Feindbild ali Bild eines Feindes?

 

V nemškem prostoru je v družboslovnem besedišču, pa tudi v javni govorici, dokaj priljubljena besedica Feindbild. Slovenskega ustreznika nimamo – najustreznejši prevod bi se glasil „podoba sovražnika,“ „sovražna predstava“ ali pa preprosto „strašilo.“ Nanaša se na abstraktne, posplošene predstave, ki vsebujejo nabor (negativnih) karakteristik, katere naj bi bile lastne določenim ljudem, skupinam ali vrstam ljudi, narodom, organizacijam, državam ali ideologijam. Bistveno zanje je, da svoj objekt na podlagi črno-belega razumevanja sveta konstruirajo kot „sovražnika“ ter ga naslikajo v čim slabši možni luči. Feindbilder zato sodijo med najljubša orodja ekstremističnih, demagoških in populističnih gibanj ter pogost in pomemben element v teorijah zarot. Eden najnazornejših primerov je denimo podoba podlega in pretkanega „Juda“, kakršna se je pojavljala v nacistični propagandi.

V sodobni evropski stvarnosti poznamo kar nekaj tovrstnih razširjenih kolektivnih mentalnih podob in predstav, skozi katere se izražajo različni predsodke – Feindbild Cigana, levičarja/komunista, desničarja/fašista, bogataša/kapitalista, če naj jih naštejem le nekaj. Na njih se pogosto utemeljuje tudi danes tako „popularni“ „sovražni govor“. Ena izmed ključnih nevarnosti sovražnih predstav pa je, da s svojo abstraktno in na binarni logiki temelječo naravo težijo k prelivanju in prepletanju z drugimi – podoba islamskega skrajneža se tako lahko hitro razširi na vse muslimane (v okvirih migrantske krize pa preplete tudi s podobo bljižnevzhodnega migranta). V trenutkih, kot je današnji, je to še posebej nevarno, saj se predstave o krvoločnem islamistu lahko aplicirajo celo na ljudi, ki so se podali na beg pred temi istimi krvoločnimi islamisti. Zato je potrebno biti izredno pazljiv in se izogibati posploševanjem in stereotipom – torej skušnjavi, da bi gojili sovražne podobe.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Tematski izbor – migrantska kriza

Namesto z običajnim tedenskim izborom se po daljšem premoru vračamo z izborom zapisov, ki se tako ali drugače dotikajo t. i. migrantske krize – teme, ki zadnje mesece stoji v ospredju in se je neposredno dotaknila tudi Slovenije. V skladu z duhom pluralizma, na katerem je utemeljen naš portal, se izbrani teksti problema lotevajo iz različnih zornih kotov. Spričo njegove kompleksnosti, večplastnosti in širine smo namenoma vključili tudi premisleke, ki ne izhajajo iz konservativnih oziroma „desnih“ pozicij.

Pri izboru pa smo se držali dveh kriterijev. Prvič: zavestno smo izbrali tekste, ki so tako ali drugače odstopali od v zadnjih mesecih prevladujoče medijske naracije, ki se je pogosto nevarno približevala propagandi enoumja. Takšne torej, ki vsebuejo bodisi bolj poglobljene premisleke, bodisi originalnejše, v primeru nekaterih pa tudi provokativnejše poglede. Drugič: omejili smo se na  zapise, ki k problemu pristopajo na razumen način. Če si delno izposodimo formulacijo časopisa Domovina, to pomeni, da smo izključili radikalna stališča iz obeh strani ideološke premice – tako tista, ki v migrantih vidijo le grožnjo oziroma priročen cilj za usmerjanje gneva, kot tudi tista, ki utopično govorijo o svetu brez meja, institucionalnega reda in nadzora ter migrante pri tem izrabljajo kot priročno orodje za širjenje lastnih ideologij.

