Bloomberg
Editorial
January 30, 2012
The president of France is getting ready to sign a bill making it a crime in his country to deny that a century ago, the Ottoman Empire committed genocide against Armenians. As President Nicolas Sarkozy’s own party proposed the legislation, we suspect that he will sign it. But it’s never too late to drop a bad idea.
Let’s start with the genocide -- it happened. Beginning in 1915, as many as 1.5 million ethnic Armenians living in what today is modern Turkey were killed or deported. The Ottoman Empire was falling apart, or more accurately was being dismembered by Britain, France and Russia. The authorities in Istanbul saw Christian Armenians as a potential fifth column and drove them out through executions and deportations. Greeks and Christian Assyrians soon followed.
This is a painful piece of Armenian history that continues to traumatize the families of its victims, now dispersed around the globe in California, France and elsewhere. Every April, there are battles in Washington as legislators with Armenian constituents lobby for the U.S. to formally recognize the genocide.
Turkey, the Ottoman Empire’s successor state, has barely started to deal with the essential process of facing the truth and bringing some kind of closure to the victims’ families. While it has recently become possible for Turkish historians to discuss the events of 1915 without facing jail, it was only in 2007 that Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was shot dead in broad daylight for daring to write about the genocide.
More
Liberty
This blog is dedicated to the worldwide struggle for freedom, individual liberties, moral 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.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
Greece's Epidemic of Racist Attacks
by Eva Cosse
New York Times
January 26, 2012
When I tell people in Athens, my hometown, that I am doing research on racist violence in Greece, I am met with disbelief. There’s no problem, they say, and even if things sometimes happen it’s a temporary blip linked to the economic crisis.
The Greek government seems to share their view. It recorded only two hate crimes in the whole country in 2009 and one in 2008. More recent figures are not available.
I experienced the reality firsthand a week ago. I was interviewing Razia, an Afghan single mother, in the small apartment she shares with her three children in Aghios Panteleimonas square in Athens about the numerous attacks on her home since she moved in a year and a half earlier. Other Afghan migrants were visiting her the day I was there.
Suddenly masked thugs, who had been gathering outside, threw heavy objects at the front door, cracking the thick glass. During the few minutes the attack lasted, I could see the silhouettes of the attackers. People panicked and backed away from the windows, as the apartment is on the ground floor of the building, while Razia gathered up her scared children.
More
New York Times
January 26, 2012
When I tell people in Athens, my hometown, that I am doing research on racist violence in Greece, I am met with disbelief. There’s no problem, they say, and even if things sometimes happen it’s a temporary blip linked to the economic crisis.
The Greek government seems to share their view. It recorded only two hate crimes in the whole country in 2009 and one in 2008. More recent figures are not available.
I experienced the reality firsthand a week ago. I was interviewing Razia, an Afghan single mother, in the small apartment she shares with her three children in Aghios Panteleimonas square in Athens about the numerous attacks on her home since she moved in a year and a half earlier. Other Afghan migrants were visiting her the day I was there.
Suddenly masked thugs, who had been gathering outside, threw heavy objects at the front door, cracking the thick glass. During the few minutes the attack lasted, I could see the silhouettes of the attackers. People panicked and backed away from the windows, as the apartment is on the ground floor of the building, while Razia gathered up her scared children.
More
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Egypt's Youth Mark Anniversary with Calls for More Changes
Spiegel
January 25, 2012
Wednesday marks the one-year anniversary of the revolution that ousted Hosni Mubarak from power. But, rather than celebrating, the country's idealistic youth are taking to the streets once again to protest military abuses and the army's continued hold on power.
Mustafa Kandil is standing on a traffic island in Cairo, tying a screen to the base of a monument. It's the statue of Umm Kulthum, an Egyptian singer venerated by all Arabs, as she faces the Nile with open arms. Kandil sets up a tripod, screws a projector into place and connects loudspeakers. He looks around. It's still quiet, but the crowd is growing larger. "Take a good look," he shouts, and switches on the projector. "This is our army."
Shaky video images flicker across the screen, showing soldiers kicking and beating protesters, people running away, the dead and dying, field hospitals, morgues and a lot of blood. A general says: "These protesters are troublemakers."
No, says Kandil: "These dead people include a sheik at Azhar University, a doctor and an engineer. Don't believe what the army tells you."
While the ruling military council in Egypt has state-owned television and the newspapers loyal to the regime, young people here have "Kazeboon." The word means "liars," and it's an attempt to refute the generals' propaganda, a grassroots form of government television, so to speak.
The Kazeboon campaign was launched in December, on the day an image of a young woman stripped down to her jeans and blue bra by soldiers circled the globe. Since then Kandil, a 21-year-old dentistry student, has been showing the videos in public spaces, and his activities have been copied by hundreds of others throughout the country.
Although Kandil and the others are often attacked, things remain quiet on this evening. After showing the videos, he and several dozen others march through the streets shouting: "Hey, you on your balcony! The army has killed a sheik, a doctor and an engineer! Tomorrow, it could be you!"
More
January 25, 2012
Wednesday marks the one-year anniversary of the revolution that ousted Hosni Mubarak from power. But, rather than celebrating, the country's idealistic youth are taking to the streets once again to protest military abuses and the army's continued hold on power.
Mustafa Kandil is standing on a traffic island in Cairo, tying a screen to the base of a monument. It's the statue of Umm Kulthum, an Egyptian singer venerated by all Arabs, as she faces the Nile with open arms. Kandil sets up a tripod, screws a projector into place and connects loudspeakers. He looks around. It's still quiet, but the crowd is growing larger. "Take a good look," he shouts, and switches on the projector. "This is our army."
Shaky video images flicker across the screen, showing soldiers kicking and beating protesters, people running away, the dead and dying, field hospitals, morgues and a lot of blood. A general says: "These protesters are troublemakers."
No, says Kandil: "These dead people include a sheik at Azhar University, a doctor and an engineer. Don't believe what the army tells you."
While the ruling military council in Egypt has state-owned television and the newspapers loyal to the regime, young people here have "Kazeboon." The word means "liars," and it's an attempt to refute the generals' propaganda, a grassroots form of government television, so to speak.
The Kazeboon campaign was launched in December, on the day an image of a young woman stripped down to her jeans and blue bra by soldiers circled the globe. Since then Kandil, a 21-year-old dentistry student, has been showing the videos in public spaces, and his activities have been copied by hundreds of others throughout the country.
Although Kandil and the others are often attacked, things remain quiet on this evening. After showing the videos, he and several dozen others march through the streets shouting: "Hey, you on your balcony! The army has killed a sheik, a doctor and an engineer! Tomorrow, it could be you!"
More
Afghanistan’s Terrorized Women
by Mohammad Musa Mahmodi
Project Syndicate
January 25, 2012
Recently, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) office in Kudoz province reported the rescue of a young woman who had been imprisoned in her in-laws’ dungeon for seven months. Fifteen-year-old Sahar Gul was forced to marry an older man who serves in the Afghan army. She was then kept in the dungeon by her husband’s family and brutally tortured for months, because she refused to work as a prostitute.
Over the past ten years, the AIHRC has received more than 19,000 complaints related to violence against women. Despite making some progress in investigating the complaints and referring them to the justice system, as well as in raising public awareness about the issue, the challenges remain huge.
Since 2002, many efforts have been made to improve women’s lives in Afghanistan. The country has enacted several new laws and established a fairly advanced legal framework to end discrimination against women, including a new law that criminalizes any act that results in violence against women.
But laws and policies alone are not sufficient to protect women from horrific domestic abuse. Indeed, the Gul case is hardly the only well-publicized case. There was also Gulnaz, a young woman who was jailed for adultery after being raped by a relative (she was recently released after a presidential pardon, but may be forced to marry her attacker). The husband of another young woman, Aisha, cut off her nose and ears when she ran away.
More
Project Syndicate
January 25, 2012
Recently, the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) office in Kudoz province reported the rescue of a young woman who had been imprisoned in her in-laws’ dungeon for seven months. Fifteen-year-old Sahar Gul was forced to marry an older man who serves in the Afghan army. She was then kept in the dungeon by her husband’s family and brutally tortured for months, because she refused to work as a prostitute.
Over the past ten years, the AIHRC has received more than 19,000 complaints related to violence against women. Despite making some progress in investigating the complaints and referring them to the justice system, as well as in raising public awareness about the issue, the challenges remain huge.
Since 2002, many efforts have been made to improve women’s lives in Afghanistan. The country has enacted several new laws and established a fairly advanced legal framework to end discrimination against women, including a new law that criminalizes any act that results in violence against women.
But laws and policies alone are not sufficient to protect women from horrific domestic abuse. Indeed, the Gul case is hardly the only well-publicized case. There was also Gulnaz, a young woman who was jailed for adultery after being raped by a relative (she was recently released after a presidential pardon, but may be forced to marry her attacker). The husband of another young woman, Aisha, cut off her nose and ears when she ran away.
More
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Crackdown on Chinese dissidents
Washington Post
Editorial Board
January 22, 2012
“As far as we, state security, can tell, there are no more than 200 intellectuals in the country who oppose the Communist Party and are influential. If the central authorities think that their rule is facing a crisis, they can capture them all in one night and bury them alive.”
So said a Chinese state security officer to the dissident Yu Jie on Dec. 9, 2010 — the day before his good friend Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in absentia. In a statement last week, Mr. Yu, a well-known writer and Christian activist, said that he was beaten nearly to death that night, then held under house arrest for more than a year. He finally was allowed to travel with his family to Washington on Jan. 11; in a news conference, he vowed to “make public to the international community all that I have endured over this past year” and to publish books about Mr. Liu and President Hu Jintao, whom he calls a “cold-blooded tyrant.”
Mr. Yu is having an impact. According to the Wall Street Journal, the phrase “bury them alive” has gone viral on the Chinese microblogging site Sina Weibo. And no wonder: In the past few weeks Mr. Hu’s regime has appeared to be implementing the thuggish cop’s threat, at least figuratively.
While Mr. Yu was pushed out of the country, three other pro-democracy writers have been given long prison sentences. The most recent is Li Tie, 52, who was handed a 10-year prison term on Wednesday in the city of Wuhan, in central China. Mr. Lie’s crimes, according to the regime, included joining the China Social Democratic Party and writing essays with such titles as “Human Beings’ Heaven is Human Dignity.”
More
Editorial Board
January 22, 2012
“As far as we, state security, can tell, there are no more than 200 intellectuals in the country who oppose the Communist Party and are influential. If the central authorities think that their rule is facing a crisis, they can capture them all in one night and bury them alive.”
