του Γιώργου Σιακαντάρη
Τα Νέα
23 Αυγούστου 2013
Σαν αύριο, 45 χρόνια πριν, την 21η Αυγούστου 1968 άρχισε η προέλαση στο έδαφος της Τσεχοσλοβακίας των στρατευμάτων του Συμφώνου της Βαρσοβίας. Για πάρα πολλούς, τότε, έσβησαν και οι τελευταίες ελπίδες ότι ο σοβιετικός κομμουνισμός είναι ένα επιδεχόμενο εσωτερικών μεταρρυθμίσεων σύστημα. Βεβαίως το καλοκαίρι και το φθινόπωρο του 89 αρκετοί συνειδητοποίησαν ότι το πρόβλημα με το κομμουνιστικό σύστημα δεν ήταν η όποια διαστρέβλωση των αρχών του, αλλά οι ίδιες οι αρχές του. Το 1968 είχαμε μια πολιτική ήττα του λεγόμενου υπαρκτού σοσιαλισμού, αλλά το 1989 η ήττα ήταν ηθική.
Ακόμη και σήμερα όμως υπάρχει μια μερίδα αναλυτών, οι οποίοι αν και δεν αρνούνται να αποδεχτούν τον αντιδημοκρατικό χαρακτήρα του «υπαρκτού σοσιαλισμού», θεωρούν πως οι αιτίες των σταλινικών θηριωδιών βρίσκονται στην εφαρμογή της θεωρίας και όχι στις αρχές της. Έχουμε εδώ την απλουστευτική εικόνα των καλών Μαρξ – Λένιν και των εγκληματιών Στάλιν- Μάο, Πολ Πότ ... Υπεραπλουστευτική θεώρηση που βλάπτει την αντίληψη σύμφωνα με την οποία η ταξική ανάλυση, η μάχη για τη μείωση των ανισοτήτων, η ιδέα της κοινωνικής και ατομικής χειραφέτησης, ο εναρμονισμός των ατομικών με τα κοινωνικά δικαιώματα είναι πράγματα επίκαιρα και ιδιαιτέρως σημαντικά.
Περισσότερα
This blog is dedicated to the worldwide struggle for freedom, individual liberties, personal autonomy and the right to self-ownership - against any kind of legal paternalism, legal moralism and authoritarianism. Its aim is to post related news and commentary published mainly in the major U.S., European and Greek media. It was created by Prof. Aristides Hatzis of the University of Athens.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Δέκα ιστορίες για τα ανθρώπινα κολαστήρια
της Λαμπρινής Κουζέλη
Το Βήμα
14 Αυγούστου 2013
Στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης, μεταγωγών, εργασίας, εξόντωσης... Είτε πρόκειται για τα ναζιστικά στρατόπεδα είτε για τα σοβιετικά γκουλάγκ, η πραγματικότητα είναι κοινή: φόβος, βασανισμοί, ψυχολογική εξάντληση, σωματική καταπόνηση, επιβίωση στην κόψη του ακραίου, φρίκη. Οσοι γλίτωσαν από τον εφιάλτη καταγράφουν συνταρακτικά βιώματα σε αφηγήσεις με σκοπό να μείνει η ιστορική μνήμη ζωντανή. Η ιστορικός Οντέτ Βαρών-Βασάρ, συστηματική μελετήτρια της λογοτεχνίας των στρατοπέδων και συγγραφέας του βιβλίου «Η ανάδυση μιας δύσκολης μνήμης. Κείμενα για τη γενοκτονία των εβραίων» (Εστία, 2012), προτείνει δέκα βιβλία για την κόλαση των στρατοπέδων.
Πρίμο Λέβι, Εάν αυτό είναι ο άνθρωπος (μτφ. Χαρά Σαρλικιώτη, Αγρα, 1997). Το εμβληματικότερο έργο για τη γενοκτονία των εβραίων και την εμπειρία της εκτόπισης στο ναζιστικό στρατόπεδο του Αουσβιτς, όπου συντελέστηκε η εξόντωση σχεδόν 1 εκατ. εβραίων της Ευρώπης για φυλετικούς λόγους. Ο ιταλοεβραίος συγγραφέας, επιζών του στρατοπέδου, δεν αφηγείται μόνο τη δική του ιστορία υπακούοντας στο «χρέος της μνήμης» αλλά προχωρεί και σε έναν αναστοχασμό για την ανθρώπινη φύση.
