「安倍総裁を守るぞー！朝鮮人は海外に追放しろー！」

秋葉原で自民党支持者が暴走！君が代大熱唱し「朝鮮人を海外に追放しろー！白川総裁を叩き潰せ！インフレを起こせー！」


togetter



ほんまかいな？


本当だとすれば、安倍氏の将来は暗い。

本当でないとすれば、安倍氏に対する捏造によるネガティブキャンペーンか？

銃乱射事件

「この憎むべき犯罪」オバマ大統領が涙の声明

　銃乱射事件について、アメリカのメディアを見ていると、日本人にとっての３．１１級の衝撃があったかのようである。

　悲劇である。そして、悲しみに満ちている。

　お悔やみ申し上げる。


　この手の学校での惨劇の歴史についての報道




Mass School Shootings: A History
By LAUREN EFFRON (@LEffron831)
Dec. 14, 2012



Timeline: School violence in the U.S.
December 14, 2012 -- Updated 1711 GMT (0111 HKT)

そして、また、銃社会についての論争。
A Land Without Guns: How Japan Has Virtually Eliminated Shooting Deaths

inShare
205 JUL 23 2012, 1:45 PM ET

日本と比較したものもある。

　日本にも精神的におかしくなって暴発してしまう人も犯罪者もいるが、銃が少なければ、銃による事故・犯罪が少ないとは当然ではある。

Friday's horrific shooting at an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater has been a reminder that America's gun control laws are the loosest in the developed world and its rate of gun-related homicide is the highest. Of the world's 23 "rich" countries, the U.S. gun-related murder rate is almost 20 times that of the other 22. With almost one privately owned firearm per person, America's ownership rate is the highest in the world; tribal-conflict-torn Yemen is ranked second, with a rate about half of America's.

But what about the country at the other end of the spectrum? What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally.




Almost no one in Japan owns a gun. Most kinds are illegal, with onerous restrictions on buying and maintaining the few that are allowed. Even the country's infamous, mafia-like Yakuza tend to forgo guns; the few exceptions tend to become big national news stories.





"Japanese, both criminals and ordinary citizens, are much more willing than their American counterparts to consent to searches and to answer questions from the police," he writes. But even the police did not carry firearms themselves until, in 1946, the American occupation authority ordered them to. Now, Japanese police receive more hours of training than their American counterparts, are forbidden from carrying off-duty, and invest hours in studying martial arts in part because they "are expected to use [firearms] in only the rarest of circumstances," according to Kopel.

　警察が拳銃を使用した場合、かなりの確率で新聞やメディアが取り上げてニュースになることも注目してもよかった。それは拳銃使用についての市民からの監視なのである。

It's not much easier to balance the costs and benefits of Japan's unusual approach, which helps keep its murder rate at the second-lowest in the world, though at the cost of restrictions that Kopel calls a "police state," a worrying suggestion that it hands the government too much power over its citizens. After all, the U.S. constitution's second amendment is intended in part to maintain "the security of a free State" by ensuring that the government doesn't have a monopoly on force. Though it's worth considering another police state here: Tunisia, which had the lowest firearm ownership rate in the world (one gun per thousand citizens, compared to America's 890) when its people toppled a brutal, 24-year dictatorship and sparked the Arab Spring.

最後の比較はどうかな？

Police State って、アメリカの監視カメラ、警察による傍聴、メールの傍受などもかなりひどいと思うが、
Militia　くらいないと、自由は確保されない、とでも思っているんだろうか？

言論による政府や警察に対する批判では足りずに、拳銃などの脅しがないと機能しない社会というのは、自由な社会ではなく、むしろ混沌とした社会であろう。


仮に日本が銃社会で、アメリカが銃が（少）ない社会なら、日本についていまだに、自己制御＝自由　がない、野蛮な後進国くらいな論調の記事はでたのではないか？

ジャッジ・ドレッ党

【緊急告知】

今週日曜日、衆議院議員・東京都知事選を迎える。これまで「この時代は絶対的なヒーローが必要だ」と考えていたが、今の日本では誰もいない。そこで自ら「ジャッジ・ドレッ党」を結党する。実は地道なＰＲ活動も行っている http://t.co/zsHRT7DP