So said a Chinese state security officer to the dissident Yu Jie on Dec. 9, 2010 — the day before his good friend Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in absentia. In a statement last week, Mr. Yu, a well-known writer and Christian activist, said that he was beaten nearly to death that night, then held under house arrest for more than a year. He finally was allowed to travel with his family to Washington on Jan. 11; in a news conference, he vowed to “make public to the international community all that I have endured over this past year” and to publish books about Mr. Liu and President Hu Jintao, whom he calls a “cold-blooded tyrant.”
Mr. Yu is having an impact. According to the Wall Street Journal, the phrase “bury them alive” has gone viral on the Chinese microblogging site Sina Weibo. And no wonder: In the past few weeks Mr. Hu’s regime has appeared to be implementing the thuggish cop’s threat, at least figuratively.
While Mr. Yu was pushed out of the country, three other pro-democracy writers have been given long prison sentences. The most recent is Li Tie, 52, who was handed a 10-year prison term on Wednesday in the city of Wuhan, in central China. Mr. Lie’s crimes, according to the regime, included joining the China Social Democratic Party and writing essays with such titles as “Human Beings’ Heaven is Human Dignity.”
More
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Καταδίκη της Ελλάδας για ανατριχιαστικά βασανιστήρια
Το Βήμα
19 Ιανουαρίου 2012
Ανατριχιαστικές σκηνές βίας, ακόμη πιό σκληρές από εκείνες με πρωταγωνιστές αμερικανούς στρατιώτες που βεβηλώνουν πτώματα νεκρών Αφγανών, ουρώντας πάνω τους - οι οποίες έκαναν πρόσφατα τον γύρο του κόσμου - έχουν καταγραφεί στην Ελλάδα, όπως προκύπτει, τουλάχιστον, από αποφάσεις του Ευρωπαϊκού Δικαστηρίου Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου που αποτελούν κόλαφο για τη χώρα μας.
Οι αποφάσεις αυτές που εξεδόθησαν στις 16 Ιανουαρίου 2012 αποτελούν, σύμφωνα με την Ελληνική Ενωση για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου, που τις φέρνει στο φως, «την κορυφή του παγόβουνου σε ό,τι αφορά την υποδοχή και την στάση των διοικητικών και δικαστικών ελληνικών αρχών απέναντι στους αλλοδαπούς. Φέρνουν στην επικαιρότητα ζητήματα τα οποία συζητιούνται για λίγο και ύστερα χάνονται στην λογική της παράπλευρης απώλειας».
Η πρώτη υπόθεση, η «υπόθεση Zontul», όπως ονομάζεται, αφορά ένα περιστατικό που είχε σοκάρει την κοινή γνώμη: τον βιασμό του προσφεύγοντα - κρατούμενου μετανάστη χωρίς χαρτιά - με γκλόμπ από άνδρα του Λιμενικού Σώματος παρουσία συναδέλφων του στα Χανιά το 2004. Οι λιμενικοί στη συνέχεια χτύπησαν τους μετανάστες συγκρατουμένους του, τους κατέβρεξαν με νερό και τους περιέλουσαν με χημικές ουσίες.
Η Ελλάδα για την υπόθεση αυτή καταδικάστηκε από το Ευρωπαϊκό Δικαστήριο Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου για παραβίαση του άρθρου 3 της Ευρωπαϊκής Συνθήκης για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου (απαγόρευση βασανιστηρίων και απάνθρωπης ή εξευτελιστικής μεταχείρισης).
Το χειρότερο για τις ελληνικές Αρχές είναι πως το Δικαστήριο έκρινε ότι δεν διεξήχθη επαρκής και αποτελεσματική έρευνα για τον καταλογισμό των ευθυνών στους θύτες και ότι η ποινή που επιβλήθηκε στον λιμενικό δεν ήταν ανάλογη με την πράξη βασανισμού!
Περισσότερα
19 Ιανουαρίου 2012
Ανατριχιαστικές σκηνές βίας, ακόμη πιό σκληρές από εκείνες με πρωταγωνιστές αμερικανούς στρατιώτες που βεβηλώνουν πτώματα νεκρών Αφγανών, ουρώντας πάνω τους - οι οποίες έκαναν πρόσφατα τον γύρο του κόσμου - έχουν καταγραφεί στην Ελλάδα, όπως προκύπτει, τουλάχιστον, από αποφάσεις του Ευρωπαϊκού Δικαστηρίου Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου που αποτελούν κόλαφο για τη χώρα μας.
Οι αποφάσεις αυτές που εξεδόθησαν στις 16 Ιανουαρίου 2012 αποτελούν, σύμφωνα με την Ελληνική Ενωση για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου, που τις φέρνει στο φως, «την κορυφή του παγόβουνου σε ό,τι αφορά την υποδοχή και την στάση των διοικητικών και δικαστικών ελληνικών αρχών απέναντι στους αλλοδαπούς. Φέρνουν στην επικαιρότητα ζητήματα τα οποία συζητιούνται για λίγο και ύστερα χάνονται στην λογική της παράπλευρης απώλειας».
Η πρώτη υπόθεση, η «υπόθεση Zontul», όπως ονομάζεται, αφορά ένα περιστατικό που είχε σοκάρει την κοινή γνώμη: τον βιασμό του προσφεύγοντα - κρατούμενου μετανάστη χωρίς χαρτιά - με γκλόμπ από άνδρα του Λιμενικού Σώματος παρουσία συναδέλφων του στα Χανιά το 2004. Οι λιμενικοί στη συνέχεια χτύπησαν τους μετανάστες συγκρατουμένους του, τους κατέβρεξαν με νερό και τους περιέλουσαν με χημικές ουσίες.
Η Ελλάδα για την υπόθεση αυτή καταδικάστηκε από το Ευρωπαϊκό Δικαστήριο Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου για παραβίαση του άρθρου 3 της Ευρωπαϊκής Συνθήκης για τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου (απαγόρευση βασανιστηρίων και απάνθρωπης ή εξευτελιστικής μεταχείρισης).
Το χειρότερο για τις ελληνικές Αρχές είναι πως το Δικαστήριο έκρινε ότι δεν διεξήχθη επαρκής και αποτελεσματική έρευνα για τον καταλογισμό των ευθυνών στους θύτες και ότι η ποινή που επιβλήθηκε στον λιμενικό δεν ήταν ανάλογη με την πράξη βασανισμού!
Περισσότερα
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Internet Censorship Is the Wrong Answer to Online Piracy
Cato Institute
December 13, 2011
Produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg.
December 13, 2011
Produced by Caleb O. Brown and Austin Bragg.
Friday, January 13, 2012
The Aftertaste of Goulash Communism
by Péter Zilahy
New York Times
January 13, 2012
The National Gallery at Buda Castle, once the residence of Hungarian kings, provided an apt location for the official celebration of Hungary’s new constitution. The government had requested 100 artworks defining 1,000 years of Hungarian statehood “to hold our ancestors as a shield against cynicism,” as Prime Minister Viktor Orban declared in his opening speech. The director of the National Gallery did not attend. He had sent in his resignation on Dec. 31, the day before the new constitution went into effect.
Several artists and politicians loyal to Mr. Orban’s Fidesz Party did attend, however, and were also able to marvel at the 15 new paintings commemorating events from Hungary’s recent past. The painting of World War I made a cavalry attack of Hungarian hussars look like a Sunday outing in the country rather than a bloodbath. My grandfather, an officer in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, could tell you a treasure trove of stories about the scars and bullet holes that made his skin seem like an old map of Europe. When I try to picture history, I see my grandpa sunbathing on the veranda.
Against the backdrop of Budapest’s stunning panorama, Mr. Orban announced “the re-establishment of the Hungarian state.” Then the celebrating crowd proceeded to the Opera, where they were met by an equally excited crowd of tens of thousands of people calling for the prime minister to resign. One banner read: “Happy New 1984!”
More
New York Times
January 13, 2012
The National Gallery at Buda Castle, once the residence of Hungarian kings, provided an apt location for the official celebration of Hungary’s new constitution. The government had requested 100 artworks defining 1,000 years of Hungarian statehood “to hold our ancestors as a shield against cynicism,” as Prime Minister Viktor Orban declared in his opening speech. The director of the National Gallery did not attend. He had sent in his resignation on Dec. 31, the day before the new constitution went into effect.
Several artists and politicians loyal to Mr. Orban’s Fidesz Party did attend, however, and were also able to marvel at the 15 new paintings commemorating events from Hungary’s recent past. The painting of World War I made a cavalry attack of Hungarian hussars look like a Sunday outing in the country rather than a bloodbath. My grandfather, an officer in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, could tell you a treasure trove of stories about the scars and bullet holes that made his skin seem like an old map of Europe. When I try to picture history, I see my grandpa sunbathing on the veranda.
Against the backdrop of Budapest’s stunning panorama, Mr. Orban announced “the re-establishment of the Hungarian state.” Then the celebrating crowd proceeded to the Opera, where they were met by an equally excited crowd of tens of thousands of people calling for the prime minister to resign. One banner read: “Happy New 1984!”
More
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Το δικαίωμα στην αποδοκιμασία
του Πάσχου Μανδραβέλη
Καθημερινή
10 Ιανουαρίου 2012
Είναι εκπληκτικό, αλλά στην Ελλάδα ουδείς ενδιαφέρεται για τους νόμους που ψηφίζονται, πολλοί όμως δυσανασχετούν όταν αυτοί εφαρμόζονται. Αυτό συνέβη και με τη σύλληψη έξι διαδηλωτών στη Χαλκίδα οι οποίοι αποδοκίμασαν τον Πρόεδρο της Δημοκρατίας κατά τη διάρκεια της τελετής αγιασμού των υδάτων.
Κακώς συνελήφθησαν; Κακώς· σε μια φιλελεύθερη χώρα, οι αποδοκιμασίες, ακόμη και οι πλέον αισχρές, μπορεί να συναντούν τη βδελυγμία των υπολοίπων, αλλά όχι την ποινική δίωξη. Η ελευθερία του λόγου είναι από τα αξιώματα της δημοκρατίας και δεν μπορεί να έχει περιορισμούς αναλόγως των προσώπων. Ομως, η προσβολή του προσώπου του Προέδρου της Δημοκρατίας -μαζί με πολλά άλλα- δεν ποινικοποιείται μόνο από απλούς νόμους· η απαγόρευση προκύπτει από το ίδιο το Σύνταγμα.
Η ανελευθερία του λόγου στην Ελλάδα έχει βαθιές ρίζες και είναι συνταγματικά κατοχυρωμένη. Αυτό γίνεται ξεκάθαρο αν ρίξουμε μια ματιά στο άρθρο 14 περί Τύπου. Είναι ένα από τα μακροσκελέστερα άρθρα. Από τις 572 λέξεις, μόνο οι 33 κατοχυρώνουν την ελευθερία του λόγου. Οι υπόλοιπες 539 είναι απαγορεύσεις! Γράφαμε και παλιότερα ότι «η ελευθερία του λόγου είναι ναρκοθετημένη τόσο πολύ, που σε μια αντιδημοκρατική εκτροπή κάποιος δικτάτορας δεν θα χρειαστεί να αναστείλει την ισχύ του άρθρου 14, αλλά απλώς να το εφαρμόσει» (Καθημερινή 12.5.2006).
Περισσότερα
Καθημερινή
10 Ιανουαρίου 2012
Είναι εκπληκτικό, αλλά στην Ελλάδα ουδείς ενδιαφέρεται για τους νόμους που ψηφίζονται, πολλοί όμως δυσανασχετούν όταν αυτοί εφαρμόζονται. Αυτό συνέβη και με τη σύλληψη έξι διαδηλωτών στη Χαλκίδα οι οποίοι αποδοκίμασαν τον Πρόεδρο της Δημοκρατίας κατά τη διάρκεια της τελετής αγιασμού των υδάτων.
Κακώς συνελήφθησαν; Κακώς· σε μια φιλελεύθερη χώρα, οι αποδοκιμασίες, ακόμη και οι πλέον αισχρές, μπορεί να συναντούν τη βδελυγμία των υπολοίπων, αλλά όχι την ποινική δίωξη. Η ελευθερία του λόγου είναι από τα αξιώματα της δημοκρατίας και δεν μπορεί να έχει περιορισμούς αναλόγως των προσώπων. Ομως, η προσβολή του προσώπου του Προέδρου της Δημοκρατίας -μαζί με πολλά άλλα- δεν ποινικοποιείται μόνο από απλούς νόμους· η απαγόρευση προκύπτει από το ίδιο το Σύνταγμα.
Η ανελευθερία του λόγου στην Ελλάδα έχει βαθιές ρίζες και είναι συνταγματικά κατοχυρωμένη. Αυτό γίνεται ξεκάθαρο αν ρίξουμε μια ματιά στο άρθρο 14 περί Τύπου. Είναι ένα από τα μακροσκελέστερα άρθρα. Από τις 572 λέξεις, μόνο οι 33 κατοχυρώνουν την ελευθερία του λόγου. Οι υπόλοιπες 539 είναι απαγορεύσεις! Γράφαμε και παλιότερα ότι «η ελευθερία του λόγου είναι ναρκοθετημένη τόσο πολύ, που σε μια αντιδημοκρατική εκτροπή κάποιος δικτάτορας δεν θα χρειαστεί να αναστείλει την ισχύ του άρθρου 14, αλλά απλώς να το εφαρμόσει» (Καθημερινή 12.5.2006).
Περισσότερα
Sunday, January 8, 2012
The Random Horror of the Death Penalty
by Lincoln Caplan
New York Times
January 7, 2012
The Supreme Court has not banned capital punishment, as it should, but it has long held that the death penalty is unconstitutional if randomly imposed on a handful of people. An important new study based on capital cases in Connecticut provides powerful evidence that death sentences are haphazardly meted out, with virtually no connection to the heinousness of the crime.
A number of studies in the last three decades have shown that black defendants are more likely to be sentenced to death if their victim is white rather than black. But defenders of capital punishment often respond to those studies by arguing that the “worst of the worst” are sentenced to death because their crimes are the most egregious.
The Connecticut study, conducted by John Donohue, a Stanford law professor, completely dispels this erroneous reasoning. It analyzed all murder cases in Connecticut over a 34-year period and found that inmates on death row are indistinguishable from equally violent offenders who escape that penalty. It shows that the process in Connecticut — similar to those in other death-penalty states — is utterly arbitrary and discriminatory.
From 1973, when Connecticut passed a death penalty law, to 2007, 4,686 murders were committed in the state. Of those, 205 were death-eligible cases (capital murders that include the killing of a police officer, murder for hire, murder-rape and murder committed during a kidnapping) that resulted in some kind of conviction, either through a plea bargain or conviction at trial. The arbitrariness started at the charging level: nearly a third of these death-eligible cases were not charged as capital offenses as they could have been, but as lesser crimes. Sixty-six defendants were convicted of capital murder, 29 went to a hearing for a death sentence, nine death sentences were sustained and one person was executed.
Why was this small group of defendants singled out for death? Did their crimes make them more deserving of execution than all the others?
More
Read the Paper
New York Times
January 7, 2012
The Supreme Court has not banned capital punishment, as it should, but it has long held that the death penalty is unconstitutional if randomly imposed on a handful of people. An important new study based on capital cases in Connecticut provides powerful evidence that death sentences are haphazardly meted out, with virtually no connection to the heinousness of the crime.
A number of studies in the last three decades have shown that black defendants are more likely to be sentenced to death if their victim is white rather than black. But defenders of capital punishment often respond to those studies by arguing that the “worst of the worst” are sentenced to death because their crimes are the most egregious.
The Connecticut study, conducted by John Donohue, a Stanford law professor, completely dispels this erroneous reasoning. It analyzed all murder cases in Connecticut over a 34-year period and found that inmates on death row are indistinguishable from equally violent offenders who escape that penalty. It shows that the process in Connecticut — similar to those in other death-penalty states — is utterly arbitrary and discriminatory.
From 1973, when Connecticut passed a death penalty law, to 2007, 4,686 murders were committed in the state. Of those, 205 were death-eligible cases (capital murders that include the killing of a police officer, murder for hire, murder-rape and murder committed during a kidnapping) that resulted in some kind of conviction, either through a plea bargain or conviction at trial. The arbitrariness started at the charging level: nearly a third of these death-eligible cases were not charged as capital offenses as they could have been, but as lesser crimes. Sixty-six defendants were convicted of capital murder, 29 went to a hearing for a death sentence, nine death sentences were sustained and one person was executed.
Why was this small group of defendants singled out for death? Did their crimes make them more deserving of execution than all the others?
More
Read the Paper
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Friday, December 30, 2011
Europe’s Squandered Minority
by Zeljko Jovanovic
Project Syndicate
December 30, 2011
Today, millions of Europeans are afraid and frustrated as they face unemployment, loss of savings and pensions, radically reduced social benefits, and other economic hardships. Their fears are warranted, because the current financial crisis is undermining the very union that was established to heal Europe’s wounds at the end of World War II.
But, in the midst of the general suffering, one group – the Roma – has been ignored. Europe’s largest and most disadvantaged ethnic minority, with a population equal to that of Greece, millions of Roma are trapped in extreme poverty and ignorance, compounded by widespread discrimination. Indeed, the 2009 European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey found that Roma experience more severe discrimination than any other ethnic-minority group in Europe.
Hard times provoke aggressive, vindictive, and intolerant attitudes, and Roma have become scapegoats in this economic crisis. In fact, Roma-bashing is helping far-right political parties to mobilize and nationalist leaders to win votes. Even some mainstream political parties have resorted to using anti-Roma rhetoric that would have been inconceivable a decade ago. But the Roma have refrained from reciprocating the sometimes lethal violence inflicted on them.
More
Project Syndicate
December 30, 2011
Today, millions of Europeans are afraid and frustrated as they face unemployment, loss of savings and pensions, radically reduced social benefits, and other economic hardships. Their fears are warranted, because the current financial crisis is undermining the very union that was established to heal Europe’s wounds at the end of World War II.
But, in the midst of the general suffering, one group – the Roma – has been ignored. Europe’s largest and most disadvantaged ethnic minority, with a population equal to that of Greece, millions of Roma are trapped in extreme poverty and ignorance, compounded by widespread discrimination. Indeed, the 2009 European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey found that Roma experience more severe discrimination than any other ethnic-minority group in Europe.
Hard times provoke aggressive, vindictive, and intolerant attitudes, and Roma have become scapegoats in this economic crisis. In fact, Roma-bashing is helping far-right political parties to mobilize and nationalist leaders to win votes. Even some mainstream political parties have resorted to using anti-Roma rhetoric that would have been inconceivable a decade ago. But the Roma have refrained from reciprocating the sometimes lethal violence inflicted on them.
More
The Freedom Writer
by Ellen Bork
Wall Street Journal
December 30, 2011
When the dissident Liu Xiaobo won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize from his prison cell, the Chinese government reacted hysterically—denouncing the Nobel Committee, retaliating against Norway diplomatically and trying to intimidate foreign governments out of sending representatives to the ceremony. Mr. Liu had been arrested nearly two years earlier, just before the release of Charter 08, a declaration of democratic principles for China inspired by Charter 77, the Czechoslovak initiative led by the playwright (and later Czech president) Václav Havel that, 31 years earlier, led to the Velvet Revolution and inspired people throughout the Soviet bloc.
China's leaders should feel just as aggrieved by No Enemies, No Hatred, a collection that shows why the Communist Party fears this 56-year-old intellectual-turned-activist and his ideas. In essays on China's rise, Tibet, the impact of materialism and nationalism on morality and sex, the 2008 Olympics, and much more, Mr. Liu advances the antithesis to the Party line, writing "free from fear," as co-editor Perry Link puts it in his valuable introduction.
The essays appeared mainly in publications based in the U.S. and Hong Kong and found their way back to China via the Internet, which Mr. Liu celebrates, perhaps only half-jokingly, as evidence of a divine being. Interspersed throughout are poems, often searing, that attest to Mr. Liu's intellectual as well as emotional partnership with his wife, Liu Xia, an artist currently under house arrest. Rounding out the book are documents including the text of Charter 08, Mr. Liu's poignant statements at his 2009 trial and the verdict sentencing Mr. Liu to 11 years in prison.
Περισσότερα
Wall Street Journal
December 30, 2011
When the dissident Liu Xiaobo won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize from his prison cell, the Chinese government reacted hysterically—denouncing the Nobel Committee, retaliating against Norway diplomatically and trying to intimidate foreign governments out of sending representatives to the ceremony. Mr. Liu had been arrested nearly two years earlier, just before the release of Charter 08, a declaration of democratic principles for China inspired by Charter 77, the Czechoslovak initiative led by the playwright (and later Czech president) Václav Havel that, 31 years earlier, led to the Velvet Revolution and inspired people throughout the Soviet bloc.
