The other day I came across a column in Public signed by a Vicenç Navarro. The content was outrageous, that is, within the strictest normal in the newspaper. What struck me was the résumé of the author was more than a standard ad columnist.
On its website, VN defends his political exile status of the dictatorship, but provided no additional information on the subject, and in this case there are several issues that move into doubt. First, who was exiled in 60, when the intensity of the repression had fallen sharply. Second, that the dictatorship was the detail of waiting ended VN lead the race before his exile (it was only then that the latter went to work at the University of Uppsala in Sweden, which leads one to suspect that, rather than an exile, was an Erasmus). Thirdly, the return from exile was not the death of the dictator, but almost 20 years later, which could lead to establish certain similarities between VN and Lt. Onoda . Keep in mind that a Franco curriculum is highly profitable, and therefore a certain distrust is healthy.
Vicenç Navarro is a fervent supporter of Historical Memory, ie that the state use public resources abundant to convince people that the story was developed by fantasies of Vicenç Navarro. According to this, the transition was not such, but with the right transaction. In fact, VN is convinced that Spain still live in a true democracy, but a crypto-fascist state. What do you understand by democracy VN? That, at least, we shall find out.
In the article that has given rise to this entry, VN would argue that democracy should not honoring equally to civil war dead, as some were good and others bad. Obviously there were ups and downs, but for NC cutting line coincides exactly with the dividing right and left. This view of things, based on the belief that the left represents Good, it is not unusual among their ranks, then or now. Nor, obviously, democratic. Faced with such conviction, the specific election results often represent a much less relevant issue, and this may explain the socialist response to the electoral triumph of the right in 33. But if this belief is not uncommon, is most striking that someone dares to state it so clearly because usually labeled as outlaws. Perhaps that is why VN in extremis try to rationalize their position: the good were those on the left, but not because they were left, but because they were fighting to restore democracy. The argument, therefore, is at the mercy of good willingness of readers to decide if they eat without flinching that the communists, socialists, anarchists and nationalists were convinced democrats. And, back to October 1934, the revolution would not contradict the assumption of the Socialist Democratic zeal? VN is ready for this question, and responds emphatically: no. Period. VN apparently sees no need to provide additional arguments.
This is your web , in case you want to browse.
0 comments:
Post a Comment