You could ask me (not that anyone bothers :) ) why I focus on the Left so much.
Well, the answer is simple: I expect more of them than the usual tribalism, and ideology-driven thinking I kind of taken granted from the Right. (In which I myself display my own set of biases and bigotry.)
Anyhow. The import of "Taharrush gamea" (the mass sexual assaults on women by young men) into Europe with the recent migrant crisis points to a very interesting contradiction on the Left.
I associate the Left with human rights, women's rights, equality, feminism. Usually left-wing thinkers campaign for these things, and usually people on the left fought for them. Most feminist writers I know identify as someone being on the left. And yet, when it comes to these sexual assaults, both the political establishment, and the media is strangely silent; it's mostly the right-center right that is vocal about them. It seems like things flip upside down when it comes to migrants and sexual assaults: the Left is content blaming the victim ("keep them at arm's length" as the mayor of Cologne suggested; blaming drinking culture, as some people in Sweden suggested), while the Right wants to defend women against these men from a very different culture.
It is mind-boggling. Jessica Valenti is silent on the matter, even though she was quite vocal during even the Shirt Gate crisis. No prominent feminist writer in left-wing papers talk about these issues. It seems like the different ideologies (multiculturalism, Wilcommenculture, feminism, human rights) have this rock-paper-scissors dynamics. Apparently multiculturalism beats feminism when it comes to migrants. And this is sad, because it points to one thing: not even the Left has a coherent world-philosophy. (Well, very few on the Left does, let's just put it like this. Chomsky would probably have no problems processing these issues.) It shows that the Left is merely a collection of activists with very little intellectual power (or just simply too lazy). People who cannot or will not comprehend that things don't have to be mutually exclusive, so when one ideology (feminism) clashes with another (open borders, multiculturalism), one will lose out. I just had a conversation with someone who said the whole issue was blown out of proportion due to "some improper touching in Cologne that happened once". The mind blows. Suddenly I have a leftie who blames women, and trivialises sexual assault -something that is usually thought to be the privilege of the Right.
This leads to this weird reversal of roles between the Left and Right. I never thought one day I'd see Farage to be more of a feminist than Merkel.
Showing posts with label 2016. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2016. Show all posts
Friday, August 26, 2016
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Austrian election fraud
It seems like nobody's bothered that there was an election fraud happening in Austria in 2016. Not 1939; we're talking 21st century here. In the middle of Europe. People celebrated it as "far right thwarted", but really? In a delicious twist of fate the Washington Post declared that the results were clean - on the same day the Constitutional Court decided to annul the results...
If the electorate votes for someone you don't like or approve, then democracy is not as sacred as you would have thought. Isn't it a dangerous path to take? Don't take me wrong, I'm not defending the far right; it's the principle that matters - democracy. You can't just cheat if you don't like the result; you'll cause more damage on the long run if you go down this slippery slope.
Yes, there are new elections to be held, and no more "sloppiness", but for Christ's sake... 77 000 votes manipulated is not sloppiness. Sloppiness is not washing your hand after peeing, or not locking your door; manipulating 77 000 votes is fraud. You can't do that by accident. If it does not work for cheating wives (oh, I slipped and fell on his dick), it sure as hell should not work for elections.
What would happen if the far right was found manipulating the results? Why isn't Austria ostracised as a country where democracy is in danger? Why isn't there an international outcry?
I guess we know why, but it's still galling; the conspiratorial silence is deafening.
If the electorate votes for someone you don't like or approve, then democracy is not as sacred as you would have thought. Isn't it a dangerous path to take? Don't take me wrong, I'm not defending the far right; it's the principle that matters - democracy. You can't just cheat if you don't like the result; you'll cause more damage on the long run if you go down this slippery slope.
Yes, there are new elections to be held, and no more "sloppiness", but for Christ's sake... 77 000 votes manipulated is not sloppiness. Sloppiness is not washing your hand after peeing, or not locking your door; manipulating 77 000 votes is fraud. You can't do that by accident. If it does not work for cheating wives (oh, I slipped and fell on his dick), it sure as hell should not work for elections.
What would happen if the far right was found manipulating the results? Why isn't Austria ostracised as a country where democracy is in danger? Why isn't there an international outcry?
I guess we know why, but it's still galling; the conspiratorial silence is deafening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
What is wrong with Rings of Power and the criticism of the critics
So Rings of Power season two is coming out, and the flame-wars flared up again on social media. So let's take a look at why people hated...
-
The Social Justice Warriors normally jump on any and all differences in outcome as a proof for oppression. Well, not any and all, because ...
-
Well, this is about actors. It seems that lately even the supposedly smart and wholesome actors fell victim of this trend of wanting only...
-
Well, look at the reactions to an obviously not white guy cosplaying Luke Skywalker . Why it is important is two-fold. 1. You do not need e...