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

branje12

Since Thomas Hobbes, many people have embraced the illusory notion that society is made up of individuals. According to this view the only fair competition is between individuals, without undue benefit from family connections.
But no society has ever been this way. Individuals don’t come fully formed. They emerge out of families and groups. The family and the group are the essential social unit. These collectives have always shaped public life.
(…)
The philosopher Michael Oakeshott once observed that it takes three generations to make a career. That is, the skills that going into, say, a teacher — verbal fluency, empathy, endurance — take a long time to develop. They emerge in grandparents and great-grandparents and are passed down magnified through the generations. I bet you can trace ways your grandparents helped shape your career.

Mothers and Presidents – David Brooks, The New York Times

***

Cameron states that for too long ‘we have been a passively tolerant society’ and is presumably ‘pumped-up’ at the possibility of actively changing this image. But, in truth, Britain has strayed a long way from the Enlightenment conceptualisation of tolerance, which advocated robust engagement with others over matters of principle while recognising and accepting the need to live side-by-side.

In recent years, British society has become not tolerant but indifferent to the mores of others, preferring to turn a blind eye to outlooks and activities deemed not too threatening. You can believe anything you like, so long as you don’t believe in it too much, has been the unstated outlook of the authorities. Now, Cameron seeks to shift gear from passive indifference to active authoritarianism.

Anti-terror: the perversion of tolerance – Bill Durodié, Spiked

Continue reading

Sovražni govor in govorica gneva

Amedy Coulibaly, Parižan, oborožen z brzostrelko, bojno puško in dvema pištolama, je 9. januarja vstopil v prodajalno s košer izdelki. Ubil je štiri ljudi in zajel več talcev; kasneje je med policijsko akcijo tudi sam umrl.

Coulibalyjev napad ni bil deležen veliko pozornosti. Zasenčil ga je poboj na uredništvu Charlie Hebdo, ki sta ga dva dni pred tem izvedla njegova sodelavca – soborca? –, brata Chérif in Saïd Kouachi. O njegovem zločinu niso pisali kolumn. Nihče ni raziskoval, kaj ga je gnalo k uboju obiskovalcev trgovine. Nihče ni pomislil, da bi na podlagi Coulibalyjevega napada preizprašal pravico Judov do obiskovanja košer trgovin ali pravico Evropejcev do prehranjevanja v skladu s svojim izročilom. In seveda, nikomur ni padlo na pamet, da so bile žrtve »krive« za to, da jih je Amedy Coulibaly postrelil.

Njegov zločin ni sprožil javne diskusije, in prav je tako. Nasilen napad na ljudi, ki izvajajo neko svoboščino – v tem primeru kupovanje izdelkov v skladu z lastno religiozno tradicijo –, ne sme biti povod za javno razpravo o upravičenosti te svoboščine. Nasilje ne more biti argument: lahko se mu uklonimo, pogosto smo prisiljeni priznati njegovo fizično premoč, vendar to ne pomeni, da mu bomo pripisali težo tudi v redu argumentov.

"Nihče ni pomislil, da bi na podlagi Coulibalyjevega napada preizprašal pravico Judov do obiskovanja košer trgovin ali pravico Evropejcev do prehranjevanja v skladu s svojim izročilom"

“Nihče ni pomislil, da bi na podlagi Coulibalyjevega napada preizprašal pravico Judov do obiskovanja košer trgovin ali pravico Evropejcev do prehranjevanja v skladu s svojim izročilom”

 

Evropska pomota

A prav to se je zgodilo po poboju dela uredništva Charlie Hebdo, ki sta ga zakrivila Coulibalyjeva sodelavca, brata Kouachi. Evropska javnost se je seveda strinjala, da je bi atentat nekaj slabega. Za trenutek ali dva smo bili »vsi« Charlie. Toda ali ni, če pomislimo bolje, satirčni časnik izzval napade? Ali niso pisci in karikaturisti sistematično smešili francoskih muslimanov, ali niso profanizirali njihovega preroka, njihovega boga? Zakonodaje evropskih držav prepovedujejo blatenje dobrega imena posameznikov. Mar ne bi bilo smiselno – z ozirom na to, kaj je izzval Charlie Hebdo –, če bi to prepoved razširili tudi na blatenje dobrega imena družbenih skupin, na svetoskrunstvo?

