added to the blog post that you can also find in the Progressive Youth Platform :
Do they reflect accurately the Youth Associations youth today?
The association, in general, is very close to the society in general and the willingness to participate, to "be in something." People vote, about the ceiling in societies is 80% democratic, and this limit is reached only at moments of maximum tension between two different political models.
The political associations is frowned upon, "the parties are bad, are all equal", it is intended. What is going to think of their organizations less as youth associations? However, keeping in mind that the association is a minority in society, between people who are active in an organization, it tends to be generally an NGO. Ie people associated it does to "help those who need help."
Today's society is very ingrained in the field of individualism and consumerism. At this point, the old liberal approaches have succeeded in that each individual thinks of himself first in the community. Young field, what is important, if not most, then in a large part, is to "have" to have the new essentials for life (mobile, mp3, computer or play station, internet, clothes such a mark). Without denying that they are very useful objects, but have helped to shape the consumer society. Without being associations as we know, organized, youth are on groups that share the same style of music, same style of dress and, if we at one end and luckily it is a minority, in the same band of legitimate violence by an irrational (Latin bands, bands skins ...). The association is natural, because it is something that individualism is not complete: the person needs the support of a group, the person needs a company.
The data show that where more extreme individualism have more suicide rate. How many suicides of young people there in Japan? The worst thing is that it has reached the suicide squad. " Attempting disconnect with the rest of the individuals, limited thinking in the "me first" generates this.
Do they reflect accurately the Youth Associations youth today?
The association, in general, is very close to the society in general and the willingness to participate, to "be in something." People vote, about the ceiling in societies is 80% democratic, and this limit is reached only at moments of maximum tension between two different political models.
The political associations is frowned upon, "the parties are bad, are all equal", it is intended. What is going to think of their organizations less as youth associations? However, keeping in mind that the association is a minority in society, between people who are active in an organization, it tends to be generally an NGO. Ie people associated it does to "help those who need help."
Today's society is very ingrained in the field of individualism and consumerism. At this point, the old liberal approaches have succeeded in that each individual thinks of himself first in the community. Young field, what is important, if not most, then in a large part, is to "have" to have the new essentials for life (mobile, mp3, computer or play station, internet, clothes such a mark). Without denying that they are very useful objects, but have helped to shape the consumer society. Without being associations as we know, organized, youth are on groups that share the same style of music, same style of dress and, if we at one end and luckily it is a minority, in the same band of legitimate violence by an irrational (Latin bands, bands skins ...). The association is natural, because it is something that individualism is not complete: the person needs the support of a group, the person needs a company.
The data show that where more extreme individualism have more suicide rate. How many suicides of young people there in Japan? The worst thing is that it has reached the suicide squad. " Attempting disconnect with the rest of the individuals, limited thinking in the "me first" generates this.
Are we just as committed today's youth about the generations of?
Today's society is no society half a century ago, let alone of a century ago. Half a century ago, and in Spain alone, the company fought for the expansion of the liberal state to social state and social democracy worked in the success of this struggle. Missing barriers (supposedly), expanded democracy, averted the danger totalitarian and authoritarian society has been free, today's society, young people today have been born in a successful society. But a society that now you can die of success.
Why fight if we have it all? It is thought that in my opinion, is dominant. Youth organizations today do not are the same for years. In times of struggle for freedom was so moved that struggle, the struggle of all, the struggle for general interest. Today, in democratic society, the interest that moves the world is another fight. The struggle of the self, the struggle for the interest. It is another victory of liberalism and, alas, has succeeded even in the same field of associations of the socialist left.
Should we understand just how fragile liberty, free thought and democracy, we would act otherwise. History seems to prove that, sometimes, in moments of greatest danger has not been able to respond to the enemy of freedom. Could I have acted otherwise the opposition to Berlusconi in Matteotti Case? Could have done otherwise the Bolshevik Party before the prospect of not constructing the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, but the personal dictatorship of Stalin? Could have done otherwise the German KPD and the democratic forces in Weimar Germany knowing that their struggle was the death of the fragile democracy and the rise of the NSDAP? Could you have acted wisely anarchists, socialists and rightists English for not fallen into mutual destruction and the emergence of forty years of dictatorship? And so to eternity, the story of the human race is an accumulation of errors, successes, decisions and possibilities that already enter the science-fiction and supposition. I believe, and pray for a mistake, that the blindness of society about the problems that shake the planet (Third World poverty, detachment of democracy, the agony of savage capitalism, the nuclear bomb, terrorism and its causes ... ) will bring in a lot near future suffering.
