Friday , November 22 2019
Home / chile / What did Mait Orsini really say about violence as a method of political action | National

What did Mait Orsini really say about violence as a method of political action | National



"When people are tortured and killed, as happened in Chile during the dictatorship, of course, people have the right to defend themselves." You cannot be asked to allow yourself to be killed. They should not be asked to give up their fundamental human rights. In the face of slaughter, like the one in which we lived under a dictatorship, the right not to be killedAnd this is something that not only left-wing Christian but also Christian humanism has raised, because it has an ethical minimum and common sense. "

With these words, the deputy Maite Orsini (RD) responded to the consultations BioBioChile after an article published this Thursday by La Tercera, entitled “The session in which Mait Orsini proclaimed violence as a mechanism for political action”, which interprets the statements of a parliamentarian in the Commission on Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples of the Chamber of Deputies of the Council of Europe. December 19 is the last.

The aforementioned, as a result of the explanation of his vote against the directive submitted by the deputies R. R Diego Schalper and Cristobal Urrutikoheheya, in the framework of the incitement to violence, which was finally rejected by 7 votes to 6 and sought to include a new article in the Penal Code that establishes that “he or she, by any means, encourages, justifies or protects violence as a means of political action, will be punished with a fine of minor imprisonment in his average degree indications and fines from 40 to 60 monthly tax units. ”

Against this, Orsini was the only one of seven opposition deputies who argued his decision and pointed out at the session that the change proposed by his colleagues R.N. "does not indicate the context," despite the fact that there are contexts in which violence as a means of political action is valid. "

“When you are persecuted, when you are tortured and when you are killed because of your thinking, I think it is justifiable to defend myself as a legitimate defense.criminal political act. Thus, since there is no context in this instruction, I think that it is inadequate, therefore I vote against, ”he noted in this line.

After the publication of the article, after 1:00 pm, criticism began on social networks. While some have criticized her for allowing herself to be carried away by the headline of the article or for her reserved meeting in France – together with Deputy Gabriel Borich last September – with former leader Ricardo Palma Salamanca, convicted as the author of the murder of UDI founder Jaime Guzman others decided to protect him.

Among these voices appeared even the columnist Teresa Marinovich, who openly opposed the opposition’s position, which accentuated that “Maite Orsini” did not justify violence as a method of political action, He clarified that in very specific conditions violence may be necessary from the point of view of self-defense. "

“I'm not a fan of Orsini. In fact, it is this distinction that allows me to judge for the murder of Jaime Gusman otherwise than for the attack on Pinochet. And I do not pretend to the second, I just think that the context forces us to make certain nuances, ”he added. “The interpretation of what he said is frankly evil,” said Marinovich.

Other comments on the networks pointed to the editor of the article, Jimenu Soto, who in the past was responsible for the work of the press group of the UDI Council of Deputies.

Fake News: Race against Vallejo

What happened to Orsini is the second episode in a row, in which erroneous information or bizarre interpretations are distributed in the media and social networks.

This Wednesday, Gonzalo de la Carrera gained fame, who in his program on Radio Agrikultura gave place to his false accusations against Deputy Camila Vallejo (PC), in which he mistakenly pointed to the support of pedophilia.

In particular, the discussion began after quoting a post on Twitter from a source of obviously false news, with which he called a parliamentarian to give explanations.

In particular, in this text quote, it was quoted that Vallejo never spoke, supporting the thesis about the use of a shirt with the image of Simone de Beauvoir, the historical character of feminism, which other sites are known for publishing false news, by the parliamentarian. – They indicate that they supported pedophilia.

Later, and due to the large amount of comments and criticism he received, casting doubt on the veracity of the publication, the radio guide decided to remove this post. After that, De la Carrera devoted several minutes to apologize for what had happened, saying that “if Camila Vallejo did not say that pedophilia is a right to recovery, I apologize for having retweeted something that I did not have the opportunity to learn that this is not true. "


Source link