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

Naš cilj je bil tudi, narediti konec enoumju, ki se v razpravi o privatizaciji ustvarja, ko mediji kot protiutež nasprotnikom privatizacije prikazujejo ljudi, ki v ključnost obsežne privatizacije sploh ne verjamejo, ampak jo zagovarjajo zgolj v zelo omejeni obliki, kot nujno zlo za pokrivanje preteklih dolgov in ugodno nadaljnje zadolževanje za tekoče potrebe proračuna, ki jih niso pripravljeni oklestiti. Tudi to dvoje sta relevantna razloga, gotovo. Nista pa ne edina ne najbolj pomembna, zato je bila dosedanja razprava brez sogovornikov, ki bi to jasno povedali, izkrivljena.

(…)

Zaključim naj z odgovorom na slogan: »Prodaja ni ne prostovoljna, ne poštena in ne pravična!«, ki ga slišimo iz druge strani te razprave.

Neprostovoljno je prav državno lastništvo, saj nam je prebivalcem vsiljeno in brez naše privolitve vzdrževano z našimi sredstvi. Nepoštena je trditev, da gre za »naša« podjetja, ko pa se o njih in za njih nikakor ne odločamo državljani, ampak jih kot bankomat uporabljajo interesne mreže. Nepravično je, da moramo davkoplačevalci nositi tveganje, ko se politiki odločijo igrati podjetnike in borzne posrednike z našim denarjem. Neprostovoljno, nepošteno in nepravično je, da je račun centralnega plana vedno znova izstavljen davkoplačevalcem. Naredimo temu konec.

Kaj je prinesla pobuda ZA privatizacijo? – Rok Novak, Časnik

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

Man_Reading_a_Book

Today is a dark day for Europe. The barbaric assault on the offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo is an attack most immediately on the journalists and cartoonists who worked there, 12 of whom are dead, executed in cold blood for the ‘crime’ of saying what they think. But this horrific act was also an attack on Europe itself, on all of us, on our fundamental right to freedom of thought and speech. None of us can feel the pain currently being felt by the friends and families of the murdered journalists and illustrators – but all of us should feel assaulted by this massacre, for it is designed to chill us and make us cower, to make us censor ourselves or else suffer the consequences.

(…)

Our response should be to reaffirm our commitment to freedom of speech and most importantly to the right to be offensive, to provoke, to mock and ridicule any belief system we want. From John Wilkes’ royalty-bashing pamphlets to Thomas Paine’s questioning of religion, offending gods and kings, kicking against the orthodoxies of one’s age, has been central to the Enlightenment, to the birth of the modern world. To fail to offer solidarity to Charlie Hebdo and other modern offenders against religious or political correctness would be to turn the clock back on the Enlightenment itself and propel Europe back into an era of self-silencing and moral obedience.

In solidarity with Charlie Hebdo: fight for the right to be offensive – Brendan O’Neill, Spiked

Continue reading

Tedenski izbor

The-young-student-Ozias-Leduc

Can you guess which books the wannabe jihadists Yusuf Sarwar and Mohammed Ahmed ordered online from Amazon before they set out from Birmingham to fight in Syria last May? A copy of Milestones by the Egyptian Islamist Sayyid Qutb? No. How about Messages to the World: the Statements of Osama Bin Laden? Guess again. Wait, The Anarchist Cookbook, right? Wrong.

Sarwar and Ahmed, both of whom pleaded guilty to terrorism offences last month, purchased Islam for Dummies and The Koran for Dummies. You could not ask for better evidence to bolster the argument that the 1,400-year-old Islamic faith has little to do with the modern jihadist movement. The swivel-eyed young men who take sadistic pleasure in bombings and beheadings may try to justify their violence with recourse to religious rhetoric think the killers of Lee Rigby screaming “Allahu Akbar” at their trial; think of Islamic State beheading the photojournalist James Foley as part of its “holy war”but religious fervour isn’t what motivates most of them.

