was held last week in Pamplona a meeting of historians to discuss in depth about the conquest of Navarre Castilla troops in 1512. A conquest, war, invasion or so passively accepted, say what you prefer, which gradually led to the incorporation of Navarre, more or less degree or force (the principle of force, of course, that's why there weapons, war and death) in what became the English monarchy.
A Mina Thomas Urzainqui this conference did not like a hair. Already in the title of your article branded him "denier." And the adjective is repeated more than once. Denial, if I mistake not, is a word that began a few years ago used to refer to all historians and groups politicians who deny that the Holocaust of the Jews in World War II took place, and thus liberated the Nazis of their principal and terrible crime. The term is heavily loaded with political connotations, and its emotional intensity, as well as we wanted, is very high. (The denial, by the way is a crime in several European countries, without going any further in France.) Later, as degrading and trivializing the charge, some have labeled deniers écolâtre who venture skepticism about climate change and its more or less catastrophic effects on the health of our planet.
throwing down the slope of the hype Urzainqui uses the adjective, with all its emotional charge, for, in their view of what happened in Navarra from 1512, set a very sharp moral separation between the invading Spaniards, genocidal, soulless, and the poor Navarre (for him Basques, of course), then slaughtered. Like Da Guipuzcoa and Vizcaya were an essential part of the Castilian army that occupied Navarra. Nothing hairs to sea, the English are murderers and Navarre (Basque) a victim, just like that.
Congress was not plural, as Urzainqui. Pluralism, more pluralism!, Roars in his article. Clear that the concept of pluralism has this lawyer, historian in his spare time, and who spends a despicable, syntax and punctuation, it suffers from obvious limitations. It resembles the plurality that made "within the regime," the Movement to different families in times of Franco. Or, to come to these times, recalls a Basque nationalist aspiration of a future to be plural, as recently wrote Fernando Savater, "from Tasio Erkicia at one end to Bernardo Atxaga in another." No more spectrum (much less, actually) covering the historians cited Urzainqui Navarre, the "true" story, which he said could not attend the conference last week.
Because for this outstanding representative of the association Nabarralde with limited pluralism that is more than enough. Other historians, such as they were in Congress, are not only representatives of "denial subordination" (sic), or "entrenched denial of deafness." They also represent "an authoritarian and monopolistic conception of power" are "a purely lopsided and biased from an entrenched attendance, which prevents them from the serene and full knowledge of the facts and historiography generated in these five hundred years", and in short, only represent the power "that seeks to shore up their present course of submission and subordination antinavarra undemocratic. " Oh, antinavarra ... sounds like "anti-English" or "antivasca" nationalist insults.
If that is the vision of Nabarralde of all who disagree with them, what does it mean in your mouth, a desire for a conference "plural and all-encompassing, all historiographical trends and contrast instead of the various arguments existing reality of the conquest of Navarre? As a joke, a joke delusional. The other, dissenting, is antinavarro, antivasco, denier, ghoul, assassin of power, or all at once, and also Lost serenity! With reproaches of such caliber, when one is filled up to that point of truth, and so loathes those who hold other theses, appeals to pluralism merely instrumental sound, pure quackery.
The protagonist of the Basque homeland of all , the estimable novel Iban Zaldivar, said that Nabarralde is "an association of historiomaniacos deluded who claim that Navarre was the first 'Basque state', and who insist on calling the Basques, for example, "Navarre West '." Exactly. told months ago in this blog how one of the historians nacioanlistas Basque Urzainqui citing these same people of Nabarralde had deleted without any permission from the author, a phrase that we liked in his book about the war in Navarra, a book otherwise orthodox. Censorship the hard way, without anesthesia. And the same dare to speak of pluralism, objectivity and science? Historiomaniacos deluded, and also shameless.
0 comments:
Post a Comment