Ζαν Αμερύ, Πέρα από την ενοχή και την εξιλέωση (μτφ. - σημειώσεις Γιάννης Καλιφατίδης, Αγρα, 2010). Η συλλογή δοκιμίων του αυστριακού εβραίου αποτέλεσε σταθμό για τη γερμανόφωνη βιβλιογραφία. Αν και αρχική πρόθεση του συγγραφέα ήταν να γράψει για τη δεινή θέση του άθρησκου διανοουμένου στο στρατόπεδο συγκέντρωσης, το βιβλίο αγγίζει ευρύτερες θεματικές, όπως αυτή των βασανιστηρίων ή της εβραϊκής ταυτότητας, με σελίδες σπάνιας διαύγειας.
Ελί Βιζέλ, Η νύχτα (μτφ. Γιώργος Ξενάριος, Μεταίχμιο, 2008). Ο συγγραφέας εκτοπίστηκε έφηβος μαζί με την οικογένειά του και ολόκληρη την κοινότητα της κωμόπολης της Τρανσυλβανίας. Το βιβλίο αφηγείται την ιστορία από τη στιγμή της εκτόπισης με τρένο στο Αουσβιτς ως την απελευθέρωση στο Μπούχενβαλντ. Η φωνή του Βιζέλ, φωνή θρησκευόμενου εβραίου που δεν χάνει την πίστη του, έχει τη δική της δύναμη και ιδιαιτερότητα.
Το Βήμα
14 Αυγούστου 2013
Στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης, μεταγωγών, εργασίας, εξόντωσης... Είτε πρόκειται για τα ναζιστικά στρατόπεδα είτε για τα σοβιετικά γκουλάγκ, η πραγματικότητα είναι κοινή: φόβος, βασανισμοί, ψυχολογική εξάντληση, σωματική καταπόνηση, επιβίωση στην κόψη του ακραίου, φρίκη. Οσοι γλίτωσαν από τον εφιάλτη καταγράφουν συνταρακτικά βιώματα σε αφηγήσεις με σκοπό να μείνει η ιστορική μνήμη ζωντανή. Η ιστορικός Οντέτ Βαρών-Βασάρ, συστηματική μελετήτρια της λογοτεχνίας των στρατοπέδων και συγγραφέας του βιβλίου «Η ανάδυση μιας δύσκολης μνήμης. Κείμενα για τη γενοκτονία των εβραίων» (Εστία, 2012), προτείνει δέκα βιβλία για την κόλαση των στρατοπέδων.
Πρίμο Λέβι, Εάν αυτό είναι ο άνθρωπος (μτφ. Χαρά Σαρλικιώτη, Αγρα, 1997). Το εμβληματικότερο έργο για τη γενοκτονία των εβραίων και την εμπειρία της εκτόπισης στο ναζιστικό στρατόπεδο του Αουσβιτς, όπου συντελέστηκε η εξόντωση σχεδόν 1 εκατ. εβραίων της Ευρώπης για φυλετικούς λόγους. Ο ιταλοεβραίος συγγραφέας, επιζών του στρατοπέδου, δεν αφηγείται μόνο τη δική του ιστορία υπακούοντας στο «χρέος της μνήμης» αλλά προχωρεί και σε έναν αναστοχασμό για την ανθρώπινη φύση.
Ζαν Αμερύ, Πέρα από την ενοχή και την εξιλέωση (μτφ. - σημειώσεις Γιάννης Καλιφατίδης, Αγρα, 2010). Η συλλογή δοκιμίων του αυστριακού εβραίου αποτέλεσε σταθμό για τη γερμανόφωνη βιβλιογραφία. Αν και αρχική πρόθεση του συγγραφέα ήταν να γράψει για τη δεινή θέση του άθρησκου διανοουμένου στο στρατόπεδο συγκέντρωσης, το βιβλίο αγγίζει ευρύτερες θεματικές, όπως αυτή των βασανιστηρίων ή της εβραϊκής ταυτότητας, με σελίδες σπάνιας διαύγειας.
Ελί Βιζέλ, Η νύχτα (μτφ. Γιώργος Ξενάριος, Μεταίχμιο, 2008). Ο συγγραφέας εκτοπίστηκε έφηβος μαζί με την οικογένειά του και ολόκληρη την κοινότητα της κωμόπολης της Τρανσυλβανίας. Το βιβλίο αφηγείται την ιστορία από τη στιγμή της εκτόπισης με τρένο στο Αουσβιτς ως την απελευθέρωση στο Μπούχενβαλντ. Η φωνή του Βιζέλ, φωνή θρησκευόμενου εβραίου που δεν χάνει την πίστη του, έχει τη δική της δύναμη και ιδιαιτερότητα.