This Is What Wannabe Jihadists Order on Amazon Before Leaving for Syria – Mehdi Hasan, The New Republic

 ***

If Mr Valls wanted to send a message with his new government, Mr Macron is it. Mr Montebourg, who was ousted the previous day, had a knack of irking foreign investors, once telling Mittal, a steel company, that it was “not welcome” in France. Mr Macron, by contrast, spent much time privately picking up the pieces, arguing to investors that France was in fact open for business. Of Mr Hollande’s election-campaign promise in 2012 to set a sky-high top income-tax rate of 75%, Mr Macron once said scathingly, “it’s Cuba without the sun!”.

By itself, of course, Mr Macron’s appointment will not make it any easier for Mr Valls to press ahead with the politically daunting job of sorting out France’s squeezed public finances and trying to revive the stagnant economy. Nor will it put an end to the debate, led by Mr Montebourg and other fellow anti-austerity Socialist deputies outside government, over the pace of fiscal consolidation. But it does at least suggest that the Valls government is serious about pursuing a more business-friendly approach, and about starting to bring the largely unreconstructed left into line with the rest of Europe’s social democrats.

No more Cuban-style policies? – Charlemagne, The Economist

***

Hearing students cite Marcuse while decrying bourgeois society, Novak thought it a good idea to bring Marcuse to campus for a day of discussion and lecturing. But the admiring conversation he expected to witness didn’t occur. Instead, Novak recounts in his 2013 memoir Writing from Left to Right,

After mingling with the students, he was affronted and disgusted. At his lecture he set aside his prepared notes and instead described the severe Prussian discipline of his own education: the classics he had to master; the languages he had to learn by exercises and constant tests. His theme was that no one had any standing on which to rebel against the past—or dare to call himself a revolutionary—who had not registered the tradition of the West. (p. 107)

We can imagine how the students felt hearing this denunciation, but what could they say? Here was a prophet of youth rebellion endorsing utterly disreputable ideas—classics, discipline, mastery, tradition, the West—and telling students fully convinced of their own supremacy that they had nostanding to overturn anything.

The Enemies, and Friends, of the Humanities – Mark Bauerlein, First Things

***

Dear Dr. Dawkins,

Earlier this week, on Twitter, you drew attention to a troubling fact unknown to most people. You pointed out that in the United States and Europe, most children conceived with Down syndrome are aborted.

/…/

You’ve traditionally held a position of moral neutrality regarding abortion. You’ve asserted that killing animals, with the capacity to experience pain, fear, and suffering, is of greater moral significance than killing fetuses: nascently human, you assert, but without the kind of sentience that gives them moral significance. You’ve suggested that no carnivore can reasonably hold a position in opposition to abortion. You’re not alone in that position, it’s become de rigueur among most contemporary analytic ethicists.

disagree with your position. I’ve long ago concluded that the fetus, the embryo, and in fact, the zygote are human beings—undeveloped, certainly, but possessing the dignity and the rights of sentient adults.

Despite my disagreement, I recognize that you’ve tried to apply your viewpoint with consistency across a variety of ethical situations.

Until this week. This week, you moved from presenting abortion as a morally neutral act to asserting that the abortion of some people—genetically disabled people—is a moral good. A moral imperative, in fact.

