Latest / Carne Cruda Podcast / Derroteros: Los Enemigos, con Inés García y Paula Ducay, PUNZADAS (CARNE CRUDA EXTRA)

Transcript

Derroteros: Los Enemigos, con Inés García y Paula Ducay, PUNZADAS (CARNE CRUDA EXTRA) · Carne Cruda Podcast

0:05
Goodbye goes equally course. Close it well, road to the middle direction taken
0:12
to reach the end, proposed a set of data that indicate the way to
0:16
reach a place. I think we are leaving direction that is given in writing
0:20
for Maria day to splendour in order of a book that contains a defeat then,
0:26
line marked on the map of tides to guide the pilots super rauta of
0:36
course stops of rote courses bros think walking with Indes García and Paula Andcai Punzandas.
0:45
What a talins Paula, how you are, because here we are a
0:48
little heated because spring has suddenly arrived in Madrid, almost a summer slap has
0:52
arrived. Yeah, yeah, yeah, and we' d come up to
0:54
the studio like Mommy to the flowers and the heat. Yes, but yes,
0:57
how are you, because a little comply, yes, the change of
1:00
time and of the night, which does not shelter you enough that you then
1:04
erase, yes, we appear. Elders, now I would support you from
1:11
being a rebekite, of course, and you get a little cold, well,
1:15
what are we going to talk about today in this course that I want
1:18
so much, because I need a moment of rest and rest. Well,
1:19
today we' re going to talk about enemies. Wow, so little rest
1:23
and few blind, but well, but let' s go without hating anyone
1:27
clear, of course we thought about it another day we talked about friends that
1:30
I like very much. Yeah, yeah, we wanted to talk a little
1:34
bit about good about everything that surrounds the word of enemies and the concept of
1:37
enemies. Think a little if we have enemies from childhood, no, what
1:40
the hell is an enemy. Evidently, it' s not just the kid
1:42
who threw you from the but in the schoolyard or the one who stole your
1:46
boyfriend in fifth grade or, for example, the co- worker who would
1:49
well stick a dagger in your eye if I could climb above you in the
1:52
company. Sometimes enemies are people we just don' t like and we don
1:56
' t know very well why not. And not only do they exist in
1:59
our lives with sin, but they also exist as an enemy. And we
2:00
wanted to talk about this a little bit. It is also a word that
2:04
has jumped to the plane of politics and international relations as well and we wanted
2:07
to ask ourselves what a political enemy is. It is no different from a
2:10
political adversary and has some kind of consequences. To conceive society as a series
2:15
of groups enmity with each other and we wanted to ask you, but by
2:20
far, with a lot of comedy, who your enemy is. That'
2:22
s why we said for sure he has, why you can' t be
2:24
like so many years and so much professional career in this industry without winning some
2:29
enemy, because you make people are very bitchy, sure, sure, but
2:31
you say sin and not the sinner. Sure, well, you can think
2:34
of them while we record this. Some present, but I actually have one
2:37
thing that I think is a defense mechanism that works very well, which is
2:40
that I don' t hold a grudge and I have a bad memory for
2:44
stab wounds. That' s very good, yes, quieter living, quieter
2:46
living. I mean, he doesn' t usually eat me back. That
2:49
' s great. It is true that some people have nailed the dagger so
2:53
deeply, because you do not stop seeing it, but in general I usually
2:55
forget it. It' s not very good of that you forget why you
2:58
' re angry with pita and in fact, it comes to me sometimes to
3:01
remember. But you remember this person did this to you and did the other
3:04
thing to you and I did before, right? It' s true,
3:07
yeah, it' s not that bad either. You' ve already prescribed
3:12
stab wounds. I' m a very benevolent judge and it' s fine.
3:15
Well, we wanted to start with this thing about political enemies and,
3:17
above all, with the distinction between enemy and adversary, precisely because language in
3:23
politics is quite important. It is not that we are experts in political communication,
3:28
but we found it very interesting to think about these two words, because
3:34
lately we might think that we heard more like the conception of a political enemy
3:39
than that of a political adversary, that we have not thought about it alone.
