. And you can always play only if they attended. It was there that I would raise the alarm. It must never happen again. Thus begins the new strategy of tension, which is always the same: how can we not recognize it? How can we not recognize the scene, always the same? Those hoods are the first enemies be isolated. " It will not be a bit 'limited its analysis? As he condemn violence because counterproductive to what you want. It is also true that a movement, also type other than the years of lead, may be accompanied by a strategy of tension and thus have the same results. I welcome therefore warned of Saviano. At the same time, warned it can not be the only prerequisite, in my opinion, of speech with these young people, because in them there is a political design of conventional type. There is a picture of who is confined in a radical way out of politics and wants to get into it. This is a political act of people who are out of peaceful conflict management. you compare with the years of lead. But these protests have nothing ideological. In the square There were no precarious future, without homes quake, researchers at risk of disappearing, Naples submerged by waste. Alemanno - one that some non-peaceful demonstration attended - said: "We must not go back to the 70s. All institutions to violent action against this wall because it is no longer tolerable. " I am a bit 'tired of hearing the 70's and even remember the phrase "must be on guard." Saying "all institutions to the wall" just means jumping the plurality of institutions. What they all have to respond to the command a single head. It is the logic of a country at war. Making the wall is an adverse opinion on the judiciary which has just released the young. There is also a given: the state-citizen relationship. The state can not be called off because the relationship is not equal. The best analysis I've seen in the spare Bonini and Bianconi. In those of the politicians I have seen only a desire to please the one they imagine is the silent majority. They do not want to solve problems, they just want the window is not broken. This is not governing, the answer is to get a good reaction from any survey. Even those politicians who are fleeing violence in comparison. The director of the Newspaper, Sallusti, said: "If a man to 37 years can not pay their mortgage is not his fault: it means that is a failure." Even opponents of '68 used similar adjectives. You say to an entire generation that has failed: we might as well take him out. majority and opposition, with some exceptions, seem to have abandoned the authority to represent the citizens. True? I also see a divestiture of the political mandate. In these years there has been a sell-off: no one takes care of its citizens. Every day we hear politicians invoke the sovereignty of a people to legitimize their political actions. But how do you allow? There is an enclave of people who command and a wall that separates them from the barbarians. But the barbarians, attention, are the Italians. myopia or malice? The error is no more able to foresee, do not listen to questions and answers. The error is not to austere policies, as demonstrated by the cases of Greece and Ireland. The mistake is to make the sacrifices only to those who are already marginalized. It must be recognized the crisis, our government has always refused, saying it was an invention of the media. But when you live a lie, the bubble bursts. He who sows misery without explaining why collects anger. And this is true for thousands of years.
0 comments:
Post a Comment