Serbie : la justice soutient le ministre Stefanović, chef des fantômes de Savamala
Ménage préélectoral en Serbie : le Défenseur des droits Saša Janković en ligne de mire
Serbie : le médiateur de la République dans le collimateur du gouvernement
Serbie : l'heure de la révolte citoyenne a-t-elle sonné ?
La Serbie d'Aleksandar Vučić, facteur d'instabilité régionale
Serbie : des élections tous les ans, au bon plaisir d'Aleksandar Vučić ?
Serbie : la justice soutient le ministre Stefanović, chef des fantômes de Savamala
Ménage préélectoral en Serbie : le Défenseur des droits Saša Janković en ligne de mire
Serbie : le médiateur de la République dans le collimateur du gouvernement
Serbie : l'heure de la révolte citoyenne a-t-elle sonné ?
La Serbie d'Aleksandar Vučić, facteur d'instabilité régionale
Serbie : des élections tous les ans, au bon plaisir d'Aleksandar Vučić ?
January 12, 2017 (JUBA) – A forum of South Sudanese youth issued a statement on Thursday, calling on national unity government to recognize the existence of the armed opposition in the country.
“The South Sudan Youth leaders forum calls upon the TGoNU [Transitional Government of National Unity] to recognize that there are armed groups engaged in hostilities across the country and urge the TGoNU to peacefully engage these groups in order to end was and usher in an era of reconciliation and healing”, partly reads the resolution derived at end of a two-day conference held in Kenya.
50 youth from different states of South Sudan, who used the opportunity to examine the situation facing the country through shared ideas about how this can be improved in-order to move the nation from the devastating conflict, attended the event.
Sponsored by International Growth center, United States agency for international development and the World Bank, the conference which was mainly graced by government supporters underlined the importance of the national dialogue which they see as the only means through which disputes could be resolved in the country.
It called on armed actors to declare an unconditional ceasefire and recommended that a credible, impartial and acceptable national dialogue be led by the faith based organizations, particularly South Sudan Council of Churches with the help of African council of churches and the world council of churches.
South Sudan national union chairperson, Albino Bol Dhieu and other government affiliated groups, including members and leaders of a deeply-divided Red army foundation, took part in the consultative dialogue.
(ST)
In November 2016, after what was by any measure a tumultuous year for Europe and the world, Oxford Dictionaries chose ‘post-truth’ as its Word of the Year. Oxford Dictionaries define the word as an adjective “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief”.
In the immediate aftermath of a six-month period which saw the success of Brexit campaigners in the United Kingdom and the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, it is certainly tempting to conclude that truth has ceased to matter.
In these two campaigns, facts and expert opinion seemed to count for nought, to be replaced by appeals to existing prejudices against immigrants, minorities and the political elite. As a result we have been forced to re-examine our conventional understanding of the relationship between facts and voting behaviour. It is not surprising that new terminology is needed to describe this situation.
There are reasons to be cautious about accepting the idea of ‘post-truth’ as the new normal. And there are perhaps even stronger reasons to resist the word itself.
The first fallacy of the idea of the world having entered a ‘post-truth’ era is the implication that an era of absolute truth existed at some earlier point in time. This view is ahistorical and in many ways unfounded.
“Before ‘post-truth’, the practice of deliberately trying to shape public opinion was called propaganda”
‘Truths’ have always been shaped by power struggles. Whether or not we accept that the phenomenon of absolute truth – such as an objectively verifiable event – exists, any attempt to communicate this truth is subjective to some extent. Communication is bound to language and cultural convention. It consists of choices made in an attempt to convey the message. Truth becomes an interpretation, rather than an absolute.
Communication and interpretation have been tied to power structures throughout history. These structures, in turn, aim to influence people as they communicate with each other. Before ‘post-truth’ there was a different word for the practice of deliberately trying to shape public opinion through appeals to emotion, personal belief and prejudice. It was ‘propaganda’.
Today, we see many of the major traits of propaganda at work in ‘post-truth’ practices such as fake news spreading on the internet and the endless repetition of unverifiable claims as ‘facts’. The mechanisms may have changed and evolved, but the goals remain largely the same.
The second fallacy about the notion of ‘post-truth’ is to do with the word itself and its potential impact. It would be a mistake to see ‘post-truth’ as a neutral label for an existing phenomenon. Words do not simply describe reality; they also actively help us perceive, understand and construct the reality we live in. Therefore, every time we repeat the notion of a ‘post-truth’ era, we give more power to the idea that truth has ceased to matter.
