Popular Corruption

In 1816, Etienne Dumont, got to know one of the least known political works of father Utilitarianism , Jeremy Bentham . In fact French was published before, given the apathy characteristic of its author when publishing their works in the original English. No public in England until eight years later.

I'm not talking about the main work of this political rather than a philosopher, as defined by Bertrand Russell; but the strength of this work is noteworthy in these days we are living. I am talking about, for me, transcendental, "Political Fallacies" .

With this book, Bentham, sought to withdraw from the worst of evils that he believed had taken root in English parliamentarism: the realm of deceit, trickery, deceit, confusion as a daily tool of the founding fathers of Parliament (Do you sound ?).

I will not be tedious with respect to introduce the subject, dear reader @ @. My advice, if you're interested in politics is that you read this excellent treatise, and even more so if you or I spend public representative to the "res publica" is required reading would among our parliamentarians at all levels: state and regional to restore them to reason and stop treating the public as puppets to be manipulated them cheerfully. There is a sector of the population, despite having our very definite ideological orientation, we will not manipulate prefabricated schemes clearly in the "kitchen" of the venues for the games.

I return to the "political fallacy." Bentham established four main types of them, with particular interest to the called Fallacies of Confusion, in his view the most damaging to the parliamentary system (democratic, of course), and including me stick with one: which he called as the "People's Corruption."

Bentham defined it well: it is one in which the source of corruption lies in the people. To that extent and so long it reaches its extension, that no political reform would be able to delete it. What he wants is to provoke the displeasure with which the speaker looking at those who spoke, accusing them of poor moral or intellectual nature, whether to provide any indication of their nature.

Clarification prior to what I set out: if there is anything I dislike in politics is how it tries to manipulate public opinion and even more as it perverts and critical thinking skills of the acolytes, followers and supporters of any cause or ideology . This certainly impoverishes the debate, limiting and curtailing freedom of intellect but of course is the game of power, and we know what this means.

He said that every public representative should read the treaty of Bentham, well I think in Genoa Street have done their homework, but VERY BAD have understood the principles defended by the author, because what they have achieved is to prostitute the essence of the principle more noble to be pursued by all public representative, the defense of the truth (as virtue ethics). Moreover, it is interpreted as retorcidamente that what they have done is to bring to the nth degree the tenets of this fallacy, using it in a perverse, in a wild flight forward, attacking even the legitimately constituted authorities in our country, thereby doubt the whole system, believing that they are beyond good and evil.

It is sad to see as the main opposition party does not comply with the most basic constitutional principles, judicial decisions are not respected, or respect the professionalism of one of the essential powers of the Division of Powers: the Judiciary (which I remember them " the "majority APM has a majority in almost all regional courts of justice - remember the hearing of the case" Camps "in the High Court of Valencia).

Let us imagine for a moment, that given the case law being created, every citizen of our country, could be invoked from now that does not comply with any judicial decision, because it is subjected to repression and surveillance of bodies and tortious security forces state. Once we provoke a laugh worthy of slapstick.

But the danger is that the slapstick is starring in the main opposition party, and that, is not good for our young democracy, or for obtaining a more active citizenship in political participation.

And this, I fear, has only begun. I sincerely hope to be clearly wrong.

Tags: Bentham , corruption , democracy , fallacies , political , popular , PP

Was This entry posted on 07/09/2009 at 07/09/2009 and is filed under Relationships "? Policy . Any dog you follow responses to this entry-through the RSS 2.0 feed.