Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Il nuovo amichetto di Giovannino e Torrieri...

Brendan O'Neill, quello del "punto di vista interessante" sul Tibet,
quello che non ci sono stati genocidi in Bosnia, quello
dell'ecoimperialismo:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brendan_oneill/2008/04/defending_freedom.html
Vi arruolate pure voi nella Milizia del Michigan?

 
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brendan_oneill/2008/04/defending_.
..
Sulla perfetta compatibilita' tra le vedute politiche di Heston da
giovane e da vecchio ha perfettamente ragione. Non a caso la NRA e'
stata una delle prime grandi istituzioni USA non-segregate.
Palmiro Pangloss

 
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brendan_oneill/2008/04/defending_.
..
Non e' un mio amichetto, ma su questo ha ragione a vendere:
-----------------
What a turnaround. Demanding gun control has traditionally been the
preserve of reactionary, even racist elements in American society. Up
until the 1980s, gun control was mostly a conservative campaign,
driven by a conviction amongst right-leaning activists, politicians
and lawmakers that ordinary people, especially those of the non-white
variety, could not possibly be trusted with guns. Only the state, they
believed, should have the right to use fatal physical force.
....
In 1840, the North Carolina supreme court passed a statute decreeing:
"That if any free negro, mulatto, or free person of colour, shall wear
or carry about his or her person, or keep in his or her house, any
shot gun, musket, rifle, pistol, sword, dagger or bowie-knife ... he
or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be indicted
therefore." This law did not apply to whites - only black or mixed-
race people.
In the 1890s, Florida also passed race-specific gun control laws. In
1941, Justice Burford, a judge in the supreme court in Florida,
overturned a conviction for carrying a handgun without a permit on the
basis that the state's original gun control statutes had a racial
basis. "I know something of the history of this legislation", he said.
"The act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro
labourers ... and to give the white citizens in sparsely settled areas
a better feeling of security. The statute was never intended to be
applied to the white population and in practice has never been so
applied."
At the turn of the 20th century, gun control became a fashionable
conservative cause again - in response to an influx of immigration
from eastern and southern Europe. New local restrictions on gun
ownership were passed, such as the 1911 Sullivan law in New York City,
in order to prevent the strange newcomers from getting their hands on
weaponry. As Gary Kleck points out in his book Point Blank: Guns and
Violence in America, gun control was anything but a liberal cause back
then: "In the 19th and early 20th century, gun control laws were often
targeted at blacks in the south and foreign-born in the north."
...
Throughout the twentieth century, too, gun control tended to rise to
the top of the political priority pile when the authorities feared
that certain communities were getting out of control. The Gun Control
Act of 1968 was ostensibly passed in response to assassinations of
Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, but its real targets were inner-
city black communities where there had been violent riots for three
summers running, and where some black activists were beginning to arm
themselves. That is why the act specifically targeted cheap imported
pistols, such as the "Saturday night special"; in other words, the
affordable guns of the black ghetto.
------------------
Poteva aggiungere che le spinte per il disarmo di milizie popolari in
Libano e Gaza, o la convinzione che alcuni stati siano
troppo barbari per avere la bomba atomica, hanno le stesse radici
razziste.
GT


PS:   fu Karl Liebknecht a dire che in una societa' perfetta ciascun
individuo dovrebbe avere il potere di distruggere tutto il mondo,
perche' cosi' lo sfruttamento dell'uomo sull'uomo sarebbe
impossibile.  Sara' estremo e folle, ma sotto un punto di vista
marxista e' ineccepibile.
GT

 marxista e' ineccepibile.
Capisci una sega tu di un punto di vista marxiasta.
Tb

 Leggiti 'Fantasmi' di Terzani sulla Cambogia, poi ci racconti.
Pol Pot / Saloth Sar marxisticamente parlando era una capra. Un po'
come Torrieri.
Palmiro Pangloss

 razziste.
Troppo tardi, s'è arruolato. Fra un po' lo vediamo a picchettare i
cinema dove danno i documentari di quel fascista reazionario di
Michael Moore.

 ma e' sempre una buona lettura
Quoto, mi sono letto tutti i suoi libri di reportage. Piu' sulla
Cambogia qualcosina d'altro.
Palmiro Pangloss

 Vi arruolate pure voi nella Milizia del Michigan?
sei pregato di non chiamare amico mio qualcuno che non ho mai citato,
egregio diffamatore...

 wrote:

perchè voi ne sapete qualcosa? Non siete morti proudhoniani? "la
proprietà è un furto" (Proudhon) "e allora diamoci dentro" (corollario
di Craxi)

 impossibile.
anche il futuro dell'umanità sarebbe impossibile. Non penso proprio
che Marx abbia mai sognato un mondo in cui i pazzi avrebbero avuto il
potere di distruggere il pianeta. A Svevo peraltro bastava un solo
uomo con tale potere per chiudere definitivamente con la peste
umana....