Rationality has been the basis of Western democracies since the Enlightenment. In many ways the technological, scientific and social progress made in Europe over the past 300 years is built on the notion that facts are relevant to the choices we make as individuals, as societies and as an international community.
If you remove the notion that truth – or at least, a sincere attempt to convey the truth with as little bias as possible – matters, the very foundation of our democracies crumbles under our feet. We are left susceptible to whichever way the next populist wind blows.
“Simple and catchy words are rarely capable of capturing complex realities, and our reality is increasingly complex”
So at its most dangerous, ‘post-truth’ has the potential to turn into Orwellian newspeak. It normalises the situation where facts no longer have any weight to them. It neutralises the sinister undertone of fake news and online hate speech. It paralyses us, leaving us feeling like there is nothing to be done since the blade of our best weapon, truth, has been made blunt and rendered useless.
This is precisely what fake news and other ‘post-truth’ practices seek to achieve. They are meant to leave us feeling confused and powerless. They are designed to divide and weaken. This confusion benefits those seeking to implement the simple-sounding solutions offered by authoritarian rule rather than solutions that actually work.
It is crucial to develop a new awareness of how ‘post-truth’ practices operate, to strip their mechanisms bare and place them under scrutiny. To do this, it may be necessary to launch an international discussion on a possible code of conduct for the ethics and responsibilities of spreading information online, where conventional ethics of journalism do not apply.
The notion of a ‘post-truth’ era may sound catchy, but perhaps this alone tells us something about the nature of the term. Simple and catchy words are rarely capable of capturing complex realities. And we live in an increasingly complex reality.
We may choose to look at it through a simplifying lens, or strive for a more nuanced understanding. History has shown that the latter is usually a more laborious way but less disastrous in the long run. We can let the notion of ‘post-truth’ politics numb us or we can resist it and turn this into an era of reclaiming the truth.
The choice, and the future built on that choice, is ours.
IMAGE CREDIT: Bigstock – devon
The post Why we should resist the idea and practice of ‘post-truth’ appeared first on Europe’s World.
January 12, 2017 (KHARTOUM) - A prominent human rights defender said on Thursday that Khartoum airport security agents prevented him flying to Egypt and told him he was banned from travel.
Amin Mekki Medani, Chairman of Civil Society Initiative group told Sudan Tribune he and his family members were banned from travel to Cairo where he would undergo a surgery.
"The Khartoum airport authorities seized our passports me and the family after we completed the immigration process, they informed me that I am temporarily banned from traveling and asked me to go to the office of the National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS)," he said.
He added that his wife and daughter were travelling with him as he would undergo a surgery in Cairo.
His travel ban coincides with a meeting the opposition Sudan Call plan to hold in France next week.
In the past, Madani had been arrested on 6 December 2014 for four months by the security service for his participation in a meeting establishing the opposition Sudan Call alliance. He was released on 9 April 2015 together with Farouq Abu Eissa the chairman of the opposition National Consensus Forces.
(ST)
To receive the Brussels Briefing in your inbox every morning, register for a free FT account here and then sign up here.
Bill English, New Zealand’s prime minister for a month, made his European diplomatic debut this week and sat down with the FT. He is here to remind folks that European decisions “wash up on our shores, even at the other end of the world”. And when it comes to Brexit, they certainly will.
Read moreBonne nouvelle: le nombre d'actes de piraterie et de brigandage maritime a encore baissé en 2016, selon le rapport annuel de l'IMB (International Maritime Bureau) qui détaille les données pour l'année écoulée.
En 2016, l'IBM a recensé 191 attaques ou tentatives contre 246 en 2015, 245 en 2014, 264 en 2013 et 297 en 2012. Il s'agit du chiffre le plus bas depuis 1998 quand 202 actes avaient été recensés. Sur ces 191 actes, on recense 150 arraisonnements de navire, 22 tentatives, 12 incidents avec des tirs d'armes à feu et 7 captures de navire.
Asie du Sud-Est et Afrique restent les zones les plus exposées:
Ces actes de piraterie et de brigandage ont principalement eu lieu dans 5 pays:
En revanche, on constate une hausse des demandes rançons:
- 62 en 2016 (lors de 15 attaques)
- 19 en 2015
- 9 en 2014
- 36 en 2013
- 26 en 2012
Ces 62 demandes de rançons ont eu lieu en Malaisie (10), aux Philippines (18), au Béninb (3), en Côte d'Ivoire (2) et au Nigeria (29).
Le rapport intégral peut être consulté ici.