3:40
Let' s say it. We asked our trusted polytologue, who is
3:44
our friend Jorge Rubio, and he told us that, in fact, this
3:46
is so, and we wanted to think a little bit if this has consequences,
3:51
to collect a little how the language is very important. Yes, we
3:53
also wanted to make a brief reflection on how interesting it is to consult the
3:58
dictionary, to consult the rae, because we all have intuitions about what words
4:01
can suggest to us. But, obviously, when we speak in our day
4:04
to day, we are not thinking about the meanings of the dictionary and we
4:08
do not stop to think about what this word or another means before we use
4:11
it and then before we see the dictionary. Thinking a little bit about these
4:14
things as an adversary. Enemy I thought that adversary led me as some kind
4:16
of rational plane, to a competition where there are certain rules or rules,
4:20
a scheduled combat, where there are things that are worth and things that are
4:24
not. Instead, enemy suggested things to me as much more rational, such
4:28
as a series of feelings of jealousy or God. Then we' ll talk
4:31
about this, feelings that can be like more personified in a person or in
4:35
a group and that could therefore lead to more violent courses of action and problems.
4:41
And I just went away additively and the radio confirmed it to me,
4:45
because adversary we see that his meanings are good. The first is adverse,
4:47
the second is opposing person or enemy, so we see that these are words
4:50
that are synonymous or set of opposing enemy people. You say it' s
4:55
all right here and then we go to the enemy and there' s a
4:59
rather curious thing that, apart from the meanings that we can all think as
5:02
for example, contrary you contradict in a war, said from a person to
5:05
a country suddenly, in the third meaning says person who has bad will to
5:10
another and wishes him or does bad that here already enters good, as bad
5:15
intention and in the meaning number five we read in the old right man who
5:17
had killed the father, the mother or some family member. I mean,
5:18
we' re already in crime. It' s getting complicated. Yes and
5:21
above in the crime of blood, in the crime of evil and the sixth
5:27
we read of enemies. It' s devil directly, I mean, we
5:30
go to evil and extreme more extreme. And then we found it very curious
5:35
to prepare in these differences of meanings, because adversary is a word as with
5:40
very contained meanings, very narrow, very rational, in a certain sense.
5:44
But we see that enemies is a word that kind of expands into regions that
5:46
have to do with crime, with the sea personified, with the diary,
5:48
with the diary, with the devil and well, we see that here there
5:53
is a difference. Yes, it has much more negative connotations. In fact,
5:57
there is also one very important thing, which is that it carries like
5:59
one of the sums of the other. When you call someone an adversary,
6:02
it' s not like Paula said, it doesn' t involve this kind
6:06
of personalized violence on someone, but it' s a much stronger thing.
6:11
In fact, this affects, as we said before, political relations and also
6:14
social relations, if we think of it in terms of how much more landed.
6:17
Voters or supporters of a party have a different relationship with voters of the
6:21
same group and with opponents. It seems to depend whether we see them as
6:29
adversaries or enemies. It has different implications, for example, that the enemy
6:32
seems to have to be destroyed, while with the adversary there is a certain
6:35
possible dialogue, such as that you may have certain bridges. In fact,
6:39
in politics there is like this whole thing of the new and old politics,
6:43
like that the old politics and one more thing of political adversary and the new
6:46
one is more of an enemy with which you cannot dialogue. And it implies
6:49
one thing, which is that when you build an outside enemy, this serves
6:54
to internally unite a group, that is, you are from a party or
6:57
a group. What unites you many times is the opposite with the other,
7:00
with the enemy who is outside. And there are many philosophers and political theorists
7:04
who have reflected on this concept of enemy in politics and we wanted to bring
7:10
in concrete one that is very important, that is Carl Smith, who developed
7:13
much of his political theory around this, and we wanted to clarify also that
7:16
he is Nazi. Of course, you always have to warn when a date
7:21
is a Nazi, because sometimes the Nazis, because they wrote things that were
7:25
half interesting. Unfortunately. It was funny when we were doing the script thinking
7:29
that in the race we did a lot of this from our notes. Suddenly
7:31
there was a naz and we put in fucking Nazi parentheses. All I took
7:34
to make Rock clear Tona good to remember him to see was also a bit
7:38
of whore Nane, of course Heidegger, all the notes in the Nazi,
7:42
but Nazi Javier is a bit Nazi. And there' s debate, but
7:44
Carl Smith seems to be bat full na. There' s no ratiz no
7:46
nuances and there' s your total tonazi. But, well, let'
7:49
s rescue some ideas that we had and we' ve read a paper specifically
7:55
called the enemy friend criterion, in call Smith, which is of weed conception,
7:58
thin vine and that you leave it s n n or want to get
8:01
in like in these moves. But what interests us basically is to think that
8:03
Smith held a very antagonistic view of society. He conceives it as a series
8:09
of competing interests between groups, and this results in a struggle as a constant
8:13
at the social level. There are like irreconcilable interests, as we said in
8:20
fact he understood that the specific distinction and the one to which almost all political
8:24
motives could be reduced is the enemy friend distinction, since there is a lot,
8:31
a lot to scratch, but we are not going to focus much.
8:33
We just wanted to see this idea of creating a new distinction between us and
8:37
them. And this explains the feeling of belonging that someone can feel when it
8:41
comes to identifying with a group, with an ideology, with a party,
8:45
because many times, as we said at the beginning, identities are built against
8:48
something. And Delgado Parra says in his article, the perception that one group
8:52
develops of itself in relation to the others is an element that, while uniting
8:56
it, distinguishes it. What he said earlier, the possibility of recognizing the
9:01
enemy implies the identification of a political project that generates a sense of belonging.
9:05
Hence the nationalisms, hence the Nazisms, which is that. We build ourselves
9:11
against others the outside enemy, in fact, the old trick of the flag,
9:16
of pulling out the flag and talking about patriotic values, precisely to question
9:22
the Community when the Community is disaggregating and when the Community is primarily looking up
9:28
at the powers that disaggregate it, of course a position to those who do
9:31
not think that, because it seems that it goes against that, precisely then
9:35
there is this vision that Smith proposed, of plural societies as bearers of permanent
9:39
conflicts and of friends and enemies. Also what you have said not that this
9:43
thing is given, of this distinction in populisms, social movements also identify enemies
9:48
against which they build a discourse. And today, for example, we see
9:52
that far- right populisms identify traditionally vulnerable groups as enemies, and this,
9:56
then, carries terrifying things. We all know this here. And a very
10:01
good example of this kind of polarization and this kind of speech of targeting an
10:03
enemy we' ve seen in the last few years in the United States.
10:07
We have a great example of this with Donald Trump, whose last barbarities are,
10:11
for example, that migrants are not people. This kind of thing that
10:13
of course totally dehumanizes this person who is being targeted or this group that is
10:18
being targeted and then has also said that if you don' t win the
10:22
elections, there will be a bloodbath, which is like good, full enemies,
10:26
because this is like a war directly that has no sense at all.
10:31
But we can also think that in left populisms similar things happen, for example,
10:35
to identify that the elite or good, the so- called caste,
10:37
is the bad enemy, while the people would be the good friend, that
10:41
such distinctions are also used in left populisms and it is understood that both formations
10:46
or both groups have irreconcilable interests. We also wanted to point a moment to
10:50
the issue of the enemy in war, for example, genocide Israel Palestine conceives
10:56
the people of Palestine as an enemy and there is no possible po, no
11:01
possible humanitarian aid. It doesn' t seem to me that the news came
11:03
out the other day that an Israeli NGO tried to bring help and everyone jumped
11:07
on it saying you can' t help an enemy, not in any way
11:09
when you' ve already put it on it. In the category of enemy,
11:11
it' s like no, he' s not a person and you
11:15
can' t help him, you can' t do anything for him.
11:16
Sure. In the category of adversary there is democracy. In the enemy'
11:18
s, not clear, the enemy is the destruction of dialogue. So if
11:22
we are all enemies of a society, we would end up killing it and
11:28
eventually killing the consensus. And although conflict is necessary throughout democracy, it is
11:31
also necessary that a clear dialogue can be held. Yes, I believe that
11:33
dehumanization is key because it looks like a mass of people who are seen not
11:37
as people with individual lives, but as the enemy. It is not a
11:39
super abstract and super useful thing, because it seems that all violence against that
11:45
group of people that well deactivated it is there. Gila with being the enemy
11:48
that becomes clear what brighter way, from the mood of destroying is precisely those
11:52
labels so destructive. Totally, quite totally and politically, we wanted to pass
11:58
a little bit to the staff through a book called The Enemies of Kikomat,
12:03
which is one of the quadrant Anagrama that we love very funny. Sometimes the
12:07
book does, here you always have to say the colors, because people lead
12:09
you scientific. Yeah, first we wanted to talk a little bit about the
12:13
book, because it' s pretty curious, especially in the form. It
12:16
has many chapters and there are small texts at the beginning of each section,
12:20
where basically it tells you I' m going to talk about this in a
12:22
very comical way. I' m going to quote this one, this one
12:24
and this one, and then he starts talking. Then the tone is super
12:28
ironic, very provocative. He invites you as if to come in when we
12:31
read the book, Paula and I were saying that it' s like he
12:33
invites you to play in some way and that if you don' t enter
12:37
his game you might not like the book or not continue it. In fact,
12:39
there are times when it compares with Hitler it was the same thing and
12:41
it puts you a footnote that is a joke, it was to see what
12:43
face you put, so there is like an exchange of a may readable book.
12:46
Yeah, then it' s very personal, too. There are personal
12:50
anecdotes, many permanent and conscious contradictions that I like this very much, because
12:54
it is a book that asks more about questions than wanting to give as answers
12:58
and then makes humor that I am, but we value a lot of things
13:01
that are clearly not fun and uses it as comedy, as a means that
13:05
can serve to express or to talk about things that are tragic or painful.
13:07
And part of the book of a very interesting premise, which is having enemies
13:11
can be useful and what Kikuamat is doing is like differentiating between different types of
13:18
enemies and we are going to make a quick summary of those that we find
13:20
most interesting. The first is the natural enemies, that this would be that
13:24
there are people that we dislike and we don' t really know them and
13:28
wonder why we feel antipathy. And the answer he gives, which seems super
13:33
curious to me, is that there is always a way of being that attacks
13:37
your way of being, that is, that it is your identity, is
13:39
threatened with another identity that is that of the other and tells an anecdote that
13:43
calls it Cebilly, which is basically that his wife invites good. They take
13:48
us to a friend of their wife' s who has a couple and they
13:50
both can' t stand each other and don' t know each other.
13:52
But at first. It' s like one identity clashes with the other and
13:56
says I hate him for who doesn' t. For what I' ve
13:58
done stop doing tonight and the same thing happens to him. With me we
14:01
hate the identity of others, for we understand that it is a threat to
14:05
ours. This happens sometimes. To me it seems very chilly, because I
14:07
always say that I have a gift that is that I' m good at
14:11
keeping people quiet in a short time and sometimes to certain i always correct,
14:16
which is what is a little scary that when someone doesn' t like you
14:18
or always first in the end it turns out that that person has something shady.