フォロー

映画『ジャッジ・ドレッド』
‏@judge_dredd_jp

拡散感謝！公職選挙法…?ここではオレがすべてを裁く！【ドレッド】RT @eiga_pia 選挙期間中にアリなの？と思ったら…… RT 《ジャッジ・ドレッ党》選挙ポスター、その他“ヒーロー的”啓蒙ポスターがＨＰでダウンロードフリーだ！http://www.judge-dredd.jp/

ジャッジドレッ党(@judge_dredd_jp)のひとり記者会見 with 東スポ(@tospo_news) - Togetter via kwout

しびれるぜ！

Must Read Article 必読記事

mozu
‏@mozumozumozu

“Your Women Are Oppressed, But Ours Are Awesome”: How Nicholas Kristof And Half The Sky Use Women Against Each Other http://j.mp/TSbQqz
なかなか難しいところだけれど、気持ち悪さの一部は言い当てているようには思う。
詳細

“Your Women Are Oppressed, But Ours Are Awesome”: How Nicholas Kristof And Half The Sky Use Women Against Each Other
by GUEST CONTRIBUTOR on OCTOBER 8, 2012 · 91 COMMENTS AND 0 REACTIONS
By Guest Contributor Sayantani DasGupta


うーむ、これはかなりいい。私が欧米人ジャーナリストやコラムニストなどに、普段いいたいことをかなり言い当ててくれている。

もっとも、私は、この記事の作者ほどクリスを評価しないが。

Despite the issues I have with militarism, or this country’s campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, I’m all for cheering for female pilots (yea, bada&& flying ladies!). What I can’t just can’t stand by and let slide is this “your women are oppressed, but ours are awesome” rhetoric, a rhetoric which only illuminates how–both actually and metaphorically–racism, xenophobia, and imperialism so often play out on women’s bodies around the world

For example, would Kristof, a middle-aged male reporter, so blithely ask a 14-year-old U.S. rape survivor to describe her experiences in front of cameras, her family, and other onlookers? Would he sit smilingly in a European woman’s house asking her to describe the state of her genitals to him? Yet, somehow, the fact that the rape survivor is from Sierra Leone and that the woman being asked about her genital cutting is from Somaliland, seems to make this behavior acceptable in Kristof’s book. And more importantly, the goal of such exhibition is unclear. What is the viewer supposed to receive–other than titillation and a sense of “oh, we’re so lucky, those women’s lives are so bad”?

In fact, many have critiqued Kristof for his repeated focus on himself as “liberator” of oppressed women.

When asked why he often portrays “black Africans as victims” and “white foreigners as their saviors,” he has answered, “One way to get people to read…is to have some sort of American they can identify with as a bridge character.” A presumption which assumes that all New York Times readers are white, of course, but I won’t get into that now.

Although a few passing comments are made about rape, coerced sex work, and other gender-based violence existing everywhere in the world–including in the U.S., hello?!–the point that is consistently reiterated in the film is that gender oppression is “worse” in “these countries”–that it is a part of “their culture.”



There’s nothing that smacks more of “us and them” talk than these sorts of statements about “their culture.” Postcultural critic Gayatri Chakrovorty Spivak, in fact, coined the term “white men saving brown women from brown men” to describe the imperialist use of women’s oppression as justification for political aggression.

According to Spivak, this trope of “white men rescuing brown women from brown men” becomes used to justify the imperialist project of “white man” over “brown man.”

Brown and black men are portrayed consistently as violent, incompetent, uncaring or, in fact, invisible. And it’s only a small leap to realize that such formulations–of countries incapable of or unwilling to care for “their” women–only reinforce rather than undermine global patriarchy, while justifying paternalization, intervention–and even invasion of these “lesser” places–by the countries of the Global North.

Rather, they are there as tourists of violence, often visiting those countries for the first time with Kristof.

By telling other peoples “their” women are oppressed, while “our” women are awesome, Half the Sky undermines global sisterhood rather than strengthening it.

更新



mozu
‏@mozumozumozu

Where Things Stand (for authors of color) http://j.mp/VBmjZ1 NYTの書評でとりあげられる本の著者にいささか偏りがないだろうかと。想定読者がそうなってるのかもね。