As a final and definitive assessment, I would like to note that within the prudence that requires comprehensive analysis of a phenomenon as diverse, incomplete and vague as the 15-M the Movement, it is worth noting both positive and negative aspects, and want to be the first prevail and mark the path from now. On the positive side, highlight the awakening of social consciousness, dormant during the years of economic goodness, the amount of ideas, many of them interesting, that are pouring these days especially in social networks (exchange, by itself, and is sufficiently valuable), and a sense of common responsibility. Among the negatives, the instruments that, from the very beginning, has tried to make some kind of phenomenon by anti-democratic Left, devoid of content demagoguery itself embroiled in doctrinal terms, topical and simple to take part for the whole, the involution democratic is the public vote by show of hands, in mass meetings, and, above all, opportunism at the approach of an election that polls are not going to make it stop on the left (here, leaving out explanations' conspiranoides ', construed as you like, but one fact is clear: it does not seem logical to require the reform of electoral laws fair and just before elections). Refusal is also the attitude of some of the concentrates, unwilling to obey the law and the provisions of the Central Electoral Board, to safeguard peace in the day of reflection and election day, a fact which I find extremely serious and it is not a conscientious objection to a law of unjust moral content, but an active disobedience to a fundamental gear formal democratic process. (On this subject I will write in later entries.)
These negative aspects have led some to be on their guard-perhaps excessively-recourse to this phenomenon and also, particularly in certain circles of the liberal right, the pure and simple disqualification and stereotype 'Perroflauta'. They also raised that people are also angry and initial supporters of the cause, doubt whether or not to join these events. Some have decided it is necessary to do so because, despite doubts about the origin and purpose last of the calls, or their possible partisan or ideological manipulation, responds to a real societal problem that has surfaced since, we must seize and even 'redirect' in the sense that is not monopolized by radicals and anti. Others think this is left to participate in instrumental and put the case to the service of the exploited, with which they collaborate unwittingly giving them strength and legitimacy.
I sincerely believe that both views are unfounded, according to what is going in G (and longer in other places of Spain and Europe) and both contain some truth. I myself have ranged from one to another and now I see that the implications of this movement are so many that, as the proverb says evangelical, wheat mixed with chaff walk to the end and it is impossible to establish an absolute opinion. With what I, personally, I keep it in the wake of the collective social consciousness through individual conscience and call for honesty in public life, if absolutely necessary. And a thought, I know that has been guessed within individuals involved in acts: why only we realize things when things go wrong? Is it at all sincere social awareness when for many years has looked the other way and things did not seem to matter both? If we get through the crisis, let us push around as before, while enjoying a life of consumption?
I want to finish on a note of humor, which I think is a key element, especially in times of heated political discussions. Someone told me, jokingly, this morning you have to do with marketing strategies ... - What do you mean? "I replied. -A campaign that has set the English Court of the Sun to sell books to a frog ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment