by: Isbel Diaz Torres
While the future and all of Cuba is Encocado-cocacolecen,
I'm telling you by now with your love, what do you think?
I have a project in constructive and loving head
Vanito and Control
Almada
After reading in the Compendium of Critical Monitoring the text "A PURPOSE OF AN ITEM OF ARMANDO Chaguaceda" , Professor Ariel Diaz Lazo (Cuba recently based in Miami), I've been a bit puzzled. Not that anyone is obliged to fulfill my expectations, but with the volume of texts produced by the Cuban political scientist Armando Chaguaceda, variety and depth of them, the ethical and patriotic emanated from them, it was logical to expect a more worthy opposition.
is important to know in advance that there are two intellectual discourse from opposing political views either, since Chaguaceda is a renowned leftist, anti-capitalist, while Ariel Pérez Lazo, as we read recently, is not recognized as such . Ariel in the quoted text says "This phenomenon is expressed in the formation of an intellectual fashion, of being anti-capitalist. Apparently few people realize that being anti-capitalist is not positive, then there can be no ethics made of negativity. To attack capitalism would have to find a social system that surpasses it, who does not advance beyond their denial, took positions close to nihilism. "I personally just the atrocities in the name of capitalism, the" free enterprise ", etc., are committed in our world, to feel a deep sense anti-capitalist, now what makes you think that those who reject Ariel capitalism and authoritarianism have proposals "Positive" as an alternative? Apparently during his time on the island recently inquired about the proposals now moving through here. The same in the rest of Latin America. Chaguaceda
himself says in the text under discussion that there are those who "need to obscure the existence of actors, ideas and proposals democratic left [in Cuba], to deposit all their symbolic capital (and material) in the hands of opponents linked policies of Western governments and international right. " Maybe that's why you can not browse Ariel pointing Chaguaceda points. I venture then to share some impressions let me work Pérez Lazo.
LA EQUIVALENCIA
Ariel no ve dónde radica la equivalencia entre las “posturas de satanización y apología al régimen cubano”, señaladas por Chaguaceda. Este punto es bien fácil de dilucidar. Considero que la similitud está justamente en los modos con que, desde cada extremo, se intenta hacer política. El socorrido recurso de descalificar al opuesto está siempre presente. No interesa si se poseen o no argumentos, solo importa desautorizar al otro para imponer una verdad. Los adjetivos que se utilizan son iguales en módulo, y diferentes en signo. Los ataques (pues el diálogo no parece importar a ninguna de las partes) buscan como objetivo establecer una única valid position, only one legitimate version. Dialogue of the deaf, that's what happens.
I'm tempted to put some examples of "egregious" of these attacks from both sides, but not yield. Truly, the game is very appealing disqualifications, but infertile.
Another modus operandi of these positions is to simplify or acquiescence of the topics under discussion. Everyone uses a "essences" almost never too explicit, and from there reject any look auscultate the complexity of the process. As a result, the rants are usually marked by the self-referentiality, fetishism, and boredom. So
yes are equivalent positions, do exist, and yes hinder the possibility of a fruitful debate, respectful even from opposing ideological positions. Chaguaceda only distinguishes the position of dualism Arango out above, just that.
Analysis Centre
Ariel jumps very quickly to what would be the second assertion Chaguaceda (later discover that there are only two points, since the text ends).
We are surprised because this is not a claim (as he says) but the fact of having chosen an article Chaguaceda Arturo Arango as the center of analysis.
According to Lasso Perez Arango "simplifies Cuban political question, or rather distorted, "terms rather arbitrary here, since it does not give arguments that protect the claim. Arango demand only to clarify what "socialism", which leads me to recall those lines of Silvio: "Nobody knows what is communism, and that grass can be censorship."
Ariel does not seem to want to see that the text of Arango (very interesting, in my opinion) is not "the focus of analysis, but only a justification Chaguaceda to express and explore some ideas. It is clear from the beginning to read the subtitle of the work, which reads: "About an article and certain offenses. " Thus, the text of Arango is a starting point from which Chaguaceda complicates the issues. Ariel
even ignores what is especially valuable for Chaguaceda Arango article "(...) to account for those who do not want a society of exclusion, marginalization, intolerance, profound inequalities, Arturo captured the essence initiatives such as those gathered in the Red Centre Critically, members of critical engagement with the Cuban socialism. And they have achieved the wide recognition of torque and foreign national, harassment and the disqualification of officials and Cuban exiles, with similar arguments to be subject to "manipulation" of "others." Ariel does not know what you think of this. Does not tell us.
But many more arguments, Ariel concludes by stating that "Chaguaceda has not advanced a step beyond that critical half-totalitarian." Do not even try to show the possible values \u200b\u200bChaguaceda article, since it is best to simply read it. Would be advisable to also read many other texts by this author, so that the view that derives from the reading is more grounded in reality. Values, of course, would be closely related to the "usefulness" of them.
Yes, I'm surprised how childish epidermal and can be demanding Ariel claim somehow that use words like "totalitarian", "Stalinist", etc. What is the advantage that our people can draw from that? The funny thing (to satisfy their claims) is to see how, in a space shared by both Chaguaceda makes use of the terms Pérez Lazo expensive, however it (I think that time was still in Cuba), did not risk much in the same publication.
overcome our egos. Develop our vocation to serve the revolutionary thinking people. Walk with humility on these discussions today's Cuba, and respect virtue where flourish.
About an article by Armando Chaguaceda. Ariel Pérez Lazo. [On line] http://www.cubaencuentro.com/opinion/articulos/a-proposito-de-un-articulo-de-armando-chaguaceda-239540
Dossier: Youth are saying about the challenges of the nation. Space Lay. Year 6, No. 1 / 2010, p.13. [On line] http://espaciolaical.org/contens/21/1300.pdf
Cuba: the colors of this. Armando Chaguaceda. [On line] http://elblogdelacatedra.blogspot.com/2010/06/cuba-los-colores-del-presente.html
Cuba: the managers of the future. Arturo Arango. El País [on line] http://www.elpais.com/articulo/opinion/Cuba/responsables/futuro/elpepuopi/20100513elpepiopi_12/Tes
We are facing a dilemma of governance. Lenier Gonzalez Mederos. Space Lay. Year 6, No. 1 / 2010, p.49. [On line] http://espaciolaical.org/contens/esp/sd_088.pdf
0 comments:
Post a Comment