China's leaders should feel just as aggrieved by No Enemies, No Hatred, a collection that shows why the Communist Party fears this 56-year-old intellectual-turned-activist and his ideas. In essays on China's rise, Tibet, the impact of materialism and nationalism on morality and sex, the 2008 Olympics, and much more, Mr. Liu advances the antithesis to the Party line, writing "free from fear," as co-editor Perry Link puts it in his valuable introduction.
The essays appeared mainly in publications based in the U.S. and Hong Kong and found their way back to China via the Internet, which Mr. Liu celebrates, perhaps only half-jokingly, as evidence of a divine being. Interspersed throughout are poems, often searing, that attest to Mr. Liu's intellectual as well as emotional partnership with his wife, Liu Xia, an artist currently under house arrest. Rounding out the book are documents including the text of Charter 08, Mr. Liu's poignant statements at his 2009 trial and the verdict sentencing Mr. Liu to 11 years in prison.
Περισσότερα
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Greece must not leave asylum seekers at the mercy of extremists
by Hans Lucht
Guardian
December 29, 2011
On the morning of 25 May, Kelly from Ghana was on the bus going to a pickup place at the outskirts of Athens, where African immigrants and asylum seekers go to look for work, when he was attacked by a mob. He saw them from afar, standing at the bus stop – a group of about 10 young men – but thought nothing of it. They were probably going to one of the demonstrations, he supposed. But as they entered the bus, they pulled out bats, iron rods and knives, and attacked him.
As Greece struggles to avoid economic meltdown, dark-skinned immigrants and asylum seekers have become scapegoats in racially motivated attacks that, according to the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, have become an almost daily occurrence in Athens.
Last week, in cases pertaining to asylum seekers caught entering the UK and Ireland, the European court of justice upheld that asylum seekers could not be sent back to Greece because they risk being subjected to "inhuman or degrading treatment".
Ninety per cent of undocumented immigrants enter the EU via Greece. The Greek response has been to announce the construction of a barbed wire wall on the Turkish border, though the EU has made clear that such a wall will receive no funding. The influx of migrants has not been welcomed by some segments of the Greek population. Thus the extreme rightwing party Golden Dawn won its first ever seat on the Athens city council in November 2010 on an anti-immigrant agenda.
More
Guardian
December 29, 2011
On the morning of 25 May, Kelly from Ghana was on the bus going to a pickup place at the outskirts of Athens, where African immigrants and asylum seekers go to look for work, when he was attacked by a mob. He saw them from afar, standing at the bus stop – a group of about 10 young men – but thought nothing of it. They were probably going to one of the demonstrations, he supposed. But as they entered the bus, they pulled out bats, iron rods and knives, and attacked him.
As Greece struggles to avoid economic meltdown, dark-skinned immigrants and asylum seekers have become scapegoats in racially motivated attacks that, according to the United Nations high commissioner for refugees, have become an almost daily occurrence in Athens.
Last week, in cases pertaining to asylum seekers caught entering the UK and Ireland, the European court of justice upheld that asylum seekers could not be sent back to Greece because they risk being subjected to "inhuman or degrading treatment".
Ninety per cent of undocumented immigrants enter the EU via Greece. The Greek response has been to announce the construction of a barbed wire wall on the Turkish border, though the EU has made clear that such a wall will receive no funding. The influx of migrants has not been welcomed by some segments of the Greek population. Thus the extreme rightwing party Golden Dawn won its first ever seat on the Athens city council in November 2010 on an anti-immigrant agenda.
More
Monday, December 19, 2011
Václav Havel
Wall Street Journal
Editorial
December 19, 2011
When Václav Havel and 241 others signed Charter 77 during the Cold War in 1977, they were denounced by the Communist regime in Czechoslovakia as "traitors and renegades" and "agents of imperialism." Such were the epithets by which some of the most courageous Europeans of the 20th century were known.
Why did Charter 77 so offend the Soviet-backed rulers? The charter's original purpose was merely to protest the harassment and imprisonment of a Frank Zappa-inspired Czech rock band. It explicitly rejected any interest in becoming a basis for "oppositional political activity." It called on the government only to fulfill civil and human-rights commitments ostensibly guaranteed under Czechoslovakia's own constitution as well as the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, which the regime had signed.
But the Charter also exposed the hypocrisy of a system claiming to speak for a "people" whose rights it comprehensively violated. And it was disgust with such hypocrisy that animated Havel's life, first as a dissident playwright and polemicist and later as a statesman who stood up for his convictions, whatever the personal cost.
More
Editorial
December 19, 2011
When Václav Havel and 241 others signed Charter 77 during the Cold War in 1977, they were denounced by the Communist regime in Czechoslovakia as "traitors and renegades" and "agents of imperialism." Such were the epithets by which some of the most courageous Europeans of the 20th century were known.
Why did Charter 77 so offend the Soviet-backed rulers? The charter's original purpose was merely to protest the harassment and imprisonment of a Frank Zappa-inspired Czech rock band. It explicitly rejected any interest in becoming a basis for "oppositional political activity." It called on the government only to fulfill civil and human-rights commitments ostensibly guaranteed under Czechoslovakia's own constitution as well as the 1975 Helsinki Final Act, which the regime had signed.
But the Charter also exposed the hypocrisy of a system claiming to speak for a "people" whose rights it comprehensively violated. And it was disgust with such hypocrisy that animated Havel's life, first as a dissident playwright and polemicist and later as a statesman who stood up for his convictions, whatever the personal cost.
More
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Help Wanted
by Thomas L. Friedman
New York Times
December 17, 2011
The historian Walter Russell Mead recently noted that after the 1990s revolution that collapsed the Soviet Union, Russians had a saying that seems particularly apt today: “It’s easier to turn an aquarium into fish soup than to turn fish soup into an aquarium.” Indeed, from Europe to the Middle East, and maybe soon even to Russia and Asia, a lot of aquariums are being turned into fish soup all at once. But turning them back into stable societies and communities will be one of the great challenges of our time.
We are present again at one of those great unravelings — just like after World War I, World War II and the cold war. But this time there was no war. All of these states have been pulled down from within — without warning. Why?
The main driver, I believe, is the merger of globalization and the Information Technology revolution. Both of them achieved a critical mass in the first decade of the 21st century that has resulted in the democratization — all at once — of so many things that neither weak states nor weak companies can stand up against. We’ve seen the democratization of information, where everyone is now a publisher; the democratization of war-fighting, where individuals became superempowered (enough so, in the case of Al Qaeda, to take on a superpower); the democratization of innovation, wherein start-ups using free open-source software and “the cloud” can challenge global companies.
And, finally, we’ve seen what Mark Mykleby, a retired Marine colonel and former adviser to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calls “the democratization of expectations” — the expectation that all individuals should be able to participate in shaping their own career, citizenship and future, and not be constricted.
More
New York Times
December 17, 2011
The historian Walter Russell Mead recently noted that after the 1990s revolution that collapsed the Soviet Union, Russians had a saying that seems particularly apt today: “It’s easier to turn an aquarium into fish soup than to turn fish soup into an aquarium.” Indeed, from Europe to the Middle East, and maybe soon even to Russia and Asia, a lot of aquariums are being turned into fish soup all at once. But turning them back into stable societies and communities will be one of the great challenges of our time.
We are present again at one of those great unravelings — just like after World War I, World War II and the cold war. But this time there was no war. All of these states have been pulled down from within — without warning. Why?
The main driver, I believe, is the merger of globalization and the Information Technology revolution. Both of them achieved a critical mass in the first decade of the 21st century that has resulted in the democratization — all at once — of so many things that neither weak states nor weak companies can stand up against. We’ve seen the democratization of information, where everyone is now a publisher; the democratization of war-fighting, where individuals became superempowered (enough so, in the case of Al Qaeda, to take on a superpower); the democratization of innovation, wherein start-ups using free open-source software and “the cloud” can challenge global companies.
And, finally, we’ve seen what Mark Mykleby, a retired Marine colonel and former adviser to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, calls “the democratization of expectations” — the expectation that all individuals should be able to participate in shaping their own career, citizenship and future, and not be constricted.
More
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Keeping the Arab Spring alive
Washington Post
Editorial
December 17, 2011
It was a year ago Saturday that fruit vendor Mohamed Bouazizi set himself aflame in the Tunisian town of Sidi Bouzid, improbably providing the spark for what has become a regional revolution. The Arab Spring acquired its name in part because early commentators likened it to the upheavals that brought an end to dictatorship in other parts of the world — including the former Soviet bloc, East Asia and Latin America. It seemed logical that Middle Eastern states would, at last, follow the same path that led in other places from dictatorship and economic stagnation to free elections, free markets and integration into a global economy.
A year later, it’s clear that the Arab revolutions are different in some fundamental ways — and may not deserve the label of “spring.” Democratic transformations in other parts of the world since 1980 were largely peaceful, as autocrats from the Philippines to Chile yielded to “people power.” But while that paradigm mostly worked in Tunisia and in Egypt early this year, the subsequent months have been dominated by scenes of slaughter, as Libya’s Moammar Gaddafi, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad and Yemen’s Ali Abdullah Saleh have chosen to fight — even to the death — rather than give up. Mr. Gaddafi is gone, and the Assad and Saleh regimes may soon follow. But the thousands of deaths they caused have cast a pall over their countries; no one yet knows when and how the killing will end or whether there will be reconciliation.
A second difference in the Arab transformation is the worrying economic prospects of newly liberated countries. Eastern European and Asian countries adopted liberal market policies that led to booming growth; so, after a few years of drift, did most of Latin America. But Egypt and other Arab states so far are leaning toward a populism that could inhibit foreign investment and trade. They are also unlikely to receive as much Western aid as helped the new democracies of the 1980s and ’90s. Libya will prosper with oil. But many young Arabs may find that their aspirations for jobs remain unmet.
More
Editorial
December 17, 2011
It was a year ago Saturday that fruit vendor Mohamed Bouazizi set himself aflame in the Tunisian town of Sidi Bouzid, improbably providing the spark for what has become a regional revolution. The Arab Spring acquired its name in part because early commentators likened it to the upheavals that brought an end to dictatorship in other parts of the world — including the former Soviet bloc, East Asia and Latin America. It seemed logical that Middle Eastern states would, at last, follow the same path that led in other places from dictatorship and economic stagnation to free elections, free markets and integration into a global economy.
A year later, it’s clear that the Arab revolutions are different in some fundamental ways — and may not deserve the label of “spring.” Democratic transformations in other parts of the world since 1980 were largely peaceful, as autocrats from the Philippines to Chile yielded to “people power.” But while that paradigm mostly worked in Tunisia and in Egypt early this year, the subsequent months have been dominated by scenes of slaughter, as Libya’s Moammar Gaddafi, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad and Yemen’s Ali Abdullah Saleh have chosen to fight — even to the death — rather than give up. Mr. Gaddafi is gone, and the Assad and Saleh regimes may soon follow. But the thousands of deaths they caused have cast a pall over their countries; no one yet knows when and how the killing will end or whether there will be reconciliation.
A second difference in the Arab transformation is the worrying economic prospects of newly liberated countries. Eastern European and Asian countries adopted liberal market policies that led to booming growth; so, after a few years of drift, did most of Latin America. But Egypt and other Arab states so far are leaning toward a populism that could inhibit foreign investment and trade. They are also unlikely to receive as much Western aid as helped the new democracies of the 1980s and ’90s. Libya will prosper with oil. But many young Arabs may find that their aspirations for jobs remain unmet.
More
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Beyond Guantánamo, a Web of Prisons for Terrorism Inmates
New York Times
December 10, 2011
It is the other Guantánamo, an archipelago of federal prisons that stretches across the country, hidden away on back roads. Today, it houses far more men convicted in terrorism cases than the shrunken population of the prison in Cuba that has generated so much debate.
An aggressive prosecution strategy, aimed at prevention as much as punishment, has sent away scores of people. They serve long sentences, often in restrictive, Muslim-majority units, under intensive monitoring by prison officers. Their world is spare.
Among them is Ismail Royer, serving 20 years for helping friends go to an extremist training camp in Pakistan. In a letter from the highest-security prison in the United States, Mr. Royer describes his remarkable neighbors at twice-a-week outdoor exercise sessions, each prisoner alone in his own wire cage under the Colorado sky. “That’s really the only interaction I have with other inmates,” he wrote from the federal Supermax, 100 miles south of Denver.
There is Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, Mr. Royer wrote. Terry Nichols, who conspired to blow up the Oklahoma City federal building. Ahmed Ressam, the would-be “millennium bomber,” who plotted to attack Los Angeles International Airport. And Eric Rudolph, who bombed abortion clinics and the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta.
In recent weeks, Congress has reignited an old debate, with some arguing that only military justice is appropriate for terrorist suspects. But military tribunals have proved excruciatingly slow and imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly — $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
The criminal justice system, meanwhile, has absorbed the surge of terrorism cases since 2001 without calamity, and without the international criticism that Guantánamo has attracted for holding prisoners without trial. A decade after the Sept. 11 attacks, an examination of how the prisons have handled the challenge of extremist violence reveals some striking facts:
More
December 10, 2011
It is the other Guantánamo, an archipelago of federal prisons that stretches across the country, hidden away on back roads. Today, it houses far more men convicted in terrorism cases than the shrunken population of the prison in Cuba that has generated so much debate.
An aggressive prosecution strategy, aimed at prevention as much as punishment, has sent away scores of people. They serve long sentences, often in restrictive, Muslim-majority units, under intensive monitoring by prison officers. Their world is spare.
Among them is Ismail Royer, serving 20 years for helping friends go to an extremist training camp in Pakistan. In a letter from the highest-security prison in the United States, Mr. Royer describes his remarkable neighbors at twice-a-week outdoor exercise sessions, each prisoner alone in his own wire cage under the Colorado sky. “That’s really the only interaction I have with other inmates,” he wrote from the federal Supermax, 100 miles south of Denver.
There is Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, Mr. Royer wrote. Terry Nichols, who conspired to blow up the Oklahoma City federal building. Ahmed Ressam, the would-be “millennium bomber,” who plotted to attack Los Angeles International Airport. And Eric Rudolph, who bombed abortion clinics and the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta.
In recent weeks, Congress has reignited an old debate, with some arguing that only military justice is appropriate for terrorist suspects. But military tribunals have proved excruciatingly slow and imprisonment at Guantánamo hugely costly — $800,000 per inmate a year, compared with $25,000 in federal prison.
The criminal justice system, meanwhile, has absorbed the surge of terrorism cases since 2001 without calamity, and without the international criticism that Guantánamo has attracted for holding prisoners without trial. A decade after the Sept. 11 attacks, an examination of how the prisons have handled the challenge of extremist violence reveals some striking facts:
More
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
The long and winding road to cannabis legalisation
by Jan van Ours
Vox
December 6, 2011
In many Western countries, between one quarter and one third of the population admit to having used cannabis at least once in their lives – according to the official statistics. This column provides an in-depth review of existing economic, social, and media evidence for and against legalisation. It concludes that although there is of course uncertainty surrounding the long-term implications, prohibition is not working and it is time to legalise.
Although some countries have quasi-legalised cannabis use (the Netherlands), made cannabis available for medical purposes (California), or allowed the growing of a small number of cannabis plants for personal use (Australia), in most countries – the Netherlands included – cannabis supply, distribution, and use is prohibited (Reuter 2010). Nevertheless, in 2009, between 2.8% and 4.5% of the world population aged 15-64, corresponding to between 125 million and 203 million people had used cannabis at least once in the past year (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2011).
Table 1 presents cannabis use statistics for a number of countries, distinguishing between lifetime use (ever), recent use (last year) and current use (last month). The range in lifetime use is substantial from a low 21% in Sweden to a high 42% in the United States. The range in recent cannabis use is also substantial from a low 1% in Sweden to a high 14% in Italy. Finally, current use ranges from 1% in Sweden to 7% in Spain and the United States. What is also striking is the big difference between lifetime use and recent use. In the Netherlands for example 25% of the population aged 15 to 64 has ever used cannabis but only 7% has done so in the last year. Apparently, for a substantial part of the users, cannabis is not very addictive (see also Van Ours 2006 for details).
More
Vox
December 6, 2011
In many Western countries, between one quarter and one third of the population admit to having used cannabis at least once in their lives – according to the official statistics. This column provides an in-depth review of existing economic, social, and media evidence for and against legalisation. It concludes that although there is of course uncertainty surrounding the long-term implications, prohibition is not working and it is time to legalise.
Although some countries have quasi-legalised cannabis use (the Netherlands), made cannabis available for medical purposes (California), or allowed the growing of a small number of cannabis plants for personal use (Australia), in most countries – the Netherlands included – cannabis supply, distribution, and use is prohibited (Reuter 2010). Nevertheless, in 2009, between 2.8% and 4.5% of the world population aged 15-64, corresponding to between 125 million and 203 million people had used cannabis at least once in the past year (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime 2011).
Table 1 presents cannabis use statistics for a number of countries, distinguishing between lifetime use (ever), recent use (last year) and current use (last month). The range in lifetime use is substantial from a low 21% in Sweden to a high 42% in the United States. The range in recent cannabis use is also substantial from a low 1% in Sweden to a high 14% in Italy. Finally, current use ranges from 1% in Sweden to 7% in Spain and the United States. What is also striking is the big difference between lifetime use and recent use. In the Netherlands for example 25% of the population aged 15 to 64 has ever used cannabis but only 7% has done so in the last year. Apparently, for a substantial part of the users, cannabis is not very addictive (see also Van Ours 2006 for details).
More
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Arab Women Fight to Defend their Rights
Spiegel
November 29, 2011
The Arab Spring seemed to herald a new era of emancipation for women in the Arab world. But Islamists are on the rise in Tunisia and Egypt, and there are worrying reports of sexual assaults on demonstrators in Cairo's Tahrir Square. Many women in the region fear a rollback of what rights they had under the dictators.
She looks serious in the picture she has posted on the Internet. She is also naked, a young Egyptian woman showing her body to her country. Aliaa Magda Elmahdy, a 20-year-old art student at the American University in Cairo, wanted to protest against the oppression of women and conservatism in her country. To achieve that, she did something that is almost unheard of.
"Undress and stand before a mirror and burn your bodies that you despise to forever rid yourselves of your sexual hangups," she wrote in her blog. In a country where couples cannot kiss in public, her act came as a shock.
Since triggering a scandal two weeks ago, the Egyptian woman has had to hide from the hatred of religious conservatives, and even secular Egyptians have distanced themselves from her. They don't want to be associated with her act, and they are afraid of being characterized as worldly, licentious and immoral.
There is much at stake at the moment for Egypt's young people, who are protesting once again on Tahrir Square, this time against military control of the country, as if the revolution of January and February had never happened. It is no longer merely a question of whether the country will achieve the transition to democracy, but also of what kind of society Egypt wants and what the status of women will be in that society.
There have been numerous reports within the last week of sexual assaults on women at Tahrir Square, assaults involving both security forces and protesters. The Egyptian-American journalist Mona Eltahawy, who had taken part in the protests on the square, was held for hours while blindfolded. Policemen groped her and broke one of her arms and a hand. "(They) groped and prodded my breasts, grabbed my genital area and I lost count how many hands tried to get into my trousers," she wrote on Twitter. "They are dogs and their bosses are dogs."
More
November 29, 2011
The Arab Spring seemed to herald a new era of emancipation for women in the Arab world. But Islamists are on the rise in Tunisia and Egypt, and there are worrying reports of sexual assaults on demonstrators in Cairo's Tahrir Square. Many women in the region fear a rollback of what rights they had under the dictators.
She looks serious in the picture she has posted on the Internet. She is also naked, a young Egyptian woman showing her body to her country. Aliaa Magda Elmahdy, a 20-year-old art student at the American University in Cairo, wanted to protest against the oppression of women and conservatism in her country. To achieve that, she did something that is almost unheard of.
"Undress and stand before a mirror and burn your bodies that you despise to forever rid yourselves of your sexual hangups," she wrote in her blog. In a country where couples cannot kiss in public, her act came as a shock.
Since triggering a scandal two weeks ago, the Egyptian woman has had to hide from the hatred of religious conservatives, and even secular Egyptians have distanced themselves from her. They don't want to be associated with her act, and they are afraid of being characterized as worldly, licentious and immoral.
There is much at stake at the moment for Egypt's young people, who are protesting once again on Tahrir Square, this time against military control of the country, as if the revolution of January and February had never happened. It is no longer merely a question of whether the country will achieve the transition to democracy, but also of what kind of society Egypt wants and what the status of women will be in that society.