14:22
Yeah, so if that' s a good compass for this kind of
14:24
thing. Then, ki Coma also proposes that there are friends, invisible enemies,
14:28
which consists in being friends of enemies, because sometimes it happens that this
14:33
happens, that we are friends of our enemies and we almost do not realize
14:37
and we wanted to think a moment about this kind of friendships as harmful,
14:41
in which you are all the time, as in tension, that you are
14:45
fighting with your friends and you have as negative feelings of jealousy of envy,
14:48
but at the same time it is your friends that perhaps good would be like
14:52
a toxic friendship that we have ever commented on in the podcast, which is
14:56
a very interesting topic and that, coma te, exposes various causes for this
14:58
to happen. And we are very interested in this idealization and romanticization that it
15:05
is possible to romanticize a friend to put on a pedestal that then, well,
15:09
we see over time that that pedestal does not correspond to reality. And
15:11
lately there' s a debate about how dangerous it is to romanticize friendship and
15:16
just like we used to do with love. We have passed as if to
15:18
say yes, friendship networks are very important and can as important as the couple
15:22
as the family. But be careful because it can also romanticize such networks,
15:28
as it can lead us to dangerous sites. Then he also distinguishes between wrong
15:31
enemies. He says sometimes we' re wrong when it comes to hating.
15:35
Do not keep a little good what you have said, that sometimes there are
15:37
people who keep hatred for a long time when you have really forgotten what that
15:39
person tells you that he was going to the stabbing, has expired or prescribed,
15:43
as he said ines and we can hate or stop hating sometimes out of
15:46
pure interest. I think he tells in the book that as soon as I
15:50
know if there' s a literary critic who doesn' t like him very
15:52
well, but doesn' t know him. But he does a good review
15:54
of his book. He says there' s better and he says it like
15:58
it' s very openly and it' s true that that happens. We
16:00
also have instant enemies. Well, this here would come up with the whole
16:03
issue of prejudice or a negative bias to hate people. Our example would be
16:10
the posh ones and yours is that this is a super cool part of the
16:12
book, which is like points where it puts all these people and me and
16:15
starts the posh ones. I don' t know what that is, but
16:18
anyway, there' s a list of people already in which they have outside,
16:22
that' s a hundred as stereotypes or types of people or collectives and
16:25
clear hatred, we' ve left the dicks, because we always have to
16:26
hate the dicks, but there are many more examples. Yeah, that'
16:27
s a pretty funny list. And then he talks about the barren enemies,
16:30
who are enemies that don' t lead you, it' s no use
16:33
to you. That hatred talking about this debate about whether it' s good
16:36
for something to have enemies that we can now continue to delve into, because
16:38
there are enemies that are useless to you. That' s not good for
16:41
you to feel bad, yes and hate is, because, in the end,
16:45
it' s a feeling like corrosive and we also wanted to think a
16:48
little bit that the word of enemies accompanies us more than we think. We
16:51
don' t have that enemies from the schoolyard and also say a lot about
16:53
those who fight they want to tell you a lot as a child if the
16:57
child is treating you badly. It' s because I like that it'
17:00
s a conception that good should be dismantled, because it' s a little
17:03
dangerous. No, but we also wanted to ask or throw the question to
17:07
listeners rather, what does friendship have to do with desire. No. This
17:08
childish idea was going to think that enmity is already a bond in itself,
17:14
it doesn' t have to always be opposed to friendship, not like it
17:15
can contain certain things and certain behaviors. And then mention that there is a
17:21
narrative scheme that is used a lot today in books for teenagers, which are
17:23
books that people read up to the age of twenty- seven, which is
17:26
one thing that I don' t understand very well, but good. People
17:27
do it that is the Enemis Tollovers from enemies to lovers who are like two
17:32
people who know each other, are called fatal, but little by little emerges
17:34
as desire, and this is used a lot also romantic comedies. Okay.
17:37
That, for example, pride and prejudice. Of course you were a classic
17:42
of hated loved ones. That would be the good example, enemy lovers is
17:47
the good example. If this is the good example, then a whole series
17:49
of strange commercial literature has been derived from it, which should also be reviewed.