How can we fight today individualism?
Individualism is not something to be fought, or the cooperative individualism is something that is learned from childhood, because society as a whole takes you act. Why, if no right is destroying education public and the principles of social democracy? Because he wants that individualism, because that individualism does not lead to socialism, because the division and selfishness is the basis of its support and power. For the record, I say, on the left there is the same individualism that perception does not take society to socialism.
However, you need to know to observe society and its responses to stimuli that occur. The right wants to destroy education as we knew it, it will generate individuals who blindly believe their most monstrous lies, as in Orwell's 1984 people believe that two plus two equals five if the Party says it is. But what the right also generates a rejection of the dictatorship of thought. So does a distance education: caring citizens and progressive generate the same number, or perhaps that people who reject these ideas. But created. Any action can generate an acceptance and rejection. That's one of the virtues of freedom, but also one of its dangers.
will always be a progressive thinking and reactionary thinking. But the Enlightenment and bourgeois liberal revolutions were able to impose on society a belief in natural rights of man, when in the previous century such things did not exist in the human mind. So, I think there is much work to get that concepts such as democracy, social rights, international solidarity and overcoming the irrational concepts of nationalism and racism, are inalienable human beings. This is not crazy because I say four, but because it is positive for society.
Should we seek new ways more attractive to induce the association?
will not be able to get the youth progressive proposals if they are not leading by example. Will they believe in solidarity in face of those who kill for power? Will they believe in democracy in the mouths of those who reject the contrary opinions within your organization? Will they believe the associations in the mouths of those who cornering who does not tell all that right? Society perceives the parties and associations as the device that created some minorities to stay in power, despite the changes, and the bases are only the transmission belt that is said above.
That brings me to a question, we have overcome the irrational concept of power? Formerly the king ruled because God provided it, now you have to say this, then another, because it has the minority that controls us. The Power from Above has not been exceeded, the power from below has not yet arrived.
Are Youth correct policies of the institutions?, What about investment?
is normal in politics, youth areas are occupied by young people. That's good as long as young people think and know what young people want. Another is what is done, which often is on track, or other operating to promote a personal or ideological interest. Will the government allow the ideology that is to be made for youth events and programs that lead to contrary ideas? I'm not saying there are people who complies with the freedom that lets you plurality, but it is also true that at other times will hinder those who think differently.
lived past the labor organizations of its members to help its members, without state support. The coming to power of the socialist left and the extension of the welfare state has been subsidizing the social and political organizations, and that the arbitrary and bureaucratic. So much has been distorted in bureaucratic organizations fighting organizations and therefore the existing conservative. Investment should go with a premise: the pursuit of freedom and free expression, both giving that money to the recipient.
As I do not believe in the systematic planning of society, that society makes on their behalf can be successful. The labor organizations emerged on its own initiative, not the state. What make young people, exercising their freedom and the collective benefit, can be highly positive.
How effective are the youth councils?
Youth Councils What's this? I would say if asked a young anonymous. The idea itself is good, but implementation has left much of the road. For starters, the socialist ideal of full democracy. The Youth Council consists of youth associations, but not chosen in "freedom" rather than the freedom of these associations. And based on the premise that the association is a minority, the members of minority councils. For me the ideal, which is the socialist ideal is total democracy, radical democracy. Freely choose the organs of speech, open to all. Also its limitation, youth, poses a problem: how old is young? Is the same as now discussed how old is old. The work of the Councils, invisible, indeed necessary, but enjoy more legitimacy if freely chosen, as well as the Congress of Deputies has every right because your choice is open to all adult citizens.
Are youth associations too imbued with the partisanship of the elderly?
As I said before, the ideal of collective struggle has been replaced by the ideal of personal struggle. And party youth organizations, more. It proclaims the autonomy, not independence, but in practice this proves to be an intrusion as a Party-Youth-Youth Party. The party youth organization must be subject to the same party, but you must set a condition: the non-intervention in each other. The speech should be coordinated, international opinion tolerated, and the work must be common. Why? Because the cooperative is the opposite of what is reported here, individualism. Individualism, personal control and interference by the power does not lead to socialism. In the party must assert the opinion of those who are members of the party and its social base, not the other organization, and less shaking votes in the internal organs. Because those "votes" are people who supposedly have freedom of thought, but tosses them as men of straw and simple transmission belts for what is decided. The truth is that freedom is severely damaged, and thus, the youth-association divorce will not be resolved.
0 comments:
Post a Comment