remnants of
visit
visit
ARGENTINO TIME Posted in the April 29, 2011
By Manuel Barrientos
Journalist
Today the exercise of civil liberties are threatened not only by the attack institutional powers of the state but also by the power of concentrated economic groups.
An action as simple as effective le bastó a Hebe de Bonafini para desnudar la verdad que se encubre bajo los bellos fuegos de artificio verbal que despliega Mario Vargas Llosa en su faceta de difusor privilegiado del liberalismo extemporáneo.
A través de una fina ironía, que quita las máscaras de la hipocresía, la presidenta de la Asociación Madres de Plaza de Mayo se presentó el jueves 21 en la Feria del Libro y coincidió en la inmaculada defensa de la libertad realizada por el gran escritor peruano. Y le acercó un petitorio para que Vargas Llosa sumara su voz al repudio contra la invisibilización que el Grupo Clarín oficia sobre las señales televisivas Pakapaka y CN23.
Maestro en el uso de las palabras, the Nobel Prize in Literature last replied balbuceos.Días only later, and at the silence of the writer, Hebe issued a letter that again put his finger on the sore on his defense of abstract ideas of freedom. "He could not sign the letter on our behalf as their patterns and Magnetto Clarin and La Nacion not allowed. Their patterns are preventing our program in CN23, The Clementina, exit at Cablevision, and also the channel for children Pakapaka. But the fish dies by mouth: you said that what is prohibited and their employers feared they fear us. That's why we criticize, "wrote Hebe.
Admittedly unforgettable book author as The City and the Dogs and War doomsday argument does not obviate the ideas. Unlike many of their colleagues on the right of Argentina, and more or less solid in its foundation, Vargas Llosa explains and defends his ideas.
And this explanation of their positions opens the possibility of political debate.
However, his speech forget one small detail: today the exercise of civil liberties are threatened not only by the attack of the institutional powers of the state but also by the power of concentrated economic groups. And in that sense, the political thought of Vargas Llosa seems to delay several decades.
Undoubtedly, since the constitution of the nation state in the modern age, the main threats to freedom in the public arena came mainly from the totalitarian tendencies of state institutions. Examples abound, and it is unnecessary to mention, in a country that still has open wounds on the terrorism unleashed by the state during the dictatorship. And the personal memory of Hebe could testify.
However, in the new globalized world where financial capital is dislocated from their territorial responsibilities and transcends state borders, the greatest threats to the exercise of freedom may also occur in the tension zone between market forces and civil rights.
Defender of libertarian ideas, the Polish sociologist Zygmunt Bauman explains that, as before, the space of non-institutionalized groups "remains a territory invaded, but this time the roles were reversed and the invading troops huddle in limit private. And, unlike the case in which "the public" was represented by the state which created and enforced the laws, "this time the invaders are not an army stable and unified command headquarters, but an undisciplined troops, varied and out of uniform. "
The additional problem, says Bauman, is that today is very difficult to find tools to stop the advance of corporations on the "agora", this area of \u200b\u200bdiscussion that people have for their public affairs. And that danger is that, by the separation between political power and independence caused by the financial markets, restricting the state's ability to impose limits on corporations in its onslaught against ágora.Si this question may sound abstract, there are vast life examples in Argentina recently.
model prevailed since 1976, which erupted in 2001, in which freedom of movement seemed the only corporate-and final- essential liberty to claim. In this context, nation-states seemed to lose its regulatory power in the hands of the pressure of multinational capital and local areas were forced to compete among themselves increasingly soft rules to enable them to "attract" those capitals - untethered and-jump from one space to another. "Deregulation and attract investment" was the fee to be imposed on local governments.
Under the logic of "can not", the politicians repeated again and again in '90, that real power lay elsewhere, a step up, and that they had in their hands the tools to govern public policy. Even today, the policy again at center stage, the government and mobilized their bases must fight-much-so that even the laws that sanction can be implemented, as evidenced by the still tied up implementation of the Act Communication Services Audiovisual.Pero there are other ways, subtle and invisible, with which economic and media corporations coerce the freedom of speech of citizens.
"If the image is the highest form of information, then the live image allows better information," he asserted, also, in the decade 1990.
With unbridled freedom, the direct, they said, had the objective "democratic" about what's going at the same time that the event is staged. Live images offered the possibility of unmediated access to the facts. And the supposed veracity of the live image was unquestionable, and it would not be subjected to any manipulation or external pressures.
And yet, the construction of this "objectivity" hides a very complex design of interventions on the image and sound. Hidden mechanisms of inclusion / exclusion about what and how material is displayed seeks to explain the events narrated.
The videographs (those titles or subtitles that frame the images issued) and the use of split screen, for example, produce specific meanings that are far from "mirror" in a supposedly "neutral" or "objective" information transmitted. The agenda of what remains is televised then subjected to a series of negotiations, consensus and censorship. The supposed freedom of live, which are hidden selective mechanisms of the corporate media is nothing more than a form of legitimation of social power which they operate.
With his mischievous and mocking gesture, Hebe made clear the true expressions that threaten freedom of expression in the contemporary world.
The question passes, then, to know who benefits from the exercise of freedom in its purest form claiming Vargas Llosa.
Published in:
http://tiempo.elargentino.com/notas/hebe-y-liberalismo-de-vargas-llosa
Published in:
http://tiempo.elargentino.com/notas/hebe-y-liberalismo-de-vargas-llosa
0 comments:
Post a Comment