17:53
But indeed, it is very, very good example, the main enemis
17:56
Stollovers. Yes, and we wanted to go on with this that Kikamat says
18:02
if enemies are useful ask us this question and see if statements as you keep
18:07
your friends close and closer to your enemies see if they are present in our
18:11
day to day and in popular and political culture also in reality, without us
18:15
noticing. For Amat, this theory seems to you, because it seems to
18:19
me that it can raise debate. It' s like it' s possible
18:23
to take the enemy as a free teacher. He calls it then that the
18:26
enemy, as it is there and you know that he is looking at you
18:30
and that he is waiting for you to do something wrong to jump, might
18:33
make you like correct your faults and always try to give the better version that
18:37
you have or what you are doing. So it' s possible, like
18:41
this living being watched by your enemies. It is true that Kikoamat speaks a
18:45
lot of art and writing, which is what he dedicates himself to and says,
18:48
for example, that in all interviews, after writing his novels, he
18:49
said I created against something written by Rencor, which was how I' m
18:55
going to make good novels for all the critics who are waiting for him to
18:59
come out to enter s or neo. At least I' ll make sure
19:00
they' re well written and well done. And this is why it says
19:03
that enemies can be useful. I shop team that was the engine of his
19:07
life, that he had actually revealed himself and had been the singer who went
19:11
and became the icon, which is precisely because when he was little, he
19:17
had many guys that he lived a caravan and then they mistreated because he was
19:21
a poor, starving and then he became a musician for Rencor, out of
19:26
spite to his enemies. He took out all the rage and if all the
19:29
rage. Punk he pulled out was in response to those calling him starving and
19:32
now looking up at them and saying who the starving are now And now look.
19:37
Of course, revenge is achieved by duckling. That' s for another
19:40
defeat. Yes, of course, in these cases the enmity is understood as
19:44
something that is tense, that feeds, that awakens. We could say I
19:47
' m this because I' m not that and it can become an engine
19:51
of action or build your life. Yes, although hate can be very paralyzing
19:52
and is really eating you inside, it is very toxic. Sure, that
19:56
would be the negative part and I was going to ask it later, but
20:00
I, when I read this, I think it makes a lot of sense.
20:03
And Kikuamat in the book, clearly the final part is where he admits
20:07
that hate can also destroy you that living like this doing things out of spite
20:11
or knowing that he has those people watching you, waiting, like doing harm.
20:15
I prefer not to have any enemies, however useful it may be.
20:18
I mean, I don' t want teachers of these free. I prefer
20:22
you want peace of mind. Yes, I don' t want to go
20:25
with me, not teacher be a friend, of course, of course,
20:27
of course, much better, it makes much more sense, because this idea
20:32
of free teachers Amat brings out a little bit of plutarco that is interesting to
20:33
think about. Well, in ancient Greece, which we bring here from time
20:36
to time, we already thought about the issue of enemies and already thought about
20:40
these terms. There is a book by Plutarch that is published here in plum,
20:44
which is called how to take advantage of enemies directly. It says this
20:48
we can squeeze it out. And it says because the laughs are always like
20:52
connecting the issue of individual relations with the issue of society and the State.
20:56
This is a thing that long ago says a state that does not produce in
20:59
video, zeal or rivalry. So far it hasn' t existed. It
21:02
' s like good. You' re still right while we wanted to talk
21:06
a little bit about good thinking about these passions of envy and rivalry that breed
21:11
enmity, and says Plutarch that this taking advantage of enemies has its roots in
21:14
the oldest of human beings, for example cavemen. Speak directly. So,
21:18
once they take the wild beasts and learn to run away from the beasts.