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Aryeh Neier, "The International Human Rights Movement: A History"
Princeton University Press
Press Release
August 2013
During the past several decades, the international human rights movement has had a crucial hand in the struggle against totalitarian regimes, cruelties in wars, and crimes against humanity. Today, it grapples with the war against terror and subsequent abuses of government power. In The International Human Rights Movement, Aryeh Neier--a leading figure and a founder of the contemporary movement--offers a comprehensive and authoritative account of this global force, from its beginnings in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to its essential place in world affairs today. Neier combines analysis with personal experience, and gives a unique insider's perspective on the movement's goals, the disputes about its mission, and its rise to international importance.
Discussing the movement's origins, Neier looks at the dissenters who fought for religious freedoms in seventeenth-century England and the abolitionists who opposed slavery before the Civil War era. He pays special attention to the period from the 1970s onward, and he describes the growth of the human rights movement after the Helsinki Accords, the roles played by American presidential administrations, and the astonishing Arab revolutions of 2011. Neier argues that the contemporary human rights movement was, to a large extent, an outgrowth of the Cold War, and he demonstrates how it became the driving influence in international law, institutions, and rights. Throughout, Neier highlights key figures, controversies, and organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and he considers the challenges to come.
Illuminating and insightful, The International Human Rights Movement is a remarkable account of a significant world movement, told by a key figure in its evolution.
Aryeh Neier is president emeritus of the Open Society Foundations and distinguished visiting professor at the Paris School of International Affairs of Sciences Po. Previously he was executive director of Human Rights Watch and executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. A contributor to many major publications, he is the author of Taking Liberties and War Crimes</i>, among other books.
Press Release
August 2013
During the past several decades, the international human rights movement has had a crucial hand in the struggle against totalitarian regimes, cruelties in wars, and crimes against humanity. Today, it grapples with the war against terror and subsequent abuses of government power. In The International Human Rights Movement, Aryeh Neier--a leading figure and a founder of the contemporary movement--offers a comprehensive and authoritative account of this global force, from its beginnings in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to its essential place in world affairs today. Neier combines analysis with personal experience, and gives a unique insider's perspective on the movement's goals, the disputes about its mission, and its rise to international importance.
Discussing the movement's origins, Neier looks at the dissenters who fought for religious freedoms in seventeenth-century England and the abolitionists who opposed slavery before the Civil War era. He pays special attention to the period from the 1970s onward, and he describes the growth of the human rights movement after the Helsinki Accords, the roles played by American presidential administrations, and the astonishing Arab revolutions of 2011. Neier argues that the contemporary human rights movement was, to a large extent, an outgrowth of the Cold War, and he demonstrates how it became the driving influence in international law, institutions, and rights. Throughout, Neier highlights key figures, controversies, and organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and he considers the challenges to come.
Illuminating and insightful, The International Human Rights Movement is a remarkable account of a significant world movement, told by a key figure in its evolution.
Aryeh Neier is president emeritus of the Open Society Foundations and distinguished visiting professor at the Paris School of International Affairs of Sciences Po. Previously he was executive director of Human Rights Watch and executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. A contributor to many major publications, he is the author of Taking Liberties and War Crimes</i>, among other books.
Monday, August 12, 2013
The Problem is Authoritarianism, Not Islam
by Dani Rodrik
Project Syndicate
August 12, 2013
Is Islam fundamentally incompatible with democracy? Time and again events compel us to ask this question. And yet it is a question that obscures more than it illuminates.
Turkey, Egypt, and Tunisia are very different countries, but one thing that they share are Islamist governments (at least until recently in Egypt’s case). To varying degrees, these governments have undermined their democratic credentials by failing to protect civil and human rights and employing heavy-handed tactics against their opponents. Despite repeated assurances, Islamist leaders have shown little interest in democracy beyond winning at the ballot box.
So those who believe that the removal of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi’s government was justified have a point. As the Muslim Brotherhood’s rule became increasingly authoritarian, it trampled on the ideals and aspirations of the Tahrir Square revolution that toppled former President Hosni Mubarak in 2011.
Nonetheless, the support that the military coup received from many Egyptian liberals is difficult to fathom. Clever word games cannot hide the essence of what happened: a government that came to power in a fair election was overthrown by the army.
More
Project Syndicate
August 12, 2013
Is Islam fundamentally incompatible with democracy? Time and again events compel us to ask this question. And yet it is a question that obscures more than it illuminates.
Turkey, Egypt, and Tunisia are very different countries, but one thing that they share are Islamist governments (at least until recently in Egypt’s case). To varying degrees, these governments have undermined their democratic credentials by failing to protect civil and human rights and employing heavy-handed tactics against their opponents. Despite repeated assurances, Islamist leaders have shown little interest in democracy beyond winning at the ballot box.
