MICHEL TERESTCHENKO: The First Oligarch

vendredi 27 avril 2012

The First Oligarch

Petite recension à cette adresse du livre, The First Oligarch, que mon cousin et homonyme, Michel P. Terestchenko, vient de publier à Kiev sur la figure titulaire de notre grand-père, dernier ministre des Affaires Etrangères du gouvernement Kerensky et bien d'autres choses encore fort romanesques :

www.matrixorange.nl

5 commentaires:

guelfenoireditions.com a dit…: Ce commentaire a été supprimé par l'auteur.; 5 mai 2012 01:04
guelfenoireditions.com a dit…: Ce commentaire a été supprimé par un administrateur du blog.; 5 mai 2012 01:14
Anthony LC a dit…: En fait je n'avais pas lu mais comme quoi je ne m'étais pas trompé dans la translitération (sauf que c'était votre ancêtre).; 14 juillet 2012 16:14
Best life insurance companies a dit…: Keep up the excellent work , I read few articles on this site and I think that your web blog is real interesting and Power to the People of excellent information.

=> Cheapest Insurance Company <=

=> Home Insurance Calculator <=

=> Best Life Insurance Companies <=

I agree, for the most part, but don’t you feel as if the issue is more complex than that?

1. Best Home Interior Design

2. Interior Design Enjoyable

3. Interior Designers; 26 janvier 2013 22:22
Dewi Novita a dit…: Nice Info :
Free Web Hosting Google

Free Web Hosting Sites; 26 janvier 2013 22:30

Enregistrer un commentaire

Inscription à : Publier les commentaires (Atom)

Such a Fragile Veneer of Humanity, The Banality of Good and Evil

Description This important new book by political philosopher Michel Terestchenko has been hailed by critics as one of the most outstanding and noteworthy essays in recent times. Expanding on the work of the German political theorist Hannah Arendt, who in Eichmann in Jerusalem raised the question of whether evil is radical or simply a function of banality -- the tendency of ordinary people to obey orders and conform to mass opinion without critically thinking about the results of their action or inaction -- Terestchenko proposes a new paradigm of “absence” vs. “presence” of self. The essence of altruism, he explains, has nothing to do with selfless acquiescence to a higher authority. In fact, selfless behavior is one of the surest paths to blind obedience and servility. Examining the psycho-sociological roots of the subservience that leads to inaction in the face of injustice, he cites specific historical examples showing that presence is more important than absence of self: forgotten cases from the history of Naziism, the “duty” performed at Abu Ghraib prison camp and, conversely, the heroic actions of the people of Chambon-sur-Lignon at the height of WWII.

www.frenchpubagency.com

On The Fair Use of Torture, or, How Democraties Justify the Injustifiable

Description The moral condemnation of torture has failed to prevent the exacting challenges of its theoretical legitimization as a “lesser evil.” In this audacious essay, Terestchenko dissects the arguments of thinkers, philosophers, and judicial authorities for whom torture, in its various incarnations and in varying circumstances, can be justified. In a thorough refutation of the school of thought known as the liberal ideology of torture, he explains how the use and legitimization of torture creates a deeply corrupting poison for civil society and its institutions. First Terestchenko presents a genealogy of new torture practices, from their origins in the 1950s to their present-day forms. He shows how such practices as “sensory disorientation” and “self-inflicted pain,” among others, have evolved over time. Then he examines the legal aspect, giving the example of the way the United States justified, or refuted, what went on in Guantánamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. He goes on to debunk the myth of the noble torturer, illustrated by the fictional counterterrorism agent Jack Bauer in the TV series 24, and vigorously refutes the liberal ideology designed to show that even perfectly compassionate citizens might justify torture to find a ticking bomb. Developing the notion of abuse of public trust, he argues that this dangerous fallacy will turn our democracies into illegitimate states.