Binnenlandse politiek

gevegt

gevegt

Well-known member
erka zei:
Christelijk is een heel breed begrip (hoef ik jou natuurlijk niet te vertellen..) maar ik vind dit echt heel extreem allemaal.
Klik om te vergroten...

Ik denk dat conservatief met een christelijke afkomst meer past. Het lijkt extreem, maar 30 jaar geleden was het nog veel erger.
 
zwammy

zwammy

Well-known member
Lees de reactie van Baudet maar gewoon ipv de andere partijen na te roepen, scheelt een hoop drama.
 
SuikerBrood

SuikerBrood

Well-known member
zwammy zei:
Lees de reactie van Baudet maar gewoon ipv de andere partijen na te roepen, scheelt een hoop drama.
Klik om te vergroten...

2ikxi0x.png


Ik heb zijn essay doorgelezen. Wat wordt er volgens jou verkeerd begrepen?
 
SuikerBrood

SuikerBrood

Well-known member
Of dit pareltje:
So yes, the modern world brought liberation. But this liberation has not made us happy. Instead, it has left our lives empty, without purpose, and, above all, extremely lonely. Existential connections have become almost impossible since few are genuinely prepared to sacrifice short-term pleasure for the commitment required to estab*lish a deep mutual connection. Television, internet, and pornography have replaced organic social intercourse and physical intimacy. As more options open up each day, our hearts close to the possibility of real human warmth, having been betrayed too many times—and having witnessed ourselves betraying others—for the brief mo*ments of seductive thrills that we, as “liberated individuals,” can no longer resist.
Now this fundamental point which Houellebecq makes time and again deserves further reflection, because it challenges the very fun*damentals of both the contemporary “Left” and the “Right.” It challenges modern anthropology as such. Both the social-dem*ocratic and the liberal wing of the modern political spectrum (re*spectively advocating the welfare state and the free market) wish to maximize individual autonomy. Liberalism and socialism differ when it comes to the most effective way to achieve that objective, but they do not differ in the objective itself. They are both liberation movements; they both want the complete emancipation of the indi*vidual.
Klik om te vergroten...

We moeten onze vrijheden inleveren om weer gelukkig te worden.
 
SuikerBrood

SuikerBrood

Well-known member
Of gewoon letterlijk:
Al*though Houellebecq, a poet more than a philosopher, shies away from laying out a detailed political manifesto, he tells us on every page that we need to rediscover a territorial, social, and historical connection with others around us, a connection which transcends individual choice, momentary whims, and instrumental interests. This naturally implies a powerful nation-state that protects the social fabric, along with a high degree of skepticism towards immigration and free trade. But this in itself is not enough. To recreate embeddedness in society, the individual himself has to be embedded again. He has to be deliberalized.
Klik om te vergroten...
 
SuikerBrood

SuikerBrood

Well-known member
Dit is niet conservatief, dit is regressief:
Any reader, in my view, will be hard-pressed to deny that Houelle*becq has identified—in passages such as this one—a crisis we all recognize. A crisis of atomization. We are free, and we are glad we are free. Yet we are also sad, fundamentally uprooted, always wan*dering, never at home, never safe—exiled, in effect, from the garden we still vaguely remember having once inhabited.
Klik om te vergroten...
 
SuikerBrood

SuikerBrood

Well-known member
En de laatste, over de positie van de vrouw:
If you allow yourself a brief moment to view the world from Houellebecq’s perspective, his philosophy is validated all around us. Consider the emancipation of women and the feminist ideology that underpins it (a favorite topic in Houellebecq’s work). The “liber*ated” status of women is usually celebrated as one of the great triumphs of late-liberal society. Today women, from an early age, are encouraged to pursue a career and be financially independent. They are expected to reject the traditional role of supporting a husband and strive instead for an “equal” relationship in which “gender roles” are interchangeable.
But how has this really been working out for them? What hap*pens when they hit thirty? If they continue to work full hours, building a family becomes extremely difficult, if not impossible. This is why women in the Western world increasingly tend to have fewer children—if they even have them at all. Work and children then often limit the time available for the maintenance of a committed relationship, and rare are the lovers that both work full hours, rear children, and invest sufficiently in each other for the marriage to remain healthy over time. An inevitable result of all this is the demographic decline of Europe. Another outcome is constant con*flict, constant competition—and in the end, fighting, divorce, and social isolation—and a new generation of boys and girls growing up in such disfigured settings.
Klik om te vergroten...
 
zwammy

zwammy

Well-known member
SuikerBrood

SuikerBrood

Well-known member
zwammy zei:
Het klinkt voor mij als een objectieve, koude analyse en geen oordeel of persoonlijke mening. Maar roep lekker mee met de Klavers en VVD stagiaires.

Vooral ook grappig omdat bij het FVD het recht op euthanasie zelfs in de partijpunten heeft staan.
Klik om te vergroten...

Waarom zou ik nou weer iemand na roepen. Ik lees toch zelf de tekst. Euthanasie noemt hij suicide en hij zet vraagtekens bij de positie van de vrouw. Als dit een essay moet voorstellen waar zijn eigen mening niet in doorsijpelt, dan moet hij echt opnieuw leren schrijven.

Dit leest als een mening:
Now this fundamental point which Houellebecq makes time and again deserves further reflection, because it challenges the very fun*damentals of both the contemporary “Left” and the “Right.” It challenges modern anthropology as such. Both the social-dem*ocratic and the liberal wing of the modern political spectrum (re*spectively advocating the welfare state and the free market) wish to maximize individual autonomy. Liberalism and socialism differ when it comes to the most effective way to achieve that objective, but they do not differ in the objective itself. They are both liberation movements; they both want the complete emancipation of the indi*vidual.
Klik om te vergroten...

Dit leest als een mening:
Any reader, in my view, will be hard-pressed to deny that Houelle*becq has identified—in passages such as this one—a crisis we all recognize. A crisis of atomization. We are free, and we are glad we are free. Yet we are also sad, fundamentally uprooted, always wan*dering, never at home, never safe—exiled, in effect, from the garden we still vaguely remember having once inhabited.
Klik om te vergroten...

Dit is een manier om je achter een anders mening te verhullen:
If you allow yourself a brief moment to view the world from Houellebecq’s perspective, his philosophy is validated all around us.
Klik om te vergroten...

Maar prima, als we aannemen dat het allemaal een objectieve recensie is van het boek. Er geen eigen meningen van Baudet in staan, wat is dan de toegevoegde waarde? Als een filosoof idee?n niet meer recenseert door een eigen inbreng ernaast te leggen, wat is dan de validatie van dit stuk?

Ik ben blij dat het partijprogramma beter is dan deze recensie.
 
Je moet ingelogd zijn om te kunnen reageren. Log in | Registreer
Bovenaan