INDEX OF SECTIONS
- The clinical fact ex Characters in Search of a censor
- reactionary thinking only of power and disease
- Holes blacks in the personality of the censor and his Richard III inner
- PS May 20, 2009, afternoon
- References
"This blog is stigmatized for its content intolerable."
An anonymous censor information
The clinical fact ex Characters in Search of a censor
Luigi Pirandello, as we all know, wrote the play Six Characters in Search of an Author (Pirandello, 1921 , fourth ed. Final 1925, ed. 1990). In this work, the Manager is to have five people who lost some report that their author has abandoned them, leaving unresolved their narrative art. In such a situation is paradoxical to find the author of a blog that tells me about his case, a situation very childish and at the same time alarming, with respect to a complaint that he received the his blog in a defined work. Who are the x characters in search of a censor author of that blog?
These reflections refer therefore to the words above to mo 'citation and his friend, the author of that site, found superimposed over the title of his blog, no one knows if it relates to a single terminal or all terminals of the institution where they work. However, after having done some research on a variety of both desktop and notebook outside the institution where the author of the blog in question works, as in several computers that are located in other regional offices of that agency working is ironically was found that the complaint in question is limited exclusivity to a computer located in the collective work of that author's blog that sometimes you need it. Therefore, the 'complaint' originates from a single computer and may have been concocted by a group of individuals mobber agree among themselves, hostile to that author's blog, among others mobbed by the institution and baked computer in his work room. And here's x characters in search of a censor .
On this basis, certain, the author of the blog 'censored' (sic) has identified the man who has devoted so much care to the work of 'censorship', being an individual and servile servant of a small power angariante which is celebrated in the tiny working environment, shared by other small and poor individuals who feel frustrated in the job of projecting enormous pleasure, pathologically, the invalid, on someone who has nothing to do with boredom which drag out their miserable existence.
Why a blog should have an "unacceptable content", and who decides this? Who makes, in its particular context, such a complaint, or at least an attempt at censorship, is putting pressure authoritarian and wants to prevent that there is someone who 'sing' out of 'chorus'. The only possibility allowed to speak, in this case, then would be allowed collective conformism from the top of an institution. The shocking thing is that a blog about free Internet and its users in the virtual world (the global), can be demonized by an institution rooted in the particular area (the local), for reasons of moral perversion of its high-level operators and than in their own sub-network computing microcontesto put a face on the blog written stigmatizing 'offending' (sic) by a devious servant of the tiny local institutional power and, of course, wrong.
In a world free and democratic freedom of speech, freedom of expression, are conditions that promote dialogue between partners who have equal rights in a community based on reason argument. Philosophers such as Karl Otto Apel and Jürgen Habermas, on the equal dignity of those who argue based on the clarity of their views (and on the provision and the "theory of communicative action"), have written books (see Habermas, 1981, fourth ed. 1984, tr. com. 1997, 2 vols.; Habermas, 1983, tr. com. and third., 2000). Even in the Internet there is freedom of speech and expression, so the complaint will fire only if what you propose, they say it is in pictures or goes against the Constitution of a country or the Criminal Code . But if what you write and the images that you are offering a way to do culture, especially exercising the critical function of reason and imagination , then who has the power within an institution, the army on the basis of a legitimate 'influential authority', then on the basis of arguments that it poses to intersubjective verification of the discussion, but based on authoritarianism and repression, then the level of despotic power and morally perverse, is already in the wrong.
who feels 'stuck' with a serious argument essays should discuss and clarify their own point of view, if it has one, with as many arguments to reach the clarification of the conflicting parties and dissolve the opposition with the tools offered by democratic pluralism and the acceptance of difference: the use of intelligence and reason, dialogue, confrontation between the parties, the end of hostilities, peace and friendship good faith. If, on the contrary, we want to pursue on the demagogic and manipulative power based on bad faith and the desire for power's sake, then you misuse their power with the role of abuse, bullying, use of equipment power at all costs to have the opportunity to prevail on who has the power only to his arguments, while the bully, which probably plays a role in setting up higher in the hierarchy of employment, has the ability to maneuver and put Apart from its top executives like him, and also who is of liability in the apical level even higher, as well as operators of low-level functional, of course, acting in secret and behind his intended victim who created the blog 'indicted' in order to isolate it as much as possible.
