Special Filoblogsofía
B arbarie with a human face Slavoj Zizek
The wave of rejection of immigrants in Europe is today the main threat to its Christian heritage. The fear of the stranger begins to permeate also the once tolerant liberal multiculturalism
The recent expulsion from France of Roma living in their territory in a situation illegal, which has been deported to Romania, her country of origin, has raised many protests across Europe, the liberal media and among leading politicians, not just the left. However, the expulsions have not stopped, and are also the tip of an enormous iceberg that rises within European politics. A month ago, a book by Thilo Sarrazin, a manager of banking considered politically close to the Social Democrats, caused outrage in Germany by proposing the thesis that the German nation was threatened by the presence of too many immigrants who were allowed to keep their cultural identity. Although the book was unanimously censored, its tremendous impact shows that the general public gave him where it hurts. Incidents like these have to be assessed in the context of long-term reorganization of political space in Western and Eastern Europe.
Until recently, the political space of European countries was dominated by two large formations on their way to the whole electorate, ie, a center-right party (Christian Democrat, liberal, conservative, popular .. .) and other center-left (social democrats or socialists a), to which were added small formations (ecologists, communists). In the West as well as in the East, the last election results point to the gradual emergence of other polarity. There is a dominant centrist party that defends global capitalism, usually with a liberal cultural agenda (tolerance for abortion, gay rights, religious and ethnic minorities, etc.). A party that increasingly opposes any strength training anti-immigration populist, in their margins, accompanied by openly racist neo-fascist groups. The best example is Poland, following the disappearance of former communists, the main political parties are the Liberal Party, centrist and "anti-ideological" Prime Minister Donald Tusk and match Christian conservative Kaczynski brothers. There are similar trends in the Netherlands, N orway, Sweden, Hungary ... How did we get here?
After decades of welfare state, or his promise, "when
funding cuts were limited to short periods and applied promising that things will soon return to normal, we now in a new era in which the crisis, or rather a state of economic emergency that requires all kinds of austerity measures, is permanent and becomes a constant, pure and simply a way of life. After the breakup of communist regimes in 1990, we entered a new era in which the predominant form of exercise of state power has become a depoliticized technical administration that is dedicated to coordinating interests. The only way to bring passion in that area, really mobilize people is through fear, immigrants, crime, the godless sexual depravity, excess state (with some tax overwhelming and excessive control), the ecological catastrophe and also harassment (political correctness is the paradigmatic case of the liberal politics of fear). That kind of politics is always based in the handling of a p ochlos Arana, the terrifying concentration of men and women fear. This is the reason that the great event of the first decade of the new millennium was the entry into the political orthodoxy of speech against immigration that finally cut the umbilical cord that bound him to far-right fringe parties. From Austria to the Netherlands, through France and Germany, and under the new pride that raises the cultural and historical identity, the main parties now find it acceptable to insist on the status of some immigrants invited to be adapted to cultural values that define the host society: "It is our country, if you want, you go. "It is essential to point out how progressive liberal tolerance share certain fundamental premises with this attitude: their demand for respect and openness to otherness (ethnic, religious or sexual), has its counterpart in the obsessive fear of harassment. The Other is OK as long as their presence is not disturbed, provided it is not really an Other ... Actually, my duty of tolerance for each other means that I should not get too close to it, crawl in space. In late capitalist society the human right that is becoming more essential is the right not to be harassed, keep a safe distance from others.
No wonder the issue of toxic beings has gained ground recently. Although the concept comes from the psychology of disclosure and guards against emotional vampires lurking out there now is going far beyond the immediate interpersonal relations: the epithet refers to property owned by toxic levels (natural, cultural, psychological and politicians) are totally different. A can be toxic to be an immigrant with a deadly disease that has to be quarantined, a terrorist whose murderous plans should be avoided and that should be locked up in Guantanamo, the empty area outside the rule of law, a fundamentalist ideologue who must be silenced because it spreads hatred, a parent, teacher or priest who abuses children and corrupts. How toxic it is the foreign resident, the gulf, for example, its pleasures or beliefs. So the ultimate goal of any of the rules governing personal relationships is to quarantine or at least neutralize toxic and contain this dimension, reducing the neighbor to neighbor status.
In today's market find a wide range of products without the harmful component: coffee without caffeine, cream without fat, beer without alcohol ... What about virtual sex, sex is no sex, of the doctrine war without casualties (on our side, of course) of Colin Powell, a war without war, the current redefinition of politics as the art of technical administration, a politics without politics? All of this leads to tolerant liberal multiculturalism, which is an experience of Other deprived of its Otherness: a decaffeinated Another fascinating dances and practice about the situation in a holistic ecologically sound, while features like wife abuse are beyond camera. Who better raised, back in 1938, the mechanism that triggers this neutralization was Robert Brasillach, condemned the French fascist intellectual and executed in 1945, declared himself an anti-Semite "moderate", invented the formula of "reasonable anti-Semitism:" We would applaud Charlie Chaplin film, a Jewish environment, admire Proust, half Jewish, and applaud Yehudi Menuhin, a Jew. And Hitler's voice travels the airwaves after the name of the Jewish Hertz. (...) We do not want to kill anybody, we do not organize any pogrom. But we also believe that the best way of blocking always unpredictable actions of instinctive anti-Semitism is to organize a reasonable anti-Semitism. "
Is not this the same attitude in the way which our Governments to address the "threat of immigration? After refusing to moral superiority populist blatant racism by labeling her as "unreasonable" and unacceptable to our democratic norms, support "reasonable" security measures racist ... or, as brasillachs today, some of them even Social Democrats, they say: "We would applaud African athletes from Eastern Europe, doctors or computer programmers Asian Indians. We do not want to kill anybody, we do not organize any pogrom , but we also think that the best way to hamper the always unpredictable and violent defensive action is to organize immigration raises reasonable protection against immigrants. "
This concept of neighbor detoxification is a clear step directly from barbarism to barbarism with a human face. Plasma ranging from a decline in Christian love of neighbor to the pagan practice to privilege one's own tribe against the other barbarian. The idea, though wrapped in the defense of Christian values, is itself a major threat to the Christian heritage.
Cuéllar Menezo translation of Jesus.
Original text
The Country
0 comments:
Post a Comment