An Open Letter to Richard Dawkins – J. D. Flynn, First Things

***

Ni ogrožena samo otrokova neodvisnost. Spremembe v strukturi prostega časa in odnosov v družini , ki na podoben način potekajo v večini razvitih držav, lahko po mnenju nekaterih strokovnjakov ogrozijo tudi zdravje otrok. Ameriški psiholog dr. Peter Gray z univerze Boston College trend upadanja količine proste igre povezuje s hkratnim trendom naraščanja psihopatologije med otroci – povečane pojavnosti depresije, anksioznosti in narcisoidnosti. Kot opaža, so intristične dejavnosti (tiste, ki nas veselijo in si jih izberemo prostovoljno) začele upadati na račun ekstrističnih ciljev (tistih, ki nam jih narekujejo od zunaj). »V šoli si otroci prizadevajo za čim boljše ocene in pohvale, v organiziranih športih si prizadevajo za pohvale in pokale. Vse temeljijo na presoji drugih. V prosti igri pa otroci počno, kar hočejo, učenje in duševni razvoj sta stranska produkta, ne pa zavestno postavljena cilja aktivnosti.« Ta premik k potrebi po zadovoljevanju zunanjih pričakovanj je po Grayevem mnenju idealen recept za povečanje depresije in anksioznosti. Če temu dodamo še upadanje občutka samostojnosti, nadzora nad svojim življenjem, ki je povezan s povečanim nadzorom staršev, je recept še prepričljivejši.

Ni časa za igro – Staš Zgonik, Mladina

***

5. Marriage must be color-blind, but it cannot be gender-blind. The melanin content of two people’s skin has nothing to do with their capacity to unite in the bond of marriage as a comprehensive union naturally ordered to procreation. The sexual difference between a man and a woman, however, is central to what marriage is. Men and women regardless of their race can unite in marriage, and children regardless of their race deserve moms and dads. To acknowledge such facts requires an understanding of what marriage is.

/…/

While Americans are free to live as they choose, no one should demand that government coerce others into celebrating their relationships.Whatever one believes about marriage and however government defines it, there is no compelling state interest in forcing every citizen to treat a same-sex relationship as a marriage when this would violate their religious or other conscientious beliefs.

7 Reasons Why the Current Marriage Debate Is Nothing Like the Debate on Interracial Marriage – Ryan T. Anderson, The Daily Signal

***

Joj, kako me je o stanju slovenskih političnih medijev, se pravi, medijev, ki pomagajo razmišljati o človeku in družbi, poučil letošnji žled! Četrtek v žlednem tednu (6. februar): Demokracija ima na naslovnici udbovca Janeza Zemljariča. Slučajno se slišiva s prijateljem J. C., ki profesionalno dela v visoki politiki. Rečem mu, da sem razočaran, da Demokracija ni zmogla na naslovnico dati žleda. Da pa bom počakal še dan, da vidim, če ga bo na svojo naslovnico dala Mladina. Z J. C. sva bila prepričana, da ga tudi Mladina ne bo dala. In res. Mladina (7. februar) je izšla, verjetno že tisočič, s popačenim obrazom Janeza Janše na naslovnici. Če ni Janše, Mladina nima družbene teorije.

To je bil slovenski žledni teden, ki se zgodi na vsakih sto let. To je bil teden, ko so gasilci, prizadeti vaščani, drugi prostovoljci in razne službe dali najboljše od sebe ter pravzaprav razkazali solidarnostni in demokratični potencial slovenskega naroda. In glej: eminentni politični tisk, ki naj bi imel nos za „demokracijo od spodaj“, je ostal v svojih fiksacijah, v svojem negativizmu. Ubožci – sem dejal – še ko vsi trpimo, oni demonizirajo drug drugega. In bil jezen.

