I just read an
article that criticised a governmental publicity clip on how "a small group of radical extremists have declared a war on employment and development in Peru out of political and ideological reasons, a war full of lies. All these people want to do is block national and foreign investment. These anti-systemic actors oppose the great benefits derived from processing our natural resources and modernising our infrastructure, in order to maintain the great inequalities that justify this war on employment and development. Warning! SOS! No one should stranglehold Peru!"
As the clip clearly shows, the small group of extremists are the affected communities protesting against the government for it to respect their rights and not to sell out the country. And, lest we forget, the object of reference also includes a set of
subversive ngo people and rebellion inciting foreign priests.
The main weakness of the Gardner's Dog rhetoric [el
perro del
hortelano] is that it all depends who's perspective your interpreting it...
Beats me how you get out of this polarised debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment