Por sus frutos los conocereís (II)
Jaime O’Hara
14 de Agosto, 2007
Por haber padecido al fascismo en nuestras carnes, reconocemos en Europa a la mala bestia cuando asoma la cabeza. Los americanos nunca han conocido nada parecido (salvo, si se quiere, la segregación racial en el Sur) y por esto no se dan cuenta de que la ideología de los neoconservadores es un auténtico proto-fascismo. Es caracerística su infatuación con el poder, su convicción de que solo con la fuerza se imponen las soluciones, su desdén por las instituciones internacionales (no les importa tampoco que los EEUU hayan sido quienes las crearon y mantuvieron desde la II Guerra Mundial) por el derecho internacional, por los aliados y, en general, por la opinión pública mundial. Rechazan todo esto porque reduce la eficacia de su acción unilateral, en cuya omnipotencia y omniciencia están seguros.
Hay quien compara a Karl Rove con Goebbels por su convicción de que la opiniòn pública puede ser manipulada a capricho, y por creer que repitiendo mil veces una mentira se convierte en verdad. También comparan al gordo Cheney con Goering, que también fue presidente del Reichstag como Cheney lo es del Senado, por su desprecio por el Congreso y por la democracia representativa.El jesuítico Procurador General, Alberto Gonzáles, se encarga de minar la independencia del poder judicial y de intimidar a los fiscales del estado.Tienen incluso su campo de concentración en Guantánamo y en otros lugares secrettos de la CIA donde el Congreso ha pasado legislación permitiéndoles “interrogar” a los prisioneros con cualquier método, con tal de conseguir resultados, y donde solo les falta gasearlos.
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. | TrackBack URI | bookmark on del.icio.us.
Leave a comment
Advertencia de Protección de Datos:
Los datos personales capturados con ocasión de la utilización del formulario de comentarios (nombre/apodo, dirección de correo electrónico, sitio web y dirección IP), serán incluidos en un fichero del propietario del sitio web y se publicarán (excepto su dirección de correo electrónico y su dirección IP) en esta página con la finalidad de permitir opinar públicamente al lector, así como para en su caso contestar al comentario o consultas que formule. Podrá ejercitar sus derechos de acceso, de rectificación, de cancelación y de oposición en lo referido a dichos datos personales dirigiendo un correo electrónico a la dirección: datos.personales@blogeuropa.eu.
----
Privacy notice:
Please be informed that by using the comments form, your personal data (name/nickname, e-mail address, website and IP address), will be included in a file owned by the website proprietor and published along your comment (except for your e-mail and IP addresses), in order for the reader to publicly comment, as well as -should that be the case-, to respond to any comment or query that readers may have made. You will be able to exercise your rights to access, rectify, cancel and oppose such personal data by sending an e-mail to the following address: datos.personales@blogeuropa.eu.
Before I start, let me clarify a couple of points: I have no sympathy for the current US administration and will be glad to see the back of it, I opposed the invasion of Iraq and I oppose many aspects of the “war on terror”. All of that said, this post is a disgrace. It amounts to little more than languorous auto-fellatio and is almost completely lacking in serious arguments. One point at a time:
1.
Por haber padecido al fascismo en nuestras carnes, reconocemos en Europa a la mala bestia cuando asoma la cabeza.
Maybe we can recognise it but that doesn’t stop a lot of Europeans voting for it. The current governments of Denmark and Poland have large far-right elements and are both tinged with racism, anti-foreigners with dark skins in the case of the former, anti-Semitic in the case of the later. Furthermore, Sarkozy got himself elected President of France by adopting much of the rhetoric of the FN
2.
Los americanos nunca han conocido nada parecido (salvo, si se quiere, la segregación racial en el Sur.
The Americans seem to be doing a lot better integrating their racial and religious minorities that the Europeans lately. Muslim religious practice seems to be much better catered for in the USA than France, for example. Blacks, Jews, Arab-Americans, gays and lesbians and many other minorities all actively participate in the planning and prosecution of the American state’s domestic and foreign policy.
3.
“la ideología de los neoconservadores es un auténtico proto-fascismo.”
What fascist or proto-fascist regime ever subjected itself to free elections? The Republicans have already lost the House and Senate. Bush becomes history in 16 months and the Republicans have no guarantee that they will retain the White House.
4.
“Es caracerística su infatuación con el poder”
That’s a characteristic of all governments, including democratic ones. Gaining political power and hanging on to it once gained is the ABC of all politics.
5.
su desdén por las instituciones internacionales (no les importa tampoco que los EEUU hayan sido quienes las crearon y mantuvieron desde la II Guerra Mundial)
Some yes, others no. Not much sign of American disdain for the World Bank, the IMF or the IAEA.
6.
por el derecho internacional,
You are right about this.
7.
por los aliados
Some yes, others no. I don’t think you’ll find that Britain or the newer members of Nato feel disdained by the US.
8.
y, en general, por la opinión pública mundial.
What is world public opinion? How could we measure it? If measured, would it form a fit basis for the formation of policy?
9.
Rechazan todo esto porque reduce la eficacia de su acción unilateral, en cuya omnipotencia y omniciencia están seguros.
There has been a definite shift towards unilateralism but hey haven’t rejected “all of this”. They have resort to “all of this” whenever it suits them.
10.
“Hay quien compara a Karl Rove con Goebbels por su convicción de que la opiniòn pública puede ser manipulada a capricho, y por creer que repitiendo mil veces una mentira se convierte en verdad. También comparan al gordo Cheney con Goering, que también fue presidente del Reichstag como Cheney lo es del Senado, por su desprecio por el Congreso y por la democracia representativa”
Absurd and offensive comparisons with the Nazis that only serve to trivialise the horror of the Third Reich. That Karl Rove is not like Goebbels was proved by the results of the last Congressional elections. Cheney may well be contemptuous of democracy, but just like his boss, he marches into the sunset never to return, in January 2009. Some Nazi… And speaking of politicians who are contemptuous of democracy; would you say that the PP has fully accepted the legitimacy of the current PSOE-led government in Spain? Would you say that JM Aznar was more respectful of democracy that Dick Cheney?
11.
Tienen incluso su campo de concentración en Guantánamo y en otros lugares secretos de la CIA donde el Congreso ha pasado legislación permitiéndoles “interrogar” a los prisioneros con cualquier método, con tal de conseguir resultados, y donde solo les falta gasearlos.
I largely agree with this but the use of the term “campo de concentración” suffers from the same weaknesses as the comparisons with the Nazis in the previous point and is a comparison so easily rebutted that its use tends only to serve the interests of Bush’s government.
Overall this post is a self-indulgent piece of tripe reflecting an alarming strain of reflex ant-Americanism that is regrettably present in many circles today. The actions of the US government require serious, well-argued criticism and not self-congratulatory rants like this.
Comment by Eamonn MCDonagh — August 14, 2007 @ 11:48 pm
I would love to say I’m in complete agreement with every single observation and objection raised by Mr. MCDonagh in his very thorough comment above. I enjoyed reading it very much… much more than Jamie’s post… (No offense intended…)
The one remark that troubles me though is the reference to being ‘contemptuous of democracy’ for not accepting the legitimacy of the last election in Spain…
I don’t belong to the PP, wasn’t in favor of Mr. Aznar’s decision towards Iraq –though I fully respect him and still think he has been the best democratic President in Spain to date…–, but I firmly believe that those results were a direct consequence of the terrorist bombings –the largest in Spain’s history–, that killed some 191 souls hours before the last general elections.
Those terrorist attacks were designed and scheduled with a very clear purpose. Sadly, that purpose was achieved… and I think the first one surprised by the general election outcome was Mr. Zapatero.
Am I contemptuous of democracy? Not really. Honestly.
Other than that, very well taken points… in my humble opinion…
TFS
Comment by tfserna (Tomás F. Serna) — August 15, 2007 @ 7:55 pm
Hi Tomás, thanks for the kind words about my comments.
With regard to Aznar and the PP, I propose a brief thought experiment. Let us suppose there was some way of knowing with certainty how the Spanish people would have voted had the Madrid atrocities not occurred. Let us further suppose that it showed that the PP would have been comfortably reelected and that the sole and only reason that voters changed their minds was the bombings and that further analysis of their decision revealed that fear of further attacks motivated their last minute switch. If all of this was the case, and we have no sure way of knowing, would it render Zapatero’s government in some way illegitimate? I think that the answer has to be “no”. We can’t decide that the results of elections in democratic countries are in some way “not right” based on post hoc ergo propter hoc analysis of voter behaviour. And anyway, the people are entitled to change their minds at the last minute for *whatever* reason they like and, as long as they don’t vote for parties that reject the basic norms of democracy, the loser’s duty is to accept the result with as much grace as he can muster and get on with the normal business of opposing the government.
Can we honestly say that that is how the PP has behaved since losing the election? I think the answer to that question is also “no” and that this failure to accept the legitimacy of their defeat amounts to a certain of contempt for democracy.
Comment by Eamonn McDonagh — August 16, 2007 @ 3:11 am
errata: the word “of” should not appear in the last line of my text above.
Comment by Eamonn McDonagh — August 16, 2007 @ 3:17 am