Čakajoč na repo iz ušes- Branko Cestnik, Časnik

***

Če zdaj to situacijo vseeno na hitro prenesemo v politični prostor in pogledamo rezultate letošnjih volitev, bomo ugotovili, da bi se pomladna politika iz tega medgeneracijskega razkoraka in prekinitve stika lahko kaj naučila. Tudi v pomladni politični drži namreč mladi nimajo pravih sogovornikov in nič ne pomaga, če se zgražamo, kako na drugi stani mlade nekakšni navidezni sogovorniki in šarlatani vedno zavedejo. Pravi sogovornik mladih je nekdo, ki se približa njihovemu doživljanju, kar sploh ni enostavno, in jih poskuša razumeti in sprejeti, kar je še težje. Tak sogovornik ni žrtev, zato ni zagrenjen in se ne posmehuje zgroženo niti najbolj čudnim idejam, ker so samo ideje. Stoji na svojih nogah, svoje potrebe rešuje drugod, ali pa jih začasno odloži ali skrije, vsekakor pa od mladih nič ne zahteva, se jim ne dobrika in jih ne krivi za njihovo kratkovidnost in obrnjenost vase. Ker vsega tega v našem političnem prostoru ni, me ne čudi, da so nekateri mladi volivci pripravljeni podpreti celo tako absurdno idejo, kot je ideja demokratičnega socializma. Če so bili pred leti zadovoljni samo s stranko mladih, je kriza očitno prinesla zaostritev retorike in, zanimivo, naslonitev na neke čudaške politične zglede pri starejši generaciji. Kot bi se povezali dedki in vnuki, in sicer dedki, ki so zamudili svoj čas, ter vnuki, ki jim nihče ne pokaže, kako vstopiti v tok časa.

Zakaj (travmatične) zgodbe dedkov vnukov ne zanimajo? – Tomaž Erzar, Časnik

***

Še nekaj za tiste, ki berete italijansko:

Nessuno dei quattro grandi paesi che adottano l’euro è davvero a posto, nessuno può alzare il ditino o indossare l’aureola del santo. Ma chi è in grado di convincerli a seguire la retta via? È questo il dilemma che Draghi ha posto indirettamente, ma con chiarezza. E si è scontrato contro un muro, perché nessuno oggi ha il potere di farlo, certo non la Ue che è ridotta sempre più a un club di nazioni chiassose e litigiose, ma nemmeno la Bce che pure è l’unica istituzione federale dotata di veri strumenti d’intervento. I cambiamenti principali finora sono stati compiuti sotto la pressione degli eventi, davanti a rischi drammatici come la crisi bancaria del 2008, il crack della Grecia nel 2010 o il collasso dell’euro nel 2012. E sono comunque rimasti cambiamenti a metà, accettati di mal grado dalla Germania che pure vanta il proprio europeismo federalista.

Draghi ha chiesto un’ulteriore cessione di sovranità e vuole un patto per le riforme da accompagnare al patto fiscale. Se si vuole dare all’euro una intelaiatura più solida è un passaggio inevitabile. Ma oggi non c’è consenso né tra i paesi del sud né in quelli del nord Europa. Dunque, la politica economica europea è in un cul de sac. La Bce alla fine sarà costretta a fare come la Fed se arriverà davvero una nuova tempesta finanziaria. Ma senza dietro un paracadute politico, nessuno può garantire che sia davvero efficace. Draghi lo sa e lo ha detto. Anche la sua diventerà una predica inutile?

Mario Draghi e l’Europa irriformabile – Stefano Cingolani, Linkiesta

***

Za konec pa še zgodba, ki daje dober vpogled na način, kako se dela kadrovska politika v Sloveniji – ali drugače, na poniglavost, s katero je odhajajoča vlada v vse pore družbenega življenja skušala nastaviti svoje mediokritetne kadre. Bo v prihodnje kaj boljše? Gotovo ne, če bomo še naprej skomigali z rameni in s tem dopuščali tako prakso.

The Judicial Council of the Republic of Slovenia prepared a ranking of candidates and proposed to President of Slovenia to send the names of three highest-ranking candidates to the Parliament, which has to vote on the list of three candidates in order to be sent to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. However, Mr Pahor, the incumbent President of Republic of Slovenia, last week refused to send the list of three high ranking candidates to the Parliament and requested that the Ministry of Justice repeats the call for applications. It is not entirely clear why Mr Pahor rejected the list approved by the Judicial Council, but it appears that the merits of the candidates did not impress him. Surprisingly, the Ministry of Justice at this point does not plan to repeat the call for application.  It seems we are witnessing situation so often seen in the Central and Eastern European countries where the merits of the candidates play only side role in the nomination process and where the nomination of the candidates to the European Court of Human Rights comes down to brutal power politics.

Problem-Ridden Nomination Process for Judge on behalf of Slovenia at the European Court of Human Rights – Esohap