A resource explains Portugal
A group of students who experienced great violence over an episode in the Bible did an experiment with a group of students who experienced what happened with violence. Result: 6% of those with fur and 6% justified the massacre done by them. However, when they changed the names and locations of the story – Joshua becomes a Chinese general -, the student group had the opposite results: 75% condemned the massacre.
Now reproduce the experience in Portugal in this way: a group of adults is told a story where a king had spent more than the kingdom produced, which had led that kingdom to lose its independence and become vassal of another. A time of poverty and humiliation had followed. In addition, it had a shipwreck meaning where after having made these people, even having been warned that it was reformed. He also says that the councilors of the king nominated the family there had already been for the best. Twenty years later, the kingdom was overtaken by more backward ones and was one of the poorest on the continent.
How many people approved of this king’s behavior? How many would consider the kingdom well governed? None, I’m sure!
Now, with another group of adults, Tamarin’s experience is this: We’ve replaced the story of the poorly ruled kingdom with the story of PS over the last twenty years. And if they were responsible for the bankruptcy, Costa had political responsibilities for having stood by Socrates, for failing to take the measures to prevent the second wave of fires, for involvement ministers involved in organs, scandals, for naming friends. for independents and, finally, due to the economic backwardness of the country, the results would be different. Just as they would find justifications, more than half would find excuses and others would find them.
Or, the absolute majority that the PS is.
Thus, it can be seen that both religion and politics can alter the moral conflict of certain events when they are considered as the deepest beliefs of the human being. Something happens: the well-educated citizen and the law-abiding football club, suddenly turns into a hooligan who insults peers and votes in his knowledge that he is corrupt president. What matters is winning. Or, also, what matters is that the doesn’t win.
In Portugal, Socialism – like Communism – works as a religion and few believers are able to free themselves from dogma. Who criticized Socrates as he led the country into the abyss? And how many did not defend him or value the news that nourishes the country, with another ethical demand, would force him to resign? Just as the teachers were the only ones, as the social incarnates were the ones who were created in Socrates who were recognized as Socrates who were considered to be unique (of course justifiable). If his trumpets tore down the wall of Jericho from the Right, why not excuse him for a few peccadilloes? It was very easy for them to throw milk with the guilt of throwing the milk with guilt up Rabbit and Costa in the savior that the that of man’s life went to the land of Cana de Passoava honey and transforming and disguised austerity
And the reverse side of their faithfulness is fury: how can you deny the existence of God and his miracles? If he doesn’t believe in the Good (Socialism), he can only be a bad person (from the Right). The critic of Socialism, the blasphemer who prefers merit to equality, is thus transformed into a heretic who deserves the stake. Just look at the insults and threats on social media and in newspaper comment boxes.
If George Tamarin had had his experience in Portugal, we might have been a different country.