The moral turmoil for violence



The disgusting story with the rector of the University of Economics finally had an eloquent continuation. He confirmed that as soon as the issue of “left violence” is raised, the Left suffers a kind of moral turmoil. The SYRIZA Department of Education spoke of “provocations of misery”, “anti-democracy” direct insult to academic freedom and human dignity “(3/11). The SYRIZA Press Office denounced” atrocities committed by a group of self-imposed punishments (which) are decisively part of the arsenal of the Far Right “(31/10). identified “provocative role of groups” (31/10) and the KKE “provocative actions of suspicious groups” (3/11). All very well. But strangely no one says what these suspicious provocateurs and punishers are. Right? Leftists? Far right? Ecologists? Scouts? N. Filis only spoke of “misery of self-proclaimed anarchists” (2/11). But from what I know in politics, everyone calls themselves and defines themselves. There are no certificates of opinion, nor do you pass exams to get a diploma or a political identity card. Even Filis, that is, a leftist, calls himself – the “self-proclaimed anarchists” could oppose him… St. Theodorakis spoke of a “fascist-inspired act” (“I Kathimerini”, 3/11) and various others of a “fascist” or “fascist” method. As if evil can only be fascist. Although expulsion as a method of political action is claimed by many fathers. From Mussolini to Mao Zedong. Not only the fascists, that is, not only the communists. After all, the perpetrators of the deportation of the rector themselves claimed with absolute clarity on the Internet their left identity and the left motives of their action. So why does the Left question to leftists something do they claim out loud? To deny the existence of “left-wing violence”? Unfair effort. Obviously there is “left or far-left violence”, as there is (talking about after the war) and “extreme right-wing violence” (Ordine Nuovo and Golden Dawn), “religious violence” (Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah) or “ethnic violence” (EOKA). , PLO, ETA and IRA). Throughout history there have been many forms of violence, of different origins in different periods or countries, and of course the Left is no exception. Violence is always characterized by the identity, motives or goals of those who exercise it. “November 17” was left-wing, like the Red Brigades in Italy or the RAF in Germany, to refer to our best-known left-wing terrorist groups. And without counting the massive brutal and repulsive violence perpetrated by various communist or “revolutionary” movements and regimes around the world. A historical figure of the Left such as Rosana Rosanda, just to challenge this absurd negativity, had publicly acknowledged that the Red Brigades “is part of the family album” of the Left. In other words, the “suspicious provocateurs”, anti-authoritarians, anarchists or squatters at the University of Economics are (for better or worse) cousins ​​of Filis and Tsakaloteos. Even if they do not like each other very much. Even if they are not responsible for their misery. Even if (as Professor Vasso Kinti complained) the SYRIZA parliamentary representative had supported in 2013 in similar actions of similar types. In democracy, however, there is no family responsibility. So the Left is trying to deny the obvious and the self-evident, even though no sensible person is meant to give it responsibilities beyond the obvious and the self-evident? Who can they convince that there is no “left-wing violence”? And that the Left is historically an angelic faction that faithfully followed the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi and Mother Teresa? I do not think the motive is defensive. No one comes out of the bloodshed of history with their hands clean. Today’s official Left has taken clear distances from traditions, from its ancestors and from its cousins. She is not in danger of being accused of something she has not done. On the other hand, the “left violence” is a scar in the moral and unblemished image that the Left has created for itself. It abolishes victimization as a group of innocent persecuted and removes it the prosecutor’s robe. In other words, he places it in the line of a political faction with the virtues and weaknesses of any other political faction. Nothing more. Nothing less. But when you admit the ugliness you carry yourself, how will you blame others for the same? How will you talk about “fascist” or “extreme right” methods when the same methods have been yours? This Left prosecutor’s office is difficult to deny. And that’s why there is moral turmoil every time the “two extremes” theory is mentioned (which is not even a theory…) or the existence of “left-wing violence”. And do you know what the joke is? That moral turmoil or the consequent disgust is manifested with greater fanaticism by those who have caressed many Koufontines and have justified in the name of “questioning” every left-wing deviant or nonsense. refer to the logic of Lyndon Johnson or, according to others, Richard Nixon who, when told that some junta generals in Latin America are bastards, replied: – Yes, but they are our bastards! Follow it on Google News and be the first to know all the news Latest News from Greece and the World, at



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *