Officials at the contributions of the very interesting article on Islam Cassoli (go to link) that introduced this event with members and sympathizers of Alexis and add some of my considerations in the debate.
Being a speech on a blog it is obvious that I will be very brief.
I state that I find the comments of Cassoli very thorough, shared and calm.
Because they are among those who consider Islam the issue will be decisive for the future of our society, our families and our children I think we should be very specific in dealing with.
The complexity of the world prevents us from where we are living apart from the question: is it for? and who is it for?
our behaviors and those of our governments will be guided by this consideration to leaving the purely ideological.
seems to me that the American strategy is deemed essential Cassoli stick. This thesis is based on the conviction that the moderate Arab partners, worried by the force of American arms would not "attract" the fundamentalist temptation. It added that American military power is such that it can subdue the world.
But I wonder if you can measure the success of a military operation only for what happens on the battlefield. After the pitched battle there is what is happening in Iraq. The normalization of a country.
The situation in Iraq is destabilized than before the war. I mean that in order to destabilize the country is in the hands of fringe fundamentalist and terrorist groups.
I also believe that Americans soon will seek a way out of the disastrous situation in Iraq that allows him to limit the damage.
This "retreat" even more unfortunately leave the field open to radical militias. If it is true as
Cassoli says that 150 million people belong to militant Islam, and at least 500 million Muslims are strongly anti-American movement that has produced this campaign military from one side (of course exclude the possibility that they have become pro-American)?
A solution of radical force is not viable if we exclude a mass genocide of such size as to fade the story.
The use of force, must necessarily be limited to international police operations, targeted, limited. It will be important to have a broad political consensus, unite and not divide the Western world, to cultivate good relations with moderate Arab world is not based on fear.
Unfortunately this is not what happened in Iraq. Bin Laden may be of interest only to a progression of the spiral of violence. Not by chance, in fact, reappear in a manner so American Journal before the vote (a beautiful spot pro-Bush). Oriana Fallaci
I follow in choosing convinced than their values. We must choose to be Western. Our achievements are too precious (liberalism, constitutionalism, democracy, human rights, equality between men and women, tolerance) for being indifferent. If this is his cry of pain I concur.
But I wonder: can it be consistent with these values \u200b\u200bengaging in a clash of civilizations that presupposes the superiority of one culture over others?
If we accompany the dialogue limited the use of force, we may use attitudes of superiority? Who is
willing to talk to someone who feels superior to him?
If it is true that the Arab world that the lives of his obsession with decadence and suffers from an inferiority complex towards the West does not need great expertise in psychology to understand that the dialogue can only occur between people who respect each other and in reported differences.
Our values \u200b\u200bare precious, but to lose a little of our superiority, it will be appropriate to reflect inconsistency of our behavior than the values \u200b\u200bbandied about.
I will not dwell on lies, more or less aware, a lot of propaganda to justify international questionable choices in recent years.
will be appropriate also reflect on the values \u200b\u200bof historicizing.
values \u200b\u200bare almost never absolute and immutable but are conditioned by historical period, from social change.
Even in Western society have been known to religious, political absolutism of divine origin.
Even today, quite rightly points out Cassoli, equal opportunities of women in our society are still an issue in the making. In some areas of our country the situation is even worse.
how we would react or how to react if arrival of the "advanced" that requires us to change where we are not culturally ready yet?
final summary reflection on immigration policies. The extra-EU workforce
is essential for the development of our economy.
fully share the opinion that it considers dangerous Cassoli multiculturalism in our society. Who wants our citizens can practice the religion they want but must adhere fully to our laws and our constitutional principles.
But we have to provide an alternative. Non-EU workers, with a regular employment contract, may enter and exit our country without having to put down roots, maintaining close relationships with family of origin.
The fear of being unable to return to Italy, once gone, forcing many to choose to stay forever, even if you are not willing to that supplement which I mentioned before.
A sensible policy must provide for the 2 binary: those who remain, temporarily, to work and those who decide to stay forever but with the rights and duties of any European citizen.
In this regard, I suggest a reading on this subject: "The arms, not the soul: a new way of being an immigrant" - taken from Giuseppe Sacco Limes, our Islam.
http://www.alexisdt.it/extdoc/IslamEuropeoeCulturaOccidentale1.pdf
0 comments:
Post a Comment