reactionary thinking only of power and disease
So who has the power in a particular context may order the institution's computer technicians to superimpose on the title of a blog, 'filtered' in the Internet of local service, the warning "This blog is stigmatized for its content unbearable," exercised an unacceptable and undemocratic fascist censorship. What is even more serious is that the dark censor shows that he is a coward, because instead of openly confront the conflict caused by the contents of a blog series with the arguments based on reason and justice, dialogue and intersubjective verification, exercises an authoritarian attempt at censorship that reveals his mediocrity and pettiness, warning users that enter the blog that has "unacceptable content", as if users could not decide for themselves, independently ,'s arguments in that blog. And 'as if the censor were considering users unable to take a good blog an intelligent position to the site 'offending' Moreover, 'complained' because he says it like it is, a blog, among other things, serious and culture.
E 'likely to censor a work is soggettivamnete involved feels personally attacked and that both envy, and because the blog tap the tooth that hurts, "the censor, here, using his position power within the institution, may mark a blog 'that does not digest' written with a stigmatizing that attempts to devalue. E 'authoritarian logic that the generation of '68 had rebelled, and now returns, in a reactionary and conservative in politics and institutions, in the age global Internet, not only among citizens who are deemed right or center, and this would be 'obvious' after all, but especially among people who consider themselves left or center, and this is really paradoxical.
Those who practice the authoritarian and repressive censorship by using a device of power, against anyone who exercises his right to express themselves with language and other forms of cultural expression in a democratic country, suffers from megalomania and is a supporter thought only of reactionary in the institution where, in the opacity of his apparent anonymity, wants fear to those who believe in the sheer force of reason, justice, which is against the abuses of the fittest.
Holes blacks in the personality of the censor and his Richard III inner
The Censor in question is likely to have a personality similar to that of Richard III by William Shakespeare (Shakespeare, 1597, tr . com. 1988): An individual from the "sadistic perversity" and "inhuman savagery" that plot behind the actions of the other most disgraceful, stained with serious crimes. Of course, in this case, the censor is only an individual prone to hostility and having the 'hump' internalized, rather than as visible as in the case of Richard III, and the 'hump' has a symbolic meaning entirely negative, compared with bad intentions and actions that plot, with his accomplices, behind the person who in theory would 'hit', revealing, in practice, all his misery, provocation, malevolence, closing relationships. On the other hand, a censor of that kind can only be a 'worker' who inhabit the real mobber 'del'istituzione upper floors' and they look good and get on stage in person, as it should be in addressing the institutional issues and resolve conflict in a manner favorable to all.
censor is not rare that an individual "respectable" whose Shadow, in the Jungian sense, was not prepared for which are active and "in place" those parts of the display elements of paranoia and moral perversion. The censor has, of course, some power and that, despite its basic curriculum of advanced studies and decades of training in the field of employment, has remained at the mercy of archaic instances of his personality that has failed to resolve and mature, in spite of everything . In this case, the 'fascist authoritarianism does not belong only to an alleged institutional logic, but is still rooted in first unsolved problems of personality and subtle philosophy of' the strongest wins, 'which takes shape in cases of bullying brought against those who simply want exercise their profession with knowledge.
the censor, on the other hand, if superimposed on the title of a blog that 'hurt' means a written complaint that well read the blog and that is giving a great value, just by the act complaint itself. We know that during Prohibition, the 'forbidden thing' by the authorities was, according to the authorities themselves, lead to compliance with the ban on authoritarian and repressive, and usually had the opposite effect, namely the 'forbidden thing,' just because 'prohibited ', was made even more attractive and sought after.
Basically, the warning of censorship superimposed on the title of a blog within institutions, with a wrongful act frankly, is increasing even more the catchment area of \u200b\u200bthe readers of this blog: the prohibition causes the violation and makes the 'forbidden thing' even more attractive, more attractive. In this sense, the author of a blog, 'put on the Index' at the time of the Internet by a small local power institutions, can not 'thank' the censor for having provided all the attention and even though the negative , attributes great importance.