There have been numerous reports within the last week of sexual assaults on women at Tahrir Square, assaults involving both security forces and protesters. The Egyptian-American journalist Mona Eltahawy, who had taken part in the protests on the square, was held for hours while blindfolded. Policemen groped her and broke one of her arms and a hand. "(They) groped and prodded my breasts, grabbed my genital area and I lost count how many hands tried to get into my trousers," she wrote on Twitter. "They are dogs and their bosses are dogs."
More
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Amnesty: why the pen is mightier than the sword
Observer
November 27, 2011
It has never been easier to support Amnesty International's campaigns. From sending tweets to signing petitions online, or even attending public rallies, people can demand action in a range of ways. So why does the pioneering human-rights organisation want us to return to old-fashioned letter-writing for its Write for Rights campaign? "It still works. It's still very important," says Kate Allen, director of Amnesty International UK. "In our 50th year, we are showing that our original founding idea, of writing either to authorities that are abusing human rights or to people who are on the receiving end of that, can still be massively powerful.
"If you're in prison, you're not going to get tweets and emails. But you may well get those letters and cards. And if you're not getting them, your family might be getting them.
"I can't remember how many times I have been told by a prisoner of conscience or an organisation like Women and Men of Zimbabwe Arise that our cards and letters bring real hope. They are a link to the outside world and give them knowledge that they're not struggling on their own."
Amnesty International has chosen 10 cases for its Write for Rights campaign, each championed by high-profile Amnesty supporters such as Ian Hislop and Saffron Burrows. It hopes that sending letters to those who can stop abuses will make a difference.
Here we profile four cases in the Write for Rights campaign, along with the names and addresses of the people you need to write to.
More
November 27, 2011
It has never been easier to support Amnesty International's campaigns. From sending tweets to signing petitions online, or even attending public rallies, people can demand action in a range of ways. So why does the pioneering human-rights organisation want us to return to old-fashioned letter-writing for its Write for Rights campaign? "It still works. It's still very important," says Kate Allen, director of Amnesty International UK. "In our 50th year, we are showing that our original founding idea, of writing either to authorities that are abusing human rights or to people who are on the receiving end of that, can still be massively powerful.
"If you're in prison, you're not going to get tweets and emails. But you may well get those letters and cards. And if you're not getting them, your family might be getting them.
"I can't remember how many times I have been told by a prisoner of conscience or an organisation like Women and Men of Zimbabwe Arise that our cards and letters bring real hope. They are a link to the outside world and give them knowledge that they're not struggling on their own."
Amnesty International has chosen 10 cases for its Write for Rights campaign, each championed by high-profile Amnesty supporters such as Ian Hislop and Saffron Burrows. It hopes that sending letters to those who can stop abuses will make a difference.
Here we profile four cases in the Write for Rights campaign, along with the names and addresses of the people you need to write to.
More
Carl Barât speaks about the plight of a Greek journalist
Guardian
November 27, 2011
Manolis Kypreos is a journalist who got caught up in the unrest in Athens when reporting on protests against the Greek government public spending cuts. His hearing was permanently damaged after a stun grenade was thrown at him, reportedly by a policeman. Singer and guitarist Carl Barât, formerly of the Libertines, explains why Amnesty International is asking people to help Kypreos through its Write for Rights campaign.
More about the Amnesty International Write for Rights 2011 Campaign
More about the Manolis Kypraios case
See also
November 27, 2011
Manolis Kypreos is a journalist who got caught up in the unrest in Athens when reporting on protests against the Greek government public spending cuts. His hearing was permanently damaged after a stun grenade was thrown at him, reportedly by a policeman. Singer and guitarist Carl Barât, formerly of the Libertines, explains why Amnesty International is asking people to help Kypreos through its Write for Rights campaign.
More about the Amnesty International Write for Rights 2011 Campaign
More about the Manolis Kypraios case
See also
Friday, November 25, 2011
Fairness and the 'Occupy' movement
by Arthur C. Brooks
Wall Street Journal
November 25, 2011
The Occupy Wall Street movement has just passed its two-month anniversary. The protesters' calls for greater income redistribution and their denunciations of capitalism have become shriller, and the protests are becoming more violent and destructive.
A major topic of debate in conservative circles these days is how to respond. There are two schools of thought. One advocates the firehoses-and-handcuffs approach. The other is to ignore the movement and hope it fades away.
Neither is correct. Conservatives and free-enterprise advocates should seize the moment to show their own passion for the issues being debated—and, where appropriate, even embrace the protesters' moral critique of America's distorted and depressed system.
The most important area of disagreement concerns what our country needs today. The "We are the 99%" signs at every Occupy rally make it clear the protesters believe greater income equality—not more free enterprise—is what America needs. Unsurprisingly, the White House has found this class-struggle leitmotif quite handy to divert attention from its economic record. Last month White House spokesman Josh Earnest assured the public that the "interests of 99% of Americans are well represented" by Mr. Obama. This came after the president's well-worn attacks on "millionaires and billionaires," who, as we have heard many times, are not paying their "fair share."
Free-enterprise advocates should view this as a rare opportunity to expose mistaken and misleading arguments about income inequality. The dreaded top 1% earns about 20% of income today, we hear. Yes, and they also pay 37% of the federal income taxes, according to the Tax Foundation. Further, as my colleague Jim Pethokoukis has shown, wealth inequality is roughly unchanged from 20 years ago—and from 40, 60 and 80 years ago too, for that matter. According to the Congressional Budget Office, every income quintile has seen a real increase in purchasing power of at least 18% over the past 30 years.
More
Wall Street Journal
November 25, 2011
The Occupy Wall Street movement has just passed its two-month anniversary. The protesters' calls for greater income redistribution and their denunciations of capitalism have become shriller, and the protests are becoming more violent and destructive.
A major topic of debate in conservative circles these days is how to respond. There are two schools of thought. One advocates the firehoses-and-handcuffs approach. The other is to ignore the movement and hope it fades away.
Neither is correct. Conservatives and free-enterprise advocates should seize the moment to show their own passion for the issues being debated—and, where appropriate, even embrace the protesters' moral critique of America's distorted and depressed system.
The most important area of disagreement concerns what our country needs today. The "We are the 99%" signs at every Occupy rally make it clear the protesters believe greater income equality—not more free enterprise—is what America needs. Unsurprisingly, the White House has found this class-struggle leitmotif quite handy to divert attention from its economic record. Last month White House spokesman Josh Earnest assured the public that the "interests of 99% of Americans are well represented" by Mr. Obama. This came after the president's well-worn attacks on "millionaires and billionaires," who, as we have heard many times, are not paying their "fair share."
Free-enterprise advocates should view this as a rare opportunity to expose mistaken and misleading arguments about income inequality. The dreaded top 1% earns about 20% of income today, we hear. Yes, and they also pay 37% of the federal income taxes, according to the Tax Foundation. Further, as my colleague Jim Pethokoukis has shown, wealth inequality is roughly unchanged from 20 years ago—and from 40, 60 and 80 years ago too, for that matter. According to the Congressional Budget Office, every income quintile has seen a real increase in purchasing power of at least 18% over the past 30 years.
More
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Ai Weiwei: 'Shame on Me'
Spiegel
November 24, 2011
The Chinese artist Ai Weiwei speaks about the changes in his life since the end of his detention in June and shows himself moved and surprised by a new culture of protest in his country.
SPIEGEL: Last week you made a €970,000 ($1.3 million) payment to the bank account of the Chinese tax authorities. You consider it to be a kind of guarantee, a deposit. Do they consider it to be an admission of guilt?
Ai: I cannot speak for them. But I can tell you a lot about the pressure from the tax bureau and the police department on me. They really, really wanted us to pay. They tried to push us hard. They said: Pay something, you should understand. But they did not tell me what I should understand.
SPIEGEL: So the fact that you finally paid is a kind of victory for them?
Ai: Well, it was desirable for them but we had no choice. They said: If you don't pay, we will bring your case to the public security office, and then you will be facing criminal charges. By law you have to pay first, and then you can make an appeal.
SPIEGEL: Have you ever seen any proof of your alleged tax evasion?
Ai: No, and it is ridiculous. The only reason why they put me in jail is my involvement in politics, my criticism of the authorities. Later the excuse for my detention became my "tax problem." But internally they never told me anything about it. I don't want to underestimate their intelligence, but up to this day I think what they did is very stupid. In fact, they even helped me in an ironic sense. They gave me a chance to explain what is happening with this system. They provided such a platform for me.
More
November 24, 2011
The Chinese artist Ai Weiwei speaks about the changes in his life since the end of his detention in June and shows himself moved and surprised by a new culture of protest in his country.
SPIEGEL: Last week you made a €970,000 ($1.3 million) payment to the bank account of the Chinese tax authorities. You consider it to be a kind of guarantee, a deposit. Do they consider it to be an admission of guilt?
Ai: I cannot speak for them. But I can tell you a lot about the pressure from the tax bureau and the police department on me. They really, really wanted us to pay. They tried to push us hard. They said: Pay something, you should understand. But they did not tell me what I should understand.
SPIEGEL: So the fact that you finally paid is a kind of victory for them?
Ai: Well, it was desirable for them but we had no choice. They said: If you don't pay, we will bring your case to the public security office, and then you will be facing criminal charges. By law you have to pay first, and then you can make an appeal.
SPIEGEL: Have you ever seen any proof of your alleged tax evasion?
Ai: No, and it is ridiculous. The only reason why they put me in jail is my involvement in politics, my criticism of the authorities. Later the excuse for my detention became my "tax problem." But internally they never told me anything about it. I don't want to underestimate their intelligence, but up to this day I think what they did is very stupid. In fact, they even helped me in an ironic sense. They gave me a chance to explain what is happening with this system. They provided such a platform for me.
More
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Chinese Dissident Exposes Prison Brutality
Spiegel
November 17, 2011
Chinese poet Liao Yiwu recently moved to Germany, where his books are best-sellers. His self-imposed exile has allowed him to finally publish his memoir, which reveals the abuses and torture he suffered during his years in prison. The book is a shocking indictment of the Chinese justice system.
The old man seemed unflappable as he spoke. Sitting in a wheelchair, his wooden cane always close at hand and his thick, silvery gray shock of hair as neatly parted as ever, he talked about China, presenting himself as someone who knew the place well, having been there 12 or 15 times. "I admire what China has accomplished since Mao Zedong's death in 1976," he said.