21:19
They take advantage of them, they use their skin, their hair, they
21:22
cook, they make milk, they use the enemy, who is the one
21:26
who can kill you in that state as the most primitive to get things that
21:30
you are useful. And he says that if the animals had failed in the
21:33
sense, had they failed the enemies, man would also have become savage directly,
21:37
for he would have starved to death. And he says that wise men,
21:40
wise men, can conveniently use even enmity. And it says how to
21:45
use enemies. Well, it says the same thing as Kikomat. Evidently,
21:48
that these always enemies, are stalking and watching your things and looking for the
21:53
opportunity to jump on you and then you can use it and say many times
21:59
for not our abandonment and negligence. We don' t find out that our
22:03
friends are sick and dying, but the enemies are even concerned with their dreams,
22:06
which seems to me to be quite a poetic date, but that eye
22:08
to what I did, not that you are permanently living pending enemies and this
22:14
vigilance can help us to improve. I also tell you that the Greeks were
22:18
all day with this thing of reducing passions, preserving reasoning, living a life
22:22
as well unreproachably and above doing so, because the enemies are looking at you
22:26
and I say that this is a tremendous boredom is totally looking like an example
22:30
to me. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean, we' ve
22:32
expired extracting passions, less passion against enemies. Of course not, also,
22:36
control the passions, well, from time to time, but other times you
22:38
have to leave them loose and the ancients are always obsessed with this of reducing
22:42
the passions. I believe that we have been able to overcome it today.
22:45
Of course that' s exactly why it' s as interesting as Kiykoma'
22:49
s book because of this contradiction it raises, because the possible conclusion of his
22:53
book would be to hate. It can be useful if we don' t
22:56
have in this sense of plutarc, but it can also be really painful.
23:00
They can do something high out of it or something that destroys you. In
23:03
fact, in an interview given by Kikamat about this book, he says I
23:07
despise morals in art, But if there is one conclusion in the book is
23:11
that enmity and hatred are a neutral thing by itself. Then there is the
23:15
way you use them, as the phrase of vice says, they can do
23:19
virtue. That is, it is also interesting as the importance of recognizing that
23:23
we hate, that we feel unpleasant emotions, that sometimes it seems that we
23:27
have to aspire to be dispassionate, totally rational beings. And in reality,
23:30
we are not like immaculate beings full of virtue and goodness all the time.
23:36
And it' s also like a kind of struggle against hypocrisy that in Kicomate
23:38
is very present. People say it' s good and it' s not
23:41
really good. It' s very hard to be good. People who brag
23:45
about being good are not viable. If you' re good one of your
23:48
traits should be humility. I really hate these people as with higher principles,
23:52
all the others that always go common. Not because I, like I'
23:56
m a good person floating over the rest. If the phrase is a good
23:57
person, it never goes well. When someone says I' m a good
24:00
person, I always say eye. That' s like when he says I
24:03
' m going to be brief and ah you do know they' re lying
24:06
and what' s totally going on. And we also thought it important to
24:08
investigate all these emotions beyond hatred, envy, and revenge, even though they
24:12
are usually criminalized. We might ask ourselves whether it is real to think that
24:19
we can stop totally hating both socially and personally, or whether, on the
24:22
contrary, we must live with hatred also at the political level, as we
24:27
said at the beginning, we must be careful with the language used and not
24:32
fall into the trap of polarization, dehumanization and hatred of another. They'
24:36
re our enemies. Necessarily people who don' t think like us shouldn'
24:41
t be, they shouldn' t be. But I' m thinking that
24:42
sometimes having some enemy isn' t bad, because I was now remembering myself
24:48
while you were talking that it' s true that against some enemies one overcomes
24:52
one. Yeah, you don' t grow up to squeal. Yeah,
24:55
it' s not okay, too. Yeah, it' s okay.
24:56
Others you have many enemies. No. People love us very much in general,
25:00
because we are very good people, we are immaculate beings. But when
25:07
we could clearly, man, of course when there' s iodine, we
25:10
' re not perfect. A silly hatred, a lot of hates you hate
25:12
a lot of people. Not a year, no harm.