So those who believe that the removal of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi’s government was justified have a point. As the Muslim Brotherhood’s rule became increasingly authoritarian, it trampled on the ideals and aspirations of the Tahrir Square revolution that toppled former President Hosni Mubarak in 2011.
Nonetheless, the support that the military coup received from many Egyptian liberals is difficult to fathom. Clever word games cannot hide the essence of what happened: a government that came to power in a fair election was overthrown by the army.
More
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the U.S. Terror State
by Anthony Gregory
Libertarian Standard
August 6, 2013
Being a U.S. war criminal means never having to say sorry. Paul Tibbets, the man who flew the Enola Gay and destroyed Hiroshima, lived to the impressive age of 92 without publicly expressing guilt for what he had done. He had even reenacted his infamous mission at a 1976 Texas air show, complete with a mushroom cloud, and later said he never meant this to be offensive. In contrast, he called it a “damn big insult” when the Smithsonian planned an exhibit in 1995 showing some of the damage the bombing caused.
We might understand a man not coming to terms with his most important contribution to human history being such a destructive act. But what about the rest of the country?
It’s sickening that Americans even debate the atomic bombings, as they do every year in early August. Polls in recent years reveal overwhelming majorities of the American public accepting the acts as necessary.
Conservatives are much worse on this topic, although liberals surely don’t give it the weight it deserves. Trent Lott was taken to the woodshed for his comments in late 2002 about how Strom Thurmond would have been a better president than Truman. Lott and Thurmond both represent ugly strains in American politics, but no one dared question the assumption that Thurmond was obviously a less defensible candidate than Truman. Zora Neale Hurston, heroic author of the Harlem Renaissance, might have had a different take, as she astutely called Truman “a monster” and “the butcher of Asia.” Governmental segregation is terrible, but why is murdering hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians with as much thought as one would give to eradicating silverfish treated as simply a controversial policy decision in comparison?
Perhaps it is the appeal to necessity. We hear that the United States would have otherwise had to invade the Japanese mainland and so the bombings saved American lives. But saving U.S. soldiers wouldn’t justify killing Japanese children any more than saving Taliban soldiers would justify dropping bombs on American children. Targeting civilians to manipulate their government is the very definition of terrorism. Everyone was properly horrified by Anders Behring Breivik’s 2011 murder spree in Norway – killing innocents to alter diplomacy. Truman murdered a thousand times as many innocents on August 6, 1945, then again on August 9.
More
Libertarian Standard
August 6, 2013
Being a U.S. war criminal means never having to say sorry. Paul Tibbets, the man who flew the Enola Gay and destroyed Hiroshima, lived to the impressive age of 92 without publicly expressing guilt for what he had done. He had even reenacted his infamous mission at a 1976 Texas air show, complete with a mushroom cloud, and later said he never meant this to be offensive. In contrast, he called it a “damn big insult” when the Smithsonian planned an exhibit in 1995 showing some of the damage the bombing caused.
We might understand a man not coming to terms with his most important contribution to human history being such a destructive act. But what about the rest of the country?
It’s sickening that Americans even debate the atomic bombings, as they do every year in early August. Polls in recent years reveal overwhelming majorities of the American public accepting the acts as necessary.
Conservatives are much worse on this topic, although liberals surely don’t give it the weight it deserves. Trent Lott was taken to the woodshed for his comments in late 2002 about how Strom Thurmond would have been a better president than Truman. Lott and Thurmond both represent ugly strains in American politics, but no one dared question the assumption that Thurmond was obviously a less defensible candidate than Truman. Zora Neale Hurston, heroic author of the Harlem Renaissance, might have had a different take, as she astutely called Truman “a monster” and “the butcher of Asia.” Governmental segregation is terrible, but why is murdering hundreds of thousands of foreign civilians with as much thought as one would give to eradicating silverfish treated as simply a controversial policy decision in comparison?
Perhaps it is the appeal to necessity. We hear that the United States would have otherwise had to invade the Japanese mainland and so the bombings saved American lives. But saving U.S. soldiers wouldn’t justify killing Japanese children any more than saving Taliban soldiers would justify dropping bombs on American children. Targeting civilians to manipulate their government is the very definition of terrorism. Everyone was properly horrified by Anders Behring Breivik’s 2011 murder spree in Norway – killing innocents to alter diplomacy. Truman murdered a thousand times as many innocents on August 6, 1945, then again on August 9.
More
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)