But he didn't stop there. He continued on to say that, while it's true China isn't a democracy, the country has nonetheless managed to create an economic boom for itself, with the result that "hardly anyone living in China today could say they aren't doing better now than at any other point in their lives." This is "an enormous accomplishment," he added, and Chinese communism has been "successful." Then he raised his index finger, and, stabbing it in the air, said, in a reference to a famous quote by the Prussian king Frederick the Great: "They have the right to find their salvation in their own way."
This 92-year-old man wasn't just chatting by a fireplace somewhere, nor was he just anyone. The man in question was former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, celebrated as the grandfather of the nation. And Schmidt said all this as a guest on Germany's most important talk show, sitting across from Günther Jauch, the country's most respected talk-show host. At his side was the man who has set his sights on becoming the next chancellor, Peer Steinbrück. The talk-show host said nothing at all in response to Schmidt's theories, but quickly changed the subject. Steinbrück, for his part, suggested the theories were "in need of some fleshing out," then praised Western-style democratic rule of law in a roundabout way.
Schmidt got away with his statements without criticism, in front of more than 5 million viewers, and with applause from the studio audience.
More
November 17, 2011
Chinese poet Liao Yiwu recently moved to Germany, where his books are best-sellers. His self-imposed exile has allowed him to finally publish his memoir, which reveals the abuses and torture he suffered during his years in prison. The book is a shocking indictment of the Chinese justice system.
The old man seemed unflappable as he spoke. Sitting in a wheelchair, his wooden cane always close at hand and his thick, silvery gray shock of hair as neatly parted as ever, he talked about China, presenting himself as someone who knew the place well, having been there 12 or 15 times. "I admire what China has accomplished since Mao Zedong's death in 1976," he said.
But he didn't stop there. He continued on to say that, while it's true China isn't a democracy, the country has nonetheless managed to create an economic boom for itself, with the result that "hardly anyone living in China today could say they aren't doing better now than at any other point in their lives." This is "an enormous accomplishment," he added, and Chinese communism has been "successful." Then he raised his index finger, and, stabbing it in the air, said, in a reference to a famous quote by the Prussian king Frederick the Great: "They have the right to find their salvation in their own way."
This 92-year-old man wasn't just chatting by a fireplace somewhere, nor was he just anyone. The man in question was former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, celebrated as the grandfather of the nation. And Schmidt said all this as a guest on Germany's most important talk show, sitting across from Günther Jauch, the country's most respected talk-show host. At his side was the man who has set his sights on becoming the next chancellor, Peer Steinbrück. The talk-show host said nothing at all in response to Schmidt's theories, but quickly changed the subject. Steinbrück, for his part, suggested the theories were "in need of some fleshing out," then praised Western-style democratic rule of law in a roundabout way.
Schmidt got away with his statements without criticism, in front of more than 5 million viewers, and with applause from the studio audience.
More
Monday, November 7, 2011
Οι ζωές των ανθρώπων
του Αριστείδη Χατζή*Books' Journal
Νοέμβριος 2011
Μια μέρα αυτός ο τρομερός πόλεμος θα τελειώσει.
Θα έρθει καιρός που θα ‘μαστε άνθρωποι ξανά και όχι μόνο Εβραίοι.
Άννα Φρανκ, 9 Απριλίου 1944
Ήταν η τρίτη φορά που βρισκόμουν στο Amsterdam αλλά η πρώτη φορά που επισκεπτόμουν το σπίτι της Άννας Φρανκ. Τα μουσεία για το ολοκαύτωμα που είχα ήδη επισκεφτεί (το μεγάλο στην Ουάσινγκτον και το μικρό στην Πράγα) με είχαν συγκλονίσει, αλλά στο σπίτι της Άννας Φρανκ τα πράγματα για μένα ήταν πολύ διαφορετικά. Βλέπετε την Άννα Φρανκ την γνώριζα προσωπικά. Από πολύ μικρό η μητέρα μου μού μιλούσε συνέχεια γι’ αυτήν και το ημερολόγιό της και έβλεπα σχεδόν κάθε μέρα όταν σκάλιζα τη βιβλιοθήκη του σπιτιού μου το προσωπάκι της στο εξώφυλλο της γαλλικής μετάφρασης που είχαμε. Το ίδιο ακριβώς εξώφυλλο, το ίδιο βιβλίο, την ίδια φωτογραφία, το ίδιο προσωπάκι, το ξαναείδα τώρα αλλά αυτή τη φορά στο δικό της σπίτι. Το δωμάτιό της, οι φωτογραφίες των ηθοποιών που κολλούσε στους τοίχους, το μικρό μπάνιο που περίμενε με τις ώρες τον Φριτζ, η βιβλιοθήκη που κάλυπτε την κρυφή είσοδο, η σοφίτα με το μικρό άνοιγμα, πάνω από το δωμάτιο του Πήτερ, όπου μπορούσε να δει τον ουρανό και λίγα κλαδιά από ένα δέντρο. Η Άννα Φρανκ πέθανε λίγες ημέρες αφού έχασε την αδελφή της στο στρατόπεδο συγκέντρωσης στο Μπέργκεν-Μπέλσεν. Άρρωστη από τύφο, αδύναμη, υποσιτισμένη, απελπισμένη, δεν ήθελε πια να ζήσει.
Δίπλα στο σπίτι της, πάνω στο κανάλι Prinsengracht, υψώνεται το καμπαναριό της Westerkerk. Είναι το ψηλότερο στο Amsterdam, τόσο ψηλό που μπορούσε η Άννα να δει το ρολόι του από το παράθυρο της σοφίτας. Έξω από αυτή την εκκλησία (που μέσα βρίσκεται ο τάφος του Ρέμπραντ) υπάρχει ένα μικρό αγαλματάκι της Άννας Φρανκ και λίγα μέτρα παραπέρα το Homomonument, το μνημείο με τα τρία ροζ τρίγωνα που είναι αφιερωμένο στη μνήμη των ομοφυλόφιλων που καταδιώχθηκαν για τις σεξουαλικές τους προτιμήσεις. Το ένα από τα τρίγωνα του Homomonument δείχνει το σπίτι της Άννας Φρανκ. Οι Ναζί έστειλαν χιλιάδες ομοφυλόφιλους σε στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης. Φορούσαν όλοι στη στολή τους ένα ροζ τρίγωνο. Εκεί τους εξευτέλιζαν, τους κακοποιούσαν σεξουαλικά, τους βασάνιζαν, τους χρησιμοποιούσαν σαν πειραματόζωα, τους ευνούχιζαν και τελικά τους εκτελούσαν.
Δεν θα βρείτε κάποιο μνημείο για τους Ρομά όμως. Δεν γνωρίζουμε καν πόσοι εξοντώθηκαν από τους ναζί. Είναι σίγουρα πάνω από 200.000 αλλά μερικοί ερευνητές επιμένουν ότι ο αριθμός των θυμάτων ξεπερνά το ένα εκατομμύριο. Ξέρουμε πολύ λίγα για εκείνους τους ανθρώπους. Οι ίδιοι δεν έχουν καταγράψει τις εμπειρίες τους και οι ερευνητές που ενδιαφέρονται είναι ελάχιστοι.
Πώς έφτασε ο γερμανικός λαός σ’ αυτό το παραλήρημα μίσους, φρίκης, θηριωδίας; Όποιος έχει επισκεφτεί το Μουσείο Γερμανικής Ιστορίας στο Βερολίνο θα δει να καταγράφεται με ανατριχιαστικό τρόπο η πορεία του γερμανικού λαού προς τη ρατσιστική παράνοια. Θα αντιληφθεί γρήγορα ότι η «κοινοτοπία του κακού» δεν περιορίζονταν σε μερικούς γκεσταπίτες και στα φανατικά SS αλλά διαχέονταν σε ολόκληρη την γερμανική κοινωνία που είχε διαποτιστεί με το μίσος, τη μισαλλοδοξία και την εθνικιστική μωρία.
Άραγε αυτό το μικρόβιο εξαλείφθηκε στη Γερμανία το 1945;
Δεν ξέρω πόσο μακριά βρίσκεται το Βερολίνο του 1933 από τη Αθήνα του 2011. Ίσως πολύ μακριά. Όχι και τόσο όμως όταν μιλάμε για τις ζωές των ανθρώπων. Ας αρχίσουμε λοιπόν:
O αντισημιτισμός στην Ελλάδα δεν περιορίζεται στη βεβήλωση μνημείων από νεοναζιστές ή στην έκδοση βιβλίων από τον Κ. Πλεύρη. Ακροδεξιοί, άνθρωποι αγράμματοι, ακαλλιέργητοι και ευήθεις υπάρχουν παντού. Αλλά εδώ υπάρχουν δικαστές που επιτρέπουν την κυκλοφορία του βιβλίου, όχι για να προστατεύσουν την ελευθερία του λόγου (ακόμα και του απαίσιου λόγου μίσους) αλλά γιατί το θεωρούν επιστημονικό έργο! Εδώ υπάρχουν δικαστές που (όπως καταγγέλλει ο Δημητρης Ψαρράς στην Ελευθεροτυπία) εκφράζουν στο blog τους απόψεις όπως αυτή: «Κωλοεβραίοι! Μακάρι να τους εξόντωνε τελείως ο Χίτλερ!». Εδώ ευδοκιμούν «διανοούμενοι» της συμφοράς και μητροπολίτες (ποιας θρησκείας άραγε;) που ξερνούν μίσος και ρατσισμό. Κυρίως όμως εδώ υπάρχει η εκκωφαντική σιωπή ή μάλλον η εκκωφαντική σιωπηρή αποδοχή.
Η ίδια σιωπή καλύπτει και την αναγνώριση των δικαιωμάτων των ομοφυλόφιλων ζευγαριών αλλά και των ομοφυλόφιλων γενικά. Το πρόβλημα δεν είναι απλώς ότι το σύμφωνο συμβίωσης ακόμα δεν έχει επεκταθεί στα ζευγάρια του ίδιου φύλου αλλά το ότι δεν γίνεται καμία σοβαρή συζήτηση έστω σε θεωρητικό επίπεδο. Οι έλληνες νομικοί (και ιδιαίτερα οι ακαδημαϊκοί) που έπρεπε να πρωταγωνιστούν, είναι σχεδόν όλοι απόντες.
