THE RIGHT TO KILL

E D I T O R I A L
“Weekendavisen”, 9-15 February 2001
THE DANISH left wing on the 70-ies and 80-ies, hadn’t only determined itself to accept all different kinds of dictatorships, as there were on the Soviet Union, China, Albania and Cuba. But at the same time, they actively supported terrorism, as for example in the Middle East. By collecting money, supportive declarations and political or ideological encouragements – in some ways making as if, or working to organize an armed battle in Denmark, by “collecting” for this reason financials through stealing.

THE MORAL considerations of this kind were very spread in the political climate of the left wing, and this way their human disdain is only surpassed by their political disdain; if their will cannot be achieved by legal political means, they preserve the right to use illegal means. This point of view is very old; the eventual right of the people to revolt, has been discussed in the European political thinking, since the last middle-age; the Dutch Grotius, who wrote in the years 1600, is one of the most well-known thinkers of this tradition.

For the European left wing, people from the third world were not only the special dish to kill every one, because they had difficulties in revenging with well-known legal means; but it was discussed also a theory, which supposed that the world revolution, should exactly come from the suppressed people of the third world. The Tier Mondism is called this theory, and it is based on the fact that the working class, which is included on the democratically elections, owner of cars and private houses, can hardly be expected to show the will and the violence, to bring people in the paradise of Communism – and furthermore, knowing the fact that the Communist paradise, established until now, couldn’t make an appeal for every one in an irresistible way, including here their own citizens.

THE CATASTROPHE was followed by catastrophe, no matter where people had tried the vision that left wing was working so energetically to promote. But this didn’t prevent so much meaningful groups to imagine Communism as a great idea principally; it was just an unlucky coincidence of bad conditions and the incompetence of the leaders in the existing Communist countries, which had disfigure the project. The proletariat’s dictatorship was and become an excellent vision of the society and this way an inevitable conclusion of world’s history, according to Marx. It was simply an effort to help the logic of the history in its way.

The civil society, which is the democracy, came to the world by the independence of USA in 1776 and the French Revolution in 1780. This is the society, which stands for the rights of the citizens – what we today call human rights – and starting from here, there exist also the logic, that these human rights are time-limited.

When the society developed further, the human rights would disappear with that society, which had brought them into life.

The revolutionary left wing, as it can be understood, took a large dose of this pleasure for the future, seeing these human rights for something very meaningful.

THE SOCIETY and its sudden development became the main object for the political thinking of the left wing. Not the people. People were considered in this kind of thinking as the raw material for this society. And if the supposed “logic” of this society, asked you to execute people, then you had nothing to do. If you were sensitive, you could begin to reduce the killings, or at least to take a distance from them. But there was not any principal objection against this. And such an objection doesn’t exist yet…

WITHOUT a concept for the individuals and their rights, we can very freely imagine the different ways of organising the world. You can move someone here, kill someone there, and direct some one up and some others down. A very imaginary order would be created, and if there were special people – individuals – who couldn’t find a reason in the fact that the society needs to let aside any kind of personal will – yes, then they are either bad and should be executed, or have lost their way and need to be mentally treated.

Because of this, the catastrophes in Soviet Union and China, are not accidentally results of an unlucky complex of surroundings, but they are basically self-build in the Communist vision. If the individual, the human being, begins to be considered as raw material to a system of society, then sooner or later killings and violation will come.

There are no premises in building a human system on those bases. Then, why should one build a society, if this society isn’t for the humans? Who should be satisfied, if the humans wouldn’t be? What kind of profit would it be by this? The pleasure of the order? This pleasure will usually be temporary, because when one begins to violate the human rights, and sends every morning the trucks to get the opponents for execution, it begins also in the same time to be more and more opponents. The pleasure of the revolutionists is very limited; it never goes as it is expected to go.

It is very strange to see, how one can close the eyes before such a thing? When will come those people on the left wing, which can be able to understand that Marx simply has done a mistake on his work of prophecy? When is this thought going to come, that there has been a moral defect built in his philosophy?

A.K.
__________________________
Arben Çokaj has translated these parts of the article, which has been taken from the Danish newspaper “Weekendavisen”, 9-15 February 2001.

Shqip | Dansk | Deutsch | English