âEst modus in rebusâ, there is a
measure of things - says a Latin motto. And we try to keep this
in mind as we open ourselves and urge the debate in the pages of
this magazine. Take, for example, the figure of Vittorio
Arrigoni. In the summer issue of our staffFrancesco
Codellothe opinions expressed about him that
raise numerous criticisms: there are four readers of "A"
we write about their opinions and find space, all in the next
issue of October, inrubric
of the letters. No "censorship",
only the invitation (accepted) to one of the writers to moderate
the language in a couple of steps, where the critical (always
legitimate) you let go to offensive considerations. It's our way
of working, our conception of what a libertarian newspaper should
be. Maximum openness to different opinions, but rejection of the
"receive and publish" if it means allowing the tone of
the debate to decrease and consequently insults, prejudice,
frontal attacks will take up space. Open yes, but not to
uncontrolled outbursts and fights from the squalor of the
gallery. Another example, more complex than thedebate
in course from some time on "A" on
veganism & the surrounding area. We have already spoken in
this same section of dialogue with readers, two
numbers ago. In order to clarify that not
only we're not vegan, but not even share the claims of vegan
anarchists about the necessary inseparability of the two options.
Plainly put, we believe it may well be without espousing
anarchist ideas and vegan practices. That said, we asked vegans
to intervene in the pages of "A" to present their views
and thus to further the debate. Confirming that even on this
topic our goal isn't to define "the" anarchist position
on the subject, but much more modestly (and useful) to encourage
free expression of thoughts and positions, so everyone has more
elements to the end to decide. The publication, in the last issue
ofcomics by
Cossi & Nuvolotti âNostra patria è il mondo interoâ,
5 pages of harsh denunciation of the decision to
also feed on meat, has attracted criticism from those who, not
being vegan, they told us to feel offended and disturbed by the
violent images of the comic and the "Taliban" message
and criminalization against those who is not vegan. One of the
criticisms (verbally) the preparation is to have one given to a
comic book violence and intolerance that would never be accepted
in the face of a hand-written setting. This would not be an
intervention in the debate, but the assertion of an intolerant
and unproblematic truth with "V" capitalized.
Therefore, unacceptable. We do not intend, here and now, to draw
conclusions or even to express our opinion editorial, which has
already been expressed precisely in its general outlines two
issues ago. It seems interesting to point out the importance of
methodological issues related to "management" of the
debate. These may seem like small things, but sometimes matters
of "futile", while something else happens in the world,
every day and often without our review found that the way to deal
with it. But it is not, in our opinion. And we are convinced that
the preparation often matters of form have to do with the
substance that lies behind (or below). And it is important that
the criteria with which it is "compiled" a magazine as
"A" should, wherever possible, be a collective heritage
of the community of friends, supporters and readers of "A".
The pipe dream that animates us must also consist of small but
meaningful daily behavior. And our opposition to the state of
things must occur with some rigor and determination, but also
with a style and subsequent behavior. From explain and discuss
openly, in broad daylight. Just as we are doing. "Est modus
in rebus", indeed.
anno
41 n. 366