Thus, it is possible that the censor, who feels jealous and resentful of the fact that the targeted blog has not created him, but probably a subordinate who works in the same institution, realizes the complaint because he knows that this blog is followed by several members of that institution, which we naturally take to stay anonymous and that, directly or indirectly for work, are in contact with the author of this blog, including the anonymous censor that instead of pretending nothing.
On the other hand, it is possible that the initiative by the censor of the blog is used by a lot of low functional level, which is a bad person inside, the emptiness of soul that makes him sterile and miserable, and ugly also in the physical and delights with the computer. A person like that, so frustrated in life, which is bored at work, which only serves to manipulate others, to manipulate if you leave, to have influence on them and feel 'important' while it is only a servant of power, attempting to who mobbed, by contrast, has cultivated other interests and intentions and that is certainly better to work to do its job and that you select the his friendships. That little censor, if that employee had a low level, it's just wanting to see an expression of Simone de Beauvoir (de Beauvoir, 1947, tr. Com. 1975), a "sub-man" who has failed in the task of becoming a true human being, who failed in the task of humanizing the Nietzschean "become what you are."
Among other things, a reader of this blog, complained in a limited area of \u200b\u200bthe Web, says the complaint in follows: "The censorship of a blog or leisure culture, entirely legitimate? What do you think? It 's only by the badness of a fool!"
The author of that blog censored in a small institutional context, which of course can not remain anonymous, in turn, asked me to report that thanks to the censor, and, furthermore, can not help but express his feelings of compassion towards its smallness as a human being.
PS May 20, 2009, afternoon
The author of the blog 'censored' in the place where 'work', a verification of the computer where the collective was forced to sign, not having consented to the establishment to supply the computer like other workers because mobbed , could ensure that after the publication of this paper reflective, which alludes to his unfortunate affair, stigmatizing the word superimposed on the title of her blog was deleted by the censor. There is no doubt that he has avidly read this reflection and thought it wise to retrace his steps, removing the ignominious mark to the blog of the friend who asked me to write to his rescue. The author of the blog is no longer censored me that the institution where he works promoting the mediocre, and that instead workers are passionate about their work, are formed continuously even at their expense, are put aside, are mobbed because 'different'.
Unfortunately, Italy is one of those countries in which bullying in institutions has spread like wildfire, as noted in a recent University of Florence, two specialists in this field of study (Giorgi, Majer, 2009). Typically, such workers are mobbed smart people or have some peculiarity, as the persecutors or mobber are mediocre at all levels of the hierarchy of the institution. Recently, a friend of the blog 'censored', and then he realized that the elimination of censorship from pc bulk of employment, I was told that a senior official of the institution, which is also his bullying, which has continued to make fun of not resolving the situation, now, in turn, was "bumped off" from the upper floors of the hierarchical organization. The prophecy of the saying "people who make it, if you expect!" in this case is made against a fully mobber. Although the friend of the blog mobbed remains, for now, that in his situation mobbing, to be expected that mature time to take some action if changing his head position will be taken into consideration in any other way. For now reflects, 'a Buddhist', on that prophetic "who makes it, if you expect!", Believing that the best thing is to take away from the victim and victimizer dialectic.
References
S. de Beauvoir
- 1947, tr. com. For a moral ambiguity , Milano, Garzanti, 1975.
GIORGI G., Majer V.
- 2009, Harassment: Organizational virus. Prevent and combat bullying
and negative behaviors at work , Florence, Giunti OS
Special Organization.
H.: J.
- 1981, tr. com. Theory of Communicative Action, 2 vols., Trans. on the third and
. or. 1984, Bologna, Il Mulino, 1997.
- 1983, tr. com. discourse ethics, Bari-Roma, Laterza, third ed., 2000.
PIRANDELLO L.
- 1921, Six Characters in Search of an Author , fourth ed. 1925,
Six Characters in Search of an Author . Henry IV, Milan, Arnoldo Mondadori, 1990.
W. SHAKESPEARE
- 1597, tr. com. Richard III, Milano, Garzanti, 1988.