Οι λιγοστοί Έλληνες εβραίοι και οι έλληνες ομοφυλόφιλοι αντιμετωπίζουν καθημερινά τον ρατσισμό της ελληνικής κοινωνίας που φτάνει μέχρι τα όρια της παράνοιας γαρνιρισμένης με θεωρίες συνωμοσίας για τους εβραίους και τους ομοφυλόφιλους που κυβερνούν την Ελλάδα και τον κόσμο. Καθημερινά σχεδόν λαμβάνω emails παρανοϊκής συνωμοσιολογίας που λερώνουν ακόμα και τα junk στο mailbox μου.
Αλλά για τους Ρομά τα πράγματα είναι πολύ χειρότερα. Οι Ρομά στην Ελλάδα υφίστανται πραγματικό διωγμό. Τον καταγράφει ο Παναγιώτης Δημητράς στο βιβλίο του Αναζητώντας τα Χαμένα Δικαιώματα στην Ελλάδα αλλά και στα σχεδόν καθημερινά δελτία τύπου του Ελληνικού Παρατηρητηρίου των Συμφωνιών του Ελσίνκι. Αστυνομία, τοπικές κοινωνίες, εκπαιδευτικοί, αντιμετωπίζουν τους Ρομά σαν ανθρώπινα σκουπίδια.
Και βέβαια η Αθήνα είναι η μοναδική ευρωπαϊκή πρωτεύουσα που δεν έχει τζαμί. Οι μουσουλμάνοι μετανάστες αναγκάζονται να τηρούν το πιο ιερό χρέος τους στις πλατείες, σε υπόγεια, σε κρυφούς χώρους, με το φόβο των τραμπούκων που δεν διστάζουν να τους επιτεθούν μπροστά στην αστυνομία και μέσα στα σπίτια τους.
Αυτά δεν είναι όλα απλά περιστατικά του αστυνομικού δελτίου, απομονωμένα στις μέσα σελίδες των εφημερίδων και στα αζήτητα των ελεεινών τηλεοπτικών δελτίων. Αυτές είναι οι ζωές ανθρώπων στην Αθήνα του 2011.
* Ο Αριστείδης Χατζής είναι Αναπληρωτής Καθηγητής Φιλοσοφίας Δικαίου και Θεωρίας Θεσμών στο Τμήμα ΜΙΘΕ του Πανεπιστημίου Αθηνών.
Κατεβάστε το άρθρο σε μορφή PDF (όπως δημοσιεύθηκε)
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Πατριωτισμός εναντίον εθνικισμού
του Θανάση Γιαλκέτση
Κυριακάτικη Ελευθεροτυπία
23 Οκτωβρίου 2011
Η ιδέα της πατρίδας έχει υποστεί φθορές από την κάκιστη χρήση και την κατάχρηση που της έκαναν ο εθνικισμός και ο φασισμός. Ο φασισμός μιλούσε για την πατρίδα, έλεγε ότι πρέπει να θυσιάζουμε τη ζωή μας αλλά και να σκοτώνουμε για την πατρίδα και στο όνομα της πατρίδας εξαπέλυε τους επιθετικούς του πολέμους και τα πογκρόμ του ενάντια στους «απάτριδες».
Η ιδέα της πατρίδας παραπέμπει σε ένα σύνολο αξιών στο οποίο ο πατριώτης αποδίδει ένα ιδιαίτερα θετικό συμβολικό νόημα. Γι' αυτό και προσφέρεται για πολιτική εκμετάλλευση από μέρους εκείνων που κατέχουν την εξουσία. Ετσι, ο πατριωτισμός μπορεί εύκολα να εκφυλιστεί και να μετατραπεί σε πατριδοκαπηλία και σε εθνικισμό. Η αγάπη για την πατρίδα υπήρξε όμως και ένα σημείο αναφοράς του αντιφασισμού, που αντιτάχθηκε σθεναρά στο φασιστικό εθνικισμό. Η αντίσταση στο φασισμό και στο ναζισμό ήταν μια κορυφαία έκφραση πολιτικού πατριωτισμού, που κατέδειξε ότι η αγάπη για την πατρίδα μπορεί να οδηγήσει σε μιαν ανιδιοτελή, γενναιόδωρη και μαχητική στράτευση, σε πράξεις αυτοθυσίας και ηρωισμού με μεγάλη ηθικοπολιτική αξία. Στο όνομα της πατρίδας ο φασιστικός εθνικισμός εξαπέλυσε τους επεκτατικούς και κατακτητικούς του πολέμους, προκαλώντας μαζικές ανθρωποσφαγές και γενοκτονίες.
Ο πατριωτισμός του αντιφασισμού αντίθετα έδωσε ηθικό και πολιτικό περιεχόμενο στην πιο αδιάλλακτη και ηρωική αντίσταση στον επιτιθέμενο εισβολέα και στον κατακτητή. Ο πατριωτισμός του αντιφασισμού εμπνεόταν από την ιδέα ότι πατρίδα σημαίνει κοινή ελευθερία ενός λαού, ο οποίος θέλει να ζει ελεύθερος ανάμεσα σε ελεύθερους λαούς. Ανάμεσα σε αυτήν την ιδέα της πατρίδας και στον εθνικισμό, ο οποίος αναγορεύει σε πρωταρχική αξία όχι την ελευθερία αλλά την εθνική, θρησκευτική ή πολιτισμική ομοιογένεια ενός λαού ή το μεγαλείο, την υπεροχή και την επικράτηση του δικού μας έθνους στην αναμέτρηση με τα άλλα έθνη, υπάρχει μια ηθική και πολιτική άβυσσος.
Περισσότερα
Κυριακάτικη Ελευθεροτυπία
23 Οκτωβρίου 2011
Η ιδέα της πατρίδας έχει υποστεί φθορές από την κάκιστη χρήση και την κατάχρηση που της έκαναν ο εθνικισμός και ο φασισμός. Ο φασισμός μιλούσε για την πατρίδα, έλεγε ότι πρέπει να θυσιάζουμε τη ζωή μας αλλά και να σκοτώνουμε για την πατρίδα και στο όνομα της πατρίδας εξαπέλυε τους επιθετικούς του πολέμους και τα πογκρόμ του ενάντια στους «απάτριδες».
Η ιδέα της πατρίδας παραπέμπει σε ένα σύνολο αξιών στο οποίο ο πατριώτης αποδίδει ένα ιδιαίτερα θετικό συμβολικό νόημα. Γι' αυτό και προσφέρεται για πολιτική εκμετάλλευση από μέρους εκείνων που κατέχουν την εξουσία. Ετσι, ο πατριωτισμός μπορεί εύκολα να εκφυλιστεί και να μετατραπεί σε πατριδοκαπηλία και σε εθνικισμό. Η αγάπη για την πατρίδα υπήρξε όμως και ένα σημείο αναφοράς του αντιφασισμού, που αντιτάχθηκε σθεναρά στο φασιστικό εθνικισμό. Η αντίσταση στο φασισμό και στο ναζισμό ήταν μια κορυφαία έκφραση πολιτικού πατριωτισμού, που κατέδειξε ότι η αγάπη για την πατρίδα μπορεί να οδηγήσει σε μιαν ανιδιοτελή, γενναιόδωρη και μαχητική στράτευση, σε πράξεις αυτοθυσίας και ηρωισμού με μεγάλη ηθικοπολιτική αξία. Στο όνομα της πατρίδας ο φασιστικός εθνικισμός εξαπέλυσε τους επεκτατικούς και κατακτητικούς του πολέμους, προκαλώντας μαζικές ανθρωποσφαγές και γενοκτονίες.
Ο πατριωτισμός του αντιφασισμού αντίθετα έδωσε ηθικό και πολιτικό περιεχόμενο στην πιο αδιάλλακτη και ηρωική αντίσταση στον επιτιθέμενο εισβολέα και στον κατακτητή. Ο πατριωτισμός του αντιφασισμού εμπνεόταν από την ιδέα ότι πατρίδα σημαίνει κοινή ελευθερία ενός λαού, ο οποίος θέλει να ζει ελεύθερος ανάμεσα σε ελεύθερους λαούς. Ανάμεσα σε αυτήν την ιδέα της πατρίδας και στον εθνικισμό, ο οποίος αναγορεύει σε πρωταρχική αξία όχι την ελευθερία αλλά την εθνική, θρησκευτική ή πολιτισμική ομοιογένεια ενός λαού ή το μεγαλείο, την υπεροχή και την επικράτηση του δικού μας έθνους στην αναμέτρηση με τα άλλα έθνη, υπάρχει μια ηθική και πολιτική άβυσσος.
Περισσότερα
Friday, October 21, 2011
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
The Death Penalty – Again
by Peter Singer
Project Syndicate
October 12, 2011
Three significant events relating to the death penalty occurred in the United States during September. The one that gained the most publicity was the execution in Georgia of Troy Davis, who had been convicted of the 1989 murder of Mark McPhail, an off-duty police officer.
Davis’s death sentence was carried out despite serious doubts about whether he was guilty of the crime for which he received it. Witnesses who had testified at his trial later said that prosecutors had coerced them. Even death-penalty supporters protested against his execution, saying that he should be given a new trial. But the courts denied his appeals. In his final words, he proclaimed his innocence.
The deliberate judicial killing of a man who might have been innocent is deeply disturbing. But the execution was consistent with something that happened just two weeks earlier, at one of the debates between Republican candidates for their party’s nomination to challenge President Barack Obama next year. Texas Governor Rick Perry was reminded that during his term of office, the death penalty has been carried out 234 times. No other governor in modern times has presided over as many executions. But what is more remarkable is that some audience members applauded when the high number of executions was mentioned.
More
Project Syndicate
October 12, 2011
Three significant events relating to the death penalty occurred in the United States during September. The one that gained the most publicity was the execution in Georgia of Troy Davis, who had been convicted of the 1989 murder of Mark McPhail, an off-duty police officer.
Davis’s death sentence was carried out despite serious doubts about whether he was guilty of the crime for which he received it. Witnesses who had testified at his trial later said that prosecutors had coerced them. Even death-penalty supporters protested against his execution, saying that he should be given a new trial. But the courts denied his appeals. In his final words, he proclaimed his innocence.
The deliberate judicial killing of a man who might have been innocent is deeply disturbing. But the execution was consistent with something that happened just two weeks earlier, at one of the debates between Republican candidates for their party’s nomination to challenge President Barack Obama next year. Texas Governor Rick Perry was reminded that during his term of office, the death penalty has been carried out 234 times. No other governor in modern times has presided over as many executions. But what is more remarkable is that some audience members applauded when the high number of executions was mentioned.
More
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




































